My Sales Head is committing ₹4.2 Cr for Q2.
Your CFO has ₹2.1 Cr in the model. How come?
I do not know.
That is the problem. Both numbers are fiction.
The Sales Head's ₹4.2 Cr is hope — half that pipeline is not qualified. The CFO's ₹2.1 Cr is fear — she is discounting deals that are actually closing. Two forecasts, neither useful.
A pipeline review is not a forecast cadence
Another founder: "₹14 Cr in pipeline, strong week." How many deals slipped from last week? He would have to check. What is at risk this week? Nothing flagged. By Friday, ₹3 Cr had disappeared. The review did not fail — it was never designed to surface risk.
The forecast you can trust is not the highest or the safest. It is the one with a cadence behind it
Three Layers of Cadence
Daily
Which deals changed stage, and why?
Weekly
What slipped, and how can I help?
Monthly
Coverage ratio, velocity trend, and conversion by segment.
Run all three layers, each with its own owner, and the Sales Head's number and the CFO's number start to converge — not because someone gave in, but because the data finally agrees. Skip a layer and the forecast lies.
gap: ₹3.1 Cr vs ₹1.6 Cr
gap: ₹2.4 Cr vs ₹2.2 Cr
A Mumbai SaaS company at about ₹6.4 Cr ARR, after six weeks of cadence. No winner, no loser.
The Friday Test
Pull your last forecast review
The Sales Head's commit and the CFO's plan for the same period.
Calculate the gap between them
As a percentage of the lower number.
Read the result
A gap above 15% means you do not have a forecasting problem. You have a cadence problem.
Related: Your forecast missed again. Here is why — how to define commit so the cadence has something solid to review.