Tier your accounts into A/B/C with plays for each tier
Builds a complete account tiering system: definitions, effort allocation, channel mix, and touch counts per tier, plus promotion/demotion triggers and the capacity math to prove your team can actually run it. The output is a one-page operating system for outbound effort, not a labeling exercise.
You are an outbound strategist who has built account tiering systems for teams running 10,000-account territories down to founder-led lists of 200. Your core belief: tiering exists to allocate scarce effort, and a tiering system that doesn't change rep behavior is decoration. You've seen the failure modes — every account somehow lands in Tier A, tiers assigned once and never revisited, and 'personalization' that means swapping the company name. Design my account tiering framework. Produce: 1. TIER DEFINITIONS: crisp criteria for A, B, and C tiers based on fit and revenue potential — including roughly what percent of a typical list should land in each (be opinionated; A should be small). 2. PLAYS PER TIER: for each tier — research depth per account, personalization level, channels used (email, LinkedIn, phone), touch count, and who works it. Tier A gets the multi-channel craft; Tier C gets scaled relevance, not spam. 3. MOVEMENT RULES: specific triggers that promote or demote an account between tiers (funding event, champion hire, three campaigns of silence). 4. EFFORT MATH: rough time cost per account per tier, and a sanity check that my team's hours cover the list I described. 5. ONE-PAGE SUMMARY: the whole system in a table a rep can pin above their desk. Before you write anything, interview me. Ask me these questions ONE AT A TIME, waiting for my answer each time: 1. What do you sell, and what's your average deal size and sales cycle? 2. How many accounts are in your target universe, and how many people work outbound? 3. What signals tell you an account is unusually valuable (size, tech stack, trigger events, lookalikes of best customers)? 4. What channels is your team actually equipped to run well today? Once you have my answers, produce the framework. If my team's capacity can't cover the list, say so and tell me what to cut.
How to use it
- 1
Copy the prompt into Claude, ChatGPT, or any LLM.
- 2
Know your numbers before starting: account universe size, team headcount, and average deal size drive every recommendation.
- 3
Take the effort math seriously — if the model says your list is too big for your team, shrink the list, don't shrink the plays.
- 4
Turn the movement rules into actual CRM automations or a Clay column so tiers update without manual reviews.
- 5
Print the one-page summary and review tier distribution monthly; if Tier A grows past its cap, someone is grade-inflating.
Best practices
Cap Tier A ruthlessly — 5-10% of the list. If a third of your accounts are 'top priority', you have no priorities.
Differentiate tiers by research depth and channel mix, not just email volume; Tier A deserves phone and LinkedIn, not merely more emails.
Demote on silence: an account that's ignored three well-built campaigns is telling you something.
Assign your best writers and researchers to Tier A explicitly — tiering people to match tiered accounts is half the value.
Example: what this looks like in practice
A sales leader with 3 SDRs and a 4,000-account universe sells $30K logistics software. The model tiers the list: Tier A is 250 accounts matching the ICP with an active trigger (new ops hire, warehouse expansion), worked with 12-touch multi-channel sequences and per-account research; Tier B is 1,200 solid-fit accounts on 8-touch email-plus-LinkedIn cadences with segment-level personalization; Tier C is the remainder on quarterly scaled campaigns. Movement rules promote any Tier B account that shows a funding or hiring trigger. The effort math shows 3 SDRs can cover this with 60% of time on Tier A. Six weeks later, 70% of meetings booked come from the 250 Tier A accounts.
Best fit
This prompt is one gear in a bigger machine. We orchestrate 20+ tools into outbound systems our clients own — and guarantee the results.
Apply for a Pilot Spot → →Frequently asked questions
Account tiering ranks your target accounts into groups — usually A, B, and C — by fit and revenue potential, then assigns different levels of effort to each: deep multi-channel campaigns for Tier A, efficient personalized-at-scale sequences for Tier B, and light automated touches for Tier C. The point is allocating scarce rep time where it compounds, instead of spreading it evenly across accounts that aren't equal.
More icp, targeting & lead scoring prompts
Define your ICP from your 10 best customers
Reverse-engineers a tight, one-page ICP from your actual closed-won history instead of aspirational guesswork. It forces narrow ranges, separates signal from coincidence, and flags when your customer base actually contains two different ICPs — the insight most founders miss until their outbound numbers tell them the hard way.
Design a lead scoring model with firmographic and behavioral points
Produces a complete, implementable lead scoring model: firmographic fit points, behavioral intent points with decay and negative scoring, threshold bands tied to actions, and a monthly validation loop. It caps complexity at 12 criteria and adapts to what you can actually track, so the model ships instead of dying in a spreadsheet.
Build a negative ICP: who to actively avoid and why
Turns your worst-customer war stories into a formal negative ICP: hard disqualifiers, stacking yellow flags, and the false-positive profile that keeps fooling your team. Includes list-building exclusion filters and a polite decline template, so avoiding bad fits becomes operational instead of a lesson everyone relearns quarterly.