Revenue planning: a target you can actually work with
A target is a number you hope for. A plan is a number you can take apart. Top-down gives you ambition, bottom-up gives you reality, and the gap between them is the most useful thing to come out of the whole exercise.
Summary
- Top-down starts from what the business needs and takes no notice of reality. Bottom-up starts from the machine and runs cautious. The plan is the gap between them, pinned line by line to something specific with a name against it.
- A revenue plan breaks into four things and no more: pipeline, conversion, deal length and capacity. Capacity is where most plans quietly fall apart, because they credit hires who land mid-year with a full year at full productivity.
- A plan is a best guess, not a promise. A plan you re-base in month four because of what you learned is healthy. A plan you defend until December is expensive.
Most revenue plans we're shown are a single line on a slide. This year we did ₹18 crore. Next year we'll do ₹30.
Ask how, and you usually get a set of reasonable hopes. We're hiring salespeople. The new product should help. Two big accounts should grow. Each of those may well turn out to be true. But none of them is a plan, because nobody can wake up on a Tuesday in March and do anything about "the new product should help."
Planning is the first pillar of a revenue operating system for a reason. Everything after it depends on it. Your monthly review has nothing to check against a hope. Your sales team has no pipeline number to work toward. And your forecast can never be trusted, because the starting point was never built properly.
Top-down and bottom-up have to meet
You need both, and the useful part is the fight between them.
Top-down starts from what the business needs. What you told the board. What the funding plan assumes. It's necessary, and it takes no notice of reality.
Bottom-up starts from the machine. This many salespeople, at this productivity, with this pipeline, closing at this rate. It's grounded, and it's usually on the cautious side, because the people building it know they'll be held to it.
Neither one is the plan.
The plan is what you get when you put them side by side and look hard at the gap.
That gap is the most useful thing to come out of the whole exercise, and most companies walk straight past it. If top-down says ₹30 crore and bottom-up says ₹23, the real conversation is about the ₹7 crore. What would have to be different? More salespeople, hired when? Better conversion, achieved how? Higher prices, justified by what? A new segment, based on what evidence?
Every rupee of that gap should be pinned to something specific, with a name against it. Whatever you can't pin down is the risk in your plan, and it's much healthier to write it down as risk than to quietly hope it works out.
The four things a plan is made of
A revenue plan breaks into four things. Not more. These are what you can actually do something about.
Pipeline. How much real, qualified pipeline you need, and by when. This is your earliest warning: the pipeline that produces next quarter is built this quarter, so a shortfall is visible while you still have time to react. How much you need depends on your own conversion rate and deal length. Copying a coverage rule of thumb from another company is how businesses end up confidently short.
Conversion. What share of deals move from one stage to the next, by segment. This gets better through sharper qualification and clearer criteria for moving a deal forward. Only plan for an improvement here if you can say what will cause it.
Deal length. How long deals take, and therefore when the money lands. This is the one most often left out of planning, and it quietly wrecks your quarterly phasing. If your average deal takes five months and your plan needs a strong first quarter, those deals should already be in your pipeline today.
Capacity. How many salespeople you have who are fully up to speed. This is where most plans break, and it's worth its own section.
Get the four right and you have a revenue number. Better still, you have a number you can question, and one that tells you in month one whether the year is in trouble.
Capacity is where plans quietly fall apart
Of everything here, this is what we see go wrong most often.
The plan assumes ten salespeople. The company has six. Four will be hired "during the year." And the plan quietly credits all ten with a full year at full productivity.
What actually happens: the four hires land across three different quarters. Each takes three to six months to get properly productive, depending on how long your deals take. One of them doesn't work out. Your real capacity for the year is closer to seven than ten, and the plan was never going to work from the day it was signed.
Three habits fix this.
Plan in months of trained salespeople, not headcount. Someone who joins in month seven gives you a fraction of a year, and less than that at full speed.
Assume some people will leave, because they will. A sales plan with zero attrition built in has a hidden hole in it.
Treat the hiring plan as part of the revenue plan, with dates, reviewed in the same meeting. If recruitment slips two months, the revenue plan has changed, and somebody should say so then, not in the last quarter.
None of this is exciting. It's also the difference between a plan that was ambitious and a plan that was never possible.
Build it by segment, not as one lump
An overall plan hides everything worth knowing.
Break it down by whatever actually behaves differently in your business: segment, product, channel, region. Enterprise and SMB don't share a conversion rate, a deal length, a deal size or a cost to serve. Blend them and you get an average that describes no part of your business, which means you can't manage any part of it.
The same goes for new business versus growth from existing customers. These are two different engines, with different owners and very different reliability. Growth from your existing base is far easier to predict than new logos, and a plan that mixes them has hidden its most dependable part.
And plan on the price you actually get, not your price list. If the last twelve months ran at an average 18% discount, a plan built on list prices already has a hole in it before anyone sells anything.
Best case, base case, worst case
Three versions, and the value is in what's different between them, not in the numbers themselves.
A base case you believe. A best case that names the specific thing that has to go right. A worst case that names what you'd actually do: which hires you'd hold, which spending you'd pause, and at what point you'd decide.
The question that makes this worth doing isn't "what if revenue is 20% lower." It's what would we do, and when would we decide to do it. A worst case with no trigger and no agreed response is a slide, not a backup plan.
A plan is your best guess, not a promise
One last point, and it's about culture more than numbers.
Any plan built on assumptions is wrong about some of them. The whole purpose of reviewing it every month is to find out which ones, and adjust.
Companies get this backwards. The plan becomes something to defend rather than something to test. So when conversion comes in below what you assumed, nobody says it out loud, because saying it sounds like admitting failure. The wrong assumption stays in the model. The gap builds up quietly. And the correction arrives three quarters late and four times bigger.
A plan you re-base in month four because of what you learned is a healthy plan. A plan you defend until December is an expensive one.
How this changes by business
The four things stay the same. The maths around them changes.
A SaaS business plans on new revenue plus growth from existing customers, minus , with pipeline and trained capacity underneath. A hospital plans from physical capacity: beds, occupancy, ARPOB, case mix. A manufacturer plans from order book and how full the plant is, split between made-to-order and made-to-stock. A D2C brand plans on traffic, conversion, order value and repeat rate, with margin tracked channel by channel.
Different sums. Same requirement: broken into parts, with a name against each one.
Where to start
Take your current plan and try to break it into pipeline, conversion, deal length and capacity. If you can do it in an afternoon, you have a plan. If you can't, you have a target, and the difference between those two is where most of this year's disappointment is currently sitting.
ROSA gives you a straight read across the pillars of a revenue operating system, so you can see whether planning is really your weakest link, or whether the plan was fine and something further down is letting it fail.
How useful was this article?
One tap. It tells us what to write more of.
The next one
Get what we publish next, by email.
Working notes on raising, borrowing, protecting, growing and structuring capital in India. One email a week at most, and you can leave any time.
We use your address only to send this. See our privacy policy.
We store your address to send you these emails and nothing else. See our privacy policy.
Related reading
