Proactive Planning Techniques

For my first 16 years in tech sales, I averaged 240K/year W2 income. In my last 4 years, I averaged 720K/year. In order to triple my income, I had to change my sales approach entirely. Here's what I changed: I started using a new approach that I now call Yo-yo selling: 🪀 Yo-yo selling emphasizes starting at the executive level, conducting thorough discovery within the organization, and then returning to the executive with a tailored business case. Like holding a yo-yo, you are constantly in communication with the Executive Sponsor and updating them as you collect information and conduct deep discovery lower down in their organization. You are literally going up and down the organization, but always taking everything back to the Executive Sponsor to surface your findings along the way. Here's a breakdown of the framework: 🎯 𝐈𝐚𝐧 𝐊𝐨𝐧𝐢𝐚𝐤’𝐬 “𝐘𝐨-𝐘𝐨 𝐒𝐞𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐠” 𝐅𝐫𝐚𝐦𝐞𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤 This strategy involves a three-step process: 1. Start at the Top (Executive Engagement) Initiate contact with a senior executive to understand their most pressing challenges, the reasons behind the need for change, and the consequences of inaction. If your solution aligns with their needs, secure their sponsorship for further discovery within their organization. To secure the Executive Meetings, it's essential to create a tailored POV (point of view) on where you think you may be able to help them based on your initial research of their highest level goals and priorities. Chat GPT has made this research a LOT faster now. 2. Conduct In-Depth Discovery (Middle Management) Engage with department heads and key stakeholders to uncover the day-to-day challenges they face. Focus on understanding their processes, pain points, and the implications of current inefficiencies. Gather direct quotes and insights to build a comprehensive view of the organization's needs. 3. Return to the Executive (Present Findings) Compile the insights gathered into an executive summary and business case. Present this to the executive sponsor, highlighting how your solution addresses the identified challenges. Tailor your demonstration to focus solely on relevant aspects that solve their specific problems. 🚀 Why It Works 1. Accelerates Sales Cycles: Engaging executives early ensures alignment and expedites decision-making. 2. Builds Credibility: Demonstrates a deep understanding of the organization's challenges and showcases a tailored solution. 3. Facilitates Internal Buy-In: By involving various stakeholders, you ensure that the solution meets the needs of all parties, increasing the likelihood of adoption. I'm pleased to share that that Yo-yo selling was recently awarded as a Top 15 Sales Tactic of All Time by 30 Minutes to President's Club, and I received a cool plaque for entering the 30MPC Hall of Fame. Since I have no chance of entering the Hall of Fame for my baseball or golf game, this is a nice consolation prize 😁

Novartis has recently announced over 2,000 job cuts in the U.S., including around 400 roles at its East Hanover, New Jersey site — the company’s U.S. headquarters. The plan signals a clear intent to shift parts of its operations and talent footprint back toward Europe. This comes even as the company reports strong results: net income up 24% to $4B, free cash flow up 37% to $6.3B, and a $10B share buyback planned through 2027. While the headlines focus on layoffs, what’s really happening is a strategic rebalancing — relocating capabilities closer to R&D, manufacturing, and decision-making centers in Europe. And since Novartis’ global headquarters are in Switzerland, the shift naturally draws attention to the country’s role within this broader transformation. But the signal extends far beyond one company. Across life sciences and other technical industries, global organisations are re-evaluating how their European operations are structured — and where their critical talent should sit to drive long-term competitiveness. We’re already seeing this play out in practice — particularly in and around Switzerland, where: • Global companies are expanding or consolidating European operations around established Swiss hubs for R&D, regulatory, and leadership roles. • The competition for technical, scientific, and manufacturing talent has intensified, driving new emphasis on retention and internal mobility. • Local workforce planning is evolving as Swiss-based teams increasingly support wider EMEA mandates, creating both opportunity and pressure to scale the right capabilities locally. As this reshaping continues, the focus now turns to how companies prepare — both from a Talent Acquisition and business strategy perspective. Are leadership teams forecasting the right skill needs in Europe? Are TA and HR functions building local pipelines fast enough to meet demand? How are organisations ensuring they can attract, relocate, and retain the best talent amid increasing competition? My view: Switzerland and Europe are entering a pivotal moment. The companies that plan proactively — aligning workforce strategies with global shifts — will not only secure critical talent but also strengthen their long-term competitiveness. This is where strategic talent planning becomes business strategy. 💬 I’d love to hear from my network — TA, HR, and business leaders across Switzerland and Europe: How do you see this global talent shift influencing the way companies build and retain teams in Europe? And what do you think it will take to stay competitive in this new landscape? #TalentPartner #Switzerland #EMEA #LifeSciences #Pharma #Biotech #TalentStrategy #FutureOfWork #Hiring

Most sales leaders run their calendars backwards. They review calls after they happen. They review pipelines after deals stall. They review activity after the week is over. Then they wonder why they're always playing catch-up. I want to challenge every VP, Director, and Manager reading this: Open your calendar right now. Find every meeting with "review" in the title. Now flip it. Call review → Call prep Pipeline review → Pipeline planning Activity review → Activity planning Forecast review → Forecast building And move them earlier in the week. This is what I call becoming a Proactive Leader. Most one-on-ones are backward-looking. "What happened last week?" "How did that deal go?" "Why didn't you hit activity?" That's all after the fact. You can't change what already happened. Proactive one-on-ones are forward-looking. "What's the plan this week?" "What do you need to win that deal?" "How are we going to hit activity?" Same amount of time. Completely different results. Think about it: You spend 30 minutes reviewing a call that already happened. What if you spent those same 30 minutes prepping for the call before it happened? Role playing. Practicing objections. Planning the flow. Which one actually moves the needle? Here's my challenge: Over the next 90 days, flip your calendar from reactive to proactive. Every review meeting becomes a prep meeting. Every backward-looking conversation becomes forward-looking. Watch what happens to your team's results. Proactive leaders don't just inspect what happened. They architect what's going to happen. That's the difference.

7 Salary Range Signals Hidden in Every Job Posting (Leverage Them To Double Your Raise!): 1. Title & Level Codes = Band Clues Recruiters don’t always post the number. But they do reveal the level. For example: Associate, Junior & Entry: lower bands Senior, Staff, Principal & Lead: upper bands If the level sits above your last role? Anchor towards the upper half of market for your location. 2. Scope Words Hint At The Top Of The Band Comp follows responsibility. Scope words tell you how high to aim. For example: “Own the roadmap”, “Define strategy”, “Manage budget” can be indicators of high-level scope. Reporting and leadership scope also count. Does the role report to upper management? How many people are under this roles leadership? Each scope signal pushes you closer to the top of the band. 3. Comp Structure Words Tell You Base Vs. Variable The split changes your take-home (and your ask). Look for terms like: OTE: base is often 50–70% Annual bonus target: often 10–20% Equity: RSUs/ options This information can help you leverage salary negotiation if the company won't budge on your ask. 4. Geographic Pay Band The same role in a different location can have a different pay band, too. For example: Remote roles: pay varies by location Hybrid roles: higher bands are usually in NYC and SF areas Anchor using the highest-cost location in their footprint if you’re in a similar band. 5. Scarcity & Burden = Premium Hard-to-find skills or tough schedules usually pay more. Here's the signals you should look for: Security clearance: usually a regulated industry On-call: might ask for nights/weekends or 30–50 % travel Niche stacks: e.g., SAP, Snowflake, CUDA, Rus Move your ask up or request a stipend. 6. Company Stage Stage hints at how much from your compensation package is cash vs. equity. Early-stage: lower cash, bigger equity Growth-stage: balanced Public: stronger base + RSUs + structured bonus If cash is light, price the equity to bump up your compensation package. 7. Wording That Can Hint Budget Struggling to get a number from the recruiter or the hiring manager? Go back to the job description. “DOE,” “competitive pay,” “lean team” are often used for lower cash. “Transparent bands,” “15 % bonus,” “annual RSUs” are often higher cash. 📊 Want to turn job descriptions into negotiation strategies that generate a $44k raise? 👉 Book a free 30-min Clarity Call and we’ll build your negotiation game plan: https://lnkd.in/gdysHr-r

Many FP&A teams forecast compensation using top-down assumptions like "salaries grow 3% year-over-year and benefits are 25% of pay." But this usually fails. Bottoms-up cost builds allow FP&A professionals to build accurate compensation models like this one. Instead of starting with high-level assumptions and averages, it begins with inputs that can then drive the averages used in the financial model. This is an example I sometimes use to illustrate how FP&A teams can build more accurate payroll forecasts: • Separate senior professionals from junior professionals • Build salary growth rates at the category level • Add fringe and statutory costs line by line • Calculate each cost as a % or salaries or per person • Include benefits % of salary to capture non-cash comp The result of this technique is you get a transparent, auditable model with inputs that can be easily flexed. You get immediate sensitivities that you can run on headcount, pay mix, or changes to benefits. And you can easily integrate these assumptions with workforce planning. You can also break down leadership, management, and staff by job category and assign salary bands. If the CFO asks why personnel costs went up 8%, you can show exactly where that increase is coming from. A bottoms-up cost build like this doesn't just make your forecast more detailed. It makes it more defensible for FP&A business partners serving human resources.

Exactly 1 year after the Draghi report, ASML commits 1,7 billion EUR to Mistral.ai, becoming its largest shareholder. Has Europe finally waken up? The alliance between the continent's two AI champions - the world leader in chip-making machines and the rising LLM star - is great news: a European corporate finally investing massively in a European scaleup from its industry, even if not directly tied to its core business. This follows other positive developments, like the partnership between automaker Renault and exoskeleton scaleup Wandercraft to lighten the workload of workers who handle heavy loads in factories. But this kind of news are still the exception and not the rule: to mainstream this virtuous deals, we need Europe to enact an industrial policy for tech and innovation. This starts with recognising that tech is not only a fully-fledged economic sector, but also a strategic one to be treated with the same consideration of energy, chemicals or steel. A sector, for which the EU should have a truly shared competence to coordinate in practice - and not just in words - the work of Member States. Once we get there, we need to put in place a 5 step action plan: 1️⃣ Introducing a European preference in public procurement to organically support the growth of our startups, scaleups and tech companies. This should not be a blank obligation, but an additional evaluation criteria which weight will depend on the sensitivity of the concerned use case. 2️⃣ Creating real incentives for massive European private capital (savings and corporate investment) to finance innovation. European pension and insurance funds already invest in US innovative companies. Why not do the same in Europe? As for corporates, we need more of them to follow the example of ASML and Renault and look beyond their immediate business for their strategic investments. 3️⃣ Put in place a “28th regime” making it seamless for European companies to expand and operate in the Single Market as their domestic market. 4️⃣ A structural reform of the European budget for innovation (starting with the Competitiveness Fund) to allocate funding based on the innovative potential of projects rather than their geographical distribution. 5️⃣ A competition and merger control framework that promotes the consolidation and emergence of European tech champions. If we manage to do this, we will create jobs, unlock growth and secure our businesses against geopolitical risks. And with that, we will finally regain our leverage in international negotiations—whether in matters of trade or peace—with the world’s other great powers. More on these ideas in our latest report drafted with Marianne Tordeux Bitker and Marie Moussy and nicely laid out by Séverine MERCIER --> link to the full publication in the comments (available in 🇬🇧 and 🇫🇷 ).

Reindustrialization is increasingly about control, resilience, and pragmatism especially in Europe. The latest Capgemini Research Institute research shows that European organizations are taking a distinct path. As investment becomes more selective, capital is being increasingly concentrated in critical areas of strategic importance. Friendshoring has become a defining supply chain strategy, with 64% of European organizations relying on allied based manufacturing and supply-chains. This shift is particularly pronounced in capital intensive and strategically critical industries such as automotive, electronics, semiconductors, and aerospace & defense where dependency risks, supply continuity, and market access outweigh pure cost considerations. The European approach also reflects a more disciplined investment environment. While strategic intent remains high, organizations are becoming more selective in how and where they deploy capital, prioritizing resilience, market access and long term value over large scale expansions. This is not about redrawing global supply chains. It reflects a move toward more flexible, multi region and hybrid operating models, shaped by the need to balance cost competitiveness, resilience, and market access under real energy, regulatory, and geopolitical constraints. Technology plays a central role in making this work. AI, digital twins and automation are becoming core enablers of end to end supply chain orchestration, supporting real time visibility, scenario planning, and faster decision making across increasingly complex ecosystems. Success depends on building a unified digital backbone that connects suppliers, production and logistics. It will also anchor decisions in long term value rather than short term reactions. I see this as a sensible and necessary evolution for Europe. By combining friendshoring, hybrid right shoring pathways, and strong digital foundations, organizations can build industrial systems that are more agile and competitive over time. Find the full research in the comments.  

From Siloed Projections to System-Wide Planning: How We Built Singapore’s Healthcare Capacity Framework 3 years ago, our healthcare demand projections were done in silos. Today, we have a coherent, system-wide framework that links demand to infrastructure, manpower, and budget planning. Honoured by the recognition on the work done by the team. Here’s the transformation journey. The Challenge We Faced Demand for each care setting is projected independently, using different assumptions and methodologies. 2023: Building the Foundation Introduced more granular inputs: added parameters e.g. functional impairment levels and family support in long-term care projections. Linked patient flows: Connected across settings (e.g. ED visits to acute inpatient to community hospital). 2024: Achieving System Coherence The coordination challenge: Working across 8+ divisions (IPP, HSD, PCC, APO, MP&S, HF) while handling new policy simulations & evolving capacity decisions. The solution: Set up Capacity Planning Committee (CPC) as single decision platform, replacing piecemeal EXCO discussions. The breakthrough: Obtained approval for our projections alignment framework: • Single baseline model across all projections • Common parameters where models intersect • Systematic accounting for care transformation impacts Real impact: Secured approval for new hospital beds through white space activation and new hospital sites. 2025: Advanced System Modelling Healthier SG simulation: Collaborated with Duke-NUS to quantify HSG’s long-term impact on healthcare demand and costs - answering our persistent questions. Disease-based projections: Piloted new method for mental health services, endorsed and used for service planning Tight deadline delivery: Completed baseline and care transformation projections across all settings that should have taken a few years to complete within one year. The Framework That Changed Everything Our Long-Term Capacity Planning Framework now seamlessly connects: • Demand drivers (population aging, functional impairment) • Care settings (from acute to community to home-based care) • Resource planning (manpower, infrastructure, budget) Policy interventions like HSG, right-siting efforts, and palliative care strategies are incorporated. Key Lessons Learned 1. Coordination is as important as methodology - The CPC structure solved more problems than technical improvements alone 2. Resilience matters - When our HSG model wasn’t endorsed initially, we went back to fundamentals and rebuilt stakeholder confidence 3. Granular parameters drive better insights - Moving from broad assumptions to specific factors like family support levels improved accuracy The result? A coherent planning system that helps Singapore prepare for demographic transitions while optimising resource allocation across the entire healthcare continuum. What challenges are you facing in system-wide planning and coordination across multiple stakeholders?

Your company won’t fix your pay gap. You will. Negative truth: lateral hires often make more than long-timers at the same level. They walk in with counter offers and market corrections; you walk in with “we’ll see at annual hikes.” Most companies aren’t proactive or flexible. Your one real shot is a review cycle or a delayed promotion every few years. So how do you handle this personally? Step 1: Know your Pay Gap Index (PGI) PGI = (Market median − Your total comp) ÷ Market median. If you’ve stayed put, expect ~20–25%. That’s the reality for many long-timers. Treat PGI > ~20% as a warning light. Track it yearly. Your goal is to compress the delta, not magically erase it in one shot. Step 2: Set two targets (absolute + relative) 1) Your Personal Number. A clear yearly amount that keeps pace with your FIRE goals, investments, and lifestyle inflation. If you hit this, you’re financially okay, even if you’re not at full market. 2) The Gap Delta. A plan to narrow the spread with laterals over time. Progress over perfection. Step 3: Work the system you’re in Companies run on bands, budgets, and timing: Bands: each role has a pay ceiling. Budgets: mostly fixed; exceptions are rare. Timing: raise the bar around reviews or after visible impact. Translation: don’t just ask for money, negotiate scope. Scope → level → band → pay. Step 4: Ask for a comp reset, not “fairness” Make a simple, business-first case: - Problem → what you owned → measurable outcome (revenue, cost, risk, customer impact). - Show your current scope already matches the next level. - Anchor to market ranges for your role and location. Step 5: Keep real options alive You are always one job switch away from a market reset. Keep it on cards: - Light interview practice each quarter. - Living portfolio (design docs, active GitHub, PRs, dashboards). - Quiet market intel on ranges for your role. This isn’t disloyal, it’s smart leverage. ----- If the gap stays high, choose a path If your company can’t close the gap or meet your Personal Number for two consecutive years: - Try internal mobility to a higher-scope role that unlocks a new pay band. - If that stalls, make an external switch. Set expectations (and protect your sanity) If you like your job, there’s good learning, and your Personal Number is met, staying can still be a great decision. Your experience compounds. At the same time, roles that truly fit your work style, learning expectations, and life are rare—leaving just for money can be harder than it looks. Bottom line: calculate your PGI, set a clear Personal Number, push for scope (not just salary), use internal mobility when possible, and keep the external option ready. Your company may not fix your pay gap, but with clarity and motion, you will.

Something remarkable happened when we started bringing Customer Success leaders into our sales conversations. The traditional sales process transformed into a strategic partnership discussion that benefited everyone involved. After implementing this approach across hundreds of deals, we discovered benefits that went far beyond our initial expectations. Sales teams gained a deeper understanding of post-implementation challenges, which helped them qualify opportunities more effectively. Instead of focusing solely on closing deals, they began asking questions about operational readiness, internal champions, and resource allocation. Prospects received authentic insights into what successful implementation truly requires. Our CS leaders shared real examples of customers who thrived and openly discussed common obstacles they might face. This transparency built trust and helped prospects make informed decisions. Better aligned customer expectations from day one. When CS leaders joined these conversations, they highlighted potential roadblocks and success metrics based on similar customer profiles. This practical guidance helped prospects understand the work required to achieve their desired outcomes. This early involvement proved invaluable for our CS team. They gained visibility into the customer's vision before contracts were signed, allowing them to proactively plan resources and create tailored onboarding strategies. A surprising result was the reduction in "rescue" situations during implementation. We eliminated many issues that typically surfaced months into the relationship by addressing potential challenges during sales discussions. The data supported our approach. Deals that included CS leaders showed 40% higher implementation success rates and 25% faster time-to-value. More importantly, these customers renewed at significantly higher rates. For those considering this approach, start small. Choose strategic opportunities where CS insights could substantially impact the prospect's decision-making process. Document the outcomes and refine your strategy based on that feedback. Great customer relationships begin with the very first conversation.