Identify Strong Plays From a Top Rep

You are a sales manager doing a fair, data-grounded diagnosis of rep performance at a digital marketing agency. You identify repeatable plays from a top rep's evidence — you do not yet generalize them into a playbook (that's Optimize).
Agency: [AGENCY_NAME] — [SERVICES] | Top rep: [REP_NAME] | Quota attainment: [ATTAINMENT_PCT]
Won-deal transcripts or summaries:
[CALL_RECORDINGS]
Deal data for these wins:
[WON_DEAL_DATA]
Team baseline behaviors (for contrast): [TEAM_BASELINE]
Identify the 3-5 specific, repeatable plays [REP_NAME] uses that materially differ from team baseline behavior. Each play must be a concrete observable action — not a personality trait.

- Evidence-only: quote 1-2 lines from transcripts per play, with call labels.
- A "play" must be observable and repeatable — "good rapport" is not a play; "opens every call with a 30-sec relevant case-study reference" is.
- Distinguish plays the rep does that the team doesn't (the alpha) from generic best practices.
- Note any plays that may not generalize (e.g., based on personal network or industry depth).
- No coaching or playbook drafts — diagnosis only.

Output:
1. Plays table (Play name | Where observed | Differs from team? | Generalizable?)
2. For each play: 1-paragraph description + 1-2 quoted evidence lines
3. Plays that look like personality, not process (be honest)
4. Suggested next diagnostic: which plays to test on other reps

• [AGENCY_NAME] — Agency name
• [SERVICES] — Services sold
• [REP_NAME] — Top rep being studied
• [ATTAINMENT_PCT] — Their quota attainment %
• [CALL_RECORDINGS] — 3-5 won-deal call transcripts or summaries, labeled
• [WON_DEAL_DATA] — Deal size, sales cycle, stage progression for the won deals
• [TEAM_BASELINE] — What the average rep typically does on equivalent calls

Agency: Northwind | Top rep: Priya | Attainment: 142%
3 won calls: each opens with a 60-sec relevant case study from same vertical. On 2 of 3, she explicitly asks 'who else needs to be in the room before we go to proposal?' On all 3 she sends a recap email within 1 hour with 3 concrete next steps.
Deals: avg $5.4k MRR, 32-day cycle.
Team baseline: generic openers; decision-process question asked ~20% of the time; recap emails inconsistent.

Plays:
| Play | Where | Differs? | Generalizable? |
| Vertical case-study opener | Calls 1,2,3 | Yes | Yes |
| Explicit decision-process ask | Calls 1,3 | Yes | Yes |
| 1-hour recap with 3 next steps | Calls 1,2,3 | Yes | Yes |

1. Vertical case-study opener — opens with a 60-sec story from the prospect's vertical. Call 2: "Before we dive in, the last SaaS company we worked with grew demo signups 38% in 90 days — let me show you how, and you tell me if it fits." Anchors credibility before discovery.
2. Decision-process ask — direct, mid-call. Call 1: "Before we book a follow-up, who else needs to be in the room before this goes to proposal?" Predicts cleaner late-stage flow.
3. 1-hour recap — every call followed within 60 min by a recap email with 3 numbered next steps. Compresses momentum.

Personality, not process: Priya's vocal warmth and humor. Not replicable.

Next diagnostic: Test plays 1 and 3 on 2 mid-tier reps for 30 days and re-measure disco→prop rate.

• Use 3-5 WON deals, not a mix — you want the winning patterns, not the average.
• Always include team baseline so Claude isolates the alpha, not generic best practices.
• Be honest about what's personality. Forcing every rep to mimic charm fails.