Scale B.O.S.S. Knowledge Base

Team to Market (TM)

How to define, assign, evaluate, and improve go-to-market execution

Summary. Team to Market is the Scale B.O.S.S. evaluation used to examine how well the organization executes the full customer journey, from creating awareness to turning customers into advocates. The article below follows the current Team to Market workflow in the software and is grounded in the Good to Growing Framework.

Team to Market is where growth strategy stops being a talking point and becomes a management discipline. It gives leadership a structured way to look at the parts of the customer journey that actually produce growth, decide who owns each part, and score both execution and support with enough honesty to drive action.

The underlying idea in the Good to Growing Framework is straightforward. A business grows more predictably when leadership can see, stage by stage, whether the right work is being done by the right people with the right support. When that visibility is missing, companies tend to discover problems late: lead flow dries up, deals stall, customers drift away, and leadership ends up reacting instead of steering.

That is why Team to Market matters. It is not only a sales exercise and it is not a marketing scorecard in disguise. It is a practical evaluation of whether the business is moving prospects and customers through the go-to-market lifecycle with enough consistency, clarity, and accountability to support growth.

Why Team to Market matters

Many companies have a decent product and a capable team but still underperform because the go-to-market system is uneven. One stage may be well run while another is weak. Marketing may produce interest that sales cannot convert. Sales may close new business that account management fails to retain. Customer satisfaction may be high, yet nobody is asking for referrals or testimonials.

Team to Market helps leadership see those gaps in sequence. That matters because the five stages build on one another. Weakness at the top of the funnel creates strain everywhere else. Weakness near the end of the journey wastes hard-earned trust and revenue. A high TM score does not mean every interaction is perfect. It usually means the system is visible, accountable, and strong enough that problems are found early instead of after the fact.

The five stages at a glance

Stage	Primary purpose	Leadership question
Create Deal Flow	Generate awareness and produce the right opportunities.	Are we creating enough qualified demand?
Assess Opportunity	Qualify leads and confirm fit before the team commits major effort.	Are we pursuing the right opportunities for the right reasons?
Sell & Close	Convert qualified opportunities into paying customers.	Can we move good opportunities to commitment with discipline?
Stay Top of Mind	Maintain relevance and engagement between key moments.	Do relationships stay warm, useful, and active over time?
Create Raving Fans	Turn customer success into advocacy, loyalty, and referral momentum.	Are customers becoming promoters, or merely staying quiet?

How Team to Market works in Scale B.O.S.S.

The software walks leadership through Team to Market in a clear sequence. Each step has a purpose. Used together, they turn a general discussion about growth into a documented evaluation that can be reviewed, compared, and improved.

1. Overview

The Overview page explains what Team to Market measures, introduces the five stages, and frames the two-score approach used throughout the evaluation. This is the orientation step. It helps leadership slow down and remember that TM is looking at the full customer journey, not just the sales pipeline.

Figure 1. The Team to Market Overview page introduces the five stages and the dual-scoring model used in the evaluation.

What to notice here. The Overview step makes an important distinction that carries through the rest of the process: every stage is scored for both performance and resource allocation. That keeps leadership from treating every problem as a people problem.

2. Strategy Definition

The Strategy Definition step is where leadership describes how the company intends to compete and execute in each stage. The prompts are simple on purpose. They force the team to define what it is actually doing, not what it hopes it is doing. You can use AI B.O.S.S. as a thought partner in this step, but management judgment still matters.

Figure 2. Strategy Definition helps leadership clarify how the business approaches each of the five go-to-market stages before assigning owners or ratings.

This step is worth taking seriously. A weak Strategy Definition usually leads to fuzzy scoring later. If leadership is not aligned on what “good” looks like in Create Deal Flow or Stay Top of Mind, the ratings will turn into opinion instead of diagnosis.

3. Team Assignment

The Team Assignment step assigns a responsible lead to each stage. This does not mean one person does all the work in the stage. It means one person owns visibility, coordination, and accountability for how that stage performs.

Figure 3. Team Assignment links each stage to a responsible lead so the evaluation reflects real accountability, not generic ownership.

This is one of the most useful parts of the TM process. Once a lead is assigned, the stage result can later be read next to that person’s individual evaluation context in the scorecard. That comparison helps leadership separate system problems from fit, coaching, or support issues.

4. Evaluation

In the Evaluation step, each stage receives two ratings: one for Stage Performance and one for Resource Allocation. The evaluator also captures written notes about what is working well and what should improve.

Figure 4. In the Evaluation step, each stage is rated for Stage Performance and Resource Allocation using the -2 to +2 scale.

Figure 5. The evaluation continues through all five stages, with room to capture strengths and practical improvement ideas for each one.

This is where TM becomes especially valuable. A stage can score poorly because the work is being executed badly. It can also score poorly because the work is under-resourced. Those are not the same problem. The dual score forces leadership to make that distinction.

5. Results

After the evaluation is complete, the Results step brings the ratings together so leadership can review the stage results, the combined status of each stage, and how those results compare to the assigned lead’s individual evaluation context in the scorecard.

This is where the conversation usually gets sharper. A weak stage next to a strong individual evaluation often points to a structural or resource issue. A weak stage next to weak individual context may point to role fit, coaching, or leadership capacity. The point is not to assign blame. The point is to make better decisions with clearer evidence.

How scoring works

Every TM stage is scored on a scale from -2 to +2. The same scale is used throughout the evaluation so the team can interpret results quickly and compare stages consistently.

Score	Label	What it means in practice
-2	Critical	The stage is materially broken or significantly under-supported. Leadership should treat this as an immediate priority.
-1	Needs Improvement	The stage functions, but inconsistently. Gaps are visible and are holding results back.
0	Adequate	The stage is serviceable. It meets a basic standard, but it is not yet a strength.
+1	Good	The stage is working well. Execution is dependable and the business is getting solid results.
+2	Excellent	The stage is a real strength. It is disciplined, repeatable, and capable of supporting growth.

Stage Performance vs. Resource Allocation

Stage Performance measures how well that part of the customer journey is actually working right now. Is the business generating leads, qualifying properly, closing efficiently, staying engaged, or creating advocates in a way that produces results?

Resource Allocation asks a different question: does the stage have what it needs to succeed? That includes the right people, enough time, usable tools, budget, process discipline, leadership support, and clarity of ownership.

A practical way to read the two scores. A low performance score and a healthy resource score often point to execution, leadership, or role-fit issues. A low performance score and a low resource score usually point to a structural problem. Good people can struggle inside a weak system.

How the software treats the scores

Scale B.O.S.S. calculates the overall stage result automatically from the two inputs and groups the stage into a simple status category for fast interpretation. In the current TM workflow, the stage can present as Rockstar, Average, or At Risk depending on the combined result.

The software also carries the stage context into the scorecard so leadership can compare the TM result to the assigned lead’s individual evaluation. That is a valuable management view because it shows whether the issue is more likely to be people, structure, support, or some combination of the three.

How to rate each stage

The guidance below is designed to make scoring more consistent. It combines the Good to Growing Framework with the way the stage appears in Scale B.O.S.S. The goal is not perfect language. The goal is a fair reading of reality.

1. Create Deal Flow

Generate leads and create awareness

Create Deal Flow is the front end of the growth engine. It covers how the business creates visibility, generates interest, and produces a healthy flow of qualified prospects. In practice, this includes channel strategy, message-market fit, campaign execution, referrals, outbound efforts, and the discipline to measure what is working.

When this stage is weak, everything downstream becomes harder. Sales teams end up chasing too few opportunities, or the wrong ones. Forecasting becomes shaky because pipeline creation is unreliable. A strong score here usually means the business knows where demand is coming from and can create momentum without depending on luck.

Questions to work through in Strategy Definition

What are your primary lead generation channels?
How effectively is your team creating awareness in your target market?
Are you reaching enough of the right prospects?

Rating guide

Score	Stage Performance	Resource Allocation
-2	Lead generation is sporadic or nearly absent. Awareness depends on random referrals, founder hustle, or one-off activity.	Ownership is unclear. Budget, tools, campaign support, reporting, or basic list hygiene are missing.
-1	There is some activity, but lead quality, volume, or consistency is poor. Channels exist, but they do not produce dependable opportunity flow.	Some support exists, but it is fragmented. The team lacks enough time, process, or channel support to execute reliably.
0	The company can generate opportunities, but results are uneven. The business has a pulse in the market, not a machine.	Resources are good enough to function, but not strong enough to make the stage predictable or scalable.
+1	Lead generation is targeted, measurable, and reasonably consistent. The business knows which channels are working and why.	The right people, systems, content, and budget are in place to run this stage without constant strain.
+2	Create Deal Flow is a repeatable growth engine. The company can build pipeline with confidence across multiple channels.	Resources are well aligned and proactive. Ownership is clear, metrics are visible, and the system can support more volume without breaking down.

How to write useful notes. Helpful strength notes often mention specific channels that are producing the right kinds of leads, not just activity. Improvement ideas usually point to channel mix, targeting, messaging, attribution, or the need for clearer ownership.

2. Assess Opportunity

Qualify leads and identify fit

Assess Opportunity is where the business decides which leads are worth real time and energy. It includes qualification, discovery, fit assessment, urgency, budget, decision process, and whether the opportunity is aligned with what the company can deliver well.

This stage protects the organization from wasting effort on bad-fit opportunities. A weak qualification process creates a false sense of pipeline health. It fills the funnel with names, but not with viable deals. A strong score here usually shows up in cleaner forecasting, better close rates, and less sales waste.

Questions to work through in Strategy Definition

How well does your team qualify inbound and outbound leads?
Do you have clear criteria for identifying high-fit opportunities?
What percentage of assessed leads move forward?

Rating guide

Score	Stage Performance	Resource Allocation
-2	Qualification is broken. The team advances poor-fit deals, discovery is shallow, and the pipeline is filled with wishful thinking.	The stage lacks standards, tools, or enough trained people to evaluate fit well. Decisions are being made with very little structure.
-1	Some qualification happens, but it is inconsistent. Different team members apply different standards and poor deals still move forward.	There are partial resources, but not enough process, coaching, or data discipline to qualify consistently.
0	The business can identify obvious fit and non-fit opportunities, but nuance is often missed and judgment varies by rep or leader.	Resources are sufficient for baseline operation, but not strong enough to create a disciplined qualification system.
+1	Qualification is thoughtful and fairly consistent. The team understands need, fit, buying readiness, and when to move forward or pause.	The stage is supported by clear criteria, CRM discipline, discovery practices, and the right people in the conversation.
+2	Assess Opportunity is sharp, consistent, and strategic. The business avoids wasted effort and advances the right opportunities with confidence.	Resources are fully aligned with strong playbooks, coaching, market intelligence, and enough capacity to qualify thoroughly.

How to write useful notes. Strong notes here usually mention clear qualification standards, consistent discovery, and a healthy percentage of assessed leads moving forward for the right reasons. Weak notes often reveal fuzzy fit criteria, poor discovery, or pipeline inflation.

3. Sell & Close

Convert opportunities to customers

Sell & Close is where the organization turns qualified opportunity into commitment. It includes presenting value, building trust, handling objections, guiding decisions, managing proposals, and keeping deals moving until they are won or honestly lost.

A company can market well and qualify well and still miss its number if it cannot close efficiently. This stage exposes whether the business is converting pipeline into revenue or simply carrying pipeline around. Strong scores here usually reflect clear value communication, disciplined follow-up, and low friction near the finish line.

Questions to work through in Strategy Definition

What is your close rate and how has it trended?
Are your sales processes and tools effective?
Where do deals stall or fall through?

Rating guide

Score	Stage Performance	Resource Allocation
-2	Deals regularly stall or die late. Messaging is weak, follow-through is inconsistent, and the team struggles to secure commitments.	The stage is under-supported. Proposal tools, pricing clarity, contracting support, or decision-making authority are missing or slow.
-1	The company closes some business, but results vary too much and progress depends heavily on a few individuals.	Some support exists, but important gaps in training, tools, or process still create friction.
0	The closing process works at a basic level. The business can win deals, but conversion is only moderate and execution is not yet especially consistent.	Resources are sufficient to operate, but not strong enough to make closing efficient, scalable, or repeatable.
+1	The team communicates value well, handles objections with confidence, and closes business at a healthy rate.	The right sales support, proposal tools, pricing guidance, and leadership backing are in place.
+2	Sell & Close is a genuine strength. The business closes with discipline, handles complexity well, and protects momentum through the last mile.	Resources are fully aligned, including enablement, proposal systems, pricing clarity, approval paths, and enough capacity to keep deals moving.

How to write useful notes. Strong strength notes often mention healthy close rates, clear messaging, solid proposal quality, and disciplined next steps. Improvement notes usually point to stalled approvals, pricing confusion, weak objection handling, or inconsistent follow-up.

4. Stay Top of Mind

Maintain engagement and relationships

Stay Top of Mind is the nurture and relationship stage. It covers the communication that keeps the company relevant between buying moments, between meetings, and between purchases. This can include follow-up cadence, customer communication, reminder systems, value-added content, and proactive check-ins.

Not every opportunity is ready right now, and not every customer stays engaged on their own. When this stage is weak, the business becomes forgettable. Prospects cool off, customers drift, and competitors gain room to move in. Strong scores here usually signal consistency, value, and relationship discipline.

Questions to work through in Strategy Definition

How do you maintain engagement with existing customers?
What touchpoints keep you relevant between purchases?
Is your retention strategy proactive or reactive?

Rating guide

Score	Stage Performance	Resource Allocation
-2	Follow-up is weak or irregular. The company disappears between key interactions and leaves too much silence in the relationship.	There is no real nurture infrastructure. Ownership, content, reminders, or communication systems are missing.
-1	The team makes some effort, but engagement is mostly reactive and inconsistent. Touchpoints happen, but not on a dependable rhythm.	Partial resources exist, but the stage still lacks enough automation, content support, or clear responsibility.
0	The business maintains basic communication and can keep relationships warm, but the effort feels ordinary rather than strategic.	Resources are adequate for baseline communication, but limited in scale, segmentation, or consistency.
+1	The company stays visible in a useful, timely way. Follow-up adds value and the business remains relevant between purchase decisions.	Ownership is clear and the stage is supported by process, reminders, content, and enough time to execute consistently.
+2	Stay Top of Mind is proactive, personalized, and systematic. The company builds trust over time instead of going quiet between transactions.	Resources are strongly aligned, with good automation, segmentation, communication cadence, and leadership support.

How to write useful notes. Good notes in this stage usually mention cadence, touchpoints, retention effort, and whether follow-up feels proactive or reactive. Improvement ideas often focus on long silence gaps, weak nurture sequences, or inconsistent customer check-ins.

5. Create Raving Fans

Turn customers into advocates

Create Raving Fans is the advocacy stage. It asks whether the company is simply delivering a service, or whether it is creating an experience strong enough that customers want to refer, review, renew, and publicly support the brand.

Advocacy is one of the most efficient growth assets in any business. It lowers acquisition friction, strengthens trust, and compounds over time. A weak score here often means the business is leaving goodwill on the table. Customers may be satisfied, but the company is not converting that success into momentum.

Questions to work through in Strategy Definition

How do you turn satisfied customers into advocates?
Do you have a referral or testimonial program?
What drives your best customer success stories?

Rating guide

Score	Stage Performance	Resource Allocation
-2	Customers are not becoming advocates. Service may be uneven, follow-up is weak, and positive experiences are not being captured or repeated.	There is no dependable advocacy system. Ownership, feedback loops, review requests, or referral process are missing.
-1	Some customers are happy, but advocacy is occasional and unstructured. Good experiences exist, but they are not being turned into growth assets.	Support for this stage is limited. The business relies on chance rather than an intentional approach to referrals, reviews, or testimonials.
0	The company delivers acceptable service and occasionally receives positive feedback or referrals, but advocacy remains opportunistic.	Resources are good enough to keep customers, but not yet strong enough to build a repeatable advocacy program.
+1	Customers are satisfied and the business has a working process for encouraging reviews, referrals, testimonials, or success stories.	The stage has capable support through customer success, follow-up, feedback collection, and clear ownership.
+2	The business consistently creates enthusiastic promoters. Customers actively share success stories and reinforce growth through visible advocacy.	Resources are fully aligned, with strong customer success follow-through, referral process, feedback systems, and enough capacity to keep the experience excellent.

How to write useful notes. Strong notes typically reference testimonials, referrals, reviews, repeat business, or customer success stories that the market can actually see. Weak notes usually point to missing follow-up after wins, no referral ask, or an inconsistent customer experience.

Reading the results well

Once the ratings are in, resist the temptation to jump straight to personalities. Team to Market is most useful when leadership reads the result with context.

A strong lead paired with a weak stage usually points to a system or support issue.
A weak stage with good resources can point to execution discipline, coaching, or role-fit problems.
A weak stage with weak resources usually means the business has not truly built that part of the customer journey yet.
A strong stage with a strong lead is usually a sign of healthy alignment between ownership, capability, and support.

That is why the scorecard comparison matters. It keeps leadership from making simplistic conclusions. Not every weak stage should trigger a personnel decision. Sometimes the real issue is missing process, unclear ownership, or too little support for a critical piece of the go-to-market system.

Best practices for using Team to Market well

Define strategy before you score. The rating means more when leadership is aligned on what the stage is supposed to accomplish.
Assign a real owner. The responsible lead should be the person expected to see problems, coordinate action, and improve the stage over time.
Score what is true now, not what you hope will be true next quarter.
Use notes to document evidence. Good notes mention patterns, metrics, customer experience, friction points, and actual examples.
Treat zero honestly. A 0 is not failure, but it is not excellence either. It means the stage is serviceable and still has work to do.
Look for patterns across stages. One weak stage can be isolated. Several weak stages usually indicate deeper go-to-market misalignment.

Common mistakes to avoid

Confusing effort with results. A busy team can still have a weak stage.
Scoring based on how the strategy sounds on paper instead of how the business is really performing.
Using the Resource Allocation score as a sympathy score. The question is whether the stage is properly supported, not whether people are trying hard.
Assigning ownership loosely. If nobody truly owns a stage, the evaluation loses most of its value.
Writing vague improvement notes such as “communicate better” or “work harder.” Useful notes point to specific actions, gaps, and decisions.

Final takeaway

Team to Market gives leadership a disciplined way to examine how the business brings opportunities in, moves them forward, supports relationships, and turns customer success into future growth. Used well, it does more than produce a score. It sharpens accountability, exposes weak links in the customer journey, and makes the conversation about growth much more concrete.

In that sense, TM is not just an evaluation form. It is a leadership lens. It helps the company answer a practical question with far more clarity: are we truly equipped to take our offering to market, sustain the relationship, and build advocates, or are we still leaving too much to chance?

Team to Market: Go-to-Market Execution Framework