One view per team that answers are we on track, and where is the risk, in under a minute.
Cockpits for pods, teams or the whole book: ARR, usage and targets with gap to target and week-over-week movement at every level of the hierarchy, forecast against actual, and a prioritisation layer that turns the view into a decision about the next two weeks.
Reporting that tells you what happened, never what to do.
Most CS reporting is a monthly retrospective assembled by hand. The team needs a weekly forward view that ranks where to spend attention, and that view has to reconcile with the CRM or nobody will use it.
Targets live in a spreadsheet nobody can join
Quarterly targets per pod sit in a document outside the platform, so gap to target is computed by hand, late, and differently by each manager.
Movement is invisible
You can see the number. You cannot see that it moved eleven percent since last week, or which three accounts moved it.
Forecast and actual never meet
Forecast inputs are collected once a quarter and never compared to what happened, so nobody learns whether the forecast is any good.
Prioritisation is relationship-driven
Which project inside a target account gets attention this cycle is decided by whoever spoke to the customer last, not by target gap, usage trajectory and relationship strength together.
No record of what was tried
Actions taken on an account live in heads and chat threads. When the outcome lands, nobody can say what caused it.
Targets in, movement computed, priorities ranked.
The shape we delivered as two sequential statements of work for a construction-tech SaaS client: pod performance visibility first, then project prioritisation and action tracking.
Target import
Week 1Quarterly targets per pod, team or segment imported into the platform against the right level of the hierarchy, with a repeatable mechanism for next quarter.
Cockpit template
Weeks 1 to 2A single home view per team: ARR, usage, targets and ahead or behind indicators, sliced by lifecycle phase, with forecast versus actual where forecasts exist. Piloted with one team, iterated, then rolled out to all.
Movers and trajectory
Week 2Biggest week-over-week movers at every level, reading the rollup metric rather than the raw delta, so the list points at the accounts that actually moved the number.
Prioritisation layer
Weeks 3 to 4Project or account-level targets built on the north-star metric, a relationship strength property designed with your team, and a portfolio view that splits active focus from next-cycle candidates.
Action log and rollout
Week 4A structured log at the account or project level, owned by the AE or CSM, capturing what was done, why and what happened. Adoption monitored in the pilot before wider rollout.
Deliverables you can point to.
Every item is handed over in your tools, walked through on a call, and accepted against written criteria before the final invoice.
Live for the current quarter, repeatable for the next, attached to the right hierarchy level.
One view per pod or team with gap to target, movement, lifecycle slicing and forecast versus actual.
Week-over-week movers at each level, reading the rollup metric.
Account or project-level targets and relationship strength, integrated into a ranked portfolio view.
Structure, ownership and the pilot adoption review.
Leadership view that reconciles to the team cockpits and to the CRM.
This is the right engagement if
- Your rollups are reliable, or you are ready to fix them first
- Teams are organised in pods or books with quarterly targets
- Managers spend the first hour of every review reconciling numbers
- You want prioritisation to be data-informed rather than purely relationship-driven
Look elsewhere if
- Parent-level numbers still disagree with child-level numbers (start with the estate work)
- There are no targets to measure against
- Leadership wants a static monthly report rather than a weekly operating view
Specifics.
Can our own team build the views?
Often, and it is a good outcome. We specify each view with exact fields and logic and review before it ships so the numbers stay right, while the assembly skill stays with your team.
What if targets change mid-quarter?
The import mechanism is designed to be re-run. Target history is kept so movement against the original target remains visible.
Does this depend on health scoring?
No, but it improves with it. Prioritisation uses target gap, usage trajectory and relationship strength; a validated health score becomes another input when it exists.
How does this connect to NRR?
Gross retention, expansion and contraction are rolled up from the same hierarchy, so the executive view reports NRR components that reconcile to the team cockpits rather than a separately computed number.
Often paired with
Automation and data architecture
Audit, catalogue and consolidate the automation estate; build rollups that reconcile.
Read more PredictionHealth scoring
A model built from your churn history and validated on a holdout set.
Read more After the buildStewardship retainer
A monthly block of senior hours that keeps the estate and its documentation true.
Read moreTell us how your teams are organised and what they are measured on.
Thirty minutes on pods, targets and the current reporting. If a cockpit build makes sense, the fixed-fee proposal follows within two business days.