Approved packaging and eligibility
Objective. Answer packaging, entitlement and eligibility questions with approved facts or a named escalation - never an improvised commitment.
A decision card for the moment a customer asks 'is that included', 'can we buy just this', or 'do we qualify'. It separates what you may state from approved facts from what must go to internal commercial ownership, and gives a clean holding answer so you never improvise packaging on a call. Pricing and terms are not yours to invent; this keeps you honest and fast.
See it in the demo
What it is and when to use it
This card governs how you answer packaging, entitlement and commercial-eligibility questions. Use it any time a customer asks what is included in their plan, whether an application can be bought standalone, whether they qualify for something, or what an add-on costs. The core rule: packaging, pricing and eligibility follow internal commercial ownership and approved facts - you confirm from the approved source or you escalate, you do not improvise. An improvised 'yes it's included' that turns out false is a credibility and commercial problem that outlives the call.
The decision card - copy this
When a packaging / eligibility question lands, run this:
- Is it an approved, published fact I can cite? (standalone vs combined capability, what an application does on its own) - if yes, state it plainly and cite the source.
- Is it a specific price, discount, term, or contractual eligibility? - if yes, do NOT answer; this is internal commercial ownership. Use the holding answer below and route it.
- Is it 'is X already in our entitlement'? - confirm against the actual account entitlement; if you cannot see it confirmed, treat it as unknown and check, do not guess.
- Is it whether an application can stand alone or needs another? - state the independent value, the required inputs and the optional enrichment (approved application-map facts); do not overstate dependency or independence.
Holding answer (say this, don't improvise): 'That's a commercial/eligibility question I want to get exactly right for you rather than guess - let me confirm it with the owner and come back with the precise answer and any conditions.'
Escalation line: category = commercial/packaging; attach the customer's exact question, the account, and the deadline. (Use the escalation-packet kit.)
How to use it
Default to the holding answer whenever you are not certain the fact is approved and current - it reads as diligence, not evasion. Keep standalone-vs-combined framing accurate: each application has independent value with required inputs and optional enrichment, so neither 'you need the whole platform' nor 'this does everything alone' is honest. For entitlement questions, confirm against the real account rather than memory; plans and add-ons change. When you route a pricing or eligibility question, use the escalation packet with the customer's exact wording so the commercial owner answers the actual question, not a paraphrase. Record the answer you get so the account has one consistent version.
Honest caveat
You do not set or quote price, discount, term or contractual eligibility - that is internal commercial ownership, full stop. Do not read a demo environment as proof of entitlement: the demo lab shows capability, not what a given customer has bought. Application-map facts (independent value, required inputs, optional enrichment) are usable when approved, but anything about packaging bundles, SKUs or eligibility rules is confirm-with-commercial. When in doubt, the holding answer plus a fast, accurate follow-up beats a confident wrong answer every time.
Interpretation check
Packaging, pricing and eligibility follow internal commercial ownership - you state approved facts or you escalate, never improvise. A demo shows capability, not entitlement, and 'you need the whole platform' is as dishonest as 'this does everything alone'.
Practical task
Take three real packaging/eligibility questions you have heard, and sort each into: state-approved-fact, confirm-entitlement, or escalate-to-commercial. Draft the exact holding answer and escalation line for the ones that route out.
Self-check
A customer asks what an add-on would cost. What do you do?
Do not quote it. Give the holding answer and route the exact question to internal commercial ownership via the escalation packet; price and terms are not yours to set.
Can the demo environment be used to confirm what a customer is entitled to?
No. The demo lab shows capability, not entitlement. Entitlement is confirmed against the actual account, and if it is not confirmed, treat it as unknown and check.
How do you answer 'can we just buy this one application'?
State the application's independent value, its required inputs and optional enrichment from approved application-map facts - without overstating either dependency or standalone completeness - and confirm any packaging specifics with commercial.
Why is the holding answer preferable to a confident guess?
Because an improvised packaging or eligibility answer that turns out false is a lasting credibility and commercial problem; diligence plus a fast accurate follow-up is stronger.
Verified vs demo. Standalone-vs-combined capability is demo-shown (platform map) as approved application-map facts; all pricing, packaging bundles, SKUs and contractual eligibility are internal commercial ownership and confirm-with-commercial.