Quarterly Forecast Roll-Up Template
Roll individual rep commits up into one leadership-ready forecast view, with built-in sandbagging and variance flags so leadership sees the risk behind the total, not just a clean blended number.
What's inside
- Rep-level input table (quota, Commit, Best Case, Pipeline, coverage ratio, last-quarter accuracy)
- Sandbagging flag logic combining under-committed forecast with a historical under-forecasting pattern
- Variance flag logic for unexplained swings of ±25%+ versus the prior period
- Auto-generated leadership rollup table with team coverage ratio and flag counts
- Guidance on never presenting a blended total without its flag counts
- Four-number 'Presentation View' format for the leadership meeting
Rep-level input table (one row per rep)
| Rep | Quota | Commit ($) | Best Case ($) | Pipeline ($) | Coverage Ratio | Last Qtr Accuracy % | This Qtr Forecast (Commit+Best Case) | Variance vs. Last Qtr Forecast |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| =(Commit+Best Case+Pipeline)/Quota | =Commit+Best Case | =This-Last | ||||||
| Team Total | Σ | Σ | Σ | Σ | Σweighted/ΣQuota | avg | Σ | Σ |
Sandbagging flag logic
Flag any rep row where both of the following are true:
Commit + Best Case < 60% of Quota, andLast Qtr Accuracy % > 95%and actual consistently landed above forecast (under-forecasting pattern per the companion Forecast Accuracy Calculator)
→ This combination means a rep is likely holding real, qualified deals out of Commit/Best Case to guarantee they beat the number. Address directly, don't just adjust the rollup number silently.
Variance flag logic
Flag any rep row where:
This Qtr Forecastdiffers fromLast Qtr Forecast(same deals, prior period) by more than ±25% with no corresponding change in headcount, territory, or pipeline generation rate.
→ Investigate before rolling up — a swing this size usually means deals were re-categorized without new evidence, not that the business genuinely shifted.
Leadership rollup (auto-generated from the table above)
| Metric | Formula | Value |
|---|---|---|
| Total Quota | Σ Quota | |
| Total Commit | Σ Commit | |
| Total Best Case | Σ Best Case | |
| Total Pipeline (unweighted) | Σ Pipeline | |
| Leadership Forecast (Commit + Best Case) | Σ Commit + Σ Best Case | |
| Team Coverage Ratio | Σ(Commit+Best Case+Pipeline) ÷ Σ Quota | |
| Weighted Coverage Ratio (feed from Weighted Pipeline Forecast Template) | ||
| # Reps flagged for sandbagging | count | |
| # Reps flagged for variance | count | |
| Blended forecast accuracy, last quarter | avg per-rep accuracy |
Reading the roll-up as a leader
- Never present the blended Leadership Forecast without also showing the flag counts — a clean team total with three sandbagging flags underneath is not actually clean.
- Coverage Ratio below the team's calculated minimum (see the companion Pipeline Coverage Ratio Calculator) means the Commit number is at risk regardless of how confident it looks, because there isn't enough pipeline behind it to survive normal slippage.
- A rep appearing in the sandbagging flag every quarter is a coaching conversation about forecast trust, not a compliment on their conservatism — inaccurate-low forecasts cause the same resourcing and planning damage as inaccurate-high ones.
Presentation view (for the leadership meeting — 4 numbers, one page)
- The Number: Total Commit + Best Case, with the team Coverage Ratio next to it
- The Confidence: last quarter's blended forecast accuracy % and bias direction
- The Risk: number of reps flagged (sandbagging + variance combined), named
- The Trend: this quarter's forecast vs. last quarter's forecast vs. last quarter's actual, three numbers side by side
How to use it
Have every rep submit their Commit/Best Case/Pipeline numbers into the rep-level table each week, let the sandbagging and variance flags surface automatically, and present only the four-number Presentation View to leadership rather than a single blended total.