Companies selling into a complex B-to-B sales environment are shifting away from traditional, stage-based forecasting models in favor of more dynamic approaches, such as Commit/Upside. This shift reflects a broader realization: rigid, probability-based models often fail to capture the nuance of complex selling.
The factored pipeline approach assigns weighted probabilities to deals based on their current stage in the sales cycle. For example, Salesforce has nine default opportunity stages:
Many sales organizations use some derivative of the Salesforce opportunity stages, often modifying the weighted probabilities based on their historical conversion rates. While this system can work reasonably well for short, transactional sales cycles, this method assumes that historical conversion rates will apply evenly across all deals, which isn't always the case. Large deals often progress unpredictably, and stage-based probabilities don't account for deal-specific nuances, such as multiple stakeholders with competing needs, shifting budgets, or competitive threats.
For sales teams with fewer larger deals involving complex sales cycles, relying solely on a factored pipeline methodology can result in inaccurate forecasts, either overly optimistic or far too conservative.
To address these gaps, many organizations are turning to the Commit/Upside methodology, which introduces qualitative judgment and context-driven inputs into the forecast.
Rather than relying solely on sales opportunity stage progression, this model assesses each deal based on multiple real-time factors, including customer commitment, legal status, competition, and timing. These categories may not map directly to sales pipeline stages, as multiple criteria influence forecasting decisions.
Commit deals are those that sales professionals and managers are highly confident in closing within the forecast period, typically with customer buy-in, legal approval, or strong purchase intent.
Upside includes deals that have a chance of closing but require additional actions or favorable conditions (e.g., customer approval, budget release, or competitive win).
This method introduces qualitative judgment, allowing reps and managers to make real-time adjustments rather than relying on historical close rates. Here is an example of Commit/Upside forecasting methodology:
|
Stage |
Definition |
Criteria |
Confidence Level |
|
Commit |
The final decision maker has committed to closing the deal |
· Start date and commercial terms are finalized. · Competition has been eliminated. · Legal and procurement hurdles are cleared, or a firm timeline is in place for signature. · The only remaining step is the execution of the agreement. |
90% |
|
Best Case |
The client has indicated that you are the solution of choice and expects to close within a defined timeframe. |
· Client mobilizers or champions confirm we are in "Column A". · A sequence of events to close (paperwork, procurement, internal approvals, kick-off) is confirmed by the client. · The client has given a general commitment to close and kick off within a 4-week window |
60-80% |
|
Upside |
A well-qualified opportunity where the customer has ruled out "do nothing" and "internal resources" as options, meaning they will be buying a solution. |
· Client has acknowledged a clear business need that requires external solutions. · High-level scope, budget, and timeline are confirmed. · Competition still in play, but we are engaged in discussions.
|
30-50% |
|
Uncommitted |
All active deals that are still in motion but lack sufficient validation to be categorized as Upside, Best Case, or Commit. |
· Sales team engaged with stakeholders, but key decision-makers may not be fully committed. · Solution fit, budget, and timeline are still being defined. · Potential risk of "do nothing" or internal competition.
|
10-30% |
This model is especially effective for longer, more complex sales cycles where rigid stage-to-probability mapping falls short.
Complex sales cycles often involve multiple stakeholders, uncertain timelines, and evolving requirements. In such environments, subjective judgment isn’t a weakness — it’s a necessity.
The Commit/Upside model introduces sales team insight, allowing sales representatives and managers to supplement data with on-the-ground knowledge. It also enables dynamic forecasting — adapting to new developments in real time, rather than relying on outdated averages. The Commit/Upside approach drives ownership and focus, encouraging teams to think critically about deal status rather than just moving opportunities from stage to stage.
Senior sales leaders need accurate forecasts for planning, and factored pipelines (probability weighting) often overestimate or underestimate revenue because this methodology relies on historical conversion rates. The Commit/Upside approach forces sales professionals and sales managers to take ownership of their numbers rather than relying on arbitrary percentages and allows sales team insights to supplement the data.
It encourages teams to focus on execution rather than just filling pipeline stages with deals that might not close.
The factored pipeline model is most effective for simpler, shorter sales cycles sales cycles. However, the factored approach is less effective in a complex selling environment. For complex sales, the Commit/Upside forecasting approach allows sales representatives to provide more insights and take more accountability for their sales forecasts.