How do we right-size rep capacity and assign quota without guessing?
Direct Answer
Use three inputs: historical productivity (ramp curve), territory size (accounts/pipeline), and geography/segment complexity. Assign quota at 85–95% of forecasted capacity to drive execution without burnout. Recalibrate quarterly.
Operator Approach
Capacity planning is math + behavior. Start with productivity curves:
Rep Ramp Data (typical SaaS):
- Months 1–2: 40–50% productivity
- Months 3–4: 70–80% productivity
- Months 5+: 95–110% productivity (full ramped)
Once ramped, measure quota-carrying capacity by historical close rate × average deal size × territory pipeline.
Example:
- 30 accounts in territory, $150K avg contract value
- Historical close rate: 25% (6 deals/quarter)
- Ramped capacity: 6 deals × $150K = $900K quarterly
- Quota assignment: $850K (94% capacity) leaves 6% buffer for ramp variance
Red flags (over-quotaed reps):
- Attainment < 60% for 2+ quarters
- Activity ratios dropping (dials, meetings, proposals)
- Turnover above 15%/year
- Forecast accuracy < 65%
Capacity table:
| Territory Type | Accounts | Avg ACV | Close Rate | Quarterly Quota | Buffer |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Enterprise | 12–15 | $500K+ | 20% | $1.2–1.5M | 10% |
| Mid-market | 25–35 | $150–250K | 25% | $750K–$1M | 8% |
| SMB | 60–100 | $30–50K | 35% | $600–800K | 5% |
Mermaid: Capacity Assignment Decision Tree
Sources: Pavilion Compensation Study, Bridge Group Territory Benchmarks, SaaStr Quota Setting Guide
TAGS: capacity-planning,quota-assignment,territory-design,ramp-curve,attainment-analysis,productivity-metrics,forecast-accuracy