How to Fail a Sales Plan Fast. Step 1: Skip Bottoms-Up Planning.

Sales leaders talk a lot about hitting targets. But not enough about how those targets get made.

If your process starts at the top, with a spreadsheet and a stretch goal, you’re not alone. But if you’ve noticed sales results that look more like a heart monitor than a healthy curve, there’s a deeper issue: your targets may be disconnected from reality on the ground.

And the data backs it up. According the 2025 SPM Market Spotlight, The Status Quo Trap:

69% of sellers say their quotas are unrealistic, but 90% still expect to hit them.

That’s not confidence. That’s reps figuring out how to hit a number they didn’t help build.

When that happens, here’s what it really means for the business:

• Forecasting loses its credibility.
  Reps hold back pipeline. Sandbagging creeps in. And the gap between what’s real and what’s reported widens fast.
• The GTM team chases the wrong signals.
  Marketing leans into territories that aren’t moving. Product builds for a customer base that’s not growing. Finance misses early warning signs because the inputs are already off.
• Sales leaders burn cycles negotiating quotas instead of coaching teams.
  When the number isn’t built with rep input, expect pushback, delays, and constant midyear rework.
• Reps stop trusting the process.
  They stop raising their hand. They start working around the system. And they focus more on protecting themselves than growing the business.

2 to 5% of revenue disappears every year due to bad rep-to-territory alignment.
If you're a $500 million company, that’s $10 to $25 million lost before the year even starts.

Bottoms-up planning isn’t new. It’s just usually misunderstood, or ignored until the rework starts in Q2.

“Our Reps Will Sandbag” And Other Reasons We Avoid Bottoms-up Planning

Let’s name the usual objections:

• “We can’t trust the reps. They’ll sandbag.”
• “We already have all the data we need.”
• “The process is already too complex.”

Fair. But incomplete.

If your reps are tenured, own named accounts, and live in their territories every day, they know more than your dashboards. And if your org has struggled with consistency across teams, bottoms-up planning might not be the risk. It might be the fix.

The Truth: Reps Won’t Sandbag If They’re Properly Incentivized

If you want reps to give honest input, make it worth their while. Here’s how:

1. Start with top-down. Then build in the bottom-up.
   Create your high-level targets with stretch built in. Align with leadership, but don’t broadcast the number to the field. If rep-submitted targets come in higher, great. If they come in lower, you’ve still got coverage.

2. Get manager buy-in before the field gets involved.
   Field leaders are your leverage. If they understand the model and trust the rationale, they will push for rep buy-in. If they don’t, you’ll end up negotiating territory by territory.

   Meet with them before rolling out anything to the field. Align on expectations. Clarify roles. Define how rep input will be evaluated. Set boundaries around what will and won’t be adjusted.

3. Build incentives into the process.
   Add an acceleration structure to the comp plan. If reps take on more quota, give them faster access to the next earnings tier. Show it up front. Build a calculator into the tool and let them twist knobs and pull levers.

   A rep who sees real upside will take on more. A mature rep who doesn’t see the opportunity won’t, because they know a higher target puts more of their OTE at risk. That’s not a flaw. That’s signal.

4. Make the process simple, not political.
   Centralize everything. Reps should have one place to see historical performance, understand what the model says, and enter their call. Once they do, compare it side-by-side with your top-down view.

   If the numbers are wildly different, dig in. Don’t assume the rep is sandbagging. Maybe the model missed something. Or maybe the rep is being too conservative. Either way, investigate. Have a system in place for reconciling gaps with their manager. And be willing to adjust either side if the rationale makes sense.

What Happens When You Trust the Field and Build the Right Process

One multi-billion-dollar company we worked with used this exact approach. By combining top-down models with rep-level input and clear incentive levers, they beat their original stretch targets by 8%.

No added headcount. No massive overhaul. Just a process the field could actually engage with.

That's what happens when you stop treating rep knowledge as a liability and start treating it like the critical input it is.

How Bottoms-up Planning Helps You Hit Target More Often

When reps help build the number, they’re not fighting it in Q1. And when planning reflects what’s actually happening on the ground, forecasts get sharper. Alignment gets stronger.

Done right, bottoms-up target setting leads to better outcomes up and down the funnel:

• Faster plan approvals. No more Q1 delays while reps push back on numbers they never saw coming.
• Higher rep quota acceptance. Participation builds buy-in. Buy-in drives focus.
• More accurate forecasts. You’re planning with field-informed reality, not wishful modeling.
• Less midyear chaos. If you’re constantly reworking the plan six months in, this approach can help you break the cycle.

Bottoms-up isn’t just about giving reps a voice. It’s about building a process that can flex when the market does and holds up under pressure.

Letting Reps “Call Their Shot” Isn’t Reckless. It’s Revenue Alignment.

Bottoms-up planning isn’t about giving up control.

It’s about building sales plans that hold up when the market moves, when Q1 turns into Q2, and when the pressure hits. It’s how you stop scrambling to fix the plan, and start delivering one the whole team can trust.

RevOps leaders who get this right can expect more than just cleaner forecasting. They build sales engines that move faster, flex smarter, and stay aligned when it counts.

The ones who ignore it? They spend the year chasing numbers that were wrong from the start.

Suggestions for expected outcomes:

• Significantly Improved Forecasting Accuracy and Predictability (ties into fundamental business challenges narrative)
• Enhanced Sales Team Motivation, Engagement, and Retention
• Optimized Resource Allocation (Headcount, Budget, Territories)
• Faster Identification of Gaps and Bottlenecks (where pipeline may be stalling)
• Stronger Cross-Functional Alignment (Sales, Marketing, Product, Finance)
• Agility and Adaptability to Market Changes (another fundamental business challenge)