> ## Documentation Index > Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://b2-b-playbook.mintlify.site/llms.txt > Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further. # MarTech governance **Last reviewed:** 2026-08-29 · **Reading edit:** 2026-09-12 Software decisions are easier when you start with the job, the users, and the constraints. Test a product on real work, talk to relevant customers, and include the cost of setup and maintenance. Give every tool an owner and a date to review whether it is still useful. Define the job and constraints; Test on real work; Choose an owner and review date *Reading guide: define the job and constraints → test on real work → choose an owner and review date.* ## Use this when * Sales wants a cadence tool, CS wants conversation intelligence, finance wants a forecast UI—and everyone thinks it is “one platform.” * The last purchase cannot two-way sync with the CRM and nobody wrote that as a requirement. * Implementation is “the vendor will configure it” with no owner and no exit test. * You found a vendor grid with scores out of 10 and are about to paste it into a board deck. ## Do not use this when * There is no motion and no CRM map. Stay in [channel strategy](../04-channels-and-distribution/channel-strategy.md) and [CRM data model](https://b2-b-playbook.mintlify.app/playbooks/09-operations-pipeline-and-measurement/crm-data-model). * You need software names for a job. Start in [TOOLS.md](../../TOOLS.md), then come back here to evaluate. * Procurement, security, or privacy review must be done by qualified owners. This page will not sign a DPA. ## A few useful terms | Word | Meaning here | | --------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | | **Job** | One operating job (cadence, conversation intelligence, forecast UI)—not a vendor’s product family name | | **Win reason** | Why a recent buyer said yes, in their words | | **Opportunity area** | What still hurts after they bought | | **Pricing model** | Per seat, platform + seat, implementation fee—not a screenshot of list price | | **Time to implement** | Range from “usable” to “the team actually lives in it,” not the sales cycle | ## Keep this in mind **Split the jobs before you split the vendors.** Cadence / engagement, conversation intelligence / coaching, and pipeline / forecast are often sold as one suite and fail as one suite. If two-way CRM sync is not in the contract of requirements, you will re-key forever. ## How to do it ### Step 1: Define the jobs the tool must do Complete: *we are buying a tool so that \_\_\_\_ can \_\_\_\_ every \_\_\_\_, writing \_\_\_\_ into the CRM.* If you cannot finish that sentence, you are shopping. [Outbound](../05-outbound-and-prospecting/multichannel-sequence.md) needs a sequence home. [Forecasting](https://b2-b-playbook.mintlify.app/playbooks/09-operations-pipeline-and-measurement/forecasting) needs a source of truth—often the CRM, sometimes an overlay. Conversation intelligence is coaching and inspection, not a second forecast. ### Step 2: Talk to relevant customers A published grid of “overall satisfaction” is **their** interviews, **their** year, **their** segments. Use it only as a **prompt for questions**, never as your score. Ask: win reasons, what is still weak, who they also evaluated, pricing shape, implementation calendar, CRM (and whether sync is two-way). Write **your** answers in the working file. ### Step 3: Record limitations alongside strengths Recurring failure modes in this category of tools (from buyer-shaped grids, not as our benchmarks): CRM sync that is one-way or brittle; conversation intelligence that does not match the category leader the buyer compared; support that collapses across time zones or during implementation; forecast that cannot hold large, slow deals; pricing that only looks cheap per seat. Treat these as **test cases**, not as a ranking of named vendors. ### Step 4: Understand the full cost Pricing model, discount logic (seats vs term), implementation as a line item, and a **range** for time-to-live-in-the-tool. Do not copy a community PDF’s median ACV into your model. Quote **your** seats and **your** legal. AI and usage pricing change the bill; treat software as a **portfolio with a kill date**, not a growing stack of seats. A vendor-spend benchmark landing page is a prompt for those questions—not your budget ([Stackpack 2026 spend report](https://www.stackpack.ai/2026-Vendor-Spend-Benchmarks-Report?ref=b2b-playbook) is gated; we did not import its tables). ### Step 5: Assign an owner and review date One owner. Fields it may write (from the [CRM map](https://b2-b-playbook.mintlify.app/playbooks/09-operations-pipeline-and-measurement/crm-data-model)). A date you will review usage and sync errors. If the bake-off winner cannot do two-way sync on required fields, that is a no—not a “phase two.” ## Worked example (illustrative) Outbound-assist, \~12 sellers. CRM is the forecast source of truth. Not a vendor ranking. | Job | Decision | | ------------------------ | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | Cadence | Need sequences + mailbox control. Conversation intelligence is a **separate** job this year. | | Win reasons we will test | Customization of the cadence builder; CRM objects we already use; whether support answers in our hours. | | Opportunity tests | Two-way opportunity sync; spam/reputation; CI quality if we bolt it on later. | | Commercial | Per-seat + implementation. Multi-year discount only if we can exit fields. | | Owner | RevOps. Review in 90 days against sync error rate and sequence completion—not seats provisioned. | ## Copy: evaluation one-pager (fill) * Jobs in scope this buy (and jobs we will **not** bundle): * Required CRM writes (objects/fields, two-way yes/no): * Recent-buyer questions we will actually ask: * Win reasons we will test: * Opportunity areas we will test: * Pricing model we will quote: * Time-to-live-in-tool we will believe: * Alternatives we must see in the same bake-off: * Owner, review date, kill criteria: Working file: [vendor-evaluation.xlsx](../../templates/vendor-evaluation.xlsx). Shortlist of products: [TOOLS.md](../../TOOLS.md). ## Before you start * [ ] Jobs are split; a suite is a choice, not a default. * [ ] CRM map exists for every field the tool will touch. * [ ] Two-way sync is a requirement or an explicit out-of-scope. * [ ] Community scores were not pasted as our scores. * [ ] Implementation has an owner and an exit test. * [ ] Pricing model is written; a borrowed median ACV is not. * [ ] Kill / review date exists. ## Metrics | Metric | Diagnostic use | | --------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------- | | Sync errors / stale CRM fields | Whether the record stays true | | Time from purchase to team living in the tool | Whether the team has adopted the tool in its everyday work | | Seats provisioned vs seats in the weekly job | Shelfware | | Bake-off jobs covered vs SKUs bought | Suite sprawl | Do not count vendor demos attended, or a 9.2/10 in a partner PDF, as governance. ## Common mistakes * One SKU for cadence, CI, and forecast because the logo is famous. * Skipping two-way CRM sync until after contract. * Treating implementation time as the vendor’s optimistic week. * Importing another researcher’s satisfaction scores as facts. * No owner after the invoice. * Expanding [TOOLS.md](../../TOOLS.md) with a Slack list of AI apps instead of a job. ## What to read next The record the tools must obey is [CRM data model](https://b2-b-playbook.mintlify.app/playbooks/09-operations-pipeline-and-measurement/crm-data-model). Sequences live in [multichannel sequence](../05-outbound-and-prospecting/multichannel-sequence.md). The call still lives in [forecasting](https://b2-b-playbook.mintlify.app/playbooks/09-operations-pipeline-and-measurement/forecasting). Product names for a defined job start in [TOOLS.md](../../TOOLS.md)—start with the job table there, then the row. A community logo sheet or a marketplace-first skill pack is not the stack—pick the problem in [AI use-case selection](https://b2-b-playbook.mintlify.app/playbooks/09-operations-pipeline-and-measurement/ai-use-case-selection) and the rung in [GTM AI maturity](https://b2-b-playbook.mintlify.app/playbooks/09-operations-pipeline-and-measurement/gtm-ai-maturity) first. ## Sources and evidence boundary This is an owner-maintained operating synthesis. It is not a ranking, not a price guide, and not an endorsement of any vendor. The evaluation shape (overall buyer sentiment as a prompt not a score, win reasons vs opportunity areas, products/use cases, pricing model, typical alternatives, time to implement, headquarters as context only) is distilled from a two-page vendor scorecard on sales engagement and revenue intelligence produced with a GTM community (buyer-interview grid). That file is a **method prompt**, not a source to copy. Its satisfaction scores, median ACVs, discount anecdotes, implementation ranges, and named vendor columns are **not** this library’s facts or a ranking. Vendor marks remain theirs. *** Copyright © 2026 Ivan Xu. All rights reserved. See the [copyright and reuse terms](https://github.com/weilun88313/B2B-Playbook/blob/main/LICENSE). Canonical source: [github.com/weilun88313/B2B-Playbook](https://github.com/weilun88313/B2B-Playbook)