Does this work with the way we already forecast?

The pattern needs a method you have written down and an authorized way to read the pipeline records. The audit confirms what yours covers and what is in scope.

What happens when a deal's record and activity disagree?

The disagreement is listed against the deal and goes to its owner before the submission is signed. A person corrects the record; the workflow reports the conflict and does not resolve it.

The number arrives without its working

Today

The sheet was built again from scratch

You rebuild the submission each cycle, and the number arrives without its working.
Somebody asks what changed since the last one, and the honest answer is that the sheet was built again from scratch.
A figure moved, and nobody can point at the deals that moved it.
The review turns into an argument about the spreadsheet instead of a conversation about deals.

With agents

Figures and working kept together, in front of the person who signs

The number can be checked rather than argued.
The change since the last cycle is attributed.
The review is about deals.

How an agent runs it

A submission is a set of figures plus the working behind them, and the working is the half that usually goes missing. The workflow keeps the two together and stops in front of the person who signs.

Assembles

Builds the submission pack from the pipeline records and the method you have already written down.

Applies

Uses your categories and your rules as written, so the shape of the submission stays yours.

Traces

Shows each figure's path back to the rows that produced it, so the number can be checked rather than believed.

Reconciles

Compares this submission against the prior one and names what moved and what the record says moved it.

Lists

Sets out the deals whose record and activity disagree, so the number rests on fields somebody can inspect.

Human gate

The judgement calls and the committed number are the revenue owner's, the pack reaches finance only after that person signs it, and the whole submission can be assembled by hand at any point because the records and the method are yours.

Records

Keeps the method version and the rows behind each figure, so a question about a past submission has an answer.

Results

What changes when the working travels with the number

Checked rather than argued

Every figure keeps its trace back to the source rows, so a challenge goes to a row instead of to a person.

The change is attributed

The pack reconciles against the prior submission and names what the record says moved.

The review is about deals

Disagreements between record and activity are listed before the meeting rather than discovered in it.

Where this fits

Workflow / Automate a Workflow

Tier 1 through the Automate a Workflow door: one process end to end, from the records to a submission a person signs. The boundary is the judgement. The workflow assembles and traces, while the commit and the number submitted stay a person's. It extends toward The sales ops coordinator as an AI Employee as a possible next step rather than a promised state, which holds no forecasting judgement either. How It Works shows how the gates and the authorizations are built.

Tier 1 / Prove

How It Works

Questions, answered

No. It assembles and traces. The judgement calls and the committed number belong to the revenue owner, and the gate is closed by default. The records and the method stay in your systems, so the pack can be assembled by hand at any point without the agent.

AI Opportunity Audit

See which figures in last cycle's submission trace to a row

Bring last cycle's submission and the records behind it, and see which figures can be traced to a row.

Book an audit