Metrics & Team

Success metrics (what “winning” means)

✅ Renewal rate — retention of multi-year district agreements is the headline metric.
✅ Depth of relationships — number of deep, multi-threaded relationships per district (multiple people engaged inside each account), not logo count or raw lead volume.

This is a depth-over-volume program. The scoreboard rewards going wider within won accounts and keeping them, more than adding new names.

Committee coverage per account (stakeholders engaged / total committee) — operationalizes “depth.”
Reference-district count and referrals/board-endorsements generated (fuels the peer halo).
Expansion within district (schools added, scope expanded).
Qualified board-presentation invites (signature channel → leading indicator of late-stage deals).

✅ 2 existing AEs pointed at this motion.
✅ Maybe 1–2 BDRs added.
✅ OffDeck = strategy + technical execution (this team builds the system, playbooks, tooling).
🔂 Division of labor (🔎 proposed): BDRs work signal-triggered outreach + qualification; AEs run the 6–12mo committee sell, board presentations, and renewals; OffDeck builds the account list, signal automation, proof system, and HubSpot orchestration.

Low-overhead tooling. A 2-AE / 1–2-BDR team can’t run heavy manual ops — the signal capture, list building, and proof packaging must be largely automated (leans on HubSpot + n8n + the existing stack).
Prioritization is critical. With few reps and a 6–12mo cycle, the named list must be tightly tiered so effort lands on the highest-probability, in-window accounts.
Renewal motion needs to be designed, not assumed — since renewal is the headline KPI, there must be an explicit play (cadence of outcome reporting to leadership/board) owned by someone.

❓ Concrete targets/numbers for renewal rate and relationships-per-district.
❓ Capacity math: how many active named accounts can 2 AEs realistically carry through a 6–12mo cycle? (drives list size)
❓ Who owns the renewal/outcome-reporting cadence — AE, OffDeck, or the platform?