Tallgrass Sales QBR, Q3 FY27

Sales QBR deck for a team of nine, quarter by quarter

Tallgrass Software’s Q3 sales review is ten slides presented by the regional sales director to the CRO and the team. It puts attainment by rep on slide three, before the pipeline, because a sales QBR exists to find out which reps and which segments made the quarter and which did not.

Create a presentation with OneCraft10 slides, read in order

Every slide, in order

The whole deck as it renders, one slide after another. Read it the way the audience would.

SALES QBR

ANZ REGION

Q3 FY27 Sales Review

Nine reps, one quarter, three plays for the next one

Priya Sharma

REGIONAL SALES DIRECTOR, TALLGRASS

Slide 1 · cover · A plain two tone cover naming the quarter, the region and the presenter.

The quarter

Q3 closed on 30 September, nine reps carrying quota for the full quarter.

94%

Team attainment

$3.01M closed against a $3.2M team quota across nine reps.

27

New logos

New customers won, five of them from the enterprise segment.

$48k

Average deal

Up from $41k last quarter as enterprise mix grew.

02

Slide 2 · metrics · The quarter in three numbers before the detail: attainment, logos and deal size.

Attainment by rep

Quota, closed and attainment for Q3, with each rep entering Q4 pipeline

Rep and patch
Quota
Closed
Attainment
M. Okafor, enterprise south
$420k
$550k
131%
J. Lindgren, mid market east
$380k
$460k
121%
T. Vu, enterprise north
$420k
$470k
112%
S. Barnes, mid market west
$340k
$350k
103%
A. Reddy, mid market north
$340k
$330k
97%
K. Moana, SMB inbound
$300k
$270k
90%
L. Franco, SMB outbound
$300k
$250k
83%
D. Hart, new patch, ramping
$300k
$200k
67%
R. Chen, new patch, ramping
$400k
$230k
58%
Attainment is closed won against the quarter quota, not the annual number.

03

Slide 3 · metrics · The rep table on slide 3, before pipeline, because the QBR exists to find out who made the quarter.

Q4 pipeline coverage

$9.6M of pipeline against a $3.4M quota, 2.8x coverage, weighted to early stages.

Qualified
Discovery done
Proposal
Negotiation
0$M2$M4$M6$M8$M
Pipeline

04

Slide 4 · metrics · Q4 pipeline by stage against quota: $9.6M over $3.4M is 2.8x coverage.

Why we won, why we lost?

VS

Won

Lost

Integrations: 11 wins where the ERP connector sealed it

01

Price: 6 wins on three year term pricing

02

References: 5 wins from customer intros

03

Rollout speed: 3 wins on the 30 day onboarding

04

Support SLA: 2 wins in regulated accounts

05

In total: 27 wins, every one with a named reason

06
01

No decision: 9 losses that simply stalled out

02

Security review: 7 losses waiting on our SOC 2 scope

03

Price: 5 losses to the low cost incumbent

04

Feature gap: 3 losses on multi entity support

05

Champion left: 2 losses when the sponsor moved on

06

In total: 26 losses, every one tagged in the CRM

05

Slide 5 · comparison · Win and loss reasons with counts. No decision is the biggest loss bucket, which sets the plays.

Sales cycle

Median days from qualified to closed, six straight quarters of improvement.

Q2 26
Q3 26
Q4 26
Q1 27
Q2 27
Q3 27
020406080
Median days

06

Slide 6 · metrics · Sales cycle falling for six straight quarters, the quiet win under the attainment number.

Q4 plays, triaged

Six candidate plays placed on effort and impact. Three graduate to commitments.

Low
Effort
High
High
Impact
Low
Quick Wins
  • No decision playbook with mutual close plans
  • Security pack sent at proposal stage
  • Reference program for the top 10 customers
Major Projects
  • Multi entity feature push with product
  • Enterprise pod for the two ramping reps
Fill-Ins
  • Refresh the demo environment
Thankless Tasks

    07

    Slide 7 · framework · Six candidate plays for Q4 placed on effort and impact, so the three commitments are chosen, not vibes.

    Three commitments

    The plays from the matrix, with an owner and a date each. Two slots stay empty on purpose.

    01

    No decision

    Mutual close plans

    Every proposal ships with a mutual close plan. Owner: Priya. Live 14 October.

    02

    Security

    Security pack early

    The security pack goes out at proposal, not at review. Owner: T. Vu. Live 21 October.

    03

    References

    Reference bench

    Ten referenceable customers matched to segments. Owner: J. Lindgren. Ready 1 November.

    04

    Held open

    Nothing else

    Three plays is the cap. A fourth commitment dilutes the first three.

    05

    Review

    Checked weekly

    Each play is reviewed in the Monday pipeline call until the next QBR.

    08

    Slide 8 · checklist · The three plays the team commits to, each with an owner and a date. The QBR output.

    Q4 by month

    Monthly targets that sum to the $3.4M quota.

    October

    $0.9M target. The proposal stage backlog from Q3 closes here; mutual close plans go live mid month.

    November

    $1.1M target. The two ramping reps carry their first full patches with the enterprise pod behind them.

    December

    $1.4M target. Year end budget flush plus the three enterprise negotiations from the coverage slide.

    January

    Q1 pipeline build: 2.5x coverage entering the new year is the exit criterion for this plan.

    09

    Slide 9 · timeline · Q4 targets by month, adding to the $3.4M quota, with December carrying the peak.

    IN THE ROOM

    Decide

    two things.

    Forty minutes of reporting is done. The room now owns two open calls, and both change the Q4 plan if they go the other way.

    01

    Which two loss reasons do we fund fixes for?

    02

    Who owns the enterprise segment through the ramp?

    03

    Do the ramping reps keep full patches in Q4?

    04

    Does the price play extend past three year terms?

    AFTER THE SESSION

    Follow up async,

    before Friday.

    EMAIL

    priya@tallgrass.example

    CHANNEL

    #sales-anz

    PIPELINE CALL

    mondays 9:00

    DASHBOARD

    tallgrass.example/qbr

    10

    Slide 10 · qa · Discussion prompts on the two decisions the room can actually make, plus follow up channels.

    The structure

    What each slide is doing, so you can reuse the order even with different content.

    Slide 1cover
    A plain two tone cover naming the quarter, the region and the presenter.
    Slide 2metrics
    The quarter in three numbers before the detail: attainment, logos and deal size.
    Slide 3metrics
    The rep table on slide 3, before pipeline, because the QBR exists to find out who made the quarter.
    Slide 4metrics
    Q4 pipeline by stage against quota: $9.6M over $3.4M is 2.8x coverage.
    Slide 5comparison
    Win and loss reasons with counts. No decision is the biggest loss bucket, which sets the plays.
    Slide 6metrics
    Sales cycle falling for six straight quarters, the quiet win under the attainment number.
    Slide 7framework
    Six candidate plays for Q4 placed on effort and impact, so the three commitments are chosen, not vibes.
    Slide 8checklist
    The three plays the team commits to, each with an owner and a date. The QBR output.
    Slide 9timeline
    Q4 targets by month, adding to the $3.4M quota, with December carrying the peak.
    Slide 10qa
    Discussion prompts on the two decisions the room can actually make, plus follow up channels.

    How to adapt this deck

    A one rep territory review keeps the same order with the rep table becoming a deal table, and the plays shrink to one. A channel sales version swaps the rep rows for partner rows and adds sell through data beside attainment. The CRO wants two things the team often leaves out: the stage weighted coverage view this deck shows instead of a single ratio, and the loss reasons counted honestly, because no decision at nine is a forecasting problem wearing a sales costume.

    Sales QBR, customer QBR or internal QBR?

    Three meetings share the QBR name. This page is the internal sales version. The customer QBR presentation is a vendor presenting value to its client, and the quarterly business review deck is the whole company against plan. The three examples cross link so the wrong template never gets loaded on the day.

    What makes this deck work

    The rep table comes before the pipeline

    Slide three lists all nine reps with quota, closed and attainment, from 131% at the top to 58% on a ramping patch. Showing the spread before the forward look keeps the meeting honest: a 94% team number reads very differently once the room can see it is two overperformers and two ramps.

    No decision is the biggest loss reason, and the plays attack it

    The win and loss slide counts reasons on both sides, and the largest single bucket is nine losses to no decision. The effort and impact matrix then puts the mutual close plan play in the quick win quadrant, and it becomes commitment one with an owner and a live date. The deck traces problem to play in three slides.

    The QBR ends in commitments, not a thank you

    Slide eight is three plays with named owners and dates, and the slide itself says a fourth would dilute the first three. Sales reviews rot when everything is an action item; capping the output at three, on the slide, is the strongest process claim in the deck.

    Questions people ask

    What goes in a sales QBR deck?

    Attainment by rep, pipeline coverage against next quarter, win and loss reasons with counts, one trend that explains the quarter, and a small number of committed plays with owners. This example runs that arc in ten slides and reserves the last one for the two decisions the room must make.

    How is a sales QBR different from a company QBR?

    A company QBR reviews every function against plan and reads like a small board pack; a sales QBR reviews one function at rep and segment depth. The quarterly business review example on this site is the company version, and its scorecard slide is the whole meeting this deck spends ten slides inside.

    Should reps see each other’s attainment?

    In most healthy teams, yes, and this deck shows all nine names with their numbers. Ranked visibility with context, patches and ramp status noted per row, drives peer learning; anonymised tables just move the ranking to hallway speculation. The judgement call is cultural, but hiding the table rarely fixes what it hides.

    What pipeline coverage is healthy?

    Two and a half to four times quota is the widely used range, varying with win rate and cycle length. Tallgrass shows $9.6M against a $3.4M quota, 2.8x, but stage weighted: over 40% sits in the earliest qualified stage, which is why the coverage slide breaks the bar down by stage instead of quoting one ratio.

    How long should a sales QBR meeting run?

    Ninety minutes to two hours for a team this size: forty minutes of review, forty of discussion on the plays, and the rest on the decisions the leadership in the room can actually make. The deck exists to compress reporting, not to fill the meeting; ten slides is deliberately all of it.

    Can I export the tables to PowerPoint?

    Yes. Tables export as native, editable PowerPoint tables in the editable PPTX format, so ops can update the rep table next quarter without rebuilding it. Charts export natively too; only diagram artwork like the effort and impact matrix stays a picture with editable labels.

    Build your own in about a minute

    The button below opens the generator with this use case already described. Change the wording to match your own, generate, then edit anything you like.

    Make my sales qbr deck for a team of nine, quarter by quarter

    Other presentation examples

    Want the steps in the builder? Read Add charts, maps and diagrams to slides, then Make a pitch presentation with AI. For everything this generator can do, see the presentation maker.

    Sources

    Written and checked by the OneCraft team. Last checked .