# Performance review — B2B SaaS

The performance review with the columns a subscription business needs: every line reviewed by ICP segment and funnel stage, results read at the point the cycle allows, and a cohort date so a period is compared with one that has had the same time to mature.

Everything else is the general review, unchanged. Planned from the plan, variance separated from cause, cause held to evidence, one decision with one owner and a date.

## How to use it

1. Copy this file, or the CSV version if you would rather work in a sheet.
2. Take the planned figures from the plan, not from memory.
3. Write one row per line the plan had, including the ones that went as expected.
4. Separate the variance from the cause, and the cause from the decision.
5. Where a cause is not known, write that instead of a plausible story.
6. Give every decision an owner and a next review date, in the room.
7. Keep the finished reviews: a year of them answers questions no single one can.

## The columns

**Period** (Text). The window being reviewed, with its dates and whether this is an input review or an outcome review. Saying which at the top is the single most useful sentence in a long-cycle review.

**Line reviewed** (Text). The ICP segment and funnel stage being reviewed, matching the plan. A row that mixes awareness and capture is carried entirely by capture, which converts quickly and was going to anyway.

**Planned spend** (Integer). What the plan said this line would spend, in minor units, taken from the plan. Quarterly plans get revised mid-quarter, so the figure comes from the version that was approved and not the current one.

**Actual spend** (Integer). What the line really spent, in matching units and currency. Underspend matters more here than elsewhere, because a line that underspent early has produced a cohort that will mature late.

**Planned result** (Text). The primary metric and target from the plan, with the deal size behind the segment beside it. A lead from a large-deal segment can cost several times a small one and still be the better purchase.

**Actual result** (Text). What it produced, on the same metric, from the pipeline data rather than the ad platform, for a cohort with a full cycle behind it. An outcome read on an immature cohort is not the outcome.

**Variance** (Text). The difference on spend and on result, stated plainly, with the cohort's age. A variance on a six-week-old cohort compared with a six-month-old one is mostly a statement about time.

**Cause** (Text). Why, as far as the evidence supports, and here three causes come before the campaign: list depletion, handover quality, and a change to the acceptance definition. All three look like a targeting problem.

**Evidence** (Text). The export, the cohort window and the cycle length assumed. Where the comparison could not be cut at equal maturity, say so here and treat the row as indicative rather than as evidence.

**Decision** (Text). Continue, change the weight or segment, change the list, or investigate. Continue is a real decision for an awareness row whose evidence is not in yet, and writing it protects the row.

**Owner** (Text). Who carries the decision, by name. Anything about the acceptance definition or the routing belongs outside marketing, and it still needs a name against it in this document.

**Next review** (Date (YYYY-MM-DD)). When this row is looked at again, set from the cycle rather than from the calendar. An outcome row reviewed before its cohort matures will produce the same wrong answer every time.

**Notes** (Text). What the next reader needs: the sales reorganisation, the pricing change, the quarter-end that pulled deals forward, the departure that left a segment uncovered for a month.

## The performance review

| Period | Line reviewed | Planned spend | Actual spend | Planned result | Actual result | Variance | Cause | Evidence | Decision | Owner | Next review | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |

## Before you commit it

- Every row is reviewed by ICP segment and funnel stage.
- The review says whether it is judging inputs or outcomes.
- Outcome rows cover cohorts with a full cycle behind them.
- Cohorts are compared with cohorts of the same maturity.
- Variance, cause and decision are in separate columns.
- Every decision has an owner by name and a next review date.
- Definition changes and list refreshes are recorded in the notes.