What’s the Best Territory Planning Approach?
Use a hybrid, data-driven model that balances revenue potential, rep capacity, and customer experience—then govern changes with clear rules.
By Pedowitz Group RevOps Practice • 200+ GTM transformations
Explore RevOps Solutions Benchmark with the Revenue Marketing Index
Executive Summary
Direct answer: The best approach is a hybrid territory design: segment accounts by ICP (industry, size, potential, intent) and assign using a mix of vertical + segment + named strategic coverage, constrained by rep capacity and customer proximity. Balance opportunity across reps (±10–15% of potential), minimize in-year disruption, and refresh with a governed annual process plus quarterly micro-adjustments.
Guiding Principles
Decision Matrix: Picking a Territory Model
| Option | Best for | Pros | Cons | TPG POV |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Geography | Field sales; travel constraints | Clear ownership; proximity | Uneven potential by region | Use with potential balancing |
| Vertical/Industry | Specialized buying centers | Expertise; tailored messaging | Coverage gaps in smaller markets | Great for mid/enterprise |
| Segment (SMB/MM/ENT) | Different cycle & deal sizes | Capacity match; process fit | Boundary creep at edges | Core layer for most orgs |
| Named/Strategic Accounts | Top revenue/brand logos | Focus; account plans | Potential hoarding | Reserve 50–150 per rep max |
| Round-Robin/Pool | High-volume SMB inbound | Fast, equitable lead flow | Less account continuity | Use for first-touch only |
| Hybrid (Recommended) | Most B2B teams | Balances expertise and fairness | Needs governance & data | Baseline model to adopt |
Capacity & Balancing (Simple Math)
| Metric | Formula | Target/Range | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rep Capacity (accounts) | (Hours/mo ÷ Hours per account) × Active accounts share | Workload within ±10% | Include prospecting + selling + admin |
| Potential Balance | Rep potential ÷ Median potential | 0.9–1.1 band | Potential from firmographic + intent + TAM |
| Continuity | Accounts reassigned ÷ Total accounts | <= 10% in-year | Protect active deals & CSAT |
| Coverage | Touches per target account / Plan | ≥ 90% plan | Use sequence SLAs |
60–90 Day Territory Planning Playbook
| Step | What to do | Output | Owner | Timeframe |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 — Define ICP & Potential | Score accounts (industry, size, intent, whitespace) | Account potential index | RevOps + Marketing | Weeks 1–2 |
| 2 — Model Capacity | Time study; touches per motion; rep bands | Capacity per role | Sales Ops | Weeks 2–3 |
| 3 — Draft Territories | Hybrid design (vertical + segment + named) | Maps & books with balance bands | RevOps | Weeks 3–5 |
| 4 — Review & Lock | Leader review; protect key accounts; finalize quotas | Signed plan & comms | CRO + Sales Leaders | Weeks 5–6 |
| 5 — Operate & Adjust | Weekly scorecard; quarterly micro-adjustments | Change log & fairness report | RevOps | Weeks 6–12 |
Do / Don’t for Territory Design
| Do | Don’t | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Balance potential and workload | Rely on last year’s bookings | Prevents legacy bias |
| Separate strategic named from patch accounts | Over-assign whales to one rep | Avoids concentration risk |
| Protect active deals and customers in changes | Reassign mid-cycle | Maintains momentum & CX |
| Publish fairness and reassignment metrics | Make opaque exceptions | Trust & adoption |
| Use AI to suggest micro-rebalances | Automate transfers without approval | Governance & accountability |
Deeper Detail
Inputs: firmographics (industry, size, HQ), technographics, historical wins, intent signals, partner presence, product fit, whitespace by SKU, and travel constraints. Normalize into a potential index and map to capacity bands for AE/SDR/SE coverage.
Governance: publish rules-of-engagement (lead/account ownership, routing, partner conflicts), a change-control window (annual reset + quarterly micro-rounds), and an appeal process. Version maps and maintain a change log tied to quota adjustments.
TPG POV: We build hybrid territory models and scorecards in Salesforce/HubSpot with data from your MAP, intent, and firmographic providers—balancing potential and workload so ramp time drops and attainment rises.
Related resources: Marketing Operations • Revenue Operations • Revenue Marketing Index.
Additional Resources
Frequently Asked Questions
Annually, with quarterly micro-adjustments to fix clear imbalances or capacity shifts. Protect active opportunities and current customers.
Industry, size, tech stack, intent, historical look-a-likes, and whitespace by product. Blend into a single potential index.
Maintain a balanced reserve pool and backfill from adjacent patches using the same potential/capacity rules.
Usually yes for continuity; carve out strategic accounts or complex products to specialized renewal/CS teams when needed.
CRM (Salesforce/HubSpot) plus data providers, mapping tools, and BI. Govern changes via RevOps change control and release notes.