Question Effectiveness, quarterly review
13 questions, 113 closed deals, minimum sample 30
| Deals in the analysis | 113 closed, won and lost both |
| Kept, rewritten or cut | 11 |
| Too few to judge | 2 |
| Cut this quarter | 2 |
1. Kept, largest separation first
| Question | Asked | Win asked | Win not | Diff |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Why now, rather than six months ago | 74 | 44% | 18% | +26 |
| What happens when it goes wrong | 88 | 41% | 24% | +17 |
| What does success look like in 12 months | 49 | 42% | 26% | +16 |
2. Cut on evidence, 30 September
| Question | Asked | Diff | Why |
|---|---|---|---|
| On a scale of one to ten, how painful is this | 61 | -1 | Answered every time, never varied |
| Are you the decision maker | 84 | -4 | Yes on 84% of calls, including the stalls |
3. Too few to judge is a verdict, not a blank
Two questions draw promising answers on 7 and 11 deals. Both read too few to judge with the shortfall stated. A win rate computed on seven deals gets quoted in a pipeline review and never retracted.
The 12-month success question is asked mainly by the two most senior reps, who close more anyway. The confound is recorded beside the number.