Agree milestones, required client inputs and a procedure for handling delays.
The situation
In this fictional brief, different team members explain the company in conflicting ways. The buyer wants a consistent message with a documented audience and reason to choose. Your offer is a positioning and identity project, but you must first establish whether its scope addresses the actual need.
A relevant delivery constraint is that the company must preserve recognition with existing customers. Treat that as a fact in the exercise; do not remove it to make the sale easier.
| Your counterpart | a founder entering a new customer segment |
|---|---|
| Offer under discussion | a positioning and identity project |
| Evidence available | a messaging comparison using actual customer language supplied by the client |
| Terms to clarify | Separate strategy, identity, applications, trademark checks and production. |
How to approach delivery deadline negotiation
A useful question for this stage: “If an input arrives late, which part of the schedule should change?” Ask it when the conversation creates a reason for it, rather than reciting every question in order.
- Work backwards from the required outcome. Identify approvals and inputs. Offer a phased delivery if it is genuinely feasible.
- Ground the discussion in the buyer’s work. Ask: “Which customer should recognise themselves in the first sentence?” Listen for a concrete example before making a claim.
- Use evidence relevant to the decision: a messaging comparison using actual customer language supplied by the client. Explain what it demonstrates and what remains unverified.
- Agree milestones, required client inputs and a procedure for handling delays.
Example exchange
An illustrative exchange. Real conversations will take a different path.
SellerWhat makes that date important, and which deliverable is needed by then?
BuyerOur concern is that different team members explain the company in conflicting ways. Also, the company must preserve recognition with existing customers.
SellerWhich customer should recognise themselves in the first sentence?
BuyerWe only need a new logo.
SellerA logo may be the right deliverable. First, let us check whether the difficulty is visual recognition or explaining the offer.
SellerIf an input arrives late, which part of the schedule should change?
An industry-specific concern
Buyer: “We only need a new logo.”
Possible response: “A logo may be the right deliverable. First, let us check whether the difficulty is visual recognition or explaining the offer.”
Why this response helps: it acknowledges the concern, brings the discussion back to a verifiable requirement and leaves room for a different decision. Adapt the wording to what the buyer actually said.
Run the practice
- Prepare for two minutes. One person takes the seller role and one plays a founder entering a new customer segment. Read the offer and constraint separately from your preferred answer.
- Have a five-minute conversation focused on agree a feasible schedule using actual dependencies and acceptance steps. The buyer should answer consistently with the brief and ask for evidence when a claim is vague.
- Add this challenge: The buyer wants the full scope sooner but cannot accelerate approvals. Explain the trade-off between scope and timing.
- Pause for feedback. Quote one useful question and one missed opportunity. Repeat the difficult exchange using a different response.
- Finish by writing the actual agreement. A sensible option, when it fits, is to test two positioning statements with a small set of relevant customer conversations. A clear decision to pause is also a useful outcome.
What to avoid
| Common mistake | Accepting a date without checking access, approvals or delivery capacity. |
|---|---|
| A stronger direction | We can assess that date once the inputs and approval windows are confirmed. Here is the dependency that currently controls it. |
| Scope and claim boundary | Customer interviews are evidence to interpret, not a statistically representative market survey. |
| What to measure in real work | whether target customers can accurately repeat the offer. Establish a baseline and definition before interpreting a change. |
Your working sheet
Write your own version below. Notes are saved on this browser when local storage is available. Use Download to keep a separate copy; avoid adding confidential information on a shared device.
Example: different team members explain the company in conflicting ways; the company must preserve recognition with existing customers.
Example: If an input arrives late, which part of the schedule should change? Industry question: Which customer should recognise themselves in the first sentence?
Example: a messaging comparison using actual customer language supplied by the client. Customer interviews are evidence to interpret, not a statistically representative market survey.
Example: Propose a clear next step, such as: test two positioning statements with a small set of relevant customer conversations. Confirm the owner and date.
Review your work
Tick only what you can support with your answer or practice. This is a reflection checklist, not an automated assessment.
Questions about this resource
Who is this branding studios exercise for?
Founders, salespeople and account managers preparing for a conversation about a positioning and identity project. Adapt the brief to your real offer and authority before using it at work.
Can I use the example as a script?
Use the questions as prompts. Listen and respond to the buyer’s actual meaning. The target is to agree a feasible schedule using actual dependencies and acceptance steps, not to deliver a memorised speech.
How should I assess the result?
Agree milestones, required client inputs and a procedure for handling delays. Use the three review questions below. The checklist is for reflection; it is not a validated prediction of sales performance.
Fictional training scenario. The dialogue illustrates response choices; it is not a customer testimonial or a record of a real sale. About these resources.