Mutual Action Plans for Startup Deals (Without Enterprise Bloat)
Why do deals stall without a MAP?
Because every party assumes someone else is moving the ball. Your champion thinks legal is on it. Legal has not seen the contract. You think the demo went well; they are still evaluating two vendors because nobody wrote down a decision date. A MAP makes passive waiting visible.
What belongs on a one-page startup MAP?
Seven rows maximum for seed-stage complexity.
| Task | Owner | Due | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Technical validation / trial | Buyer + you | Date | Open |
| Security / IT review | Buyer | Date | Open |
| Economic buyer alignment | Champion | Date | Open |
| Commercial terms | You | Date | Open |
| Legal / MSA | Both | Date | Open |
| Implementation kickoff | You | Date | Open |
| Target signature | Both | Date | Open |
Share it in kickoff of week two. Ask: "What did I miss?" The buyer will add the row that was about to kill the deal quietly.
How do you keep MAPs from rotting?
Review them in your weekly pipeline meeting — one slide per deal in commit. If a row is red for 10+ days, the deal is not in commit; it is in hope. Pair MAPs with the 30-minute pipeline review cadence so dates stay honest.
Where should the MAP live?
On the opportunity, versioned, visible to your team — optionally shareable to the buyer. A doc in Workspace attached to the deal beats a PDF in email thread twelve. When AI reads the graph, it can draft the nudge email from stale rows — that is the July 23 AI v2 promise in practice, not theory.