The Inspection Cadence

The Theater Problem

The typical pipeline review follows a familiar script.

The manager asks: "Tell me about your deals."

The rep talks. They describe meetings, conversations, relationships. They share their interpretation of buyer sentiment. They explain why they are confident or concerned.

The manager listens. They ask follow-up questions. They offer advice. They move to the next deal.

Forty-five minutes pass. The manager has heard about 12 deals. They feel informed. They have "inspected" the pipeline.

Nothing useful has happened.

This is pipeline theater. It feels like management. It produces no change. The manager learned what the rep thinks. They did not learn what is actually true. They did not identify risks. They did not accelerate stuck deals. They did not improve forecast accuracy.

Theater consumes time without producing value.

What Inspection Should Accomplish

Effective pipeline inspection serves four purposes:

1. Validate Evidence

For each deal, verify that the evidence claimed actually exists. The rep says the champion confirmed budget. Where is that documented? The rep says the decision meeting is scheduled. Is it on the calendar?

Validation is not distrust. It is discipline. Evidence that exists can be verified. Evidence that does not exist cannot be relied upon.

2. Identify Risk

For each deal, assess what signals indicate health or decay. Has the deal progressed since last review? Are Stall Signals present? Is the Decision Audit complete?

Risk identification enables intervention. Deals at risk that are identified early can be saved or accurately re-forecasted. Deals at risk that are not identified become surprises.

3. Remove Blockers

For each deal, determine what is preventing progress and what resources could help. Does the rep need executive involvement? Technical resources? A reference customer? Pricing flexibility?

The manager's job is to clear obstacles that the rep cannot clear alone.

4. Update Forecast

Based on evidence validation and risk assessment, determine if forecast category is accurate. Should this Commit deal be Upside? Should this Upside deal be excluded?

The review should produce a more accurate forecast than existed before the review.

The Three-Question Framework

Effective inspection does not require lengthy deal narratives. It requires answers to three questions.

Question 1: What changed?

Since the last review, what has changed in this deal?

Possible answers:

• Buyer took an action (meeting held, stakeholder engaged, document sent)
• Buyer did not take expected action (meeting slipped, no response to proposal)
• New information emerged (competitor identified, budget confirmed/denied)
• Nothing changed

"Nothing changed" is a critical answer. A deal that has not changed since last review is stalling. Stall is decay. Decay is risk.

Question 2: What is the next buyer action?

Not the next rep action. The next buyer action.

Possible answers:

• Buyer will schedule decision meeting by [date]
• Buyer will provide feedback on proposal by [date]
• Buyer will introduce us to economic buyer by [date]
• Unknown

"Unknown" is a critical answer. If the rep does not know what the buyer will do next, the rep does not have control. The deal is drifting.

Question 3: What is blocking that action?

If the buyer action is known, what could prevent it?

Possible answers:

• Stakeholder is out of office until [date]
• Buyer waiting for internal budget approval
• Buyer evaluating competitive option
• Nothing identified

The blocker reveals where intervention may be needed. If the blocker is internal to the buyer, the rep may need to engage differently. If the blocker is something the seller can address, resources should be applied.

Framework in Practice

Deal A:

• What changed? Buyer stakeholder meeting held; CTO expressed concerns about integration.
• Next buyer action? CTO to evaluate our integration documentation by Friday.
• Blocker? CTO has competing priorities; timeline may slip.

Action: Ensure integration doc is excellent. Follow up Thursday. If slip, offer solutions engineering call for CTO.

Deal B:

• What changed? Nothing since last week.
• Next buyer action? Unknown.
• Blocker? Unknown.

Action: This deal is drifting. Rep must reengage with direct questions. If engagement cannot be established, deal is at risk.

Deal C:

• What changed? Buyer sent contract to legal.
• Next buyer action? Legal review complete by Wednesday.
• Blocker? None identified; standard process.

Action: No intervention needed. Follow up Thursday for status.

The Pipeline Review Protocol

The Three-Question Framework is the content of inspection. The Protocol is the structure.

Preparation (Before the Meeting)

The rep prepares written updates for each deal:

• Changes since last review
• Current Decision Audit status
• Stall Signals present
• Proposed forecast category

The manager reviews preparation before the meeting. The meeting is for discussion, not information transfer.

Prioritization (Start of Meeting)

Not all deals require equal time. Prioritize:

1. At-risk deals: Stall Signals present, forecast category uncertain, decision audit incomplete
2. High-value deals: Above a threshold (top 20% of pipeline value)
3. New deals: Recently created, initial qualification to verify
4. Changes: Deals where something significant changed

Deals that are progressing normally with no flags receive minimal time. Do not review healthy deals in detail just to fill time.

Inspection (Bulk of Meeting)

For each prioritized deal, run the Three-Question Framework:

• What changed?
• What is the next buyer action?
• What is blocking?

Limit deal discussion to 3-5 minutes. If more time is needed, schedule a separate deep dive.

Document decisions and actions in real time. Verbal agreements without documentation disappear.

Actions (End of Meeting)

Summarize:

• Deals that need intervention (and who is doing what)
• Forecast category changes
• Escalations required
• Follow-ups before next review

The output of the meeting should be clear actions, not just shared understanding.

Cadence

Weekly reviews for reps with significant pipeline. The pipeline changes weekly; inspection should match.

Twice-weekly reviews for end-of-quarter, when deal movement accelerates.

Bi-weekly reviews acceptable for reps with smaller portfolios or longer sales cycles.

Common Inspection Failures

Failure 1: Narrative Dominance

The rep talks for 20 minutes about one deal. The manager listens politely. Time runs out before other deals are reviewed.

Solution: Time-box deal discussions. Three-Question Framework keeps discussions focused. If the rep cannot answer the questions concisely, they do not understand the deal.

Failure 2: Manager Monologue

The manager shares war stories, gives advice, and demonstrates their experience. The rep nods. The deal is not discussed.

Solution: The manager's job is to ask questions and remove blockers. Advice should be brief and directly responsive to a stated blocker.

Failure 3: Happy Path Focus

The discussion centers on deals that are going well. At-risk deals are glossed over because they are uncomfortable.

Solution: Prioritize at-risk deals first. Do not proceed to healthy deals until risks are addressed. Discomfort is a signal that attention is needed.

Failure 4: No Documentation

Discussions happen. Actions are identified. Nothing is written down. By next week, no one remembers what was agreed.

Solution: Document in real time. Use a shared document or CRM notes that both parties can reference. Actions without documentation are not actions.

Failure 5: No Follow-Up

Actions are documented but not followed. The same issues appear week after week.

Solution: Start each review by reviewing prior week's actions. What was supposed to happen? Did it happen? If not, why not? Accountability is the only enforcement mechanism.

Manager as Diagnostician

The shift in mindset is from manager-as-advisor to manager-as-diagnostician.

The advisor listens to symptoms and prescribes treatment based on experience. "You should try sending a breakup email." "Have you involved your executive sponsor?"

The diagnostician examines evidence to identify root cause. "The deal has not progressed in three weeks. What evidence do we have that the buyer is still engaged?" "The Decision Audit shows budget is unverified. What would it take to verify?"

Diagnosis precedes prescription. Advice without diagnosis is guessing. A deal might be stalled for dozens of reasons. Generic advice addresses the wrong reason 90% of the time.

The Three-Question Framework is diagnostic. It surfaces what is happening, not what the rep feels. From diagnosis, targeted intervention follows.

Scaling Inspection

As teams grow, inspection scales differently.

First-line managers: Inspect all deals for direct reports. Weekly cadence. Full Three-Question Framework.

Second-line managers: Inspect subset (at-risk, high-value, forecast-critical). Rely on first-line managers for routine inspection. Focus on pattern recognition across teams.

CRO/VP Sales: Inspect aggregate metrics and exceptions. Review forecast accuracy by team. Investigate outliers. Ensure first-line managers are inspecting effectively.

The Skip-Level Trap

Senior leaders sometimes want to inspect individual deals to "stay close to the business." This creates problems:

• Undermines first-line managers
• Creates inconsistent standards
• Consumes time better spent on strategy
• Signals distrust

Senior leaders should inspect the inspection. Are first-line managers conducting effective reviews? Is forecast accuracy improving? Are at-risk deals being identified early?

Inspect the system, not the deals.

Case Study: The Review Transformation

A Remotir client (SaaS platform, $30M ARR, 8 first-line managers, 45 reps) had inconsistent pipeline review practices. Some managers conducted rigorous reviews. Others held "story time" sessions. Forecast accuracy varied from 65% to 92% by team.

The Diagnosis:

We observed pipeline reviews across all 8 managers. Findings:

• 3 managers used structured frameworks; 5 used unstructured conversation
• Average deal discussion time ranged from 2 minutes to 15 minutes
• Documentation was inconsistent; 4 managers documented nothing
• Follow-up on prior actions ranged from rigorous to nonexistent

The correlation was clear: structured reviews produced accurate forecasts; unstructured reviews produced inaccurate forecasts.

The Implementation:

1. Standardized on Three-Question Framework
2. Created review template (prep doc, discussion notes, actions)
3. Implemented 5-minute per deal time limit (exceptions require scheduling separate session)
4. Required CRM documentation of all review notes
5. Added "prior action review" to start of each meeting
6. Trained managers on diagnostic vs. advisory mindset

The Results (two quarters post-implementation):

• Forecast accuracy improved from 76% average to 89% average
• Variance across managers decreased from 27 points to 8 points
• Time spent in reviews decreased 20% (less narrative, more structure)
• Rep satisfaction with reviews increased (more actionable, less story time)

The insight: The problem was not bad managers. It was lack of system. When a system was provided, good behaviors followed.

Conclusion: Inspection Is the Operating System

Revenue predictability is not built in forecasting meetings. It is built in pipeline reviews.

The weekly inspection cadence is where evidence is validated, risks are identified, and blockers are removed. It is where forecast categories are adjusted to match reality. It is where the physics of the pipeline become visible.

Most organizations waste this operating rhythm. They fill reviews with narrative and advice. They emerge with the same understanding they entered with. They are surprised when forecasts miss because they never actually inspected.

The Three-Question Framework transforms inspection. It replaces "Tell me about your deals" with "What changed? What is the next buyer action? What is blocking?" It forces focus on evidence and progress rather than interpretation and hope.

The cadence is the system. A team that runs rigorous weekly inspections will outforecast a team that does not, regardless of CRM sophistication or AI tools.

Build the cadence. Follow the protocol. Inspect for evidence, not stories.