Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

gtm-enterprise-account-planning(GTM 企业客户规划)

gtm-enterprise-account-planning 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

gtm-enterprise-account-planning 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,通过GitHub 仓库获取,权限为权限未标注;许可证信息还不明确,第三方扫描有提醒项,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,674 个 Skill 里排第 4,972。

总安装 28,512周安装 1,157GitHub Stars 31,688下载 9,984核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
unknown

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:gtm-enterprise-account-planning(GTM 企业客户规划)
来源仓库:https://github.com/github/awesome-copilot
仓库路径:skills/gtm-enterprise-account-planning
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/github/awesome-copilot --skill gtm-enterprise-account-planning
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/github/awesome-copilot --skill gtm-enterprise-account-planning

这个 Skill 是做什么的

研究检索类 Skill 主要解决「找资料、核对事实、把来源整理清楚」的问题,通常会让助手先检索再总结。

gtm-enterprise-account-planning 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要根据关键词快速定位候选结果时使用。它专注于企业级客户规划场景,支持销售策略和客户管理相关内容。

可通过 npx skills add 命令从指定 GitHub 仓库安装并使用该技能。安装前建议确认权限范围和维护状态,避免触发不必要的联网或文件操作。适用宿主包括 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,接入前应确认版本、权限和运行环境要求。

来源仓库内路径:skills/gtm-enterprise-account-planning

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 npx skills add https://github.com/github/awesome-copilot --skill gtm-enterprise-…;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    权限没有明确标注,第一次使用时只给一个无关紧要的任务,观察它到底读了哪些文件和网络。

常见问题

6 条

gtm-enterprise-account-planning 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/github/awesome-copilot --skill gtm-enterprise-account-pl…。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

gtm-enterprise-account-planning 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

gtm-enterprise-account-planning 需要什么权限?

权限级别没有明确标注。第一次使用时建议只给无关紧要的任务,观察它实际读写了哪些内容。

gtm-enterprise-account-planning 是免费的吗?

公开资料没有标注明确许可证,收费和商用限制都无法确认。正式使用前请到来源仓库核对授权说明。

gtm-enterprise-account-planning 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 28,512 次,近一周安装 1,157 次,下载 9,984 次,GitHub 31,688 星。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

gtm-enterprise-account-planning 安全吗?

第三方扫描有提醒项,说明存在需要人工确认的行为。安装前请打开源码看清它读了什么、联网到哪里。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 同时适配 4 种工具,换客户端不用重新找替代品。
  • 来源仓库有 31,688 星,维护活跃度相对可查。

先想清楚的地方

  • 许可证没有明确标注,能不能商用、能不能再分发都不确定。
  • 第三方扫描存在提醒项或未通过项,需要人工逐条确认。
  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 Codex,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理研究检索类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。

不太适合

  • 需要明确授权才能用到公司项目里的场景。
  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

研究检索类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
find-skills

寻找技能 · Codex、Claude

31,199,81316,486操作浏览器MIT有提醒
self-improving-agent

自我改进 Agent · OpenClaw

16,464,0023,396接触敏感数据MIT-0通过
soultrace

灵魂追踪 · Codex、Claude

7,588,94412需要联网未明确有提醒
self-improving

自我完善 · OpenClaw

6,829,2841,046需要联网MIT-0通过
microsoft-foundry

微软代工厂 · Codex、Claude

6,614,144764调用外部服务未明确有提醒
gtm-enterprise-account-planning

GTM 企业客户规划 · 本页

28,51231,688权限未标注未明确有提醒

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

Enterprise Account Planning

Strategic account planning and execution for enterprise deals. Turn complex sales cycles into systematic wins — or at least know when they're dying before you waste months.

When to Use

Triggers:

  • "How do I plan this enterprise deal?"
  • "This deal has been in motion 3 months, why isn't it closing?"
  • "Should I create a full account plan or simplified version?"
  • "How do I know if this deal is actually moving?"
  • "MEDDICC qualification"
  • "Building a mutual action plan"

Context:

  • Strategic deals above your average ACV
  • Multiple stakeholders involved
  • Sales cycle exceeds 60 days
  • Complex buying process (legal, procurement, security)
  • Enterprise or mid-market accounts

Core Frameworks

1. If Your MAP Hasn't Been Updated in 3 Weeks, That Deal Is Dead

The Pattern I've Seen:

The Mutual Action Plan (MAP) is the single best indicator of deal health. Not pipeline stage. Not verbal commitments. Not "they love the product."

The MAP tells you everything:

Healthy deal:

  • MAP updated weekly
  • Customer adding their own action items
  • Both sides completing tasks on schedule
  • New stakeholders appearing in MAP
  • Dates moving up (not pushed out)

Dying deal:

  • MAP last updated 3+ weeks ago
  • Only your side has action items
  • Customer tasks marked "pending" for weeks
  • No new stakeholders engaged
  • All dates in the past

Why This Happens:

When a deal is real, the customer wants it to happen. They're doing work. They're involving stakeholders. They're moving through their process.

When a deal is dying, you're doing all the work. They're "too busy." They'll "get back to you next week." The economic buyer is "traveling."

The 3-Week Rule:

If your MAP hasn't been updated in 3 weeks, the deal is dead — you just don't know it yet. I've never seen a deal close with a stale MAP. Not once in 11 years.

What to Do:

Week 1 of silence: Send MAP update: "Here's what we've completed. What's your status on [specific customer action]?"

Week 2 of silence: Escalate to champion: "Haven't heard back on MAP. Are we still on track for [date]? If priorities shifted, let me know."

Week 3 of silence: Qualify out or reset: "It seems like timing might not be right. Should we pause and reconnect in [timeframe], or is there a blocker I can help with?"

Common Mistake:

Keeping deals in pipeline because "they said they want it." Verbal interest ≠ action. If they're not doing work, they're not buying.


2. The EB Discovery Problem (And Why Deals Die at Week 8)

The Pattern:

You're 8 weeks into a deal. POC went great. Champion loves you. Technical validation complete. You send the proposal.

Then: radio silence.

What happened? You never met the Economic Buyer.

The Economic Buyer (EB) is the person who:

  • Controls budget allocation
  • Makes final purchase decision
  • Signs the contract

Not:

  • Your champion (they influence, don't decide)
  • The technical lead (they validate, don't buy)
  • The VP who attended one demo (they advise, don't sign)

Why Deals Die Without EB Access:

You built the business case with your champion's assumptions. But the EB has different priorities:

  • Champion cares about: solving their team's pain
  • EB cares about: ROI, risk mitigation, strategic alignment

When you send proposal to EB through the champion, EB sees:

  • Price tag with no context
  • Solution to a problem they didn't articulate
  • Risk they haven't evaluated

Result: Deal stalls or dies.

The Framework: EB Validation Checklist

Before sending proposal, validate:

  • Have you identified the EB? (Name, title, confirmed by champion)
  • Have you met the EB? (Video call minimum, in-person ideal)
  • Does EB agree on the problem? (In their words, not yours)
  • Does EB agree on success metrics? (How they'll measure ROI)
  • Does EB know the price range? (Ballpark discussed, not surprised)
  • Does EB understand timeline? (Implementation, go-live, value realization)

If you answered "no" to any, don't send the proposal yet.

How to Get EB Access:

Ask your champion: "Before we finalize pricing, I'd love 15 minutes with [EB name] to make sure we're aligned on outcomes and timeline. Can you intro us?"

If champion blocks: "I can handle that, you don't need to talk to them" → This is a red flag. Either champion doesn't have access (not a real champion) or they're afraid EB will kill the deal (which means deal is weak).

Push back: "I totally understand. At the same time, I want to make sure [EB] sees the full value before seeing the price. In my experience, when economic buyers aren't involved early, deals get delayed in procurement. Can we do a quick alignment call?"

Common Mistake:

Treating EB meeting as "nice to have." It's mandatory for any deal >$50K. No EB access = no deal.


3. Personal Win Mapping (People Buy for Themselves)

The Pattern:

Enterprise software purchases are made by committees. But committees don't buy. People buy.

And people buy for personal reasons:

  • Career advancement
  • Looking good to their boss
  • Reducing their workload
  • Covering their ass (CYA)
  • Proving they were right
  • Not looking stupid

Framework: Personal Win Identification

For each stakeholder, map:

Professional Win:

  • What do they get credit for if this succeeds?
  • What pain goes away for them personally?
  • How does this make them look good?

Professional Risk:

  • What happens to them if this fails?
  • What's their reputation cost if this goes wrong?
  • Who's skeptical of them internally?

Personal Motivations:

  • Are they new in role? (Need quick wins)
  • Facing budget cuts? (Need to justify spend)
  • Up for promotion? (Need visible success)
  • Burned by vendors before? (Extra risk-averse)

Example: VP of Engineering

Professional Win:

  • Reduce on-call burden for team (they'll stop complaining to her)
  • Faster incident response (looks good in QBRs)
  • Attract better eng talent (modern tooling)

Professional Risk:

  • Team rejects new tool (she forced it on them)
  • Migration goes badly (downtime, incidents)
  • Vendor fails (she picked them)

Personal Motivations:

  • New in role (6 months), needs wins
  • Under pressure to improve uptime metrics
  • Previous monitoring tool she picked failed

How This Changes Your Pitch:

Generic pitch: "Our platform improves incident response time by 40%."

Personal win pitch: "You mentioned the on-call burden is burning out your team. We've seen teams reduce on-call pages by 40% in the first month, which helps with retention. And since you're focused on uptime metrics for the board, the improved response time shows up immediately in your QBR dashboards."

The Difference:

Generic = business case Personal = career case

Both matter. But personal wins close deals.

Common Mistake:

Selling only to the business problem. "This saves money. This improves efficiency." That's necessary but not sufficient. People need to see what's in it for them personally.


4. Enterprise Account Plan Structure (Four Components)

A complete account plan has four interconnected pieces. Each feeds the others.

Component 1: Account Summary

  • Company basics (HQ, size, industry, subsidiaries)
  • Technical landscape (infrastructure, tools, platforms)
  • Top corporate initiatives (from press, annual reports, LinkedIn)
  • Hypothesis: "How can we help?" (write this before engaging)
  • LinkedIn keyword analysis (quantify their investment in your domain)

Component 2: Org Chart

  • Map all relevant contacts: name, title, location, LinkedIn, email, phone, notes
  • Notes capture: domain of responsibility, technical specialties, personal win
  • Include people across levels: C-suite, directors, architects, leads, specialists
  • Don't just map buyer — map influencers, users, potential blockers

Component 3: Opportunity Plan (MEDDICC)

  • M - Metrics: How will the customer measure success? (Validated with EB)
  • E - Economic Buyer: Who has budget authority? Have you met them?
  • D - Decision Criteria: What criteria will they use to decide? (Technical, business, political)
  • D - Decision Process: What's their buying process? (Procurement, legal, security review)
  • I - Identified Pain: What specific pain have they articulated? (Their words, not yours)
  • C - Champion: Who inside the account is actively selling on your behalf?
  • C - Competition: Who else are they evaluating? What's the competitive dynamic?

Plus: Issues/Risks table with mitigation plans, help needed, responsible parties

Component 4: Mutual Action Plan (MAP)

  • Joint timeline with: Action, Your Owner, Customer Owner, Others Involved, Due Date
  • Both sides must have actions — if only your team has actions, it's not a deal, it's a demo
  • Track status (complete/in-progress)
  • Use MAP as running agenda for check-in calls
  • If MAP isn't updated in 3 weeks, deal is dead

Decision Criteria:

Full account plans worth investment for top 10-20% of accounts by potential deal size. For rest, use simplified version (summary + MEDDICC + next steps).

Common Mistakes:

  • Creating account plan after deal is in motion (build before first engagement)
  • Not maintaining MAP weekly (stale MAP = stale deal)
  • Filling MEDDICC with assumptions instead of validated info
  • Mapping only obvious contacts instead of full org chart
  • Not tracking personal win for each stakeholder

5. LinkedIn Keyword Analysis for Account Intelligence

Before engaging strategic account, quantify their investment in your domain via LinkedIn.

How to Execute:

  1. Define 8-10 keywords relevant to your space (e.g., category terms, technical roles, workflow keywords)
  2. Search LinkedIn for "[company name] + [keyword]" and record count
  3. Map concentrations: Which locations? Which departments?
  4. Identify outliers (high keyword concentration in specific departments signals maturity)

Why This Works:

If a company has 50 employees with "SRE" in their profile, they're mature in site reliability. If they have 2, they're not ready for advanced observability tools.

This tells you:

  • Whether to pursue the account (do they have the team?)
  • Who to target (where are the concentrations?)
  • How to personalize outreach (reference their specific context)

Example:

Searching "[Company] + DevOps":

  • 120 results → Mature DevOps org, good fit
  • 5 results → Early, not ready

Searching "[Company] + SRE":

  • 50 results → They care about reliability, pitch uptime/incident reduction
  • 0 results → Don't lead with SRE value prop

Common Mistakes:

  • Just searching job titles (vary wildly) instead of keywords (consistent)
  • Not comparing counts to total employee count
  • Not refreshing analysis (hiring trends change quarterly)

6. The Unified Sales Process (Stage Gates)

Enterprise sales follows defined stages with clear exit criteria. Don't advance stages without meeting criteria.

Stage 0 — Pipeline Generation: Prospecting → Qualified interest confirmed Stage 1 — Discovery: Environment/pain/requirements → Pain identified, stakeholders mapped Stage 2 — Demonstrating: Product demo, champion building → Champion identified Stage 3 — Proving Value: POC/trial → Technical validation complete Stage 4 — Proposal: Pricing, terms, scope → Proposal delivered, EB aligned Stage 5 — Paper Process: Legal, procurement, security → Approvals secured Stage 6 — Closed Won: Deal signed → Customer success handoff

Exit Criteria Matter:

Don't move from Stage 2 → Stage 3 until you have a champion. Don't move from Stage 3 → Stage 4 until POC success criteria are met. Don't move from Stage 4 → Stage 5 until EB has approved.

Common Mistake:

Advancing stages based on activity, not criteria. "We demoed, so we're in Stage 3" — but if they haven't agreed to POC, you're still in Stage 2.


Decision Trees

Do I Need a Full Account Plan?

Is deal size above average ACV?
├─ No → Simplified plan (summary + MEDDICC)
└─ Yes → Continue...
    │
    Sales cycle >60 days?
    ├─ Yes → Full account plan
    └─ No → Simplified plan

Is This Deal Actually Moving?

Is MAP being updated weekly?
├─ Yes → Healthy
└─ No → Continue...
    │
    Has it been >3 weeks since last MAP update?
    ├─ Yes → Dead deal (qualify out or reset)
    └─ No → At risk (escalate to champion)

Should I Send the Proposal?

Have you met the Economic Buyer?
├─ No → Don't send yet (get EB access first)
└─ Yes → Continue...
    │
    Does EB agree on problem and success metrics?
    ├─ Yes → Send proposal
    └─ No → Align with EB before sending

Common Mistakes

1. Creating account plan too late

  • Build before first engagement, not after deal is in motion

2. MEDDICC filled with assumptions

  • Validate each element with customer, don't guess

3. Stale Mutual Action Plan

  • If MAP isn't updated weekly, deal is stalling. 3+ weeks = dead.

4. Mapping only the buyer

  • Need full org chart: influencers, users, blockers

5. Ignoring personal wins

  • People buy for career/reputation reasons, not just business ROI

6. Not tracking deal health

  • Green/yellow/red indicators catch dying deals early

7. Skipping champion validation

  • Without internal champion, you're selling alone

Quick Reference

MAP Health Check:

  • Green: Updated weekly, both sides have actions, customer completing tasks
  • Yellow: Updated bi-weekly, mostly your actions, customer slow to respond
  • Red: 3+ weeks stale, only your actions, customer unresponsive → Dead deal

MEDDICC Validation:

  • Metrics: Success criteria agreed with EB
  • Economic Buyer: Met them, validated problem/solution
  • Decision Criteria: Understand their evaluation rubric
  • Decision Process: Know procurement/legal/security steps
  • Identified Pain: In customer's words, not yours
  • Champion: Actively selling internally on your behalf
  • Competition: Know alternatives they're considering

Personal Win Questions:

  • "What does success look like for you personally?"
  • "What happens to your team if this works? If it doesn't?"
  • "What are you being measured on this year?"
  • "Who internally is skeptical? Why?"

Account Plan Checklist:

  • Account summary with hypothesis
  • Org chart with personal wins mapped
  • MEDDICC fully validated (not assumed)
  • MAP with customer actions (not just yours)
  • Weekly MAP update cadence scheduled

Related Skills

  • enterprise-onboarding: Post-close customer implementation
  • partnership-architecture: Deals involving partner relationships
  • technical-product-pricing: Enterprise pricing strategy

*Based on enterprise sales at a platform company during hypergrowth, with patterns from closing strategic accounts, navigating complex procurement processes, and learning the hard way that stale MAPs = dead deals. Not theory — lessons from watching deals die because we didn't track health metrics and closing deals because we validated EB alignment early.*

平台分布

Codex

35.82%
按下载量换算3,576

Claude

32.45%
按下载量换算3,240

Cursor

19.12%
按下载量换算1,909

Gemini CLI

9.37%
按下载量换算936

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

可疑

权限和风险

权限未标注

当前来源未能明确判断权限范围,默认进入异常复核队列。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。来源安全扫描存在提醒或未通过项,安装前请自行复核。目前只有一个公开来源,建议同时核对源仓库。

继续浏览同类 Skills