本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

account-plan

Build a strategic account plan for winning, retaining, or expanding a named account. Use when the user says "build an account plan", "strategic account planning", "how do I grow this account", "account expansion strategy", "whitespace analysis", "QBR prep", "key account review", "map the stakeholders in this account", "land and expand plan", "how do I break into [company]", or wants a structured strategy for a specific account.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md6.0 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Overview

Based on "The New Strategic Selling" by Robert B. Miller and Stephen E. Heiman. Miller and Heiman's framework established that complex B2B sales are never one-to-one - they involve multiple buying influencers, each with different priorities and different definitions of "win." Strategic Selling maps every key player in the account, diagnoses your position with each one, and builds a coordinated plan to move the account forward.

Workflow

Step 1: Define the account objective and timeline

Write one sentence: what does winning this account mean in the next 90 days, and what does it mean in 12 months?

Format:

  • 90-day objective: [specific, measurable outcome - e.g., "Close initial $120K deal with [division]"]
  • 12-month objective: [expansion target - e.g., "Expand to 3 divisions, $400K ARR"]
  • Strategic importance: [why this account matters - size, logo value, reference potential, or industry influence]

Without a clear objective, every action in the account plan is activity without direction.

Step 2: Map all buying influencers

Miller and Heiman identified four roles in every complex sale. Every account has all four - find them.

RoleWho they areWhat they care about
Economic BuyerFinal financial authority. One person, usually senior.ROI, strategic fit, risk to the organization
User BuyerPeople who will use your product day-to-day. Often multiple.Ease of use, workflow impact, job security
Technical BuyerEvaluates fit against technical, legal, or compliance requirements.Risk elimination, standards, integration
CoachYour internal ally. Wants you to win. Provides intelligence.Their own credibility and advancement

For each person you've identified, record:

  • Name and title
  • Role type (Economic / User / Technical / Coach)
  • Their primary win (what success looks like for them personally)
  • Your current relationship strength: Red (no contact / hostile), Yellow (neutral / unknown), Green (supportive)

Step 3: Diagnose your position in the account

For each key influencer, answer:

  • Mode: Are you in "Growth" mode (expanding a relationship), "Trouble" mode (at risk of losing ground), or "Even Keel" mode (stable but no urgency)?
  • Response mode: What does this person think of your solution - Overconfident, Panic, Complacent, or Realistic?

Overconfidence is the most dangerous. If you rate a relationship Green without evidence of recent advocacy from that person, you're in Overconfident mode.

Step 4: Identify red flags and strengths

Strengths (what's working in your favor):

  • e.g., "Strong Champion in [department] who has budget access"
  • e.g., "Existing contract provides stickiness and usage data"

Red flags (gaps that threaten the account):

  • e.g., "No access to Economic Buyer - all activity through mid-level manager"
  • e.g., "Technical Buyer is evaluating a competitor with stronger [integration]"
  • e.g., "Renewal in 60 days with unresolved support issue outstanding"

Each red flag requires a specific action in Step 5.

Step 5: Build the action plan

For every red flag and every key influencer in Yellow or Red status, write one action.

Format per action:

  • Objective: what you're trying to change
  • Action: specific next step
  • Owner: who on your team executes this
  • By: specific date

Limit to 5-7 actions total. More than that is a list, not a plan.

Example actions:

  • Objective: Gain access to Economic Buyer Action: Ask Coach to arrange 20-min exec briefing with CFO Owner: [AE] / By: [date]

  • Objective: De-risk Technical Buyer concern about integration Action: Schedule technical deep-dive with [your SE] and their IT lead Owner: [SE] / By: [date]

Step 6: Define success metrics and review cadence

Set two things:

  1. Success metrics: how you'll know the account plan is working (e.g., "Economic Buyer meeting secured", "Expansion SOW signed by Q3", "NPS above 8 at next QBR")
  2. Review cadence: when you'll revisit and update the plan (monthly for strategic accounts, quarterly for growth accounts)

An account plan that isn't reviewed is a document, not a plan.

Anti-Patterns

1. Building the plan around one contact Bad: An account plan that lists one stakeholder and calls it done. Good: Map all four buying influencer types. If you only know one person in the account, that's the first red flag.

2. Confusing activity with progress Bad: "We had 3 calls this month - account is healthy." Good: Progress means a buying influencer moved from Yellow to Green, or a specific red flag was closed.

3. Treating the Coach as the Economic Buyer Bad: "Our Champion told us the budget is approved - we're good." Good: Verify with the Economic Buyer directly. Coaches report what they believe, not what's decided.

4. Static plans Bad: Building the account plan at the start of the quarter and never updating it. Good: Review monthly. Update influencer status and red flags as new information comes in.

Quality Checklist

  • 90-day and 12-month account objectives are written and specific
  • All four buying influencer roles identified (Economic, User, Technical, Coach)
  • Each named stakeholder has a relationship status (Red / Yellow / Green)
  • At least one person confirmed as Coach with evidence of active advocacy
  • Red flags are listed with a specific action assigned per flag
  • Action plan has 5-7 items max, each with an owner and a date
  • Success metrics defined - outcome metrics, not activity metrics
  • Review cadence is set and calendared

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Rate any product, feature, or experience on the 11-star scale (Brian Chesky's Airbnb thought experiment). Use when user says "rate this experience", "11-star", "star rating", "experience audit", "how good is this", "experience rating", "product audit", "quality assessment", or wants to evaluate product quality and identify improvement paths. Also trigger when user wants to benchmark a feature, assess where a product stands, or map out what "great" looks like - even if they don't explicitly say "11-star".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年10月13日 更新

Generate A/B copy variants grounded in Eugene Schwartz's awareness and market-sophistication stages and John Caples' tested-headline discipline. Every variant declares its angle, the awareness stage it targets, and a falsifiable hypothesis, and the skill recommends which pair to test first and what delta counts as signal. Use when the user says "A/B test this", "write variants", "give me options", "test different angles", "copy variants", "ab copy", "test this headline", "multiple versions", "which version is better", or wants to test copy before publishing. For reviewing copy that already exists, see copy-review. For sample size and stopping rules, see growth-experiment. For diagnosing a page rather than its words, see page-cro. For full paid ad sets by platform, see ad-campaign-writer.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年10月13日 更新

Write measurable acceptance criteria for requirements or user stories. Use when the user says "write acceptance criteria", "definition of done", "how do we test this", "fit criteria", "given when then", "Gherkin scenarios", "what does done look like", "testable conditions", "how will we know this works" - even if they don't explicitly say "acceptance criteria".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年10月13日 更新

Write paid ad copy for LinkedIn, Google, Meta, and YouTube. Produces multiple variants per platform, each targeting a different Eugene Schwartz awareness level and Cialdini persuasion principle. Use when the user asks for ad copy, ad variants, "write LinkedIn ads", Google ads, Meta ads, paid social copy, ad headlines, or wants creative for a paid campaign. Reads brand voice, ICP, and positioning from knowledge/. For organic social posts, see linkedin-post or social-calendar. For the landing page the ad points at, see landing-page-writer. For testing variants, see ab-copy-writer.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年10月13日 更新

Design clean and consistent APIs. Use when the user says "design an API", "API design review", "design these endpoints", "REST API for X", "GraphQL schema", "API contract", "how should this endpoint work", "review my API design", or wants to create or improve an API interface - even if they don't explicitly say "API design".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年10月13日 更新

Write a clear, reviewable audit workpaper documenting procedures, evidence, and conclusions. Use when an auditor says "write a workpaper", "document this audit procedure", "tick and tie this", "I need to document my testing", "substantive testing workpaper", "controls testing documentation", "audit evidence memo", "prepare the workpaper for this balance", "document the audit steps I performed", or needs to capture any audit work in a format that supports review and sign-off. Also trigger when someone has completed audit testing and needs to write it up even if they don't use the word "workpaper".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年10月13日 更新

qa-aman のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する