Best for
- First meetings in large enterprise accounts
- Industrial and automotive account entry
- Sellers with many possible use cases but no clear wedge
Force one evidence-backed entry wedge for a complex account, define what would disprove it, and prepare a first meeting that tests the hypothesis instead of pitching broadly.
A single recommended entry wedge, alternative wedge, stakeholder hypothesis, validation plan, meeting objective, proof package, and stop conditions.
Quick view
Check the audience, core tools, and access before you start the detailed steps.
Best for
Core tools
4 tools used across the workflow.
Access
Preview the open steps, then unlock the remaining implementation details and prompts.
Why this works
Broad account research often produces a catalogue of possible pains without a decision about where to enter. This workflow turns evidence into one testable wedge, preserves an alternative, and requires disconfirming evidence and stop conditions so the seller can learn quickly without pretending the hypothesis is already a qualified opportunity.
Expected results
Entry decision
One primary and one fallback wedge
The seller must choose a focused opening rather than carrying every possible use case into the meeting.
Evidence traceability
Every hypothesis cites dated sources
Internal history, external research, and relationship signals remain distinguishable.
Meeting readiness
One testable plan per account
The plan defines who to meet, what to learn, what proof to bring, and when to stop.
Assumption control
All material unknowns logged
Unsupported claims become validation questions rather than sales assertions.
Step-by-step 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.
45-60 min
45-60 min
Use Salesforce to set the account scope, offer boundaries, acceptable wedge types, evidence threshold, disqualification rules, reviewer roles, and meeting timeline. Create or update the exact fields `plan_id`, `account_id`, `offer_scope`, `wedge_types`, `evidence_threshold`, `disqualifiers`, `reviewers`, `meeting_date`, `plan_owner`, 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 account owner cannot approve a wedge outside the offer or unsupported by current evidence, and write every proposed change to a dated change log rather than replacing the prior approved value. Validate the work by testing three possible wedges against inclusion, disqualification, 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 sales manager and solution lead approving the decision rules; document the rollback or fallback path if the source is unavailable, the connector fails, or the buyer disputes the record.
An approved account-entry decision contract.
A wedge must name a buyer problem, stakeholder, and entry event; an industry slogan is not a wedge.
45-60 min
45-60 min
Use Claude and Salesforce to package instructions, account fields, wedge rubric, source register, proof library index, approved examples, test cases, and changelog. Create or update the exact fields `project_version`, `instructions_file`, `field_dictionary`, `wedge_rubric`, `source_register`, `proof_index`, `test_cases`, `changelog`, `owner`, 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, `vYYYY.MM` naming, primary and backup owners, refresh rules, tests, and maintenance calendar, and write every proposed change to a dated change log rather than replacing the prior approved value. Validate the work by running the package on two won and two no-decision accounts and reviewing whether it overstates confidence; 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 account owner and sales manager approving the production 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 account-entry 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.
A persistent account-entry workspace with repeatable governance.
Pro workflow preview
Previewing 2 of 13 steps
Get the remaining 11 steps, copy-paste prompts, pro tips, tool-by-tool setup guidance, and ongoing workflow and prompt releases.
$9/month
Keep rejected wedges and reasons in the changelog so later research does not resurrect them without new evidence.
ROLE
You are the governed sales-execution analyst supporting an enterprise account executive working with a sales engineer. You work inside the “Choose a strategic account entry wedge and first-meeting hypothesis” 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 account-entry Claude Project,” and produce this operational outcome: A persistent account-entry workspace with repeatable governance. 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_account_entry_claude_project_source_records}}
2. FIELD DICTIONARY AND ALLOWED VALUES: {{create_the_versioned_account_entry_claude_project_field_dictionary}}
3. ACCOUNT, OPPORTUNITY, OR PROGRAM CONTEXT: {{create_the_versioned_account_entry_claude_project_deal_context}}
4. OPERATING RULES, PERMISSIONS, AND APPROVAL MATRIX: {{create_the_versioned_account_entry_claude_project_operating_rules}}
5. PRIOR APPROVED VERSION OR CURRENT STATE: {{create_the_versioned_account_entry_claude_project_prior_state}}
6. DEADLINES, OWNERS, AND REVIEW CADENCE: {{create_the_versioned_account_entry_claude_project_approval_context}}
WORK TO PERFORM
1. Perform the exact job described by “Create the versioned account-entry 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, account fields, wedge rubric, source register, proof library index, approved examples, test cases, and changelog.
OUTPUT SCHEMA
Return valid JSON only with this exact top-level structure:
{
"workflow_slug": "strategic-account-entry-wedge-first-meeting-plan",
"step_number": 2,
"step_title": "Create the versioned account-entry 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",
"wedge_rubric": "value|null",
"source_register": "value|null",
"proof_index": "value|null",
"test_cases": "value|null",
"changelog": "value|null",
"owner": "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.Related workflows
Continue with workflows that share a similar GTM motion, category, or tool stack.
A governed weekly territory plan with ranked accounts, reason codes, next actions, owners, evidence, and capacity limits.
A reusable discovery plan with stakeholder branches, evidence requirements, qualification mapping, follow-up logic, and post-call capture fields.
A continuously refreshed plant-investment signal register with evidence, confidence, product relevance, urgency, account owner, and seller action.