Design a Multi-Stakeholder Sales Process for Mid-Market Agencies

You are a sales leader who has scaled multiple digital agencies from $5M to $20M+ by adding mid-market deals. You think in stakeholder maps and multi-thread strategies.
Agency: [AGENCY_NAME] — [SERVICES]
Current ICP: [ICP_DESC]
Move-upmarket target: [TARGET_ICP]
Deal size range targeting: [TARGET_DEAL_SIZE]
Expected sales cycle: [EXPECTED_CYCLE_DAYS] days
Current process strengths/weaknesses for big deals: [BIG_DEAL_NOTES]
Procurement experience: [PROCUREMENT_NOTES]
Design a multi-stakeholder sales process. Include:
1. Stakeholder roles to identify in every deal (champion, economic buyer, technical evaluator, blocker, procurement, end-user).
2. The stages and how each stage advances stakeholder coverage, not just the deal.
3. Multi-threading targets per stage (e.g. 'by Proposal, have 3 contacts engaged').
4. The artifacts produced specifically for mid-market buyers (mutual action plan, security/SOC docs, references).
5. Procurement engagement strategy — when to invite them, what they need.
6. The risk signals unique to mid-market (champion change, RFP appearance, legal expansion).

- Process must extend, not replace, the existing pipeline — name where it plugs in.
- All multi-threading targets must be measurable in CRM contact role fields.
- No vague 'build relationships' language — every item is a tracked action.
- Use mid-market agency vocabulary (MSA, SOW, retainer, statement of work).

Six sections matching the six task items. Include a 'Stakeholder map template' table at the end with columns: Role | Title patterns | Coverage check | Risk if missing.

• [AGENCY_NAME] — Agency name
• [SERVICES] — Service lines
• [ICP_DESC] — Current ICP
• [TARGET_ICP] — Mid-market ICP you're moving toward
• [TARGET_DEAL_SIZE] — Target deal size range
• [EXPECTED_CYCLE_DAYS] — Expected sales cycle days
• [BIG_DEAL_NOTES] — What's worked or failed in past large deals
• [PROCUREMENT_NOTES] — Your prior experience with procurement

Agency: Vertex Performance — full-funnel performance marketing
Current ICP: $5M-$30M DTC brands, founder buyer
Target ICP: $100M-$1B enterprise retail brands, CMO + procurement
Target deal size: $250K-$750K annual
Expected cycle: 95 days
Big deal notes: lost 2 of last 3 enterprise deals to silence after proposal
Procurement: limited — usually engaged too late

**1. Stakeholder roles:** Champion (Director Growth), Economic buyer (CMO), Technical evaluator (Director Analytics), Blocker (in-house team lead), Procurement, End-user (campaign managers). Track each in HubSpot contact role.

**2. Stages:** Insert two new stages between Discovery and Proposal — 'Stakeholder Mapped' and 'Mutual Action Plan Signed.' A deal cannot advance to Proposal without both.

**3. Multi-thread targets:** Discovery = champion + 1. Stakeholder Mapped = champion + economic buyer + tech eval. Proposal = all 6 roles identified, 4+ engaged.

**4. Mid-market artifacts:** Mutual action plan (Notion template), SOC2 brief, 3 logo-matched references, executive overview deck.

**5. Procurement strategy:** Ask champion 'who else signs?' in Discovery. Invite procurement to MAP review. Send MSA + SOW templates upfront, not at the end.

**6. Risk signals:** Champion title change, RFP issued after proposal, legal team adds new reviewer, >7 days of silence post-proposal.

**Stakeholder map template:**
| Role | Title patterns | Coverage check | Risk if missing |
|---|---|---|---|
| Champion | Director Growth/Demand | Met 2+ times | No internal advocate |
| Economic buyer | CMO/VP Mktg | Confirmed budget owner | Deal stalls at signature |
| Procurement | Sr. Sourcing Mgr | Engaged by MAP signing | 30-60 day delay at end |

• Never let a single-thread deal advance past Discovery in this motion — exceptions are how you lose 6-figure deals.
• Build the mutual action plan with the champion live on a call; it doubles as a commitment-extraction tool.
• Track 'days since last stakeholder added' — staleness predicts churn-before-close better than days-in-stage.