Territory & Quota Design Exercise

What it tests

Strategic and quantitative thinking around how candidates design fair, motivating territory and quota structures from imperfect data — and how they handle rep pushback

Format

1. 1Candidate receives a dataset: 15 AEs, 12 months of historical bookings per rep, territory definitions (geography or vertical), company's annual revenue target, and average deal size by segment
2. 2Task 1: design territory carve recommendations to balance opportunity across reps — explain the methodology and flag any territories you'd consolidate or split
3. 3Task 2: build quota assignments for each rep based on territory opportunity, ramp status, and historical attainment — show your math
4. 4Task 3: write a 1-page FAQ answering the top 5 objections reps will raise about the new structure

What to look for

• Is territory design data-driven (ICP density, account size, industry mix) or just geographic convenience?
• Does the quota model account for ramp time, account penetration, and historical variance — or is it just target divided by headcount?
• Does the FAQ anticipate real rep objections ('my territory is smaller than last year,' 'the quota is higher than my past attainment') — and are the answers honest, not just spin?
• Red flag: quotas that don't roll up to the company target, or that ignore the difference between new logo and expansion motions

Adaptation guide

Use your real territory structure and anonymize rep names. For companies with PLG motion, adapt to account expansion territories rather than new logo. For senior RevOps roles, add a third dataset with competitive account overlap to increase complexity.

Full description