You have deals closing — but not reliably. The Engineer path fixes the structural gaps between activity and consistent revenue, with a guaranteed pipeline coverage ratio written into the contract.
You're closing deals, but the pipeline is lumpy. Some months are great, others miss plan. The revenue architecture isn't broken — it's just not engineered yet.
The Stress Test identifies which domains are fragile. The Engineer path fixes them — in order of financial exposure.
Is your pipeline actually sufficient to hit plan — or does it look sufficient because of how it's being measured?
Are your conversion assumptions realistic, or are you projecting last quarter's win rate onto a different motion?
Does the unit economics model support the revenue target, or does it only work if every assumption hits simultaneously?
Is the data your team uses to make decisions accurate, or is attribution creating a false picture of pipeline health?
Where is revenue being lost between signal and closed — in the conversion model, the handoff, or the pricing architecture?
Is the overall revenue architecture designed to compound, or does it require the same effort each month to sustain?
$997 to find where the risk is. Carry it forward into Engineer if the path is right.