B2B AI DirectoryB2B AI Directory
Sales CallsadvancedPro

Prepare plant visits and onsite workshops for technical sales

Plan objectives, stakeholders, safety, observation routes, workshop exercises, evidence capture, and post-visit decisions so an onsite becomes structured technical discovery.

What you will have

A complete plant-visit charter, agenda, role map, safety and logistics checklist, observation guide, workshop board, evidence template, and debrief decision pack.

Setup time
6-9 hours
Time saved
6-10 hours per visit
Estimated cost
$80 to $550 per month
Tools used
4 tools

Why this works

Onsite access is scarce and easily wasted when the visit becomes an unstructured tour. This workflow connects objectives, participant roles, safety, observation evidence, workshop decisions, and post-visit follow-up so the team can learn from the real operating environment without turning observations into unsupported requirements.

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

Define the visit charter and decision outcomes

45-60 min

Use Salesforce and Google Drive to set visit objectives, questions, required decisions, in-scope sites and processes, participant roles, evidence rules, and success criteria. Create or update the exact fields `visit_id`, `opportunity_id`, `site_id`, `visit_date`, `objective`, `decision_required`, `process_scope`, `participant_role`, `evidence_rule`, `success_criterion`, 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 team cannot add surveillance, photography, or sensitive-data collection beyond host permission, and write every proposed change to a dated change log rather than replacing the prior approved value. Validate the work by testing agenda ideas against objectives, time, site scope, and evidence rules; 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 customer host and internal account leader approving the charter; document the rollback or fallback path if the source is unavailable, the connector fails, or the buyer disputes the record.

Output

An approved visit charter linked to the opportunity.

SalesforceGoogle Drive
Pro tip

A plant tour and a design workshop are different jobs; state which decisions the day must support.

2

Create the versioned onsite Claude Project

45-60 min

Use Claude and Google Drive to package instructions, site context, field dictionary, safety rules, observation taxonomy, source register, workshop templates, tests, and changelog. Create or update the exact fields `project_version`, `instructions_file`, `field_dictionary`, `safety_rules`, `observation_taxonomy`, `source_register`, `workshop_templates`, `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 uses required versioned files, owners, refresh rules, tests, and `vYYYY.MM` or visit-date releases, and write every proposed change to a dated change log rather than replacing the prior approved value. Validate the work by testing the package on a prior visit and confirming site, process, and evidence distinctions remain intact; 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 visit lead approving the workspace; 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 onsite-workshop 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 onsite preparation workspace with named files and owners.

ClaudeGoogle Drive
Pro tip

Archive each visit as its own dated release; do not mix observations from different plants without explicit site IDs.

Prompt template
ROLE
You are the governed sales-execution analyst supporting an account executive, sales engineer, or industrial solution architect. You work inside the “Prepare plant visits and onsite workshops for technical sales” 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 onsite Claude Project,” and produce this operational outcome: A maintained onsite preparation workspace with named files and owners. 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_onsite_claude_project_source_records}}
2. FIELD DICTIONARY AND ALLOWED VALUES: {{create_the_versioned_onsite_claude_project_field_dictionary}}
3. ACCOUNT, OPPORTUNITY, OR PROGRAM CONTEXT: {{create_the_versioned_onsite_claude_project_deal_context}}
4. OPERATING RULES, PERMISSIONS, AND APPROVAL MATRIX: {{create_the_versioned_onsite_claude_project_operating_rules}}
5. PRIOR APPROVED VERSION OR CURRENT STATE: {{create_the_versioned_onsite_claude_project_prior_state}}
6. DEADLINES, OWNERS, AND REVIEW CADENCE: {{create_the_versioned_onsite_claude_project_approval_context}}

WORK TO PERFORM
1. Perform the exact job described by “Create the versioned onsite 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, site context, field dictionary, safety rules, observation taxonomy, source register, workshop templates, tests, and changelog.

OUTPUT SCHEMA
Return valid JSON only with this exact top-level structure:
{
  "workflow_slug": "plant-visit-onsite-workshop-preparation-agent",
  "step_number": 2,
  "step_title": "Create the versioned onsite 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",
    "safety_rules": "value|null",
    "observation_taxonomy": "value|null",
    "source_register": "value|null",
    "workshop_templates": "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

Export opportunity, stakeholder, and commitment context
Collect host logistics, safety, and access requirements
Map onsite stakeholders and facilitation roles
Design the plant observation route
Create the observation evidence sheet
Build stakeholder-specific onsite questions
See Pro plan
3Export opportunity, stakeholder, and commitment context
Locked
4Collect host logistics, safety, and access requirements
Locked
5Map onsite stakeholders and facilitation roles
Locked
6Design the plant observation route
Locked
7Create the observation evidence sheet
Locked
8Build stakeholder-specific onsite questions
Locked
9Design workshop exercises and decision boards
Locked
10Prepare the visit agenda and internal run-of-show
Locked
11Run an internal safety, evidence, and facilitation rehearsal
Locked
12Execute the visit and protect source integrity
Locked
13Run the 24-hour debrief, measure visit quality, and issue the next-step pack
Locked

Expected results

Visit readiness

One approved charter and agenda

Objectives, roles, evidence, logistics, and decisions are agreed before travel.

Observation coverage

All priority processes assigned

Each production, quality, maintenance, engineering, IT, or OT observation has an owner and capture field.

Evidence quality

Facts separated from interpretations

Photos, notes, timestamps, statements, and hypotheses retain permissions and source context.

Post-visit action

Debrief completed within 24 hours

The team converts observations into validated questions, requirements, risks, and next decisions while context is fresh.

Related workflows

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