Blog · Wallet share and penetration
Choose a feasible account-growth portfolio after reviewing eligibility, contribution and required selling effort. Compare constrained combinations instead of pursuing the largest gap alone.
Share-of-wallet priority after margin and capacity is a resource-allocation decision. The gap measures what the customer spends outside your business under the declared category assumptions. The pursuit decision asks which eligible portions deserve the effort available this quarter. Keeping those two stages separate makes the sales list more useful and the claims more honest.
Use the gap-valuation guide for the underlying opportunity measure. This guide compares competing pursuits after that measurement exists.
Record whether the customer can buy the category from you, whether your product fits, whether any restriction blocks pursuit and whether the decision is accessible in the planning period. An unknown eligibility answer goes to review, not automatically into the pursued population.
Examples of relevant evidence include the customer's required specification, an active sourcing window, product availability and an owner who can reach the buyer. Missing product lines in the ledger are clues, not proof that the customer needs or can buy them.
Keep rejected and deferred accounts with their reasons. Otherwise the same unusable gap repeatedly returns to the next month's report.
Estimate incremental contribution after the costs that change with the sale. Use the company's account economics, not one company-wide gross margin when fulfillment or service effort differs materially. Record whether additional onboarding, credit exposure or specialist capacity is required.
Use selling hours for the constrained planning resource in a simple model. Then add separate delivery or specialist constraints where they can block execution. The sales-capacity guide owns the total capacity calculation; here the task is allocating the available portion among growth candidates.
If a conversion weight is used, identify its origin: observed comparable results, a salesperson's judgment or a scenario assumption. Preserve the unweighted contribution alongside it.
Amounts below are invented incremental-revenue opportunities within the evaluation period, already narrower than each customer's full wallet gap. The weights are hypothetical planning assumptions, not calibrated probabilities.
| Account | Candidate revenue | Contribution margin | Planning weight | Weighted contribution | Selling hours |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | $100,000 | 20% | 50% | $10,000 | 10 |
| B | $60,000 | 40% | 50% | $12,000 | 10 |
| C | $150,000 | 30% | 20% | $9,000 | 30 |
| D | $80,000 | 35% | 60% | $16,800 | 15 |
Weighted planning contribution = candidate revenue × incremental margin × declared weight
C has the largest candidate revenue, but its 30 hours exceed the entire 25-hour budget in this illustration. It cannot be selected as an indivisible pursuit under that constraint. Splitting C would require evidence that a smaller pursuit is workable, not just dividing its hours mathematically.
With 25 available hours, A plus B uses 20 hours for $22,000 weighted contribution. A plus D uses 25 hours for $26,800. B plus D uses 25 hours for $28,800. Under these stated assumptions, B and D form the preferred feasible pair.
This is a conditional planning result. It does not mean that those accounts will produce $28,800, or that any conversion weight has been empirically validated. Test alternative weights and margins before treating the result as robust.
Microsoft documents Solver's objective and constraint approach. For a small list, enumerating feasible combinations may be easier to inspect. Its SUMPRODUCT reference supports multiplying candidate values by selection and weight fields.
Limit simultaneous pursuits per owner, required specialist hours and near-term onboarding load. Identify mutually exclusive product offers and customer groups where separate site pursuits would duplicate one buying decision. Keep ordinary account-service obligations outside the discretionary growth budget.
Use wallet-estimate sensitivity when candidate sizes depend on weak denominators. A high-ranked opportunity that disappears under a modest evidence correction deserves a validation action before a resource commitment.
Publish measured gap, eligible candidate amount, assumed margin, effort, source strength, selected/deferred status and next action. Give the owner room to correct documented constraints while preserving the calculation and reason for the override.
Use the review business case to assess the cost of the overall exercise. Bring a sample and the constraints to Covirage to discuss an account-growth review suited to the available data and agreed service scope.
No. It may be ineligible, inaccessible within the review period, low margin or too demanding for current capacity. Keep the measured gap and the pursuit decision as separate fields.
Not always. Accounts are often indivisible pursuits, and combinations can leave different amounts of capacity unused. Compare feasible sets and explicit constraints rather than assuming a single sorted list is optimal.