Sales is a zero-sum game. Only the process is yours.
You can't control who wins the deal. You can control the system the number comes out of. Sriram Chidambaram on why raising the target changes nothing about what produces it, and the four inputs that do.
Summary
- Over a quarter, in a market that already exists, sales is close to a zero-sum game: the deal you win is a deal your competitor lost. Raising the target pushes harder on the result while changing nothing about what produces it.
- Pushing harder does three things, none of them good: it makes the forecast dishonest, it brings in bad revenue bought with unapproved discounts, and it costs you your best salespeople first.
- Four inputs are controllable and measurable: coverage, conversion, cycle and capacity. Change one of them and the number changes.
I have sat in the same meeting many times, in many companies.
The quarter has missed. The room is tense. And the response is almost always the same. Raise the target. Tighten the reviews. Tell everyone this quarter has to be different. The next number goes up, partly to make up the shortfall, partly because setting a lower one would feel like giving up.
Nobody in that room is being silly. It is a normal reaction to a bad number. But in my experience it is also the least useful thing a company can do, because it pushes harder on the result while changing nothing about what produces it.
The part founders don't like hearing
You cannot force a revenue number into existence.
The deals available in a quarter are mostly decided before the quarter starts: by how many buyers are actually in the market, whose budget cycle is open, and who else is sitting in the room with them. Inside that window, sales is close to a zero-sum game. The deal you win is a deal your competitor lost. The one you lost, somebody else won.
Let me be fair about this, because the point is easy to overstate.
It is not fully zero-sum. If you are creating a new category, you are growing the market rather than taking a share of it. Good marketing doesn't only catch buyers who were already looking, it wakes up buyers who hadn't thought about the problem yet. And over a few years, a better product does grow its own market.
But over a quarter, with a known set of accounts, in a market that already exists, which is most of the companies I work with, it is close enough to zero-sum that the difference stops mattering. And in that world, telling your team to try harder is really just asking them to take business from someone who is trying just as hard to take it from them.
What pushing harder actually does
Three things, and none of them help.
It makes the forecast dishonest. When the target is obviously out of reach, the safest thing for a salesperson to do is forecast high and explain later. So you lose the one number you needed most, exactly when you needed it.
It brings in bad revenue. Under pressure, the quickest lever a salesperson has is price. So the quarter gets saved with discounts nobody approved, payment terms nobody costed, and extra scope nobody agreed. The number lands. The margin doesn't. And you've just set the price that account expects at every renewal from now on.
It costs you your best people first. Good salespeople have options, and a fairly accurate sense of what is possible. They leave a pressure-driven company before the weaker ones do, simply because they can. So the approach quietly removes the very people you needed.
The four things you can control
If you can't control the result, what can you control?
Four things. All of them are inputs. All of them can be measured. And all of them are something somebody in your company can act on this week.
Coverage. How much real pipeline exists compared to what the plan needs. Pipeline is built, not found, and you can see a shortfall months before it becomes a missed quarter.
Conversion. What share of deals move from one stage to the next. This improves through better qualification and clearer criteria for moving a deal forward. It does not improve because you raised a target.
Cycle. How long a deal takes. Removing friction in legal, in procurement, in security reviews, in your own internal handoffs, brings revenue forward without anyone selling harder.
Capacity. How many salespeople you actually have who are fully up to speed. Not headcount. A plan that assumes six sellers when four are trained and two joined last month isn't a plan. It's maths done on people who don't exist yet.
Change any of those four and the number changes. Change none of them, raise the target, and all you've done is make the disappointment bigger and easier to predict.
The shift
The founders I've watched get this right make one specific change in how they think.
They stop asking how do we hit the number? and start asking what has to be true for the number to happen?
That sounds like word play. It isn't. The first question has no real answer except "try harder," which is why it produces louder meetings. The second one breaks down straight away into things you can act on. We need this much pipeline by this date. Which means this many enquiries from this channel. Converting at this rate. With this many trained salespeople. At this deal length.
That's something a team can actually run. And more importantly, it tells you in month one that the quarter is in trouble, instead of month three, when there's nothing left to do about it.
Why your monthly review decides this
None of this survives on good intentions. It needs the right question asked every month.
If your review asks "are we going to hit the number," you'll get a feeling.
If it asks "what happened to pipeline, conversion, deal length and capacity, and what are we changing because of it," you get a real answer and a decision.
That's the difference between a company that manages results and one that manages the machine the results come from. In my experience it's also the difference between a company that sometimes gets lucky and one that keeps improving.
You can fix a machine on purpose. You can't fix luck.
What investors are really buying
One last thing, from the other side of the table.
When an investor asks about your revenue, they aren't really asking what you did last year. They're trying to work out whether the next number will show up. Everything else in the conversation is just their way of getting to that one judgement.
A founder who can explain the four inputs, say who owns each one, and show how they moved is answering that question directly.
A founder who says the team is motivated and the pipeline feels strong is not, even if both things are completely true.
Predictable revenue isn't just easier to run. It's the most convincing thing you'll ever put in front of someone, because it's the only claim that doesn't ask them to take your word for it.
Where to start
Stop managing the number. Start reading the machine behind it. Pipeline, conversion, deal length, capacity, and a monthly review that keeps all four honest.
ROSA is a short assessment across the pillars of a revenue operating system. It will show you which of those four is actually holding you back, which, in most companies, is not the one getting the attention.
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
