MCP HubMCP Hub
Retour aux compétences

commission-intelligence

guia-matthieu
Mis à jour Yesterday
2 vues
111
20
111
Voir sur GitHub
Autreai

À propos

Cette compétence permet à Claude d'expliquer les calculs de commissions commerciales, de résoudre les écarts de paiement et de modéliser des scénarios de rémunération pour la planification. Elle est utile aux développeurs qui conçoivent des outils pour l'analyse des rémunérations commerciales, la conception de quotas ou la résolution de litiges. La compétence s'appuie sur des principes établis de rémunération commerciale et gère des structures telles que l'atteinte des quotas, les accélérateurs et les règles de répartition.

Installation rapide

Claude Code

Recommandé
Principal
npx skills add guia-matthieu/clawfu-skills -a claude-code
Commande PluginAlternatif
/plugin add https://github.com/guia-matthieu/clawfu-skills
Git CloneAlternatif
git clone https://github.com/guia-matthieu/clawfu-skills.git ~/.claude/skills/commission-intelligence

Copiez et collez cette commande dans Claude Code pour installer cette compétence

Documentation

Commission Intelligence

Demystify sales compensation by explaining commission calculations, identifying discrepancies, and modeling payout scenarios.

When to Use This Skill

  • Reps questioning commission statements
  • Designing or updating comp plans
  • Modeling quota and OTE scenarios
  • Resolving payout disputes
  • Planning territory changes

Methodology Foundation

Based on Alexander Group Sales Compensation Design and WorldatWork Incentive Compensation principles, covering:

  • Base + variable structures
  • Quota attainment mechanics
  • Accelerators and decelerators
  • Split and overlay rules

What Claude Does vs What You Decide

Claude DoesYou Decide
Explains calculation logicFinal payout approvals
Identifies discrepanciesException handling
Models scenariosPlan design choices
Documents rules clearlyPolicy changes
Calculates examplesQuota assignments

What This Skill Does

  1. Calculation explanation - Break down how commission was computed
  2. Discrepancy identification - Find calculation errors or data issues
  3. Scenario modeling - Project earnings under different assumptions
  4. Plan documentation - Clarify complex comp plan rules
  5. Dispute resolution - Provide clear audit trail

How to Use

Explain this commission calculation:

Rep: [Name]
Role: [AE, SDR, etc.]
Quota: $[Amount]/[Period]
Closed this period: $[Amount]

Comp plan rules:
- Base: $X
- OTE: $X
- Variable: X% of base
- Commission rate: X% up to quota
- Accelerator: X% above quota

Deals closed:
- [List deals with amounts and close dates]

Statement shows: $[Commission Amount]
Rep expected: $[Expected Amount]

Instructions

Step 1: Understand the Comp Plan Structure

Common Structures:

TypeDescription
Revenue Commission% of deal value
Quota-Based% payout based on attainment
TieredDifferent rates at different levels
DrawAdvance against future commissions
MBOBonus for specific objectives

Step 2: Calculate Attainment

Attainment % = (Closed Revenue / Quota) × 100

Example:
- Quota: $500,000
- Closed: $450,000
- Attainment: 90%

Step 3: Apply Commission Rules

Standard Calculation:

Base Commission = Closed Revenue × Commission Rate

With Quota Thresholds:
- Below 50% attainment: 0% payout (common)
- 50-100% attainment: Linear payout
- Above 100%: Accelerator rate kicks in

Accelerator Example:

Plan: 10% up to quota, 15% above quota
Quota: $500K, Closed: $600K

Commission:
- First $500K × 10% = $50,000
- Next $100K × 15% = $15,000
- Total: $65,000

Step 4: Handle Special Cases

ScenarioRule
Split dealsDivide credit per agreement
Multi-yearRecognize per year or upfront
Churn/ClawbackDeduct if customer cancels
Ramped quotaReduced quota for new hires
SPIFsOne-time bonus amounts

Step 5: Reconcile Discrepancies

Common Issues:

IssueCauseResolution
Missing dealNot in CRMAdd deal, recalculate
Wrong amountIncorrect ACVVerify contract value
Wrong rateTier confusionCheck attainment level
Split errorCredit allocationReview split agreement
TimingRevenue recognitionCheck close date vs. pay period

Examples

Example 1: Commission Explanation

Input:

Explain why Sarah's commission is $12,500:

Rep: Sarah (AE)
Quota: $200,000/quarter
Q4 Closed: $175,000

Comp plan:
- OTE: $200,000 (50/50 split)
- Variable: $100,000/year = $25,000/quarter
- At 100% attainment: Full $25K variable
- Linear payout from 50-100%
- Accelerator: 1.5x above 100%

Deals:
- Acme Corp: $80,000 (Oct 15)
- Beta Inc: $45,000 (Nov 3)
- Gamma LLC: $50,000 (Dec 20)
Total: $175,000

Output:

## Commission Breakdown: Sarah - Q4

### Step 1: Verify Closed Revenue
| Deal | Amount | Close Date | ✓ |
|------|--------|------------|---|
| Acme Corp | $80,000 | Oct 15 | ✓ Q4 |
| Beta Inc | $45,000 | Nov 3 | ✓ Q4 |
| Gamma LLC | $50,000 | Dec 20 | ✓ Q4 |
| **Total** | **$175,000** | | ✓ |

### Step 2: Calculate Attainment

Attainment = $175,000 / $200,000 = 87.5%


### Step 3: Apply Commission Formula

**Plan Rules:**
- 50% threshold: Below 50% = $0
- 50-100%: Linear from $0 to $25,000
- 100%+: 1.5x accelerator

**Calculation:**

Sarah is at 87.5% (between 50% and 100%)

Linear formula: Payout = (Attainment - 50%) / 50% × Full Variable Payout = (87.5% - 50%) / 50% × $25,000 Payout = 37.5% / 50% × $25,000 Payout = 75% × $25,000 Payout = $18,750


### ⚠️ Discrepancy Found!

**Statement shows**: $12,500
**Calculated**: $18,750
**Difference**: $6,250 underpaid

### Likely Cause

If system shows $12,500, it may be calculating:

$12,500 / $25,000 = 50% payout


This would happen if:
1. One deal not credited (Beta Inc $45K?)
2. Wrong formula (% of revenue vs % of variable)
3. Deal attributed to different quarter

### Recommended Action
1. Verify all 3 deals in commission system
2. Check if Beta Inc close date is in Q4
3. Confirm formula is linear 50-100%, not flat rate
4. Escalate to compensation admin with this breakdown

Example 2: Scenario Modeling

Input:

Model commission scenarios for Mike:

Current:
- Quota: $400,000/quarter
- OTE: $240,000 (60/40 split)
- Variable: $96,000/year = $24,000/quarter
- Rate: 6% of revenue up to quota
- Accelerator: 9% above quota

Q1 pipeline:
- Committed: $320,000
- Best case: $450,000
- Upside: $600,000

What would Mike earn in each scenario?

Output:

## Commission Scenarios: Mike - Q1

### Plan Summary
- Quota: $400,000
- At-quota commission: $24,000 (6% × $400K)
- Accelerator: 9% above quota

### Scenario Analysis

#### Scenario 1: Commit Only ($320K)

Attainment: 80% Revenue: $320,000

Commission at 6%: $320,000 × 6% = $19,200

Quarterly Variable: $19,200 Annualized: $76,800 vs OTE Variable ($96K): -$19,200

**Status**: Below quota, standard rate applies

---

#### Scenario 2: Best Case ($450K)

Attainment: 112.5% Revenue: $450,000

Below quota: $400,000 × 6% = $24,000 Above quota: $50,000 × 9% = $4,500

Total Commission: $28,500

Quarterly Variable: $28,500 vs At-Quota ($24K): +$4,500 (19% bonus)

**Status**: Accelerator kicks in, strong quarter

---

#### Scenario 3: Upside ($600K)

Attainment: 150% Revenue: $600,000

Below quota: $400,000 × 6% = $24,000 Above quota: $200,000 × 9% = $18,000

Total Commission: $42,000

Quarterly Variable: $42,000 vs At-Quota ($24K): +$18,000 (75% bonus)

**Status**: Excellent quarter, maximizing accelerator

---

### Summary Table

| Scenario | Revenue | Attainment | Commission | vs Plan |
|----------|---------|------------|------------|---------|
| Commit | $320K | 80% | $19,200 | -$4,800 |
| Best Case | $450K | 112% | $28,500 | +$4,500 |
| Upside | $600K | 150% | $42,000 | +$18,000 |

### Key Insights

1. **Break-even point**: $400K (100% attainment)
2. **Accelerator value**: Each $10K above quota = $900 extra
3. **Commit gap**: Need $80K more to hit quota
4. **Upside potential**: 75% more commission if pipeline converts

### Recommendations for Mike
1. Focus on moving $80K from Best Case to Commit
2. Push for upside deals - 9% rate is lucrative
3. Prioritize larger deals for accelerator impact

Skill Boundaries

What This Skill Does Well

  • Explaining commission math step-by-step
  • Identifying calculation discrepancies
  • Modeling what-if scenarios
  • Documenting plan rules clearly

What This Skill Cannot Do

  • Access actual payout systems
  • Make policy exceptions
  • Override approved calculations
  • Handle edge cases without rules

When to Escalate to Human

  • Policy exceptions or special approvals
  • Historical adjustments requiring audit
  • Plan design decisions
  • Legal or HR compensation issues

Iteration Guide

Follow-up Prompts

  • "What if Mike closes an extra $50K deal?"
  • "Show me the break-even point to hit OTE."
  • "Compare this plan to a flat 8% rate."
  • "Model the impact of increasing Mike's quota by 20%."

Refinement Cycle

  1. Document plan rules clearly
  2. Run sample calculations
  3. Verify against actual statements
  4. Build exception handling guide
  5. Create rep-facing FAQ

Checklists & Templates

Commission Dispute Resolution Checklist

  • Verify all deals in calculation
  • Confirm close dates in pay period
  • Check split/overlay credits
  • Validate attainment tier
  • Review for clawbacks/adjustments
  • Compare to plan document

Comp Plan Documentation Template

## [Role] Compensation Plan - [Year]

### Structure
- Base Salary: $X
- OTE: $X
- Variable: $X (X% of OTE)
- Pay Period: [Monthly/Quarterly]

### Commission Mechanics
- Quota: $X/[period]
- Base Rate: X%
- Accelerator: X% above quota
- Threshold: X% minimum attainment

### Special Rules
- Splits: [Policy]
- Clawbacks: [Policy]
- Ramping: [New hire policy]

### Examples
[Include 3 scenarios at 80%, 100%, 120%]

References

  • Alexander Group Sales Compensation Design
  • WorldatWork Incentive Compensation Handbook
  • Salesforce Sales Cloud Commission Documentation
  • Xactly Commission Best Practices

Related Skills

  • pipeline-forecasting - Project commission from forecast
  • deal-risk-scoring - Prioritize high-commission deals
  • quota-planning - Set achievable targets

Skill Metadata

  • Domain: RevOps
  • Complexity: Advanced
  • Mode: centaur
  • Time to Value: 15-30 min per analysis
  • Prerequisites: Comp plan document, deal data

Dépôt GitHub

guia-matthieu/clawfu-skills
Chemin: skills/revops/commission-intelligence
0
ai-skillsanthropicclaude-codeclaude-skillsmarketingmcp-server

Compétences associées

llamaguard

Autre

LlamaGuard est le modèle de Meta, doté de 7 à 8 milliards de paramètres, conçu pour modérer les entrées et sorties des LLM selon six catégories de sécurité comme la violence et les discours haineux. Il offre une précision de 94 à 95 % et peut être déployé avec vLLM, Hugging Face ou Amazon SageMaker. Utilisez cette compétence pour intégrer facilement le filtrage de contenu et des garde-fous de sécurité dans vos applications d'IA.

Voir la compétence

cost-optimization

Autre

Cette compétence de Claude aide les développeurs à optimiser les coûts du cloud grâce au redimensionnement des ressources, aux stratégies d'étiquetage et à l'analyse des dépenses. Elle fournit un cadre pour réduire les dépenses cloud et mettre en œuvre une gouvernance des coûts sur AWS, Azure et GCP. Utilisez-la lorsque vous devez analyser les coûts d'infrastructure, redimensionner les ressources ou respecter des contraintes budgétaires.

Voir la compétence

quantizing-models-bitsandbytes

Autre

Cette compétence quantifie les LLMs en précision 8 bits ou 4 bits à l'aide de bitsandbytes, permettant une réduction de 50 à 75 % de la mémoire utilisée avec une perte de précision minime. Elle est idéale pour exécuter des modèles plus volumineux sur une mémoire GPU limitée ou pour accélérer l'inférence, prenant en charge des formats comme INT8, NF4 et FP4. La compétence s'intègre à HuggingFace Transformers et permet l'entraînement QLoRA ainsi que l'utilisation d'optimiseurs en 8 bits.

Voir la compétence

dispatching-parallel-agents

Autre

Cette compétence Claude déploie plusieurs agents pour enquêter et résoudre simultanément 3 problèmes indépendants ou plus. Elle est conçue pour des scénarios impliquant des défaillances non liées qui peuvent être résolues sans état partagé ni dépendances. La capacité fondamentale est la résolution de problèmes en parallèle, en assignant un agent par domaine problématique indépendant afin de maximiser l'efficacité.

Voir la compétence