Most vendors don't lose deals at the proposal stage. They lose them the moment they decide to pursue the wrong account.
On paper, it looks fine: big logo, right industry, decent budget, someone replied on LinkedIn. So it goes on the "strategic" list. Months later, nothing moves, everyone is tired, and the forecast is a mess.
The problem isn't how you sell. The problem is what you decide is worth selling into.
That's where a Clear Yes Filter comes in.
What is a Clear Yes Filter?
A Clear Yes Filter is a short, non-negotiable set of conditions that must be true before you invest seriously in an account.
Not "nice-to-have" traits. Not "ideal ICP" fluff. Hard filters.
If the account fails the filter, it doesn't go on your strategic list. You don't "keep nurturing." You don't assign an SDR to "keep a foot in the door."
You accept the no early and free that capacity for the accounts that could actually redefine your future.
Why you need one (and why very few teams have it)
Without a Clear Yes Filter, most enterprise pursuit decisions are driven by:
- Hope ("Imagine if we landed them…")
- Size ("Look at their revenue…")
- Personal attachment ("I've been speaking to them for a year…")
- Empty signals ("They liked the demo / They read the deck")
None of these tell you if the account is structurally capable of saying a real yes to what you offer.
A Clear Yes Filter forces you to ask a different question: "Under what conditions would this account almost have to say yes to us?"
If those conditions don't exist or can't be created in a reasonable time frame, it's not strategic. It's just big.
Five Clear Yes questions to ask before you pursue
Here's a starting point for a practical Clear Yes Filter. If you can't answer "yes" to at least four out of five, you should think very hard before investing.
The Clear Yes Framework
- Is there a business problem we can improve by at least 10x more than the friction of change?
Not "we can save them some money." A problem big enough that internal stakeholders will spend political capital to fix it. - Can we see where we would sit in their internal architecture?
In other words: can you clearly place yourself in their stack, workflows, governance and reporting? If you're hand-waving, reviewers will too. - Can we name the people whose success would visibly improve if we succeed?
Not just a "champion." Actual roles whose KPIs move measurably if your solution works: Head of X, Risk, Ops, P&L owners. - Is there a believable path to a safe internal yes?
Do you see how Finance, Risk, Legal and IT could say: "This is understandable, documented, and doesn't blow up our risk profile"? If you can't imagine the internal approval path, your champion won't manage it either. - Does this account fit the pattern of your best wins, not just your biggest names?
Your best wins share a shape: buying logic, internal politics, urgency, culture. If this account feels completely different, you're not running a playbook; you're gambling.
If you're honest, a lot of "top opportunities" fail this filter immediately.
What happens when you actually apply this filter
Three things change quickly:
Your pipeline shrinks. Your odds improve.
Less noise, fewer "nice-to-have" pursuits, more energy on the few that could truly move the needle.
Deal reviews become about reality, not theater.
Instead of: "What did you send them last week?" You get: "Which filter condition is still missing? Who owns closing that gap?"
Your team stops treating every inquiry as a blessing.
They start asking: "Do they deserve a serious pursuit from us?" That small psychological shift changes how they show up in every conversation.
Two examples (you've seen both of these)
Example 1 – Big, famous, wrong
- Global brand, strong logo
- Vague interest: "We're exploring options"
- No clear internal owner, no pressing deadline
- You never meet the people who'd actually run or approve your solution
- Every step requires you to push
It fails the filter: No big, defined problem. No visible internal path to yes. No match with your best-win pattern.
You stay in "maybe" for 12 months and get a polite no—or worse, silence.
Example 2 – Smaller, but truly strategic
- Not a household name, but central in their niche
- The initial conversation starts with "We keep losing X because of Y"
- Clear owner with something to lose and something to gain
- They openly talk about internal constraints: Risk, IT, regulators
- Your best-wins look very similar to them
This passes the filter: Strong problem-fit. Clear path to internal yes. Strong pattern match.
This is the type of account that can redefine your future — reference, learning, expansion.
How to create your own Clear Yes Filter
You don't need a workshop or a slide deck.
- List your 3–5 best wins. The ones that pulled you forward, not just paid invoices.
- Write down what was true before those deals moved. What did the first contact sound like? Who was already involved internally? What was already painful for them?
- Turn those into 5–7 yes/no conditions. Make them concrete enough that two people would answer the same way.
- Apply this filter to your current "top" opportunities. See which ones survive. That list is your real strategic pipeline.
- Commit. A filter only works if you're willing to drop accounts that don't pass it.
The uncomfortable part (and why it's worth it)
A Clear Yes Filter forces you to say no to big names that flatter the ego but don't really want you.
It's uncomfortable in the short term. But over time it:
- Protects your team from slow, demoralizing losses
- Cleans your forecast
- Frees capacity for the accounts that could actually become future-defining for your business
Most vendors will keep chasing every logo that looks impressive on a slide.
You don't have to.