Evidence-Based Sales Close Plan
Turn late-stage opportunity inputs into a concise, evidence-based close plan.
Customise & copy
Add the context you have. The prompt updates as you work.
Include the opportunity name, current sales stage, and any known close objective.
List each stakeholder, role, influence, position, and any known involvement in approval.
Provide stated requirements, evaluation metrics, approval standards, or commercial conditions.
Describe known objections, unresolved questions, approval delays, legal or security issues, and their current status.
List agreed actions with owners and deadlines where known.
Live prompt
5 fieldsProduce a structured, evidence-based close plan for the sales opportunity described below. Use only the supplied information. Do not invent facts, statistics, testimonials, stakeholder motivations, deadlines, dependencies, or decision criteria. Where information is missing, write "Not provided" and identify the specific gap. Distinguish explicit evidence from reasonable inferences. Opportunity context: {{opportunity_context}} Stakeholders and roles: {{stakeholders}} Decision criteria or evaluation metrics: {{decision_criteria}} Active risks or blockers: {{risks_blockers}} Committed next steps and required actions: {{committed_actions}} Use exactly these section headers and keep the content concise and actionable: ## Opportunity Snapshot Summarize the opportunity name, current stage, stated objective, and close status based only on the input. ## Decision Criteria List each known evaluation metric or approval criterion. For each, state the evidence, current status, and any gap. ## Stakeholders For each stakeholder, list name, role, stated or evidenced influence, position if known, and the next engagement needed. Mark unknown information as "Not provided." ## Dependencies List internal or external prerequisites for approval or execution. Identify the source input and whether each dependency is confirmed, inferred, or unresolved. ## Risks List each active risk or blocker, its likely impact on close, evidence, mitigation action, owner if known, and target date if known. Do not assign owners or dates that are not provided. ## Commitments and Actions Convert the supplied commitments into a table with columns: Action, Owner, Deadline, Success Signal, and Status. Preserve stated owners and deadlines; use "Not provided" when absent. ## Close Recommendation State the recommended immediate close motion, the strongest evidence supporting it, the unresolved approval gap, and the next decision checkpoint. Do not use hype or unsupported probability claims.
Proof before you use it
A real example
Tested on gpt-5.6-luna on 2026-09-09
{
"stakeholders": "Dr. Amina Okafor — Chief Nursing Officer, executive sponsor; Luis Romero — Director of Clinical Informatics, workflow evaluator; Mei Wong — Hospital Finance Manager, budget validator; Carla Jensen — Compliance Counsel, regulatory reviewer; unit nurse managers — frontline users with advisory influence",
"risks_blockers": "Pilot adoption data covers only two units; compliance counsel has requested clarification on audit-log retention; nurse managers have conflicting preferences about workflow changes; finance has not confirmed whether expansion funding is available this fiscal year",
"committed_actions": "Customer team to provide pilot adoption report by August 16; vendor clinical specialist to run a workflow workshop with nurse managers on August 20; Carla to review the governance response by August 23; Mei to confirm budget treatment after the September planning meeting",
"decision_criteria": "Improve medication-administration documentation compliance; work with the existing Epic environment; require nurse training of less than four hours per unit; demonstrate measurable adoption during the pilot; satisfy clinical-data governance requirements; fit within the fiscal-year expansion budget",
"opportunity_context": "Riverbend Health Network — pilot expansion under clinical leadership review; decision needed before the September budget lock"
}A small ritual that works
How to use it
- 01Enter the opportunity name, stage, and close objective in Opportunity context.
- 02List stakeholders, roles, influence, and positions in Stakeholders.
- 03Add decision criteria and active risks or blockers.
- 04Record committed actions, owners, and deadlines.
Why it works
The prompt imposes a clear evidence boundary: it instructs the model to use only supplied information, distinguish facts from inferences, and label gaps as "Not provided." Its fixed section headers organize the opportunity around criteria, stakeholders, dependencies, risks, commitments, and the next close motion. The required fields also connect each risk and action to evidence, ownership, timing, status, or a stated gap, which makes the requested plan concrete rather than speculative.
Where it fails
The structure is limited when the supplied opportunity data is sparse, ambiguous, or lacks decision authority, timing, ownership, or approval details. In those cases, the prompt correctly preserves the uncertainty but cannot fill the resulting planning gaps. It also cannot independently verify whether a stated fact, commitment, deadline, or stakeholder role is accurate.
Customisation tips
Adapt the section instructions to the sales process you use. Add fields for contract stage, legal status, forecast category, competitive position, or required approval gates when those details matter. If your organization uses specific status labels, define them explicitly. You can also replace the generic close recommendation with a named decision framework, provided the added framework does not encourage unsupported assumptions.
Watch-outs
- The prompt asks for reasonable inferences while also requiring strict evidence discipline. Define what counts as an acceptable inference if consistency matters.
- The action table requires a Success Signal, but the input fields do not provide a dedicated source for success signals. The model must derive one from the supplied commitments or mark it as unavailable.
- The close recommendation depends on the completeness of the stakeholder, criteria, risk, and action fields. Missing inputs will flow through the plan as unresolved gaps.
- The prompt requests concise content across several detailed sections, so highly complex opportunities may require a deliberate prioritization rule.
Works in
Was this useful?
Submit your variation
If your version helps, it may be published with your name and a link back to you.
Related prompts
Want to make AI useful across your team? Explore Atul's training.