B2B AI DirectoryB2B AI Directory
Deal SupportadvancedPro

Build a pilot or POC success, governance, and exit plan

Define hypothesis, scope, data, environments, owners, metrics, baselines, tests, governance, issue handling, exit criteria, and commercial conversion before a pilot starts.

What you will have

A joint pilot charter with bounded scope, success metrics, responsibilities, governance, risk controls, acceptance, exit paths, and commercial next steps.

Setup time
10-16 hours
Time saved
12-20 hours per pilot
Estimated cost
$120 to $700 per month
Tools used
4 tools

Why this works

A pilot succeeds commercially when the parties agree what belief is being tested, what work is included, what evidence counts, who owns dependencies, and what happens after pass, partial pass, fail, delay, or buyer nonparticipation. The workflow treats governance and exit as part of the proof rather than administrative details added after work begins.

Step-by-step workflow

Preview the workflow

The first 2 steps are open. Pro unlocks the remaining steps, copy-paste prompts, pro tips, tool-by-tool setup guidance, and implementation details.

1

Confirm the pilot is the right proof method

45-60 min

Use Salesforce and Google Sheets to document the buyer belief, decision, lighter proof considered, why a pilot is necessary, cost, effort, strategic value, and approval. Create or update the exact fields `pilot_id`, `opportunity_id`, `belief_id`, `decision_supported`, `alternative_proof`, `why_pilot`, `cost_estimate`, `effort_estimate`, `strategic_value`, `approval`, retaining the native account, opportunity, contact, site, program, requirement, and source IDs instead of matching on display names alone. Apply the operating rule that the pilot cannot proceed without a decision owner, commercial path, and reason lighter proof is insufficient, and write every proposed change to a dated change log rather than replacing the prior approved value. Validate the work by reviewing buyer authority, cost, capacity, timing, and alternative evidence; assign each warning or exception an owner, severity, due date, and evidence link, and hold records that fail the check. The completion gate is sales, solution, and delivery leadership approving pilot pursuit; document the rollback or fallback path if the source is unavailable, the connector fails, or the buyer disputes the record.

Output

An approved pilot justification and no-pilot alternative.

SalesforceGoogle Sheets
Pro tip

Reject pilots requested only because the buyer wants free evaluation without a defined decision.

2

Create the versioned pilot Claude Project

45-60 min

Use Claude and Google Sheets to package instructions, charter fields, metric rules, source register, responsibility model, issue taxonomy, examples, tests, and changelog. Create or update the exact fields `project_version`, `instructions_file`, `field_dictionary`, `metric_rules`, `source_register`, `responsibility_model`, `issue_taxonomy`, `test_cases`, `changelog`, retaining the native account, opportunity, contact, site, program, requirement, and source IDs instead of matching on display names alone. Apply the operating rule that the project includes required files, `vYYYY.MM` or pilot-release versions, owners, refresh rules, tests, and maintenance procedures, and write every proposed change to a dated change log rather than replacing the prior approved value. Validate the work by testing historical pass, partial, failed, and abandoned pilot scenarios; assign each warning or exception an owner, severity, due date, and evidence link, and hold records that fail the check. The completion gate is the pilot owner approving the package; document the rollback or fallback path if the source is unavailable, the connector fails, or the buyer disputes the record. Run this template in Claude within the approved pilot Claude Project after attaching the source records named for this step; store the returned JSON beside the source register before any downstream action. Maintain the Claude Project with `instructions.md`, `field-dictionary.json`, `source-register.csv`, `review-rubric.md`, `approved-examples.md`, and `changelog.md`; name releases `vYYYY.MM`, assign a primary and backup owner, refresh source exports before each operating review, and review permissions and maintenance quarterly.

Output

A maintained pilot workspace with stable governance files.

ClaudeGoogle Sheets
Pro tip

Create a separate project release for every material scope or success-criteria change.

Prompt template
ROLE
You are the governed sales-execution analyst supporting a sales engineer, solution consultant, or pilot program owner. You work inside the “Build a pilot or POC success, governance, and exit plan” operating system, where source traceability, stable CRM identifiers, buyer-safe language, and human authority are more important than producing a polished but unsupported answer.

OBJECTIVE
Complete workflow step 2, “Create the versioned pilot Claude Project,” and produce this operational outcome: A maintained pilot workspace with stable governance files. Execute only this step; do not silently broaden the task, fabricate buyer facts, or make external changes.

INPUTS
1. APPROVED SOURCE RECORDS: {{create_the_versioned_pilot_claude_project_source_records}}
2. FIELD DICTIONARY AND ALLOWED VALUES: {{create_the_versioned_pilot_claude_project_field_dictionary}}
3. ACCOUNT, OPPORTUNITY, OR PROGRAM CONTEXT: {{create_the_versioned_pilot_claude_project_deal_context}}
4. OPERATING RULES, PERMISSIONS, AND APPROVAL MATRIX: {{create_the_versioned_pilot_claude_project_operating_rules}}
5. PRIOR APPROVED VERSION OR CURRENT STATE: {{create_the_versioned_pilot_claude_project_prior_state}}
6. DEADLINES, OWNERS, AND REVIEW CADENCE: {{create_the_versioned_pilot_claude_project_approval_context}}

WORK TO PERFORM
1. Perform the exact job described by “Create the versioned pilot Claude Project” using the supplied IDs and field names.
2. Separate observed facts, direct buyer statements, operator-entered decisions, calculations, and model inferences.
3. Preserve account_id, opportunity_id, contact_id, site_id, program_id, requirement_id, source_id, owner, and effective_date whenever supplied; do not merge records merely because names look similar.
4. Populate the requested fields, identify missing values, and flag contradictions, stale evidence, duplicate entities, unsupported claims, permission issues, and dependencies.
5. Return records that can be copied into the declared system of record without renaming identifiers, flattening one-to-many relationships, or overwriting an approved value.
6. Provide a compact change summary, exception queue, approval request, and next-action list with owner and due date.
7. Apply the step-specific instructions: package instructions, charter fields, metric rules, source register, responsibility model, issue taxonomy, examples, tests, and changelog.

OUTPUT SCHEMA
Return valid JSON only with this exact top-level structure:
{
  "workflow_slug": "pilot-poc-success-governance-exit-plan",
  "step_number": 2,
  "step_title": "Create the versioned pilot Claude Project",
  "run_status": "pass|warning|hold|fail",
  "source_register": [{"source_id":"string","source_type":"string","captured_at":"ISO-8601|null","authoritative":true,"notes":"string|null"}],
  "records": [{
    "project_version": "value|null",
    "instructions_file": "value|null",
    "field_dictionary": "value|null",
    "metric_rules": "value|null",
    "source_register": "value|null",
    "responsibility_model": "value|null",
    "issue_taxonomy": "value|null",
    "test_cases": "value|null",
    "changelog": "value|null",
    "evidence_source_ids": ["string"],
    "confidence": "high|medium|low",
    "review_status": "approved|needs-review|held"
  }],
  "exceptions": [{"record_id":"string|null","exception_type":"string","severity":"low|medium|high|critical","evidence":"string","owner":"string","required_action":"string"}],
  "changes_from_prior_state": [{"record_id":"string","field":"string","prior_value":"value|null","proposed_value":"value|null","reason":"string","source_ids":["string"]}],
  "review_summary": {"facts":["string"],"inferences":["string"],"open_questions":["string"],"next_actions":[{"action":"string","owner":"string","due_date":"YYYY-MM-DD|null"}]},
  "qa": {"schema_valid":true,"ids_preserved":true,"evidence_complete":true,"human_approval_required":true}
}

GUARDRAILS
- Treat the supplied field dictionary, approval matrix, security policy, commercial rules, and prior approved state as binding.
- Do not invent quotes, dates, metrics, relationships, customer permissions, product capabilities, legal positions, security answers, pricing authority, or approvals.
- Do not perform, simulate, or claim an external write. Return proposed records or actions for the named operator or governed automation to apply.
- Do not collapse conflicting evidence into one confident statement. Preserve each source and route the conflict to the exception queue.
- Do not expose confidential margin, personal data, security detail, or contract language to an audience not authorized in the inputs.
- Mark any record that could change scope, price, legal obligations, security posture, implementation effort, or buyer commitment as human-approval-required.

EVIDENCE REQUIREMENTS
- Every material claim must cite one or more supplied source_id values and include the source date when available.
- Direct buyer statements must remain distinguishable from seller interpretation and model inference.
- Calculations must show inputs, units, formula, and rounding rule; relationships must show the evidence supporting the match.
- A record without adequate evidence must be marked needs-review or held, never approved by default.

UNCERTAINTY HANDLING
- Use high confidence only for current authoritative records or direct, corroborated buyer evidence.
- Use medium confidence for a plausible interpretation supported by one credible source, and low confidence for hypotheses requiring validation.
- When two sources disagree, list both values, explain the conflict, and name the person who must resolve it.
- If required inputs are absent, return run_status “hold” and state exactly what is missing instead of guessing.

HUMAN REVIEW
The named operator must review the source register, exceptions, inferred fields, proposed changes, and audience permissions. Require explicit approval before any CRM write, buyer-facing publication, pricing or scope commitment, legal or security response, pilot promise, or external notification. Return the approval decision, reviewer, timestamp, rejected items, and required revisions in the final review summary.

Pro workflow preview

Previewing 2 of 13 steps

Pro membership

Unlock the full workflow

Get the remaining 11 steps, copy-paste prompts, pro tips, tool-by-tool setup guidance, and weekly new workflows.

$9/month

Define hypothesis, use cases, and scope boundaries
Create the stakeholder and responsibility matrix
Define baselines, metrics, and success thresholds
Plan data, environment, integration, and security readiness
Design the test protocol and evidence capture
Build the Asana work plan and milestone dependencies
See Pro plan
3Define hypothesis, use cases, and scope boundaries
Locked
4Create the stakeholder and responsibility matrix
Locked
5Define baselines, metrics, and success thresholds
Locked
6Plan data, environment, integration, and security readiness
Locked
7Design the test protocol and evidence capture
Locked
8Build the Asana work plan and milestone dependencies
Locked
9Define governance, issue, and change-control rules
Locked
10Define pass, partial, fail, pause, and termination exits
Locked
11Run the pilot kickoff and baseline validation
Locked
12Execute tests and manage evidence and issues
Locked
13Run final acceptance, commercial conversion, and retrospective
Locked

Expected results

Pilot scope

One bounded charter

Included and excluded use cases, systems, sites, users, data, and services are explicit.

Success evidence

All metrics have baseline and owner

The team knows how evidence will be captured, reviewed, and accepted.

Governance

Named cadence and escalation

Issues, changes, dependencies, and missed buyer obligations follow a controlled process.

Exit readiness

Pass, partial, fail, and stop paths

The opportunity has a commercial or closure decision rather than an indefinite extension.

Related workflows

Continue with workflows that share a similar GTM motion, category, or tool stack.