Key Takeaways
- 1. Every sales role needs its own plan, but all plans should share common design principles (from Chapters 2.1-2.6). The variation is in the parameters, not the framework.
- 2. The single biggest role-design mistake is treating all revenue-facing roles the same. An SDR plan that looks like an AE plan attracts the wrong candidates and rewards the wrong behaviors.
- 3. Manager plans are the trickiest because they must balance team performance with coaching accountability without pulling the manager into individual selling.
- 4. SE plans need to reward collaboration, not competition with the AE. When the SE and AE are working against each other for credit, the customer loses.
Everything you learned in Chapters 2.1 through 2.6 applies to every role. The framework is universal: set OTE, choose a mix, select measures, build a curve, add guardrails. What changes is the specific values you plug into each parameter. An SDR and an enterprise AE both have OTEs, mixes, and measures, but the numbers are completely different because the roles are completely different.
This chapter provides a full plan blueprint for each of the five core sales roles. For each role, I will specify the recommended measures, mix, curve shape, and the most common design mistakes. Use these as starting points and adjust for your context.
SDR / BDR plans
Sales Development Representative
Primary measure: Qualified meetings accepted by AE (70%). Secondary measure: Pipeline value generated (30%). Threshold: 50-60%. Accelerator: 1.5-2x above 100%. No cap.
SDR plans must measure quality, not just volume. "Meetings booked" without a quality filter produces a pipeline full of unqualified leads. The definition of "qualified" must be binary and objective: either the AE accepted the meeting and confirmed it met criteria, or they did not. Subjective quality scores create disputes.
An SDR team was paid per meeting booked with no quality gate. SDRs optimized for volume: scheduling meetings with anyone who would take a call. AEs spent 40% of their meeting time on unqualified prospects. When the team switched to "AE-accepted qualified meetings" as the measure, meeting volume dropped 30% but qualified pipeline increased 45%. The SDRs who stayed were better at targeting. The ones who left were the volume-over-quality producers the team needed to shed.
Account Executive plans
Account Executive (Full-Cycle)
Primary measure: Revenue or new ARR (60-70%). Secondary measure: New logos or strategic product (30-40%). Threshold: 60-80%. Accelerator: 1.5x (mid-market) to 2x (enterprise). No cap preferred.
The AE plan is the reference design. It anchors the entire comp structure. Full-cycle AEs who own prospecting through close deserve aggressive mixes (50/50) and strong accelerators. AEs who receive inbound leads and only manage the closing process have less control and warrant slightly more conservative mixes (60/40).
Account Manager plans
Account Manager / Customer Success
Primary measure: Net Revenue Retention / NRR (50-60%). Secondary measure: Expansion revenue (30-40%). Optional gate: Churn rate below X%. Threshold: 80-90%. Accelerator: 1.25-1.5x.
AM plans should reward both keeping and growing existing revenue. NRR captures both in a single metric. The conservative mix (70/30) reflects the reality that much of an AM's success depends on product quality, CS support, and factors beyond individual effort. The higher threshold reflects that retention should be the baseline expectation, not a stretch goal.
Sales Engineer plans
Sales Engineer / Solutions Consultant
Primary measure: Team / pod revenue (80-100%). Secondary measure: Technical win rate (optional, 20%). Threshold: 70%. Accelerator: 1.25-1.5x. No individual deal credit.
SE plans must incentivize collaboration, not competition with the AE. The best design ties the SE's variable to the same revenue number as the AE team they support (team or pod quota), so the SE and AE are pulling in the same direction. Individual deal credit for SEs creates a toxic dynamic where the SE prioritizes their own credited deals over team support.
An SE was paid on individual deal credit, earning variable pay only on deals where they were formally assigned as the SE of record. When a colleague asked for help on a deal they were not assigned to, the SE declined because helping would not impact their own comp. The deal required technical depth the assigned SE lacked. It was lost. Individual SE credit creates competition between SEs and between SEs and AEs. Team-based credit aligns everyone toward the same outcome.
Sales Manager plans
Frontline Sales Manager
Primary measure: Team quota attainment roll-up (80-100%). Optional: Team ramp success rate, rep retention (up to 20%). Threshold: 70-80%. Accelerator: 1.5x on team performance. No personal selling component.
The critical design decision for managers: zero personal selling component. When managers carry individual quotas, they compete with their own reps for deals, prioritize closing over coaching, and neglect underperformers who need the most development. The manager's job is to make their team better, and the plan should reward that exclusively.
A frontline manager plan split 50/50 between personal selling and team attainment. The manager spent 3 days a week on their own deals and 2 days on "management." The bottom two reps on the team were on PIPs for underperformance, but the manager did not have time to coach them because their own quota was at risk. When the team moved to 100% team-based manager comp, the manager immediately shifted focus. Within two quarters, the bottom performers improved and the team hit plan collectively for the first time. The manager earned more under the team model because a rising tide lifted all boats.
Need a plan designed for your specific role?
The Commission Structure Modeler lets you build and compare plans for any role type with full curve visualization.
Build a role-specific plan Get expert helpCross-role consistency principles
While each role has its own plan, the plans should work as a system. A few principles keep the system coherent:
OTE should increase with the career path. SDR OTE < AE OTE < Senior AE OTE < Manager OTE. If any step in the ladder is flat or inverted, you create a promotion disincentive. A top SDR should see a meaningful OTE increase upon promotion to AE, or they will not want the role change.
Mix should get more aggressive as influence increases. SDR (60/40) < AE (50/50). AM (70/30) reflects lower deal influence, not lower seniority. SE (75/25) reflects support-role dynamics. This progression makes intuitive sense to reps and reinforces the Rule of Influence.
All plans should use the same measurement period unless there is a specific reason not to. If AEs are measured quarterly, AMs should be quarterly too, unless their metric (NRR) genuinely requires a different cadence. Consistent periods simplify reporting, payout processing, and cross-role comparisons.
🤖 Try This Prompt
You are a sales compensation consultant designing a comp plan for a specific role. Here is the role: Role: [SDR / AE / AM / SE / Manager] Company stage: [Startup / Growth / Mature] Industry: [Your industry] Sales motion: [Transactional / Mid-market / Enterprise] Team size for this role: [Number] Current plan (if exists): [Describe briefly] Biggest challenge with this role: [e.g., "retention of top performers" or "reps gaming quality metrics"] Please: 1. Recommend a full plan: OTE range, pay mix, measures (with weights), threshold, accelerator, and cap/no-cap 2. Explain why each parameter fits this role specifically 3. Identify the 2-3 most common mistakes for this role type and how to avoid them 4. Show how this role's plan connects to the other roles in the sales org (does the AE plan align with the SDR plan?) 5. Draft a one-paragraph plan summary that a rep could understand in 30 seconds
Building plans for multiple roles?
Book a 30-minute session. We will design a complete multi-role compensation framework that keeps all plans aligned and ensures the career ladder makes economic sense.
Book a multi-role reviewChapter Checkpoint
Test your understanding of multi-role design.
Common Practitioner Questions
Qualified meeting count is cleaner. Pipeline value introduces a variable the SDR does not control (how the AE sizes the opportunity). A blended approach works well: primary measure is qualified meetings accepted (70%), secondary is pipeline value generated from those meetings (30%). This rewards volume through the primary measure while using pipeline value as a quality signal in the secondary.
The short answer: do not do it. If your manager needs to carry a personal quota, you either have too few reps for the management overhead (the manager is really a player-coach and should be titled accordingly) or you are understaffing the team. If you must have a hybrid role, never exceed 20% personal and 80% team. Above 20% personal, the manager will consistently prioritize their own deals over coaching. Title them "Player-Coach" to set clear expectations.
No. SEs typically have 20-25% variable (75/25 to 80/20 mix) compared to the AE's 40-50%. The SE has less direct control over the revenue outcome. They influence the technical decision but do not own the relationship, the pricing, or the close. Their lower variable percentage reflects their lower deal influence while still providing meaningful skin in the game through team-based metrics.
Common in smaller companies where specialization is not yet possible. Design the plan based on the dominant motion. If the rep spends 70% on new business and 30% managing existing accounts, weight the plan accordingly: new revenue (70%) and NRR or expansion (30%). The mix should reflect the new business component (55/45 or 60/40, not the conservative 70/30 you would use for a pure AM). As the company grows and roles specialize, split the plan into dedicated AE and AM structures.
Map the OTE at each level and verify that promotions produce a meaningful (15-25%) increase at target. SDR to AE should be the biggest jump (often 50-100% OTE increase). AE to Senior AE should be 15-20%. AE to Manager should be 20-30%. If any promotion is flat or inverted, you create a disincentive. Also check that at high attainment (120%+), the higher-level role still earns more than the lower-level role. A top SDR earning more than a mid-performing AE is a career path problem.