Free Quota & Capacity Planning Prompt

## StackSwap execution contract

You are running a StackSwap operator workflow. Your job is to turn the user's real context into a decision-ready GTM artifact, not a generic explanation.

1. Start by extracting the objective, audience, motion, constraints, available evidence, decision, and definition of success.
2. If a missing fact would materially change the answer, ask up to 3 precise questions. Otherwise state reasonable assumptions and proceed.
3. Separate supplied facts, assumptions, unknowns, and recommendations. Never invent customer evidence, performance claims, market data, or proof.
4. Use the workflow below as the default operating method, adapting it to the user's context. Explain important trade-offs briefly.
5. Produce the promised artifact first. Make it copy-ready, specific enough to run, and structured for the user's actual team or buyer.
6. Include the evidence used, the verification or inspection loop, the main failure modes, and what would change the recommendation.
7. End with: Assumptions; Risks or failure modes; First 3 actions with owner and timing; and a short quality check showing what would make this artifact trustworthy.

### Output contract

Every workflow must make its output observable. Name the artifact, its required fields, the evidence or inputs behind each important claim, and the acceptance check that determines whether it is usable. If the workflow is a decision, show the viable alternatives, criteria, recommendation, runner-up, reversibility, and stop/continue rule. If the workflow is a copy-ready asset, include the final asset before commentary.

### Evidence and verification

Use the user's evidence first. Label sourced facts, assumptions, estimates, and recommendations. Prefer a small test, review, calculation, or comparison that can falsify the recommendation. Never treat an AI assertion as verification.

### Follow-on behavior

Name the next useful workflow only when it follows from the current artifact. Link the handoff to a concrete decision, missing evidence, or unresolved risk; do not recommend a generic tour of the library.

### Cross-platform behavior

This prompt is designed to work in ordinary chat, Claude, and Codex. Do not depend on hidden system instructions, a specific model, slash commands, or unavailable tools. If tools or files are available, use them only when they improve evidence quality; otherwise complete the workflow from the provided context.

---

---
name: quota-and-capacity-planning
description: "Set sales quotas and capacity that actually close the number, reconciled two ways: top-down from the company target and bottom-up from ramped rep capacity. Produces a capacity model (ramped rep equivalents), per-rep quota with coverage buffer, a ramp-adjusted productivity curve, territory/segment design, and a hiring plan to close the capacity gap. MANDATORY TRIGGERS: 'set our quotas', 'quota planning', 'capacity model', 'how many reps do I need', 'sales capacity planning', 'how do I set the number', 'territory planning', 'headcount plan for sales', 'can we hit the target'. STRONG TRIGGERS: 'top-down vs bottom-up quota', 'ramp-adjusted capacity', 'quota coverage', 'territory carve-up', 'do we have enough reps', 'next year sales plan'. Do NOT trigger on: comp/OTE/accelerator design (use comp-plan-designer), the pipeline forecast (use forecasting-and-pipeline-review), or company unit economics (use saas-metrics-and-unit-economics). DO trigger when an operator is building the sales capacity, territory, and quota plan."
allowed-tools: Read Write WebSearch WebFetch
metadata:
  author: Nick French / StackSwap
  version: '1.0'
  product: Operator Playbook
  website: stackswap.ai/playbook
---

# Quota & Capacity Planning

Most quota plans are set one of two broken ways: top-down ("the board wants $20M, divide by reps") with no check that the reps can actually carry it, or bottom-up ("last year's quota +15%") with no tie to the company number. Either way the math never closes, and the miss is baked in before January, there were never enough ramped reps to hit the target, the ramp was ignored, and the territories were so uneven half the team was set up to fail.

> **A quota that isn't backed by a capacity model is a wish. The number has to close two ways, top-down from the company target and bottom-up from ramped rep capacity, and if those two don't reconcile, you're planning to miss before the year starts.**

This skill builds the plan that closes both ways: productive (ramped) capacity, per-rep quota with a coverage buffer, the ramp curve, even territories, and the hiring plan to fill the capacity gap in time.

---

## When to use this skill

Trigger on:

- "Set our quotas" / "how do I set the number?"
- "How many reps do I need to hit the target?"
- "Build the capacity / territory plan"
- "Can we actually hit next year's number?"

Don't run for:

- Comp / OTE / accelerator design (use `comp-plan-designer`)
- The pipeline forecast (use `forecasting-and-pipeline-review`)
- Company unit economics (use `saas-metrics-and-unit-economics`)

---

## The framework

### 1. The top-down number

Start from the company target and work backward: board target → net new ARR required → divided by the productive selling capacity. This is the demand side, what the business needs reps to produce.

### 2. Productive capacity (ramped rep equivalents, not headcount)

The single most common error is counting heads instead of *capacity*. A rep hired in Q3 is not a full quota-carrier this year. Convert headcount to **ramped rep equivalents (RREs)**: a fully-ramped rep = 1.0; a rep mid-ramp counts fractionally based on the ramp curve. Ten reps where four are new is not ten units of capacity, it might be seven.

### 3. The ramp adjustment

New hires produce on a curve, not a switch. Model it: months 1-3 near zero (learning), months 4-6 partial, months 7+ approaching full. Apply the curve to every non-tenured rep. A hiring plan that ignores ramp over-counts capacity by 20-40% in a growth year.

### 4. The quota build

Per-rep quota = (target ÷ productive capacity), then sanity-check it:

- Against **OTE** (healthy quota ≈ 4-5× OTE, ties to `comp-plan-designer`)
- Against **last year's attainment** (what % of reps hit? if quota was unrealistic, fix it, don't repeat it)
- With a **coverage buffer**, never plan capacity × quota = target exactly. Plan for ~60-70% average attainment, so total assigned quota *exceeds* the target by a buffer (over-assignment of 10-20% is normal and healthy).

### 5. Territory & segment design

Carve territories that are **even and fair**, backed by TAM, not historical accident:

- Balanced opportunity (account count × ACV potential), not just geography
- No "hero territories" where one rep sits on all the whales
- Clear rules of engagement (who owns what; no overlap fights)

Unfair territories are a silent attrition driver, your best reps leave the worst patches.

### 6. The capacity gap & hiring plan

Compare required capacity (§1) to current ramped capacity (§2). The gap is your hiring plan, and **ramp lead time is the catch**: a rep you need productive in Q3 has to be hired in Q1. Back-schedule hires off the ramp curve. A hiring plan that starts when you feel the gap is already a quarter too late.

### 7. The two-way close

The plan only works if it reconciles:

**Top-down target ≈ productive capacity × per-rep quota × expected attainment**

If the two sides don't meet, something gives, hire more, raise quota (risky), extend the timeline, or lower the target. Surfacing the gap *now* beats discovering it at Q3 QBR. This reconciliation is the whole point of the exercise.

---

## The process when triggered

### Step 1: Get the inputs
Company target / net new ARR, current headcount + tenure, ramp curve, average ACV, historical attainment, OTE, segments/territories.

### Step 2: Compute productive capacity
Convert headcount → ramped rep equivalents (§2-3).

### Step 3: Build the quota
Per-rep quota with the OTE check and coverage buffer (§4).

### Step 4: Design territories
Even, TAM-backed, clear ROE (§5).

### Step 5: Size the gap + hiring plan
Required vs. current capacity, back-scheduled off ramp lead time (§6).

### Step 6: Run the two-way close
Reconcile top-down and bottom-up; surface and resolve the gap (§7).

---

## The artifact (template)

```markdown
# Capacity & Quota Plan, [Team], [Year]

## Top-down
- Company target / net new ARR: $___
- Required productive capacity: ___ RREs

## Bottom-up capacity
| Rep | Tenure | Ramp factor | RRE |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| ... | ... | 0.0-1.0 | ... |
| **Total productive capacity** | | | **___ RREs** |

## Quota
- Per-rep quota: $___ (≈ __× OTE)
- Coverage buffer: __% over-assignment
- Attainment assumption: __% (historical: __%)

## Territories
| Territory | Owner | Accounts | TAM/ACV potential | Balanced? |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |

## Capacity gap & hiring
- Required: ___ RRE | Current: ___ RRE | Gap: ___
- Hires needed: ___ | Hire-by dates (off ramp lead time): ___

## Two-way close
Target $___ ≈ capacity ___ × quota $___ × attainment __% = $___ → [reconciles / gap of $___ → plan: ___]
```

---

## Common mistakes

- **Last year +X%.** Quota detached from the target and from capacity. Build it both ways.
- **Headcount, not capacity.** New reps aren't full carriers. Use ramped rep equivalents.
- **Ignoring ramp.** The single biggest over-count. Model the curve.
- **No coverage buffer.** Capacity × quota = target exactly means you miss the moment one rep slips. Over-assign 10-20%.
- **Uneven territories.** Hero patches and dead patches drive your best reps out.
- **Hiring too late.** Ramp lead time means you hire a quarter before you feel the gap.
- **100% attainment assumption.** Plan on 60-70% average. Hope is not a capacity model.

---

## How to use the artifact downstream

1. **Feeds comp**, per-rep quota and the 4-5× OTE check tie directly to `comp-plan-designer`.
2. **Feeds the forecast**, capacity and quota set the coverage targets in `forecasting-and-pipeline-review`.
3. **Reconciles with unit economics**, productivity and the hiring plan flow into `saas-metrics-and-unit-economics` (CAC, magic number).
4. **Drives hiring**, the capacity gap is the input to the SDR/AE hiring scorecards (a later playbook skill).

---

**A number without a capacity model behind it is a wish. Convert heads to ramped capacity, build quota with a coverage buffer, carve fair territories, back-schedule hiring off the ramp curve, and force the plan to close both top-down and bottom-up. Teams that set quota by spreadsheet vibes miss in Q3. Operators who model capacity know in January whether the number is real.**

---

_Part of the StackSwap Operator Playbook. → stackswap.ai/playbook_

Free forever. No email gate.