Signed in as:
filler@godaddy.com
Signed in as:
filler@godaddy.com
A large technology organization was staring at a significant quarterly revenue gap.
There was plenty of pipeline on paper. Teams were busy. Marketing was generating leads. Sales was quoting. Leadership was tracking activity.
And it still wasn't producing enough revenue.
The target for the Revenue Gap Plan was approximately $27 million in incremental booked revenue.
But the number isn't the most important part of this story.
What we changed to get there is.
On paper, some of the fundamentals looked healthy.
Pipeline coverage was roughly 3X. There were millions of dollars in active opportunities. Sales teams were making calls, responding to customers, generating quotes and advancing pipeline.
But confidence in that pipeline was low—and getting worse.
At the same time, the organization was dealing with reduced headcount, changing account assignments and competing priorities. Roughly 120 direct and technical sellers were responsible for the primary sales motion, supported by a much larger network of generalist sellers.
Everyone was working. The revenue wasn't following.
And when that happens, finger-pointing starts pretty quickly.
Sales needed better leads. Marketing needed sales to follow up.
Teams needed more people. Account changes were hurting coverage.
Leadership needed more pipeline.
Each concern had some truth behind it.
But none of them explained the entire problem.
The first question I wanted answered wasn't:
“How do we get everyone to sell more?”
It was:
I worked with leadership and cross-functional teams to understand what activities were happening, where teams were spending their time, what they were being measured against and whether those activities were actually producing revenue.
The more we pulled it apart, the clearer the problem became.
Everyone could technically be doing what they were told to do while the business still wasn't getting what it needed.
The definition of what good looked like had become blurred.
I built custom reporting and used Power BI to analyze the revenue motion from multiple angles, including:
Patterns started sho
I built custom reporting and used Power BI to analyze the revenue motion from multiple angles, including:
Patterns started showing up. Certain products converted better than others. Certain account types moved faster. Some quoting activity consumed effort without producing enough return.
Pipeline quantity didn't necessarily equal pipeline quality.
And some activities being measured as “good” weren't contributing enough to the outcome we actually needed.
One particularly interesting finding was the performance of public-sector accounts. Historically, they generated less revenue than the commercial segment in this motion. Once we focused the right activities against the right opportunities, public-sector accounts produced significantly more traction than expected.
The data gave us something we didn't have before:
This wasn't simply a pipeline problem.
It wasn't a marketing problem.
It wasn't a sales problem.
And it wasn't just a headcount problem.
Sales, marketing, product, operations, finance and leadership all had legitimate priorities and KPIs.
The problem was that those priorities didn't always translate ac
This wasn't simply a pipeline problem.
It wasn't a marketing problem.
It wasn't a sales problem.
And it wasn't just a headcount problem.
Sales, marketing, product, operations, finance and leadership all had legitimate priorities and KPIs.
The problem was that those priorities didn't always translate across the organization.
Marketing could successfully generate a lead that went to the wrong person. Sales could successfully complete an activity that didn't create meaningful revenue.
A team could hit its KPI without meaningfully advancing the larger business goal.
The individual pieces were moving. They just weren't always moving together.
I worked across sales, marketing, product management, operations, finance and leadership to understand what each group needed from the others.
Then I built the Revenue Gap Plan around a much simpler objective:
Inste
I worked across sales, marketing, product management, operations, finance and leadership to understand what each group needed from the others.
Then I built the Revenue Gap Plan around a much simpler objective:
Instead of asking teams to simply do more, we created structure.
Specific blocks of time were dedicated to activities including:
We defined ownership.
We aligned cross-functional dependencies.
We established weekly direction and accountability.
And we measured whether those activities were actually moving the business.
The team stopped winging it.
They had a defined operating rhythm.
The first-quarter Revenue Gap Plan targeted approximately $27 million in incremental revenue.
The motion produced approximately $30 million—roughly $3 million above the targeted gap opportunity.
That incremental revenue represented approximately 25% of the overall quarterly revenue target and roughly 30% of the revenue ultimately achieved during the period.
And it wasn't accomplished by throwing more people at the problem.
It happened while the organization was operating with reduced headcount.
The approach was carried into the following quarter and again produced a significant incremental revenue contribution, demonstrating that the operating motion could be repeated rather than treated as a one-quarter fire drill.
The financial result mattered. But something else happened along the way.
The team gained structure. Leadership gained visibility. Activities gained purpose.
People understood what they owned and why it mattered.
Cross-functional teams had clearer expectations of one another.
And success stopped being defined simply by whether someone completed an activity.
It became:
That clarity created accountability.
Accountability built confidence.
And confidence created momentum.
Years later, I can see a direct line between the Revenue Gap Plan and the thinking that eventually became MomentumOS.
Every department has its own priorities. That's normal.
The problem starts when those priorities stop translating across the business.
Marketing needs to understand what sales needs. Sales needs to capitalize on what marketing creates. Operations needs to support what sales promises. Leadership needs visibility into whether any of it is actually producing the intended result.
That principle applies whether you're coordinating 120 sellers and hundreds of supporting resources or running a company by yourself.
The scale changes. The connection problem doesn't.
That's the thinking behind MomentumOS.
The problem making the most noise isn't always the problem creating the biggest gap.
The Opportunity Snapshot is a focused look at what's happening in your business, where I see the biggest opportunities and what I would address first.
Copyright © 2026 IAO consulting - All Rights Reserved.
Veteran Owned Small Business Certified Cage#16GV9
We use cookies to analyze website traffic and optimize your website experience. By accepting our use of cookies, your data will be aggregated with all other user data.