POV Planning
Most proof-of-value plans start life as a copy of a spreadsheet one sales engineer built years ago. The criteria drift, the buying team never sees the plan, and when the deal closes nobody can say which criteria won it. Opine makes the plan a real object on the deal, built from your own criteria library and scored by both sides.
trusted by the world's
highest performing revenue teams
A plan that holds up for the whole evaluation
This is a real one, start to finish. Four phases, eleven work items, and a scorecard both sides are looking at.
It starts from your playbook
Pick a template and the phases, tasks, and standard criteria are already in place. Or let an agent draft the plan when the deal reaches your pilot stage, and review what it wrote before anyone else sees it.
Drafted by an agent when Bellgrove reached the pilot stage, and assigned to P. Nadel to review.
- SSO through Okta with SCIM provisioningMust-HaveMeetsD. Ruiz
from your criteria library · used in 61 plans
- Data residency held in the EUMust-HaveExceedsR. AdeyemiBuyer
from your criteria library · used in 44 plans
The criteria are ones you already agreed on
These came out of your success criteria library, which is searchable by meaning rather than by keyword. One-off criteria sit right beside library ones when a deal needs something bespoke.
- Provision the sandbox tenantP. Nadel
- Wire the Snowflake connectorP. Nadel
- Ingest 2TB a day without backpressureMust-HaveMeetsP. Nadel
from your criteria library · used in 34 plans
Both sides score the same list
Every criterion carries an owner, and that owner can sit on the buying team. They rate the ones assigned to them, sub-requirements catch the detail, and the results roll up to plan progress.
- Row-level access policies hold on every downstream queryMust-HavePartially MeetsR. AdeyemiBuyer
- Policies apply to the BI layer
- Policies apply to notebook access
from your criteria library · used in 27 plans
- Alerts route into the on-call rotation without custom codeMust-HaveNot yet ratedR. AdeyemiBuyer
from your criteria library · used in 19 plans
It leaves in the shape they asked for
Share the live plan through the buyer portal, export it to a spreadsheet, or generate a Document that exports to Word. Your internal notes stay on your side of it.
- Platform team signs off on the runbookMust-HaveNot yet ratedR. AdeyemiBuyer
Buyer portal
3 people in the plan
Spreadsheet
XLSX export
Document
exports to Word
Nobody can tell you which criteria won the deal
A POV tracker holds one deal's list, and the day that deal closes it goes quiet. Nothing in it can say which criteria showed up in every win, which one the losses all stalled on, or whether the requirement your team argues about most has ever changed an outcome. In Opine a criterion is a library object first and a row on a plan second, so it carries its own history: every plan that used it, how each buyer rated it, and how those deals ended. Ask that across the portfolio instead of one spreadsheet at a time.
Your best evaluation, run again on every deal
The plan stops being one person's spreadsheet and becomes the thing the team, the rep, and the buyer all work from.
Your criteria stop drifting
The success criteria library is your team's canon: reusable, searchable by meaning rather than by keyword, and carrying a count of how many plans lean on each one. Import the years you already have in spreadsheets instead of retyping them, and they keep their library linkage.
A plan starts from your playbook
Templates seed the phases and the standard work items, so a new evaluation opens with your process already in it. When a deal reaches your pilot stage, an agent can draft the plan and hand it to the assigned sales engineer to review.
The buyer scores their own criteria
Assign a criterion to someone on the buying team and they rate it themselves. Scores roll up to plan progress, so the technical win is a number both sides watched land rather than a claim you make at the readout.
Buyer-ready without a rebuild
Share the live plan through the buyer portal, export it to a spreadsheet, or generate a Document that exports to Word. Nobody spends the night before a readout reformatting the tracker.
One plan, three people who need it
The plan belongs to the sales engineer, and it is the first thing everyone around them asks about.
They stop asking where the POV stands
Plan progress is a number on the deal rather than a Slack thread. The rep can see which criteria are still open and who owes what without pulling the sales engineer off the work to find out.
They score the criteria they own
The buying team reaches the plan through the buyer portal, rates the criteria assigned to them, and can see exactly what is left. Your internal notes never cross over with it.
They start from the playbook, not a blank page
The phases, the criteria, and the standard work items are already there. The afternoon that used to go into rebuilding the document goes into running the evaluation it describes.
Asked in real demos
The questions that come up when a team stops running its proofs of value out of a spreadsheet.
Have one we didn’t cover? Bring it to the demo →
TemplatesEvery one of our POVs is different. Are we forced through templates?
No. A template is a starting point, not a track. Any plan takes one-off criteria alongside library ones, and anything a template seeded can be reordered or dropped. The library exists so the criteria you reuse stay consistent, not to stop you writing bespoke ones.
MigrationWe have years of success criteria in spreadsheets. Do we recreate them by hand?
No. Import them. Criteria come in from a spreadsheet and stay editable afterward, keeping their library linkage intact. The canon your team already argued its way to is the canon you start with.
ScoringHow does scoring actually work, and can buyers rate criteria?
Criteria carry owners and scores, and buyer-side owners rate their own. Results roll up to plan progress on the deal. Across deals, the Criteria Metrics view reports on criteria outcomes portfolio-wide, so “which criteria do our wins have in common” is a report rather than an argument.
StructureWhat's the best practice for tasks versus success criteria?
Criteria are outcomes. Tasks are the work. “Integration data quality meets X” is a criterion the buyer evaluates; “configure the connector” is a task on the way there. Plans hold both, with sub-requirements when a criterion needs finer grain, so the scorecard stays clean while the work stays tracked.
AutomationYou said an agent can create the plan. Does it just appear without us?
It drafts, then waits for you. When a deal enters your pilot stage, an agent generates a draft plan and notifies the assigned sales engineer. It is a draft on your side of the deal, and nothing reaches the buying team until a person has reviewed it.
OutputOur buyers want this in their own format. Do we rebuild it every time?
No. The plan exports. Share it live through the buyer portal, export the plan to a spreadsheet, or generate a Document that exports to Word. The plan on the deal stays the source, and internal notes stay internal.
Three evaluations, one library underneath
The plans look different because the deals are. What they draw on is the same canon.
A platform team runs the same evaluation every quarter, and every quarter somebody copies last quarter's tracker and edits the parts they remember. Two criteria that decided the last win are missing from this one.
Row-level access policies hold on every downstream query: rated Partially Meets by R. Adeyemi. Two sub-requirements still open, the BI layer and notebook access.
The plan is built from the library, so the criteria that won the last three deals are in this one whether or not anyone remembered them.
The buyer's security lead keeps a checklist of their own and shares it two days before the readout. Half of it overlaps the POV, and the half that doesn't is where the deal stalls.
3 criteria assigned to the buying team. Audit log exports to the customer's SIEM: rated Meets by their security lead, five days before the readout.
Both checklists become one plan the buyer owns their half of, so the surprises turn up during the proof of value instead of at the end of it.
A twelve-person presales team has twelve ways of writing a success criterion, so leadership can compare deals on stage and dollar value and on almost nothing else.
Alerts route into the on-call rotation: used in 19 plans, scored Meets or better in 15 of the 17 evaluations that closed won.
One canon, used everywhere, so the team can finally see which criteria their wins have in common.
“Opine has been a major win for reps and leadership alike, accelerating POCs and helping close our highest-value deals faster. I’m very bullish on what we can do with them next.”
Amjed Aboukhadijeh
VP of Sales at Socket
