Federico Presicci writes about B2B sales leadership and enablement, including how organizations can improve sales behavior and redesign revenue work for people and AI agents.
Useful for practical diagnosis of sales behaviour and redesigning revenue work across people and AI agents.
Best for
A B2B sales enablement webinar or content collaboration on revenue work redesign.
Not for
Paid performance campaigns with product testimonials or short-form video ads.
Key takeaways
Manage processes that cross functions, not just the functions themselves.
Bring AI agents into the end-to-end revenue process, not just individual workflows.
Diagnose why a sales behaviour is not sticking before reaching for more training.
Check first: Confirm framework materials, partnership route, audience data and terms before committing.
Main ideas
Manage processes that cross functions, not just the functions themselves · Bring AI agents into the end-to-end revenue process, not just individual workflows · Sales leadership operates at a broader level than sales management
Federico Presicci writes about B2B sales leadership, sales enablement and redesigning revenue work for people and AI agents.
They focus on how work moves across teams: who owns an outcome, where hand-offs fail and what helps a sales behaviour happen consistently.
Their work is useful to readers trying to improve a revenue process without assuming that more training or more automation is the answer.
Presicci turns broad sales and AI questions into practical ways to diagnose work.
When a sales behaviour is missing, they check whether the right prompt was present, whether the action was easy to perform and whether it was reinforced before recommending an intervention.
For cross-functional revenue work, they ask leaders to map the process end to end, make ownership and hand-offs visible, and decide task by task whether a person, an AI agent or both should do the work.
That combination—diagnosing the specific work before choosing a solution—makes the posts worth following for people responsible for sales enablement, revenue operations or sales leadership.
Federico Presicci argues that commercial outcomes come from end-to-end work — across functions, systems, and now people and AI agents — not from functions or tools performing well in isolation.
Read more
They also emphasise diagnosing why work or behaviour is failing before prescribing a fix. Their material ranges from sales enablement behaviour change and cross-functional GTM process design to sales leadership competencies and AI agents in revenue workflows.
Manage processes that cross functions, not just the functions themselves
Presicci argues that functional structure is necessary but not sufficient.
Read more
Marketing, sales, revenue operations, enablement, and customer success need clear responsibilities, expertise, goals, and accountability.
But commercially important outcomes — generating qualified pipeline, progressing a complex opportunity, onboarding a customer, expanding an account — depend on work moving across teams, systems, decisions, and hand-offs.
Each function can perform its part reasonably well while the end-to-end process still performs badly: context is lost between teams, work is repeated, decisions slow down, and ownership becomes hard to see once something crosses a functional boundary.
Presicci recommends identifying the three to five GTM processes most closely tied to commercial performance and mapping each end to end: define the outcome and its end-to-end owner; map the major jobs to be done; show which functions contribute to each job; break those jobs into tasks and sub-steps; and make inputs, outputs, hand-offs, and measures visible.
A qualified pipeline does not sit inside marketing or sales alone. It depends on hand-offs and decisions across both, so mapping the process end to end shows where context or ownership drops instead of treating pipeline as a function-level output.
Bring AI agents into the end-to-end revenue process, not just individual workflows
Presicci writes that revenue teams are adding AI agents workflow by workflow.
Read more
One agent prepares sellers for meetings, another updates the CRM, and others support coaching, forecasting, reporting, and handovers.
Each workflow may create value on its own, but the design problem arises when they connect across teams, systems, and stages of the revenue process.
Presicci asks how data and context should move between agents; where agents should act and where people should review or take over; and who owns the outcome when several people, systems, and agents perform different parts of the work.
Without an end-to-end view, organisations risk improving individual workflows while making the wider system more fragmented and difficult to govern.
In the webinar announcement, Presicci says they will be joined by Adam Liska of Airspeed, Amrutha Suresh of Asana, and Alexander P.
Mueller of Revenue Enablement.
The session, 'How to Redesign Revenue Work for Humans and AI Agents,' focuses on real workflows and the choices involved in dividing work between people and AI agents.
Presicci extends the cross-functional process argument to AI agents: once work is visible at task level, they say some tasks remain human-led, some can be handled by an agent within clear boundaries, and others work best as a shared system where the agent prepares, checks, or acts, while a person interprets, decides, or handles exceptions.
Sales leadership operates at a broader level than sales management
Presicci distinguishes sales leadership from sales management — and from simply adding the words strategy and vision to a management role.
Read more
The two overlap: strong sales managers need leadership capability, and senior sales leaders still need management discipline.
As responsibility broadens, those capabilities apply at a different level: decisions grow in scale, more people and systems are influenced, and the time horizon extends well beyond the current quarter.
Presicci sets out an eight-area sales leadership competency model: strategic vision and direction; customer and commercial acumen; sales strategy and organisational design; organisational influence and GTM alignment; culture and ethical leadership; talent and leadership development; change and transformation leadership; and self-leadership and learning agility.
Supporting behaviours include translating company strategy into sales strategy, making priorities and trade-offs explicit, turning customer and market evidence into strategic choices, designing the sales model around strategy, aligning functions around shared GTM priorities, developing managers and future leaders, creating the conditions for change to stick, and seeking challenge and adapting your own judgement.
A senior leader deciding which customers and markets deserve focus, how to configure the sales organisation, and how functions should work together is applying this broader model, not just managing a sales team.
Diagnose why a sales behaviour is not sticking before reaching for more training
When a sales behaviour is not showing up consistently, Presicci follows a fixed order before choosing an intervention.
Read more
First, was the behaviour prompted at the right moment?
If the seller has to remember it from a training session three weeks earlier, the cue may be missing.
Second, was it easy enough to perform?
The process may be too cumbersome, the workflow may create friction, or the salesperson may need clearer structure, better support, or more practice.
Third, was it worth doing and repeating?
What happened when the seller used the behaviour — did it help them, did the manager notice, was there useful feedback, was the behaviour reinforced?
Only then does Presicci decide whether the answer is training, a workflow change, a better prompt, or clearer manager reinforcement.
The diagnostic flow is: define one observable behaviour and the moment it should happen; check the prompt; check ability and friction; check motivation and reinforcement; inspect what is actually happening in the field.
Presicci calls jumping straight from 'the behaviour is missing' to 'we need more training' one of the easiest mistakes in enablement.
A missed discovery question may not signal a training gap. If the salesperson has no prompt at the right moment, or the CRM workflow makes the behaviour cumbersome, a cue or workflow change may be a better fix than another training session.
This is the clearest starting point for understanding how Federico Presicci frames senior sales leadership.
Read more
It explains what they see as the role’s actual scope, beyond a title change or added strategy language.
Presicci argues that sales leadership differs from sales management because decisions grow in scale, influence more people and systems, and extend over a longer time horizon.
They set out an eight-area sales leadership competency model: strategic vision and direction; customer and commercial acumen; sales strategy and organisational design; organisational influence and GTM alignment; culture and ethical leadership; talent and leadership development; change and transformation leadership; and self-leadership and learning agility.
The post also lists supporting behaviours: translating company strategy into sales strategy, making priorities and trade-offs explicit, designing the sales model around strategy, aligning functions around shared GTM priorities, developing managers and future leaders, creating conditions for change to stick, and seeking challenge.
The result is a structured leadership framework, not a generic opinion about sales.
For brands planning a campaign
For a webinar or content collaboration on sales enablement, this model offers a clear outline for segmenting audiences or shaping a session on what senior sales leaders need to develop. It focuses less on tools than on the leadership decisions surrounding revenue work.
When a sales behaviour is not showing up, what should a manager or enablement team check first?
Read more
This post offers a compact example of Presicci's diagnostic approach.
Presicci lays out a simple sequence.
First, ask whether the behaviour was prompted at the right moment; a seller may not remember a training session from weeks earlier.
Second, ask whether the behaviour was easy enough to perform: the process may be cumbersome, the workflow may create friction, or the seller may need clearer structure, better support, or more practice.
Third, ask whether the behaviour was worth doing and repeating: did it help the seller, did the manager notice, did useful feedback follow, and was the behaviour reinforced?
Only then decide on an intervention.
The diagnostic flow is to define one observable behaviour and when it should happen; check the prompt; check ability and friction; check motivation and reinforcement; and inspect what is actually happening in the field.
Presicci warns against jumping from 'the behaviour is missing' to 'we need more training.'
For brands planning a campaign
This is ready-made material for an enablement-focused webinar, guide, or workshop. Presicci teaches a practical sequence sales enablement audiences can apply, and offers a session format built around diagnosing a behaviour rather than defaulting to training.
This explains why cross-functional revenue work breaks down even when each function performs its own role.
Read more
It introduces Presicci's process-first lens and connects it to decisions about where AI agents should sit in the work.
Drawing on performance engineering, Presicci argues that organisations cannot become truly effective by managing only through functions.
Functional structure still matters: marketing, sales, revenue operations, enablement, customer success and other teams need clear responsibilities, expertise, goals and accountability.
But commercially important outcomes—generating qualified pipeline, progressing a complex opportunity, onboarding a customer, or expanding an account—depend on work moving across teams, systems, decisions and hand-offs.
When work crosses a functional boundary, ownership can become hard to see.
Presicci recommends identifying the three to five GTM processes most closely connected to commercial performance and mapping them end to end: define the outcome and end-to-end owner; map the major jobs to be done; show which functions contribute; break jobs into tasks and sub-steps; and make inputs, outputs, hand-offs and measures visible.
The post also treats AI agents as a design choice within that system: some tasks stay human-led, some can be handled by an agent within clear boundaries, and others work best as a shared system in which an agent prepares, checks or acts while a person interprets, decides or handles exceptions.
For brands planning a campaign
This is directly relevant to a revenue work redesign collaboration. It offers a concrete framework for deciding how humans and AI agents should divide work, and could anchor a webinar around mapping a real GTM process rather than debating AI in the abstract.
This explains the problem Presicci sees emerging as AI agents enter revenue work: the governance and design questions their webinar addresses.
Read more
Presicci describes a common pattern: one agent prepares sellers for meetings, another updates the CRM, and others support coaching, forecasting, reporting and handovers.
Each workflow may create value on its own, but the design challenge arises when they connect across teams, systems and stages of the revenue process.
The questions they raise are: how should data and context move between agents; where should agents act, and where should people review or take over; and who owns the outcome when several people, systems and agents perform different parts of the work?
Without an end-to-end view, organisations risk improving individual workflows while making the wider system more fragmented and difficult to govern.
The post announces a session on 27 October titled 'How to Redesign Revenue Work for Humans and AI Agents,' with Adam Liska, Amrutha Suresh and Alexander P.
Mueller joining.
For brands planning a campaign
This is the closest match for a campaign aimed at sales enablement audiences. It names the topic—the division of labour between humans and agents—and the governance questions a webinar or content collaboration could explore.
Redesigning revenue work for people and AI agents2
Managing across functions, not just inside them2
A competency model for sales leadership1
Diagnosing why a sales behaviour is not sticking1
Redesigning revenue work for people and AI agents
Presicci argues that revenue teams are adding AI agents workflow by workflow — one prepares sellers for meetings, another updates the CRM, others support coaching, forecasting or handovers.
Read more
Each can create local value while making the wider system more fragmented.
They ask how data and context should move between agents, where agents act and where people review or take over, and who owns an outcome when several people, systems and agents perform different parts of the work.
They frame this as a missing end-to-end view rather than a tooling problem.
The argument is presented as the Revenue Work Redesign Framework and in a co-hosted webinar on 27 October with named guests from Airspeed, Asana and Revenue Enablement — turning a post into a structured expert discussion rather than a product pitch.
The posts describe the framework’s questions, not its full method. Ask to review the framework before treating it as a documented deliverable.
For brands planning a campaign
For a sales enablement company seeking a webinar or content collaboration on revenue work redesign, this is the closest match: a stated framework, a named topic, a willingness to run a co-hosted expert session, and an audience of revenue, sales and RevOps readers.
Taking a lesson from performance engineering, Presicci writes that an organisation cannot become effective by managing functions alone; it must also manage the processes that cut across them.
Read more
Functions still need clear responsibilities, expertise, goals and accountability, but commercially important outcomes such as generating qualified pipeline, progressing a complex opportunity, onboarding a customer or expanding an account depend on work moving across teams, systems, decisions and hand-offs. Each function can perform its part reasonably well while the end-to-end process performs badly: context gets lost, work is repeated, decisions slow and ownership becomes unclear when something crosses a functional boundary.
A concrete starting point: identify the three to five GTM processes most closely tied to commercial performance and map each end to end.
Define the outcome and its end-to-end owner, map the major jobs to be done, show which functions contribute to each job, break the jobs into tasks and sub-steps, and make inputs, outputs, hand-offs and measures visible.
Once work is visible at task level, Presicci argues, decisions about which tasks stay human-led, which an agent can handle within boundaries, and which work best as a shared system become much better informed.
For brands planning a campaign
An enablement vendor can use this as a vendor-neutral diagnostic frame for content or a workshop: it helps buyers locate hand-off problems before choosing tools and pairs naturally with the AI-agent theme for a session on dividing work between people and agents.
Presicci distinguishes sales leadership from sales management, and both from adding the words strategy and vision to a management role.
Read more
As responsibility broadens, they argue, the same capabilities apply at a wider level: bigger decisions, more people and systems influenced, and a time horizon extending well beyond the current quarter.
The result is an eight-area model — strategic vision and direction; customer and commercial acumen; sales strategy and organisational design; organisational influence and GTM alignment; culture and ethical leadership; talent and leadership development; change and transformation leadership; and self-leadership and learning agility.
Each area is broken down into specific competencies, such as translating company strategy into sales strategy, making priorities and trade-offs explicit, aligning functions around shared GTM priorities, and creating the conditions for change to stick.
The post summarises the model and offers readers a one-pager and a longer guide in exchange for commenting a request phrase.
For brands planning a campaign
Useful for leadership development, assessment or coaching vendors: the eight areas offer a ready-made structure for a content collaboration, an assessment instrument or a workshop. The one-pager also shows a resource-led approach to audience building.
When a sales behaviour is not showing up consistently, Presicci follows a fixed order before choosing an intervention: Was the behaviour prompted at the right moment?
Read more
Was it easy enough to perform?
Was it worth doing and repeating — did it help the seller, did the manager notice, was there useful feedback, and was the behaviour reinforced?
Only then do they decide whether the answer is training, a workflow change, a better prompt or clearer manager reinforcement.
They call jumping straight from “the behaviour is missing” to “we need more training” one of the easiest mistakes in enablement.
A five-step flow: define one observable behaviour and when it should happen; check the prompt; check ability and friction; check motivation and reinforcement; then inspect what is actually happening in the field. A short linked piece goes deeper into the framework.
For brands planning a campaign
Directly usable by enablement platforms and training providers as a content hook or webinar topic: it argues for diagnosing before prescribing, a position that suits a vendor wanting to look useful rather than product-first and connects with the audience for the revenue-work-redesign theme.
Across the four posts, the recurring format is a numbered model or ordered diagnostic, a brief explanation of why the conventional answer is incomplete, and a resource offered in exchange for a comment — a one-pager, a guide or a short linked piece.
Read more
Two posts promote or recap a named webinar with external guests. Over this period, the subjects move from sales-enablement behaviour change through cross-functional GTM process design to sales leadership competencies, with the most recent post centred on AI agents inside revenue workflows.
Numbered frameworks, arrows and checklists carry the practical detail; the promotional element is usually a single line at the end rather than in the body of the post.
For brands planning a campaign
A partner can expect a collaborator who brings structured, text-led content and an existing framework to a joint session, and who will advertise a resource or event in the post rather than only in the comments. Ask whether any planned collaboration would include product endorsements or commercial relationship framing.
Federico Presicci's posts do not document any sponsorship, affiliate arrangement, client work, employment, or owned business.
Read more
The only named companies appear because Federico Presicci introduced the co-presenters joining a webinar Presicci promoted, and none of the posts states a commercial relationship between Presicci and those companies. They are recorded below as mentions so readers can see who Presicci works alongside rather than mistake the names for sponsors.
Asana
Mention
Amrutha Suresh, described in the post as Head of GTM AI Innovation at Asana, is named as a speaker joining Presicci for the webinar “How to Redesign Revenue Work for Humans and AI Agents” on 27 October.
Mueller, described in the post as a RevOps leader and founder at Revenue Enablement, is named as a third webinar speaker. The relationship shown is a shared speaking slot, not a disclosed commercial tie with Presicci or Presicci's employer.
Presicci writes short, structured arguments rather than news or commentary, with practical threads that run from the small to the large.
Read more
The behaviour diagnostic sets out how they decide whether a missing behaviour calls for training, a workflow change, a better prompt or stronger manager reinforcement.
At a larger scale, cross-functional process posts argue that pipeline, complex deals, customer onboarding and account expansion all depend on hand-offs no single function owns.
The latest thread puts AI agents inside that picture and asks who owns an outcome when people, systems and agents each perform part of the work.
Read the process-design posts alongside the webinar announcement, which extends the reasoning to how work is divided between people and agents.
Then look for the competency model post, where the post offers a one-pager and longer guide.
Redfern makes a core argument also found in Presicci's enablement writing: more training content rarely fixes inconsistent behaviour.
Read more
Teams need reinforcement, coaching and manager capability built into the working rhythm. Both write for sales and revenue leaders, pairing a diagnostic point with a practical offer at the end of the post.
Redfern's material centers on a named fractional-enablement service, listing the roles covered, outcomes delivered and questions buyers might ask.
One post examines the gap between the seller's process and the buyer's buying cycle.
Presicci's posts stay at the framework and diagnostic level, with a co-hosted webinar or downloadable guide as the offer at the end.
Both treat AI agents as participants in a workflow rather than as a productivity feature.
Read more
They ask the same governance questions: what an agent may access, which decisions it may influence or take, and who owns the outcome when several people, systems and agents perform different parts of the work.
Sharma frames the issue as enterprise-wide AI governance and risk, covering access boundaries, agent identity, approval processes, audit trails and whether capability is outrunning controllability.
The examples include cybersecurity, financial systems and critical infrastructure.
Presicci keeps the focus on revenue work design and hand-offs between marketing, sales, revenue operations and enablement.
Radford's central claim is close to Presicci's: most teams do not have a training problem; they have a system problem.
Read more
Both emphasize reinforcement over time, consistent manager conversations and clear behavioural expectations. Without sustained support, training fades and old habits return.
Radford grounds the argument in field sales manager capacity: weekly briefings, reports, vacant territories and larger territories crowd out coaching.
The post closes with a short diagnostic scorecard.
Presicci places similar behaviour-diagnosis logic within a wider GTM process and AI-agent redesign argument, ending with a written guide and one-pager.
For a webinar or content collaboration on revenue-work redesign, plan around LinkedIn.
Read more
The four posts on Presicci’s profile address the topic directly: sales leadership competencies, diagnosing why a sales behaviour is not sticking, and dividing revenue work between people and AI agents.
Two promote a 27 October webinar on that last theme, with named guests from Airspeed, Asana and a revenue-enablement practice.
Presicci already convenes the conversation the campaign proposes, making the profile a strong fit for sales leaders, enablement and revenue-operations practitioners.
The posts don’t report impressions, reactions, comment counts or reader demographics.
Before committing, ask for recent post-level results on comparable themes and formats and, if available, a short audience survey covering respondents’ job function and seniority.
LinkedIn follower counts alone won’t establish whether the audience includes the enablement buyers the campaign wants.
Instagram has 833 followers as of 11 October 2026, making it a secondary placement rather than the primary one.
Federico Presicci's posts do not describe a sponsorship or paid-partnership offer.
Read more
They focus on educational and promotional writing about sales leadership, enablement and revenue work redesign.
The clearest collaboration format is a live webinar they hosted on 27 October, with named contributors from vendor companies — Adam Liska of Airspeed, Amrutha Suresh of Asana, and Alexander P.
Mueller of Revenue Enablement — positioned as guest speakers rather than sponsors.
The four posts do not specify fees, deliverables, timelines, exclusivity terms, an approval process or disclosure practices.
The registration link in two posts is a public event sign-up, not a partnership inquiry route.
Before budgeting a paid collaboration, ask Presicci for rates, deliverable formats, review and approval steps, and how sponsored content would be labelled.
Guest spot on a hosted webinar or live session
Buyer requirement
The only collaboration pattern visible in Federico Presicci's posts is a hosted online session with named guests from vendor companies, introduced with their job titles and employers.
Buyers cannot plan cost, placement or rights from these posts.
Ask Presicci whether vendor participants pay, what guests are expected to do (preparation, slides, speaking time and promotion to their own audience), how recordings may be reused, and how the commercial relationship would be disclosed.
A B2B sales enablement company wants to assess Federico Presicci for a webinar or content collaboration on revenue work redesign.
Reasons
The posts already cover the subject for a campaign on redesigning revenue work. One announces a session on 27 October titled 'How to Redesign Revenue Work for Humans and AI Agents' and raises the design questions directly: how data and context move between agents, where agents act and where people review or take over, and who owns an outcome when several people, systems and agents do different parts of the work.
There is a documented format precedent. Two posts promote a hosted live session with named guests from vendor companies — Adam Liska of Airspeed, Amrutha Suresh of Asana, and Alexander P. Mueller of Revenue Enablement — introduced by name, title and employer. That closely matches the shape of a co-hosted brand session.
Presicci offers a method, not just an opinion. Their mapping sequence is concrete enough to run live: identify the three to five GTM processes most tied to commercial performance, define the outcome and its end-to-end owner, map the major jobs to be done, show which functions contribute, break jobs into tasks and sub-steps, and make inputs, outputs, hand-offs and measures visible. Then decide which tasks stay human-led, which an agent handles within boundaries, and which work as a shared system.
A second post shows they can teach enablement practitioners a usable sequence — check the prompt, check ability and friction, check motivation and reinforcement, inspect the field — and explicitly warns against jumping from 'the behaviour is missing' to 'we need more training.' That is a register an enablement audience recognises and a co-hosted session can build on.
The posts are educational and vendor-neutral, with no product endorsements. A joint session can therefore be framed as a working discussion about a real process rather than a product slot, making it easier to defend editorially.
Conditions
The posts reference a webinar recording, a fuller framework guide and a downloadable one-pager, but none was inspected. Ask for the materials and brief on the framework before fixing the session format.
Fees, deliverables, speaking expectations, approval steps, exclusivity, recording reuse and sponsored-work labelling are undocumented. The only visible link is for event registration, not partnerships; ask for the appropriate partnership route.
The subject matter makes enablement buyers a plausible audience, but the posts provide no engagement, comment, seniority, geography or job-function data. Ask for audience data before relying on that fit.
When to choose a specialist
Poor fit based on the posts.
Read more
Brief
A revenue-intelligence vendor wants a paid performance campaign: a filmed product testimonial plus short-form video ads driving demo sign-ups, planned and judged on cost per lead, with Instagram Reels as the main placement.
Reasons
No paid or sponsored content appears in the posts. The only collaboration pattern shown is guest speakers joining a hosted session; it comes with no fees, deliverables, timelines, rights or approval process. A performance campaign would be a new commercial arrangement, not an extension of a demonstrated one.
The reviewed work consists of written frameworks and checklists. There is no filmed product walkthrough, on-camera demonstration or testimonial about a vendor's results to assess for delivery style, product handling or claim discipline.
The posts provide no performance benchmarks: no impressions, clicks, leads or costs, and no past sponsored campaign to model a cost-per-lead target on. A performance brief would have no evidence base for pricing.
Instagram is the weaker channel here. Presicci has 833 followers there against 16,006 on LinkedIn, and the posts show no short-form video performance on either. The evidence does not support Reels as the primary placement.
The posts show no practice for labelling paid content and make no product claims. Ask for substantiation before requesting a pipeline-lift claim.
Note
This is a statement about what appears in the posts, not a claim that Presicci never accepts sponsorships. The gap should be tested directly: request rates, deliverable formats, approval steps, disclosure wording and any past sponsored-campaign results before a performance brief is taken further.
A worked campaign example
Angle
Process-first revenue redesign clinic. Run a co-hosted live session that maps one real GTM process end to end and uses it to decide, in the room, which steps stay human-led, which an agent could take within clear boundaries, and which work best as a person-and-agent pair.
How to judge it
Test whether registrants leave with a completed map of a real process and can rerun the worksheet without help. Attendance figures alone will not show that, so ask for completed worksheets or a short follow-up response from attendees. Ask for results from comparable past sessions to set realistic expectations.
Suggested run
Detail
Choose one cross-functional process the vendor's customers visibly struggle with, such as the hand-off from qualification to first meeting, or from onboarding to expansion. Give Presicci and the guest practitioners the process name and any anonymised hand-off data ahead of time so mapping starts from a real case, not a generic example.
Step
Before the session
Detail
State the commercial outcome for the chosen process and name who owns it end to end. This surfaces the ownership gap Presicci describes when work crosses a functional boundary.
Step
Segment one: define the outcome and owner
Detail
List the major jobs to be done and mark which functions contribute to each. Then break the jobs into tasks and sub-steps, and make the inputs, outputs, hand-offs and measures visible on a shared worksheet the audience can follow.
Step
Segment two: map jobs, functions, tasks
Detail
Using the task-level map, mark which tasks stay human-led, which an agent could handle within defined boundaries, and which work best as a shared system: the agent prepares, checks or acts, while a person interprets, decides or handles exceptions. Then demonstrate the vendor’s tool against a task the audience has just mapped.
Step
Segment three: place the agents
Detail
Give attendees the same one-page mapping worksheet used live so they can rerun the exercise on their own process. Publish a short joint follow-up walking through the map and placement decisions.
Step
After the session
What to agree first
Confirm with Presicci what the Revenue Work Redesign Framework contains beyond the post summary, so the session builds on the actual method rather than the version described in two LinkedIn posts.
Agree on the guest practitioners, what each is expected to bring, and how much of the session the vendor’s speaker will lead.
Settle recording reuse, who may republish clips, and the exact wording identifying the session as a vendor collaboration.
Choose the process to map and get a real, anonymised example in advance; the exercise depends on specific hand-offs, not an abstract diagram.
Why this angle
Turn the method Presicci already teaches into the exercise itself. Bring in the vendor’s product only where the map shows an agent should act or check, once the process is visible. That keeps the session a working discussion and gives the product a purpose beyond filling an agenda slot. The format also fits Presicci’s existing hosted sessions with named practitioner guests.
Choose Kate Redfern when the need is a working enablement partnership rather than a co-hosted discussion: building or repairing an enablement function, coaching managers, rolling out a methodology such as MEDDPICC, Challenger or Value Selling, standing up a BDR or SDR motion, or fixing onboarding and ramp.
Read more
Redfern's posts come from the seller's side of the table and list outcomes with numbers — a 33% improvement in conversation rates, a 23% uplift across a 500-plus-person sales and customer success organisation, and a 43% improvement in sales capability across 350-plus commercial professionals.
They also take a clear position on modern buying behaviour: buyers are already past the start of the journey, and sellers who run their own process and agenda lose access.
Buyers seeking someone to work inside the team on a fractional basis or coach a management layer have a more direct match here than with Presicci's mapping method.
The tradeoff is topic and format.
Neither post covers redesigning revenue work around AI agents: where agents act, who reviews, and who owns the outcome when people and systems share the work.
A session on that brief would need new material rather than extend published teaching.
Redfern's material reads as service marketing: an offer list, headline outcome percentages and a closing invitation to get in touch, with no method, worksheet or sequence an audience could apply to its own process.
The percentages have no described baseline or measurement method, so they support a credential claim rather than a live exercise.
For a teaching session, ask for a method and supporting detail behind the results; the posts offer credibility and a stance, not a curriculum.
Choose Sam Sharma when the room is focused on AI governance, risk or security rather than revenue operations.
Read more
Sharma's posts examine what an agent may access, decide and do; who owns the outcome when it gets something wrong; how to monitor it live; and how to prevent a useful pilot from becoming uncontrolled agent sprawl.
They argue that agents should be governed like digital workers, with a purpose, owner, identity, access boundary, risk level, approval process and audit trail.
The companion post makes the leader-level case: the real danger is not that AI turns hostile, but that increasingly capable systems get more autonomy and permissions before their behaviour can be reliably controlled.
Capability should not outrun controllability.
If the collaboration is about controlling agent autonomy in enterprise systems, that framing is closer to the problem than a GTM process map.
The tradeoff is that Sharma's material addresses a different subject.
It covers AI risk, alignment, regulation, critical infrastructure and military decision-making, not pipeline, hand-offs, forecasting or the work an enablement team owns.
It offers no process-mapping method or revenue-workflow example, so a sales enablement audience would get governance principles but nothing to apply to its own funnel.
The argument also targets executives and boards rather than practitioners executing the process.
The vendor would need to decide whether to present its own product as a governed agent subject to those controls — a more defensive placement than demonstrating a tool against a process the audience has just mapped.
Choose Steve Radford when the buyer's problem is that behaviour does not stick after training or managers lack the capacity to reinforce it.
Read more
Radford's posts spell out the pressure on field sales managers: deliver briefings, plan quarterly meetings, analyse performance, produce reports, attend internal meetings, cover vacant territories, recruit and onboard, travel the region and still coach everyone — across territories roughly 20% larger than they used to be.
The result is reactive development and inconsistent reinforcement.
The second post turns that diagnosis into a session-worthy position — most teams do not have a training problem, they have a system problem — and sets out four conditions for consistency: a shared sales language, clear behavioural expectations, consistent manager conversations and reinforcement built into the rhythm of the business.
It also offers a named diagnostic, the Consistent Sales Performance Scorecard.
For an enablement audience whose failure mode is training that fades, this diagnoses the cause more sharply than Presicci's posts.
The tradeoff is that Radford's material answers a different question.
It offers no cross-functional process map or AI-agent content, so a revenue-work redesign session would become a discussion about reinforcement in the field, shifting the audience from a cross-functional GTM group to sales managers and their leaders.
Radford identifies as a sales trainer and offers a diagnostic to complete, pulling the session toward a product-led assessment rather than a vendor-neutral working discussion.
The posts diagnose the gap and list four conditions but do not show the scorecard or how a team would use it.
Ask Radford for the scorecard and a worked example before building the exercise with them.
