Why 2026 Requires a New Sales Plan: Territory Planning, Value Selling, and Revenue Growth
Kevin Lawson and Sean O'Shaughnessy argue that sellers must treat 2026 as a distinct strategic opportunity rather than a continuation of 2025, emphasizing territory planning, deal mix optimization, and value-based selling. They contend that revenue growth should come from smarter planning and trust-building, not more hours worked. The episode focuses on how sellers can set themselves up for annual success through deliberate quarterly planning and understanding customer ecosystems.
Summary
The episode opens with Sean O'Shaughnessy challenging sellers to resist the temptation of treating 2026 as a simple extension of 2025. He argues that great salespeople focus on increasing revenue year over year without increasing hours worked, and that continuous evolution is necessary to stay competitive. Kevin Lawson frames this as a fundamental 'mind shift' discussion, asserting that trust — not activity volume — is the real currency in modern sales, and that territory planning should be understood as a trust-building exercise across good products, good process, and good people.
The hosts then explore territory planning in depth. Kevin distinguishes between sellers covering large geographic territories ('selling in dirt') and those in dense, high-tech markets, arguing that sellers must prioritize where they can make the most impact rather than simply covering every account assigned to them. He warns that having nine states in a territory doesn't mean all nine should receive equal attention, and that sales managers ultimately only reward results, not activity breadth.
Sean builds on this by introducing the concept of deal mix planning — analyzing how many small, departmental, or pilot deals versus larger enterprise deals a seller needs to close in order to hit quota. He illustrates this with examples from technology sales where pilot projects often precede full enterprise rollouts, and argues that sellers must calculate whether small-deal volume alone can achieve quota, or whether larger transactions must be pursued. He recommends planning to exceed quota by 20% as a buffer.
Kevin then pivots to program sales, particularly in tier two and tier three manufacturing supply chains. He argues that sellers in these environments must think in multi-quarter strategic arcs — Q1 focused on getting noticed, Q2 on becoming an approved vendor — rather than expecting quick closes. He explains the 'bullwhip effect' in supply chains, where a shortage of 100 units at one tier can ripple into tens of thousands of units of disruption downstream, and argues this is precisely why sellers must communicate value in terms of supply chain risk and downtime costs, not just product features.
The episode closes with a call to action: sellers should document their deal mix, quarterly targets, and territory strategy immediately, before the demands of daily selling cause them to lose focus. The hosts position trust-building and value selling as the distinguishing traits of top performers versus transactional sellers.
Key Insights
- Kevin Lawson argues that trust — not activity metrics — is the foundational currency of sales success, and that territory planning should be structured around how trust is built through good products, good process, and good people.
- Sean O'Shaughnessy contends that sellers must calculate their deal mix mathematically — determining how many small deals versus enterprise deals are physically achievable — because relying solely on small deals often makes quota mathematically impossible.
- Kevin Lawson claims that sellers assigned large territories should actively self-select their highest-impact areas rather than attempting full coverage, because sales managers reward results, not the number of accounts touched.
- Kevin Lawson argues that program sales in manufacturing require multi-quarter strategic territory plans — where Q1 is about gaining visibility and Q2 is about becoming an approved vendor — because customers only call known vendors during supply chain disruptions, not unknown ones.
- Kevin Lawson uses the supply chain 'bullwhip effect' to argue that sellers in tier two and tier three manufacturing must sell on downstream impact and downtime costs, since a shortfall of 100 units at one tier can translate to tens of thousands of units of disruption for the end manufacturer.
Topics
Full transcript available for MurmurCast members
Sign Up to Access