Sales Capacity & Pipeline Model
How much your team can actually sell, after ramp and attrition.
Replaces: Sales-ops modelling and revenue-planning tools
How to use it
Start from headcount times quota, then remove what actually happens: reps leave, replacements ramp, and almost nobody hits quota exactly. What remains is the number worth planning against.
Where the number comes from
- Paper capacity is simply headcount multiplied by quota — the figure that appears in most plans.
- Attrition removes a share of reps across the year, and each replacement spends the ramp period producing less, so both effects reduce productive rep-years.
- Attainment scales what remains: if the average rep hits 72% of quota, the team delivers 72% of its effective capacity.
- Deals needed is the target divided by average deal size.
- Pipeline required is the target divided by the win rate — the value of opportunities you need to create to close the target.
What goes wrong
The part most calculators leave out.
- Average attainment hides a distribution. Sales performance is famously top-heavy: a team averaging 72% often has three reps above quota and half the team well below, and losing one of the three matters more than the average suggests.
- The ramp and attrition adjustment here is a simplification. When reps leave matters enormously — a departure in January costs most of a year, one in November costs almost nothing.
- Pipeline coverage assumes the win rate holds as volume grows. Pushing reps to create more pipeline usually lowers quality and the win rate with it.
- Hiring is not a lever within the year. A rep hired mid-year contributes a fraction of quota, so a plan that closes a gap by hiring in month seven is a plan for next year.
- Territory and lead supply cap capacity independently of headcount. Adding reps to a market that cannot supply the pipeline lowers attainment for everyone.
- Quota is a management decision, not a measurement. Raising quota raises paper capacity and lowers attainment, leaving the real number unchanged.
The plan that was never achievable
Twelve reps at 800,000 quota reads as 9.6m of capacity, comfortably above an 8m target. But 25% annual attrition means three reps leave and three replacements each spend five months ramping, costing 1.25 rep-years. Effective headcount falls to 10.75. Then average attainment is 72%, not 100%. Realistic capacity lands at 6.19m — 1.81m short of a target the plan showed as covered. Closing that gap needs 3.5 more reps, each taking five months to contribute. The plan was not aggressive; it was arithmetic that stopped one step too early.
Questions
- What pipeline coverage should I target?
- Coverage is the inverse of your win rate — a 22% win rate needs roughly 4.5 times the target in pipeline. Rules of thumb like "3x coverage" are really assumptions about win rate wearing a disguise.
- Why does attrition cost so much more than the headcount suggests?
- Because you lose the productive rep and then pay a replacement to ramp. One departure can cost most of a rep-year even when the seat is refilled quickly.
- Should I plan on quota or attainment?
- Attainment. Quota is a target you set; attainment is what has historically happened. Planning revenue on quota assumes every rep performs at their ceiling, which no team has ever done.
- Does anything I type get sent anywhere?
- No. The whole calculation runs in your browser. Nothing is transmitted, stored, or logged, and there is no account to create.
Last updated .
Put this calculator on your site
Free to embed, on any site, commercial or not. No sign-up and no tracking script — the calculator runs in your reader’s browser exactly as it does here. All we ask is that you keep the credit line.
The small script resizes the frame as the reader changes inputs. Drop it if your CMS strips scripts — the calculator still works, it will just stay at a fixed height.