Designing one CRM for multiple commercial motions
A fictional CRM architecture case: an opportunity taxonomy, universal states, motion-specific extensions and a reporting model that keeps one pipeline.
Independently created. Contains no employer or client implementation detail, internal names or figures.
01The outcome
One opportunity model with universal states and shared fields, motion-specific stages and extensions on top, and one forecast semantics that every motion maps to.
New business, strategic projects, expansion and account growth are forced through one lifecycle—or about to be split into incompatible models.
Which states are universal, which stages differ, and what does ‘Closed Won’ mean for each motion?
Separate universal state (open, won, lost) from motion-specific stages, and keep motion-specific data in extensions rather than in separate models.
A B2B manufacturer sells in several distinct ways: winning new customers, long strategic projects with equipment makers, adding product lines to existing customers and growing volume inside existing accounts. One opportunity lifecycle serves all of them, so stages mean different things to different teams—and a proposal to build a separate model for each motion threatens to split the pipeline.
02The reality · current state
What the platform looks like today.
- One stage list serves motions that progress in completely different ways
- Strategic projects sit in ‘Proposal’ for a year and distort the forecast
- Expansion deals carry fields that only new-customer deals need
- ‘Closed Won’ means a signed contract for one team and a first order for another
- A separate model per motion is proposed, which would split the pipeline
- Reports compare stages that do not mean the same thing
03System responsibilities
Every platform, one job—and a boundary.
What each platform owns in this design, and what it deliberately does not. These are the responsibilities for this context, not universal rules.
CRM
One opportunity model, several motions- Opportunity taxonomy and motion type
- Universal states and forecast category
- Motion-specific stages and exit criteria
- Motion extension data
- Contract and order execution
- Win-rate and forecast-accuracy analysis
Pricing
Price and margin for any motion- Price books and discount policy
- Margin calculation
- Opportunity stage or probability
ERP
What happens after the win- Orders, deliveries and invoices
- Supply agreements and call-offs
- Pipeline or forecast
Data platform
Comparable pipeline analytics- Conversion and forecast accuracy by motion
- Stage-duration benchmarks per motion
- Stage definitions
04Key dimension · Common core + specialized motion
Common core, specialized motions
Every opportunity shares one core: identity, universal state, amount, forecast category and owner. Each motion adds its own stages and data—and states what ‘won’ means.
New customer
- Qualify
- Discover
- Propose
- Negotiate
- Extension
- Customer-creation readiness · Credit pre-check
- Forecast
- Committed at ‘Negotiate’
- ‘Closed Won’ means
- Signed first order
- Then
- Customer creation, then first order
Strategic project
- Specify
- Nominate
- Prototype
- Series award
- Extension
- Programme and project · Nomination date · Volume ramp by year
- Forecast
- By volume ramp, not by close date
- ‘Closed Won’ means
- Series award
- Then
- Supply agreement, then call-off orders
Product-line expansion
- Identify
- Sample
- Approve
- Order
- Extension
- Product line · Sample approval
- Forecast
- Committed after sample approval
- ‘Closed Won’ means
- First order of the new line
- Then
- Order on the existing customer
Account growth
- Plan
- Propose
- Agree
- Extension
- Account-plan link · Growth lever
- Forecast
- Rolled into the account plan
- ‘Closed Won’ means
- Agreed volume or price change
- Then
- Contract or price update
- Open
- Won
- Lost
- Account and legal entity
- Motion type
- Amount and currency
- Close date
- Forecast category
- Owner and team
Demand generation is not a motion. It is a source any motion can have—an attribute, not another lifecycle.
06Candidate architectures
Credible options, judged against these premises.
One lifecycle for every motion
Homogeneous transactional sales
Cost: Stages lose meaning; forecasts mix incompatible cyclesA separate model per motion
Motions with no shared accounts or reporting
Cost: A split pipeline, duplicated automation, no global forecastShared core with motion-specific stages and extensions
Distinct motions on shared accounts and one forecast
Cost: Needs a governed taxonomy and a stage mapping07The second layer
Questions that change the architecture.
Taxonomy
- Is this a different lifecycle, or only different data?
- Which states are universal?
- Is demand generation a motion or a source?
Forecast
- Do all opportunity types forecast the same way?
- What does ‘Closed Won’ mean for each motion?
- How do long project cycles enter a quarterly forecast?
Downstream
- Which process follows each type after the win?
- Which fields belong to the base model, and which to a motion?
- How do reports stay comparable across motions?
08Decisions & outputs
What the work produces.
- 01Opportunity taxonomy
- 02Shared lifecycle & universal states
- 03Motion-specific stages & extensions
- 04Stage-to-forecast mapping
- 05Reporting model
- 06Automation boundaries per motion