Keep the programme’s unit and result stable

Use MKT.14’s case of Sever, Vector and Luch. There are three organisations and four opportunities: two can use a limited batch-file trial; two need continuous integration that is presently unavailable. The intended result for the two-week period is two supported trials plus two reasoned decisions about the missing integration. Comparing four meetings with that result would change the question.

MKT.12 asks what must be known to select the next action in each opportunity. MKT.1 recovers users, decision holders, payer, data conditions and relevant workflow. A permitted representative sample and a conversation about use can qualify a batch trial; a request for continuous integration returns a construction question to engineering. Interest from one Sever department establishes no readiness in the other.

MKT.6 helps the trial participants state the useful result and what they must contribute to obtain it. MKT.2 then constructs an offer and positioning against their actual alternatives. The common demonstration can explain a shared contribution. State explicitly that continuous integration is unavailable when explaining that demonstration.