coverage-modellisted

# Coverage Model A coverage model is a set of decisions about **who you are choosing not to serve properly**, and the reason most of them fail is that this is never said out loud. The tiers get named, the ratio gets set, and the part where the bottom forty per cent of accounts receive nothing is left implicit until it shows up as churn nobody predicted. The failure this exists to prevent: **the model designed backwards from headcount.** Take the number of CSMs, divide by the number of accounts, call the result a ratio, and describe whatever that produces as a strategy. --- ## What this needs **Shared context.** If an `account-context` document exists, read it first: segments, contract shapes, motion and what healthy usage looks like. That is the raw material for segmentation. Where it is absent, carry on and name the assumption. **Minimum: the account list with values, and your headcount.** Enough for a first model with the trade-offs stated. **Better with** churn history by segment, product usage data, and support load per account, which is the cost side nobody counts. **Best with** the last two years of churn including the reason and the segment, because a coverage model that would not have caught your actual losses is a plausible model rather than a working one. --- ## Step 1: Segment by need, not only by revenue Revenue-only tiering is the default and it is wrong in a specific, expensive way: it puts a simple two-hundred-thousand-dollar account and a complex, h