The PACED Review is a revenue growth audit for B2B companies, not a tax or financial audit. The PACED Review asks forty questions about how you win, keep and grow revenue, then a person runs 79 checks across the five gates against your answers. The PACED Review names the gate holding revenue down and what it costs you a year.
We think it's the pipeline.
It's an answer that invites three more questions, and nobody has evidence they'd put in front of an investor.
The dashboard shows the number, not the reason.
So every explanation of a miss is a guess delivered with confidence.
We're about to spend a quarter fixing one thing.
A headcount and three months are about to go on one fix, and nobody can say it's the right one.
Two people I trust named two different problems.
Each has a case, and there's no way to settle it, or to say what either fix would be worth.
Start somewhere else if
Everything in it is about your business, and the finding comes with its evidence.
Your Yield
Revenue Debt
One year of ARR
What the engine gives up, every year, to Position. Lifted to benchmark, the same engine brings in twice as much.
Your theory, and the data
Deals stall at the close, so Capture looked broken. The buyers were wrong before they arrived.
Where the engagement starts
The confirmed fault inside Position, and the order its fix gets built in, whoever builds it.
Five are about your business, then seven for each of the five gates, and thirty-three ask where the figure came from, so the answer survives someone asking “says who?” long after the call has ended. Where you don't have a number, say so: the gap becomes part of the finding. It takes roughly ninety minutes, not necessarily in one sitting.
The five gates are Position, Activate, Capture, Embed and Develop.
A person reads your answers and your evidence, runs 79 checks across the five gates, and sets each gate's score by hand. That means the result can't be improved by answering optimistically, and it can be argued with, which an algorithm can't.
The five scores multiply rather than average, so a business that is strong in four places and weak in one performs at the level of the weak one. The lowest score is the binding gate, and the fault inside it is confirmed rather than guessed at.
It's the idea behind the binding constraint.
What the binding gate costs comes out of your own ARR as Revenue Debt: the revenue the engine gives up, every year, to its weakest gate. If that gate runs at half of what it could, the gap is worth a full year of revenue.
The arithmetic is in the Revenue Debt whitepaper.
Two weeks after you start, we take you through one document: your Yield, the binding gate and its fault, the annual figure, and your own theory set beside the data. It ends with where the fix starts, and it's written to be built by whoever you choose, including your own team.
01
The Review as described: forty questions, 79 checks by a person, and the readout. You leave knowing which gate is binding and what it costs, in two weeks. Stopping here is a legitimate outcome, not a failed sale, and if nothing much is broken, you get that in writing, with the evidence.
02
Everything in Diagnose, and we fill the forty questions in together in a working session rather than sending them to you. The fix for the binding gate is then written up as a build order: what gets built, in what sequence, who owns each piece, and the one measure that says it worked. You leave with a plan your team can run without us.
03
Everything in Prescribe, and we run it with you for ninety days against that one gate, weekly, until its number moves. Then it ends. Not a retainer, not an open-ended engagement, and not a relationship you have to extract yourself from later.
What each one costs depends on which you take. We'll tell you on the call, before you commit to anything, and what you pay for the diagnosis is credited in full if you go further.
The symptom and the cause are rarely in the same place. Deals stall at the close, so the close looks broken, when conviction never formed in the person who signs: in a study of more than 2.5 million recorded sales conversations, between 40% and 60% of deals were lost to buyers who said they intended to buy and never acted.1 The Review finds the gate that's actually binding, before you spend a quarter on the one that hurts.
| Question | PacedRevenuePACED Review79 checks by a person | Free diagnosticOurs, onlineAbout ten minutes | Consultancy auditA good oneInterviews and a report | You with your AI agentClaude, ChatGPT or an AI adviserYour time, AI's speed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| What does it ask for? | Forty questions, most wanting the figure and where it came from. | Fifteen answers, self-reported. | Interviews with you and your team, and a data pull. | Whatever you paste in. |
| Who judges the answers? | A person, running 79 checks across the five gates. | An algorithm. | A consultant, against their own framework. | The model, from what you tell it. |
| What do you leave with? | The binding gate, its fault and what it costs a year, beside your own theory. | An estimated Yield and a direction. | A report and a recommendation. | An answer as good as what you gave it. |
| How long does it take? | Two weeks. | About ten minutes. | Usually two to four weeks. | An afternoon. |
| What happens after? | Credited in full if you go further, and yours to build with anyone. | A call, if you want one. | Usually a proposal for the fix. | You decide, and you build it. |
Still weighing it up?
Book a callThe PACED Review is a paid revenue growth audit of a company's whole revenue engine, not a tax or financial audit. It asks forty questions, most wanting a figure and the evidence behind it. A person then runs 79 checks across the five gates, and the readout names the one gate holding revenue down, and what that gate costs each year.
The free diagnostic gives you an estimate from fifteen self-reported answers in about ten minutes, and it's genuinely useful for pointing at a direction. The Review asks forty questions, wants the evidence behind most of them, and has a person run 79 checks against them. One is a hunch with structure. The other survives scrutiny.
That's largely what it's for. The readout names the binding gate, the fault inside it, what it costs a year and the evidence you gave for it, so it stands up without you narrating it. The most useful page is often the one showing where your own account of the problem and the evidence parted company.
It depends which of the three depths you take, and we'll tell you on the call before you commit to anything. Prices aren't printed here because they change and this page doesn't. What you pay for the diagnosis is credited in full against the second depth, the third or an ongoing engagement, so you never pay twice for the same work.
Two weeks from the questionnaire to the readout. The questionnaire takes roughly ninety minutes and doesn't have to be done in one sitting, because the time goes on finding the evidence rather than answering the questions. From the second depth upward, we fill it in with you in a working session instead.
When you're pre-revenue, because there isn't yet an engine to measure, and product-market fit validation is the better first step. Also when your constraint is already known and evidenced, in which case you should spend the money fixing it rather than confirming it.
Two weeks from now you could know which part of your revenue engine is holding the rest down, what it is costing you every year, and what the evidence is. Or you could still be deciding whose theory to back.
A 30-minute conversation first. We'll tell you which of the three depths fits, and what it costs, before you commit to anything.