The first is to calculate OPPS WON / OPPS CLOSED.
The second is to calculate OPPS WON / OPPS OPENED.
The first says, of all the opportunities you close, this percentage is won.
The second says, of all the opportunities you open and work on, this is how many you win.
For discussion purposes, since you measure Win Rate over a period of time, let's use 6 months as the basis. Meaning, we will look back 6 months to determine the variables above.
Example:
A rep opens 100 opportunities, closes 50 (either won or lost), and wins 5.
By calculation 1, you would calculate 5/50 and declare the win rate to be 10%.
By calculation 2, you would calculate 5/100 and declare the win rate to be 5%.
The thing that throws off the values is the time period. In the second calculation, some of the Opps Opened could still be open. The first caclucation only deals with opportunties that were opened then closed.
I like the second calculation because it shows how many opportunities a rep currently opens in order to get to one close. It would be a good way to say, hey you only close 5% of all your deals. Therefore, you can impact this several ways; you can work less deals that are better qualified, you can be a better closer, or you can shorten your time to close a deal. It would also let you guage pipeline size
In the first calculation, you're only looking at closed deals so the coaching is more limited. Of all the deals you bring to closure, only x% of them are wins. So....what's the coaching?
Anyway, I hope you picked up the subtle difference we're arguing and can offer your experience and avice on how to do this.
Thanks!
답변 1개
They're both valid, and an argument can be made to use both of them. It really depends on what your personal "Win Rate %" definition is.
It's like Baseball Stat Geeks arguing about "values" of Batting Average vs On-Base Percentage vs Slugging Percentage.
