Territory design is a map problem, not a spreadsheet exercise.

0

years of customer and demographic movement, mapped before a single boundary gets drawn.

Territory design

The scope of work

Territories get drawn on state lines and balanced on account count, because those are the two numbers everyone already has. Neither tells you anything about opportunity, so the books come out three times apart and nobody can prove it either way.

We score the accounts, map where the market actually moved, and redraw on zones that balance to within a couple of percent.

How does Sapwood draw territories that stay balanced?

Step 1

We start from your current books

  • Who you closed, and where they were
  • What each book holds today
  • Nothing written, changed or deleted
Who you closed, and where
Current books, as they stand
Where customers concentrate
Where they are moving
Read only. We build from what actually happened.
Step 2

We measure how uneven they actually are

  • Every account scored on fit and intent
  • Potential summed by territory
  • The gap is usually bigger than anyone thinks
BOOKS, BEFORE
West1.8x the potential
East1.2x
South0.9x
Central0.6x
Same account count in each. Three times the opportunity gap.
Step 3

We map where the market moved

  • Four years of customer movement, in ArcGIS
  • Demographic shift by region
  • Where concentration is building
WHERE THE MARKET ACTUALLY MOVED
Central and westgrowth concentrating
Southflat, holding
Eastdeclining density
Four years of movement, mapped in ArcGIS before anything is drawn.
Step 4

We cut zones, not states

  • Boundaries where the buyers concentrate
  • Crossing state lines when the data says so
  • Each zone balanced on opportunity
ZONES, NOT STATES
Zone 1Pacific and Mountain West
Zone 2Front Range and Plains
Zone 3Central corridor
Cut at the grain the buyers live atcrossing state lines wherever the data said they should
Step 5

We balance to within a couple of percent

  • Every book within 2% of the same potential
  • Checked against who you have closed
  • Open pipeline rules agreed first
BOOKS, AFTER
Zone 11.00x
Zone 20.98x
Zone 31.01x
Zone 40.99x
Every book within 2% of the same opportunity.
Step 6

You own the map

  • Assignment rules written into the CRM
  • Evaluated on record creation, not quarterly
  • Redraw it yourself next year
Book time with us →
SapwoodYou
The rules are in your CRM. Redraw it yourself next year without us.

Three things that make a book fair.

Scoring the accounts

What usually happens: Books get balanced on account count because it is the only number everyone has. Two hundred accounts in a saturated region is treated as equivalent to eighty in a growing one, and it is not.

What we build instead: Every account scored on firmographic fit and live intent, then potential summed per territory. The target is every book within a few percent of the same opportunity, not the same headcount.

How it is different
Within 2%of the same opportunity per book
Scoredon fit and intent, not on logo count
Evidencefrom who you have actually closed
Drawing the boundary

What usually happens: State lines are an administrative boundary, not a market one. Drawing on them is how a book ends up looking tidy on a map and being wildly uneven in practice.

What we build instead: ArcGIS and four years of customer and demographic movement, so the boundary falls where the buyers actually concentrate. Zones cross state lines when the data says they should.

How it is different
GISnot states dragged into columns
4 yearsof customer and demographic movement
Crosses borderswhere the buyers do
Making it hold

What usually happens: A territory map that lives in a slide drifts within a quarter. Someone reassigns an account manually, then someone else does, and by Q2 the balance you designed is gone.

What we build instead: Assignment written into the CRM as rules evaluated on record creation, so a new account lands with the right owner without anyone thinking about it. The map is a system, not a document.

How it is different
On creationnot a quarterly cleanup
One rulesetagreeing across CRM and scheduler
Holdsthrough the year, not just January
Can you prove your territories are balanced?We will score your accounts and show you the real spread between books. Free, and the write up is yours either way.
Get a free audit →

Case study: Same account count in every book, three times the opportunity gap.

The territory map
Four territories, drawn on state lines, each with roughly the same number of accounts. Scored on opportunity, the spread ran from 1.8x down to 0.6x. Four years of customer and demographic movement showed growth concentrating central and west. So we cut zones at the grain the buyers live at, and balanced on potential.
West1.8x / 0.6x spread
CAORWANVIDUTAZNM
Central1.8x / 0.6x spread
MTWYCONDSDNEKSMNIAMOILWIOKAR
South1.8x / 0.6x spread
TXLAMSALGAFLTNSCNCKY
East1.8x / 0.6x spread
VAWVMDDENJPANYCTRIMAVTNHMEOHINMI
Zone 1Pacific and Mountain WestCA, NV, AZ and the western half of CO1.00x
Zone 2Front Range and PlainsEastern CO, UT, WY, NM into western KS0.98x
Zone 3Central corridorMO, AR, TN and the Mississippi counties1.01x
Zone 4Great Lakes and EastUnchanged, the buyers had not moved0.99x
What each book was actually worth
West, before1.8x
Nearly twice the opportunity of the average book
East, before1.2x
Comfortable, and quietly protected
Central, before0.6x
The book everyone complained about, with cause
All four, after1.00x
Within 2% of each other, balanced on opportunity

The account counts barely changed. What changed was which accounts sat in which book, and the attainment spread that followed closed with them.