Blog · Board and management reporting
How a commercial team sets the discount level at which a rep needs approval from what its own invoice lines show: the distribution of discounts given, the discount at which win rate stops improving, the reps and product lines where discounts cluster just under the current threshold, the revenue given away between the effective and the agreed discount, and the threshold per product line that follows, with the approval volume it will generate.
A discount approval threshold of 15 percent was set in a meeting years ago. The invoice lines show a third of all discounts at 14.5, a win rate that stops improving at 10, and four hundred thousand dollars a year given away between the two. This guide sets out the threshold from the data: the distribution, the win-rate curve, the cluster, and the approval volume.
Per product line:
Discount distribution = share of invoiced lines in each discount band Win rate by discount band, from outcomes joined to the proposed discount Flattening point = the band beyond which win rate rises by less than a stated amount Cluster = share of lines within one point below the current threshold Revenue between = value of discount given above the flattening point
Per rep: the same, to find who prices to the threshold.
Customer and rep identifiers only.
Line A. Current threshold 15 percent.
| Discount band | Share of lines | Win rate |
|---|---|---|
| 0 to 5% | 18% | 24% |
| 5 to 10% | 22% | 38% |
| 10 to 12% | 15% | 41% |
| 12 to 14% | 11% | 42% |
| 14 to 15% | 31% | 42% |
| Over 15% (approved) | 3% | 44% |
Win rate flattens at 10 to 12 percent. Nearly a third of lines sit in the last point below the threshold, at the same win rate as 10. Everything between 12 and 15 on those lines is discount that bought nothing.
| Line | Lines between flattening and threshold | Discount given above flattening | Annual |
|---|---|---|---|
| A | 4,200 | 3 pts average | $410,000 |
| B | 1,900 | 2 pts | $90,000 |
| C | 800 | 0; flattens at the threshold | none |
| Line | Current | Proposed | Approvals per month at proposed | Revenue protected |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 15% | 12% | 140 | $410,000/yr |
| B | 15% | 13% | 40 | $90,000/yr |
| C | 15% | 15% | unchanged |
A hundred and forty approvals a month on line A is a workload the sales director accepts or delegates; the report says it before the policy changes rather than after.
| Rep | Share of lines in the cluster | Average discount, line A |
|---|---|---|
| R-04 | 58% | 14.6% |
| R-11 | 12% | 9.1% |
Rep R-04 prices to the threshold. The conversation is about that, with the win-rate curve showing it buys nothing.
One threshold for all lines. Too tight for one; too loose for another.
No win-rate curve. The threshold is a guess about what discount wins.
Cluster ignored. The threshold is the price.
Policy changed without the workload. Approvals flood; the threshold is quietly ignored.
Mapped once, the invoice lines, the outcomes and the policy produce the distribution, the win-rate curve, the cluster, the revenue between and the proposed thresholds with their workload. Covirage builds this from the exports as they are. The metrics governance solution describes the setup, and the price realisation guide covers the unagreed discount the new threshold reduces.
Because the discount that wins a commodity line is different from the one that wins a specialised one, and one threshold across both is too tight for one and too loose for the other. The invoice lines carry the product; the threshold follows it.
If the approval threshold is 15 percent and a third of all discounts are between 14 and 15, reps are pricing to the threshold rather than to the deal. The cluster is visible in the distribution, and it is the strongest evidence that the threshold is the price, not the ceiling.
From outcomes joined to the discount on the proposal or invoice: win rate by discount band, per line. It usually rises with discount and then flattens, and the flattening point is where extra discount buys nothing. The threshold goes there, or slightly below.