Monthly Tier Ranking · Northwind Financial (synthetic demo)

What this page answers: where every rep landed this cycle, what moved, and whether the cycle is clean enough to ship goals off.

180

Rated this cycle

of 180 on the roster; 0 below the 5-opportunity activity floor

29 / 63 / 63 / 25

Tier 1 / 2 / 3 / 4

target mix at calibration 15% / 30% / 35% / 20%

Tier changes

18% of the rated floor, 9 of them driven by the floor rather than the rep

Unexplained changes

365 tier changes and 1,875 goal changes attributed across 11 cycles

Tier changes with a named cause
0 unexplained of 365 tier changes across 11 cycle transitions

Tier replay reproduces the shipped board
0 rep-cycles where walking the four model inputs did not reproduce the shipped score and tier

Manual overrides carry a written reason
3 overrides on file, 0 without a reason, 0 applied outside the override log

Goal changes with a named cause
0 unexplained of 1875 goal changes

Roster reconciles cycle over cycle
every cycle: rated(prev) + entered - exited = rated(now)

Goal steps inside the per-cycle cap
515 goals hit the 3.0 point conversion cap and were truncated, none exceeded it

Tier by team · allocation is reported, never scored
Team	T1	T2	T3	T4	Rated	Median score	Median opportunities
Aurora	3	14	3	5	25	52.2	147
Basalt	3	8	13	2	26	49.0	144
Cypress	4	8	11	4	27	50.7	135
Dunmore	6	8	11	5	30	50.4	122
Eastwick	4	15	11	4	34	51.4	142
Foundry	9	10	14	5	38	50.7	143

Opportunity allocation is a management decision, so it sits next to the tier and never inside it. A team with a thin book should not be a team of Tier 4 reps, and this column is how you check that it is not happening.

Tier board · 2026-07 · every rated rep
Tier	ID	Rep	Team	Tenure	Opps this cycle	Window n	Shrink weight	Raw conv	Shrunk conv	Consistency	QAV index	Score	vs last cycle
Tier 1	NF-1031	Ivo Vandcroft	Eastwick	71	216	524	0.87	34.4%	32.5%	65.0%	103.8	74.1	– held
Tier 1	NF-1042	Sten Jorborne	Foundry	74	185	511	0.86	29.0%	27.8%	63.5%	120.9	73.0	– held
Tier 1	NF-1043	Zane Torwick	Foundry	42	184	476	0.86	28.4%	27.2%	68.0%	95.9	70.7	– held
Tier 1	NF-1072	Edda Torlyn	Dunmore	37	85	326	0.80	28.2%	26.7%	68.0%	93.3	69.3	– held
Tier 1	NF-1196	Mira Dunstead	Foundry	10	211	569	0.88	27.4%	26.6%	63.5%	107.8	68.2	– held
Tier 1	NF-1209	Linnea Ostermarsh	Dunmore	8	168	412	0.84	29.4%	27.9%	60.5%	110.2	68.0	– held
Tier 1	NF-1148	Osric Emblyn	Cypress	76	119	339	0.81	29.5%	27.8%	62.3%	97.2	66.6	– held
Tier 1	NF-1162	Vera Fenwick	Foundry	29	153	398	0.83	23.1%	22.7%	65.0%	116.1	65.9	– held
Tier 1	NF-1191	Finn Ashdale	Dunmore	11	172	456	0.85	26.1%	25.3%	65.0%	96.9	65.3	– held
Tier 1	NF-1125	Kester Torhurst	Aurora	63	144	308	0.79	31.2%	29.0%	55.9%	109.4	65.1	– held
Tier 1	NF-1062	Dov Osterford	Foundry	76	181	460	0.85	30.0%	28.6%	57.4%	105.2	65.0	– held
Tier 1	NF-1215	Ilse Farstan	Basalt	7	129	385	0.83	24.7%	24.0%	66.5%	97.8	65.0	– held
Tier 1	NF-1154	Bree Hardale	Eastwick	20	230	564	0.88	26.4%	25.7%	65.0%	90.0	64.3	– held
Tier 1	NF-1198	Zane Fencroft	Dunmore	10	181	488	0.86	25.8%	25.1%	62.0%	104.6	63.9	– held
Tier 1	NF-1186	Gwen Embgate	Aurora	12	186	464	0.85	28.4%	27.3%	62.0%	85.5	62.8	– held
Tier 1	NF-1180	Zane Osterdale	Eastwick	12	58	299	0.79	25.1%	24.1%	58.9%	117.1	62.6	– held
Tier 1	NF-1159	Doran Selgate	Foundry	42	109	516	0.87	21.1%	21.0%	65.0%	109.1	61.9	– held
Tier 1	NF-1102	Doran Ellwick	Aurora	74	128	385	0.83	25.7%	24.8%	65.0%	83.4	61.6	– held
Tier 1	NF-1203	Cyra Osterdale	Cypress	9	96	341	0.81	24.0%	23.4%	62.0%	101.7	60.8	▲ 2 → 1
Tier 1	NF-1120	Wren Fardale	Basalt	50	143	279	0.78	26.5%	25.2%	57.4%	107.6	60.6	– held
Tier 1	NF-1003	Adair Cormarsh	Foundry	42	165	368	0.82	30.4%	28.7%	57.4%	85.1	60.6	▲ 2 → 1
Tier 1	NF-1000	Zane Pellford	Eastwick	70	172	465	0.85	24.5%	23.9%	62.0%	95.5	60.2	▲ 2 → 1
Tier 1	NF-1133	Vera Pellgate	Dunmore	66	164	548	0.87	23.4%	23.0%	62.0%	100.9	60.1	– held
Tier 1	NF-1145	Gil Vandlyn	Cypress	70	188	424	0.84	22.2%	21.9%	63.5%	101.3	60.0	▲ 2 → 1
Tier 1	NF-1081	Wren Duncroft	Foundry	58	87	507	0.86	30.8%	29.4%	57.4%	76.9	59.7	– held
Tier 1	NF-1013	Uli Torford	Foundry	31	144	418	0.84	24.6%	24.0%	63.5%	85.8	59.5	– held
Tier 2	NF-1168	Halden Torridge dead band	Eastwick	15	135	465	0.85	28.2%	27.0%	54.4%	102.3	59.3	– held
Tier 2	NF-1021	Halden Corcroft dead band	Aurora	30	153	451	0.85	20.4%	20.4%	62.0%	111.6	58.7	– held
Tier 1	NF-1101	Osric Yarhurst	Basalt	27	247	519	0.87	27.6%	26.6%	57.4%	89.9	58.7	– held
Tier 2	NF-1030	Ivo Gelgate dead band	Basalt	78	200	383	0.83	27.7%	26.4%	55.9%	96.7	58.5	– held
Tier 1	NF-1027	Hale Torcombe	Dunmore	40	63	255	0.76	22.7%	22.2%	58.9%	111.3	58.5	– held
Tier 1	NF-1121	Calla Caldwick	Cypress	75	164	617	0.89	22.4%	22.2%	60.5%	105.2	58.4	– held
Tier 2	NF-1235	Elin Harlyn dead band	Basalt	3	139	253	0.76	19.0%	19.3%	62.1%	116.7	58.4	– held
Tier 2	NF-1160	Elin Normarsh dead band	Basalt	20	205	499	0.86	19.2%	19.4%	62.0%	116.0	58.3	– held
Tier 2	NF-1085	Orin Marhurst dead band	Dunmore	45	110	296	0.79	21.3%	21.1%	55.9%	129.7	58.3	▲ 3 → 2
Tier 2	NF-1177	Calla Ellwick	Cypress	13	40	428	0.84	25.2%	24.5%	62.0%	82.9	58.2	– held
Tier 2	NF-1229	Uli Torley	Cypress	4	222	448	0.85	25.2%	24.5%	59.2%	93.1	57.9	▲ 3 → 2
Tier 2	NF-1217	Tova Dunborne	Dunmore	6	215	522	0.87	28.7%	27.6%	55.9%	85.7	57.8	– held
Tier 2	NF-1026	Linnea Quenridge	Eastwick	47	161	479	0.86	29.6%	28.3%	52.9%	93.5	57.8	– held
Tier 2	NF-1028	Mira Ravley	Dunmore	33	174	441	0.85	24.5%	23.9%	58.9%	96.8	57.6	– held
Tier 2	NF-1230	Mott Jorholt	Eastwick	4	146	409	0.84	17.8%	18.3%	64.1%	111.4	57.6	– held
Tier 2	NF-1048	Gwen Torgate	Cypress	66	164	524	0.87	17.2%	17.6%	68.0%	99.1	57.4	▲ 3 → 2
Tier 2	NF-1019	Aris Harwick	Basalt	46	215	420	0.84	25.2%	24.5%	55.9%	103.8	57.3	– held
Tier 2	NF-1151	Orin Caldstan	Foundry	36	174	547	0.87	20.8%	20.8%	60.5%	108.9	57.3	– held
Tier 2	NF-1131	Aris Ravborne	Eastwick	76	238	586	0.88	22.4%	22.1%	63.5%	87.6	57.2	– held
Tier 2	NF-1035	Tova Gelmere	Cypress	45	134	383	0.83	23.0%	22.5%	59.9%	97.6	56.7	▼ 1 → 2
Tier 2	NF-1012	Mott Brenholt	Aurora	43	127	495	0.86	21.8%	21.6%	66.5%	75.9	56.6	– held
Tier 2	NF-1083	Dov Marlyn	Aurora	53	133	450	0.85	18.7%	18.9%	58.9%	123.8	56.6	– held
Tier 2	NF-1216	Edda Corcroft	Eastwick	6	123	461	0.85	21.5%	21.3%	60.5%	102.2	56.5	– held
Tier 2	NF-1172	Finn Quendale	Cypress	14	117	331	0.81	23.3%	22.7%	57.4%	105.2	56.5	▼ 1 → 2
Tier 2	NF-1118	Edda Embdale	Eastwick	40	127	407	0.84	26.3%	25.3%	57.4%	87.6	56.3	▲ 3 → 2
Tier 2	NF-1221	Rhea Yarstead	Foundry	6	138	391	0.83	23.8%	23.2%	58.9%	94.9	56.2	– held
Tier 2	NF-1181	Hale Kellvale	Cypress	12	142	557	0.87	17.6%	18.0%	66.5%	96.3	55.9	– held
Tier 2	NF-1092	Gwen Vandley	Basalt	76	49	403	0.83	21.6%	21.4%	60.5%	98.3	55.8	▼ 1 → 2
Tier 2	NF-1091	Juna Zelfield	Dunmore	48	207	384	0.83	20.8%	20.8%	60.8%	100.8	55.7	– held
Tier 2	NF-1093	Jem Jormarsh	Eastwick	26	69	348	0.81	25.9%	24.9%	53.0%	106.1	55.7	– held
Tier 2	NF-1095	Kai Ashgate	Foundry	31	134	428	0.84	22.4%	22.1%	58.9%	98.8	55.5	– held
Tier 2	NF-1116	Cyra Ellvale	Foundry	42	163	309	0.79	26.2%	25.0%	52.9%	104.3	55.5	– held
Tier 2	NF-1071	Hale Norholt	Eastwick	56	147	305	0.79	26.2%	25.0%	55.9%	91.7	55.4	– held
Tier 2	NF-1006	Ilse Harlyn	Eastwick	21	248	601	0.88	17.5%	17.8%	58.9%	125.6	55.3	– held
Tier 2	NF-1045	Mott Ashstan	Aurora	24	134	284	0.78	16.5%	17.4%	62.0%	115.0	55.1	– held
Tier 2	NF-1139	Adair Norcroft	Basalt	68	68	326	0.80	23.6%	23.0%	51.4%	122.2	55.1	▲ 3 → 2
Tier 2	NF-1007	Vera Harmarsh override	Aurora	50	133	321	0.80	18.7%	19.1%	60.5%	110.3	55.0	– held
Tier 2	NF-1040	Juna Embley	Foundry	62	22	221	0.73	31.7%	28.7%	53.7%	75.4	55.0	– held
Tier 2	NF-1039	Edda Zelstan	Basalt	26	111	383	0.83	20.1%	20.2%	58.9%	108.1	54.8	▲ 3 → 2
Tier 2	NF-1157	Calla Vandcroft	Aurora	22	88	402	0.83	21.6%	21.5%	57.4%	104.3	54.4	– held
Tier 2	NF-1176	Cyra Yarvale	Dunmore	13	112	290	0.78	25.9%	24.7%	52.9%	101.8	54.4	– held
Tier 2	NF-1236	Kai Marhurst	Aurora	3	251	420	0.84	22.4%	22.1%	55.4%	108.5	54.4	– held
Tier 2	NF-1238	Jem Corstan	Basalt	2	71	118	0.60	26.3%	23.9%	56.7%	90.5	54.2	▲ 3 → 2
Tier 2	NF-1059	Vera Farlyn	Foundry	40	212	472	0.86	17.6%	18.0%	60.5%	110.4	53.6	– held
Tier 2	NF-1199	Lora Duncombe	Foundry	10	152	421	0.84	19.0%	19.2%	62.0%	96.1	53.5	– held
Tier 2	NF-1197	Kester Corwick	Dunmore	10	98	346	0.81	16.8%	17.5%	63.5%	100.6	53.3	▲ 3 → 2
Tier 2	NF-1077	Ilse Geldale	Dunmore	51	220	440	0.85	18.6%	18.9%	60.5%	103.0	53.2	– held
Tier 2	NF-1005	Halden Pellford	Aurora	59	204	581	0.88	21.9%	21.7%	55.9%	103.4	53.2	▲ 3 → 2
Tier 2	NF-1004	Mira Jorcroft	Foundry	63	111	370	0.82	20.8%	20.8%	57.4%	103.0	53.1	– held
Tier 2	NF-1090	Kai Lanwick	Aurora	63	120	316	0.80	19.0%	19.3%	63.5%	86.9	52.9	– held
Tier 2	NF-1255	Bree Osterridge	Dunmore	0	16	16	0.17	25.0%	21.2%	59.3%	90.6	52.7	new
Tier 2	NF-1070	Gil Farmere	Eastwick	68	81	315	0.80	22.2%	21.9%	57.4%	93.1	52.5	▲ 3 → 2
Tier 2	NF-1112	Aris Fencombe	Eastwick	59	224	526	0.87	19.0%	19.2%	58.9%	103.0	52.2	– held
Tier 2	NF-1243	Ilse Draygate	Aurora	1	55	66	0.45	25.8%	22.9%	56.3%	89.9	52.2	▲ 3 → 2
Tier 2	NF-1149	Cyra Quenholt	Cypress	38	199	500	0.86	16.2%	16.8%	60.5%	111.9	52.1	▲ 3 → 2
Tier 3	NF-1032	Calla Yardale dead band	Cypress	29	135	510	0.86	18.8%	19.1%	55.9%	114.7	51.9	– held
Tier 2	NF-1024	Mott Draydale	Eastwick	39	23	324	0.80	18.2%	18.7%	59.9%	99.9	51.6	– held
Tier 3	NF-1192	Gil Fenrick dead band	Eastwick	10	194	393	0.83	21.4%	21.2%	55.9%	99.2	51.5	– held
Tier 3	NF-1204	Yara Ashley dead band	Dunmore	9	129	438	0.85	21.0%	20.9%	55.9%	100.8	51.5	– held
Tier 2	NF-1146	Adair Brenholt	Aurora	40	214	418	0.84	17.0%	17.5%	58.9%	110.0	51.4	– held
Tier 3	NF-1142	Edda Vandstead dead band	Foundry	59	245	489	0.86	24.7%	24.1%	55.9%	79.7	51.4	– held
Tier 3	NF-1037	Kai Osterlyn dead band	Eastwick	52	208	540	0.87	22.4%	22.2%	57.4%	85.7	51.2	– held
Tier 3	NF-1202	Doran Vandhurst dead band	Eastwick	9	190	406	0.84	21.7%	21.5%	54.4%	102.2	51.2	– held
Tier 2	NF-1251	Ivo Brenley	Eastwick	0	14	14	0.15	14.3%	19.6%	56.9%	103.4	51.0	new
Tier 2	NF-1136	Dov Kellborne	Foundry	62	128	315	0.80	21.9%	21.6%	57.4%	87.6	50.9	– held
Tier 3	NF-1064	Kai Yarlyn dead band	Basalt	40	144	463	0.85	18.6%	18.9%	58.9%	99.2	50.9	– held
Tier 2	NF-1158	Gwen Caldstan	Aurora	54	206	465	0.85	22.6%	22.3%	51.4%	107.7	50.8	– held
Tier 3	NF-1001	Aris Ravfield dead band	Cypress	78	133	360	0.82	16.1%	16.9%	58.3%	113.8	50.8	– held
Tier 3	NF-1227	Gil Normarsh dead band	Cypress	5	137	409	0.84	23.0%	22.6%	52.2%	102.3	50.7	– held
Tier 3	NF-1138	Kai Draydale dead band	Foundry	33	142	408	0.84	17.2%	17.7%	54.4%	123.8	50.5	– held
Tier 2	NF-1002	Dov Torholt	Aurora	76	218	514	0.87	24.3%	23.8%	52.9%	90.2	50.5	– held
Tier 2	NF-1208	Quill Brenwick dead band	Foundry	8	112	440	0.85	18.6%	18.9%	57.4%	102.6	50.3	– held
Tier 3	NF-1233	Finn Dunrick	Cypress	4	169	353	0.82	22.1%	21.8%	54.8%	93.2	50.0	– held
Tier 3	NF-1103	Cyra Corvale	Aurora	74	132	372	0.82	21.2%	21.1%	54.4%	98.5	49.8	– held
Tier 3	NF-1254	Hale Ellcombe	Cypress	0	13	13	0.14	15.4%	19.8%	56.9%	96.6	49.8	new
Tier 3	NF-1015	Wren Harrick	Eastwick	37	101	403	0.83	17.9%	18.3%	62.0%	85.4	49.7	– held
Tier 3	NF-1152	Gil Norlyn	Cypress	42	144	473	0.86	19.7%	19.8%	54.4%	106.1	49.6	– held
Tier 3	NF-1247	Gwen Jorridge	Dunmore	0	12	12	0.13	16.7%	20.0%	56.9%	93.8	49.4	new
Tier 3	NF-1117	Yara Quenborne	Dunmore	24	116	298	0.79	19.1%	19.4%	58.3%	91.3	49.3	▲ 4 → 3
Tier 2	NF-1115	Lora Normarsh dead band	Aurora	57	140	312	0.80	14.4%	15.7%	55.2%	127.8	49.3	– held
Tier 3	NF-1049	Elin Draystan	Basalt	46	203	321	0.80	17.4%	18.1%	59.9%	93.1	49.1	– held
Tier 2	NF-1130	Adair Yarstead dead band	Eastwick	39	113	438	0.85	17.8%	18.2%	60.5%	89.4	49.1	– held
Tier 2	NF-1244	Sten Lanmere dead band	Eastwick	1	64	70	0.47	12.9%	16.9%	57.6%	109.1	49.0	– held
Tier 2	NF-1033	Nils Lancroft dead band	Cypress	41	138	432	0.84	16.2%	16.9%	60.5%	97.4	49.0	– held
Tier 3	NF-1211	Orin Pellcroft	Aurora	7	216	525	0.87	20.6%	20.6%	55.9%	91.8	48.9	– held
Tier 3	NF-1106	Adair Dunlyn	Eastwick	59	118	417	0.84	21.6%	21.4%	52.9%	98.6	48.9	– held
Tier 3	NF-1124	Quill Ashvale	Basalt	29	158	440	0.85	21.4%	21.2%	52.9%	99.6	48.8	– held
Tier 3	NF-1207	Pell Barthorpe	Foundry	8	169	520	0.87	23.7%	23.2%	52.9%	86.6	48.8	– held
Tier 3	NF-1249	Sten Embcroft	Dunmore	0	5	5	0.06	0.0%	19.3%	55.9%	99.7	48.8	new
Tier 3	NF-1038	Nadia Ashhurst	Cypress	35	199	508	0.86	17.9%	18.3%	58.9%	93.4	48.7	– held
Tier 3	NF-1253	Cyra Ravridge	Foundry	0	8	8	0.09	12.5%	19.8%	55.9%	95.5	48.5	new
Tier 3	NF-1147	Adair Quenmarsh	Dunmore	30	203	483	0.86	17.2%	17.7%	58.9%	94.6	48.1	– held
Tier 3	NF-1250	Kester Norcombe	Foundry	0	12	12	0.13	8.3%	18.9%	55.6%	100.1	48.0	new
Tier 3	NF-1195	Finn Selstead	Foundry	10	142	354	0.82	22.0%	21.8%	52.9%	92.2	47.9	– held
Tier 3	NF-1056	Linnea Ellmere	Foundry	50	212	551	0.87	16.7%	17.2%	58.9%	95.1	47.5	– held
Tier 3	NF-1144	Kester Wendcombe	Dunmore	45	82	238	0.75	20.6%	20.6%	54.4%	91.4	47.4	– held
Tier 3	NF-1239	Kai Ravley	Basalt	2	97	170	0.68	19.4%	19.8%	54.7%	95.1	47.4	– held
Tier 3	NF-1096	Rhea Ellrick	Basalt	60	200	409	0.84	20.5%	20.5%	52.9%	97.1	47.2	– held
Tier 3	NF-1252	Vera Barcroft	Dunmore	0	18	18	0.18	11.1%	18.8%	56.6%	93.0	47.2	new
Tier 3	NF-1069	Halden Torgate	Foundry	72	95	304	0.79	14.8%	16.0%	51.4%	132.4	47.1	– held
Tier 3	NF-1098	Gwen Farmarsh	Basalt	58	77	329	0.80	17.6%	18.2%	54.4%	105.4	47.1	▼ 2 → 3
Tier 3	NF-1219	Gil Garthorpe	Dunmore	6	155	447	0.85	20.8%	20.8%	52.9%	94.2	46.9	– held
Tier 3	NF-1222	Bex Pellvale	Cypress	5	204	431	0.84	18.1%	18.5%	53.7%	105.4	46.9	– held
Tier 3	NF-1140	Gil Quenmarsh	Eastwick	57	110	387	0.83	21.2%	21.1%	51.4%	97.7	46.8	– held
Tier 3	NF-1087	Tova Jorridge	Eastwick	45	181	464	0.85	15.5%	16.2%	57.4%	103.7	46.7	– held
Tier 3	NF-1023	Orin Harthorpe	Dunmore	34	113	372	0.82	22.6%	22.2%	49.8%	95.8	46.6	▲ 4 → 3
Tier 3	NF-1175	Vera Yarhurst	Eastwick	13	200	554	0.87	18.1%	18.4%	55.9%	95.6	46.5	▼ 2 → 3
Tier 3	NF-1224	Nils Yargate	Basalt	5	179	420	0.84	18.3%	18.7%	54.5%	99.0	46.5	– held
Tier 3	NF-1193	Mott Harborne	Basalt	10	146	287	0.78	14.6%	15.9%	57.4%	104.8	46.4	– held
Tier 3	NF-1068	Rhea Quenstan	Foundry	67	247	562	0.88	22.4%	22.2%	51.4%	88.3	46.2	▲ 4 → 3
Tier 3	NF-1156	Linnea Wendthorpe	Basalt	43	144	389	0.83	13.9%	15.0%	57.4%	109.4	46.2	– held
Tier 3	NF-1246	Ilse Wendhurst	Eastwick	0	15	15	0.16	0.0%	17.3%	55.9%	99.7	45.8	new
Tier 3	NF-1060	Zane Ellridge	Foundry	60	122	453	0.85	18.8%	19.0%	51.4%	106.5	45.8	– held
Tier 3	NF-1141	Nils Brenborne	Cypress	48	110	324	0.80	18.5%	18.9%	51.4%	106.5	45.6	– held
Tier 3	NF-1050	Edda Harmere	Eastwick	35	84	398	0.83	15.6%	16.4%	54.4%	110.0	45.5	– held
Tier 3	NF-1173	Orin Selthorpe	Foundry	14	189	520	0.87	16.3%	16.9%	57.4%	93.7	45.4	▼ 2 → 3
Tier 3	NF-1119	Lora Ellmarsh	Cypress	46	153	532	0.87	15.4%	16.1%	55.9%	104.2	45.1	▲ 4 → 3
Tier 3	NF-1150	Calla Farhurst	Basalt	76	98	262	0.77	17.6%	18.2%	52.2%	105.4	45.1	▲ 4 → 3
Tier 3	NF-1020	Uli Dunhurst	Dunmore	25	105	408	0.84	19.6%	19.8%	52.9%	92.4	45.0	– held
Tier 3	NF-1079	Cyra Dunthorpe	Aurora	42	151	530	0.87	13.6%	14.5%	58.9%	101.6	45.0	▲ 4 → 3
Tier 3	NF-1086	Tova Harridge	Foundry	29	169	415	0.84	16.1%	16.8%	58.9%	86.2	45.0	▲ 4 → 3
Tier 3	NF-1100	Aris Wendford	Eastwick	53	150	518	0.87	17.0%	17.5%	54.4%	100.2	44.9	– held
Tier 3	NF-1248	Cyra Hardale	Basalt	0	15	15	0.16	0.0%	17.3%	54.5%	99.7	44.6	new
Tier 3	NF-1166	Linnea Harmere	Foundry	16	123	383	0.83	14.1%	15.2%	52.9%	117.2	44.0	– held
Tier 3	NF-1242	Doran Farford	Foundry	1	44	56	0.41	17.9%	19.4%	53.0%	89.5	44.0	– held
Tier 3	NF-1163	Hale Torford	Basalt	61	176	361	0.82	15.0%	16.0%	55.9%	98.8	43.8	– held
Tier 4	NF-1234	Juna Selcroft dead band	Cypress	3	112	293	0.79	15.7%	16.7%	51.6%	111.2	43.7	– held
Tier 4	NF-1094	Pell Jorgate dead band	Aurora	70	165	325	0.80	20.0%	20.1%	50.6%	93.4	43.7	– held
Tier 3	NF-1245	Osric Lanstan	Cypress	1	65	85	0.52	11.8%	16.0%	55.1%	101.1	43.6	– held
Tier 4	NF-1011	Hale Embcroft	Eastwick	54	163	343	0.81	17.5%	18.1%	52.9%	95.6	43.3	– held
Tier 3	NF-1153	Gil Caldmarsh dead band	Basalt	43	163	444	0.85	12.4%	13.6%	57.4%	104.8	43.1	– held
Tier 4	NF-1225	Yara Dunvale	Foundry	5	142	328	0.80	18.0%	18.5%	53.0%	91.5	43.1	– held
Tier 3	NF-1126	Kester Gelridge dead band	Dunmore	48	92	256	0.76	18.4%	18.9%	53.7%	85.7	43.0	– held
Tier 4	NF-1155	Uli Marlyn	Aurora	46	97	388	0.83	19.1%	19.3%	49.9%	96.0	42.4	– held
Tier 4	NF-1046	Gwen Vandgate	Foundry	73	153	424	0.84	13.0%	14.2%	52.9%	115.1	42.0	– held
Tier 4	NF-1206	Ilse Drayrick	Dunmore	8	143	474	0.86	12.4%	13.6%	60.5%	86.8	41.8	– held
Tier 4	NF-1044	Halden Fenfield	Foundry	50	83	275	0.77	18.2%	18.7%	49.9%	96.1	41.6	– held
Tier 4	NF-1111	Linnea Lanwick	Eastwick	50	138	373	0.82	15.8%	16.6%	54.4%	90.5	41.5	▼ 3 → 4
Tier 4	NF-1058	Ilse Vandstead	Cypress	66	63	433	0.84	17.8%	18.2%	52.9%	86.3	41.4	▼ 3 → 4
Tier 4	NF-1029	Osric Kelllyn	Aurora	45	171	519	0.87	14.1%	14.9%	57.4%	88.7	41.4	– held
Tier 4	NF-1034	Vera Selford	Aurora	37	147	388	0.83	14.7%	15.7%	51.4%	104.6	40.5	– held
Tier 4	NF-1200	Orin Vandwick	Dunmore	10	202	309	0.79	18.4%	18.9%	48.3%	96.6	40.5	– held
Tier 4	NF-1018	Finn Ostervale	Foundry	60	153	349	0.81	15.5%	16.4%	46.8%	116.8	40.1	– held
Tier 4	NF-1237	Kai Vandley	Dunmore	2	77	124	0.61	14.5%	16.9%	50.8%	97.0	39.9	▼ 3 → 4
Tier 4	NF-1047	Gwen Pellrick	Basalt	46	179	403	0.83	13.2%	14.4%	52.9%	104.3	39.9	– held
Tier 4	NF-1228	Linnea Marwick	Aurora	5	175	417	0.84	16.5%	17.2%	52.2%	87.4	39.5	– held
Tier 4	NF-1143	Calla Kellstan	Eastwick	24	104	411	0.84	10.9%	12.5%	52.9%	111.8	38.9	– held
Tier 4	NF-1135	Jem Garford	Cypress	74	121	420	0.84	12.9%	14.1%	55.9%	87.5	38.5	– held
Tier 4	NF-1066	Gil Barthorpe	Cypress	52	104	425	0.84	14.1%	15.1%	51.4%	98.5	38.3	– held
Tier 4	NF-1078	Kester Kellstan	Dunmore	40	166	316	0.80	13.6%	15.0%	50.6%	100.1	37.8	– held
Tier 4	NF-1240	Jem Corfield	Foundry	1	72	84	0.51	10.7%	15.5%	50.9%	90.6	36.5	▼ 3 → 4
Tier 4	NF-1169	Doran Garlyn	Dunmore	15	136	398	0.83	6.8%	9.1%	55.9%	106.4	35.4	– held
Tier 4	NF-1074	Mira Harlyn	Basalt	36	41	330	0.80	10.6%	12.5%	52.9%	89.5	33.9	– held
Tier 4	NF-1223	Juna Harstan	Eastwick	5	181	553	0.87	10.1%	11.4%	52.2%	96.6	33.2	– held

Window n is the trailing 3-cycle opportunity count behind the conversion metric; shrink weight is n / (n + 80), the share of the estimate the rep earned themselves. Raw conv is shown next to shrunk conv on purpose: the gap between those two columns is the model.

What this page answers: what the prior did to the ranking, where the number 80 came from, and whether the shrunk ranking actually holds up next cycle.

Where k = 80 came from · conversion rate
Route	Fitted floor rate	Fitted k	Notes
Moment estimator (beta-binomial)	20.93%	76.0	binomial noise is 37% of the measured spread in rep rates
Maximum likelihood (beta-binomial)	20.77%	73.9	alpha 15.4, beta 58.6, converged
Out-of-sample loss minimum	–	95	flat within 1% from k = 55 to 150 on 2,858 rep-cycle pairs
Shipped	–	80	the round value where the population fits and the loss basin overlap; costs 0.1% against the empirical minimum

The other two priors, fitted the same way and on their own units
Metric	Sample unit	Typical n	Fitted k	Shipped k	Method
Consistency	eligible weeks	26	37	40	split-half reliability 0.41 after the Spearman-Brown correction; the moment estimator is not usable here because the metric grades each week against the rep's own baseline
Quality-adjusted volume	closed deals	80	5.2	5	variance components: deal-to-deal variance 598 over between-rep variance 114

Prior strength is only interpretable next to the sample size it competes with. A prior of 40 weeks against a 24-week window means consistency is roughly two thirds floor and one third rep, which is a statement about the metric, not about the reps.

How to read the scatter: each rep is a hollow red circle at their raw rate and a filled circle at their shrunk estimate, joined by the correction. On the left, where the denominators are small, the corrections are long and almost always toward the floor. On the right they are barely visible. Nobody is being protected or penalized: the estimate simply tracks how much evidence exists.

Does the prior actually help? Next-cycle behavior of each selection
Selected as	Rep-cycles	Conversion in the selection cycle	Conversion the next cycle	Give-back
Tier 1 on raw rates	288	26.9%	25.8%	-1.1pp
Tier 1 after shrinkage	266	26.6%	25.9%	-0.8pp
Tier 4 on raw rates	373	15.1%	16.9%	+1.8pp
Tier 4 after shrinkage	394	15.9%	16.7%	+0.8pp
Thin-sample reps the raw board promoted to Tier 1	4	–	20.8%	–
The floor as a whole	1875	–	20.8%	–

Each row pools the selected reps' own conversions and opportunities in the cycle they were selected in, and again in the following cycle. The first four rows are the undramatic version: the raw-rate Tier 1 gives back 1.1 points of its apparent edge against the shrunk Tier 1's 0.8, and the raw-rate Tier 4 rebounds 1.8 points against the shrunk Tier 4's 0.8. Both ends of the raw board are further from the truth than they look, in both directions, which is the regression a prior exists to pre-empt. The two boards' pooled next-cycle levels are close, because they agree about most of the floor: the disagreement is concentrated at the thin end, and so is the damage. Over the reporting window the raw board put a rep whose window was smaller than the prior itself (under 80 opportunities) in Tier 1 on 6 occasions and in Tier 4 on 76. The shrunk board put one in Tier 1 on 0 occasions and in Tier 4 on 21. The fifth row is what those raw-board promotions were worth: the 4 of them with a following cycle converted at 20.8% in it, against the floor's 20.8%. They were never top performers. They were small samples, and a raw-rate board cannot tell the difference.

Where each board puts a thin sample · window under 80 opportunities, smaller than the prior itself
Tier	Raw-rate board	Shrunk board	Shrunk minus raw
Tier 1	6	0	-6
Tier 2	20	17	-3
Tier 3	21	85	+64
Tier 4	76	21	-55

Counted in rep-cycles across the reporting window. The middle rows are the mechanism, not an error: a rep with almost no denominator belongs near the middle of the board until they produce one. The raw board is confident about reps it has almost no evidence on, and it is confident in both directions. The shrunk board holds them near the floor until they produce a denominator, which is not leniency: it is the only defensible reading of eight opportunities.

Largest ranking corrections, 2026-07
ID	Rep	Window n	Raw conv	Shrunk conv	Naive rank	Model rank	Move	Naive tier → shipped tier
NF-1255	Bree Osterridge	16	25.0%	21.2%	7	77	-70	Tier 1 → Tier 2
NF-1249	Sten Embcroft	5	0.0%	19.3%	180	115	+65	Tier 4 → Tier 3
NF-1253	Cyra Ravridge	8	12.5%	19.8%	177	117	+60	Tier 4 → Tier 3
NF-1247	Gwen Jorridge	12	16.7%	20.0%	163	104	+59	Tier 4 → Tier 3
NF-1254	Hale Ellcombe	13	15.4%	19.8%	160	101	+59	Tier 4 → Tier 3
NF-1250	Kester Norcombe	12	8.3%	18.9%	175	119	+56	Tier 4 → Tier 3
NF-1251	Ivo Brenley	14	14.3%	19.6%	139	90	+49	Tier 3 → Tier 2
NF-1252	Vera Barcroft	18	11.1%	18.8%	174	125	+49	Tier 4 → Tier 3
NF-1246	Ilse Wendhurst	15	0.0%	17.3%	178	138	+40	Tier 4 → Tier 3
NF-1248	Cyra Hardale	15	0.0%	17.3%	179	149	+30	Tier 4 → Tier 3
NF-1069	Halden Torgate	304	14.8%	16.0%	106	126	-20	Tier 3 → Tier 3
NF-1242	Doran Farford	56	17.9%	19.4%	170	151	+19	Tier 4 → Tier 3

A positive move means the naive ranking had the rep too high. Every large correction is a thin denominator: that is the whole mechanism, and it is why the correction list is also the list of reps a manager would otherwise have promoted on a lucky quarter.

What this page answers: why every rep who moved, moved. The gate does not let the cycle ship goals until this page has zero unexplained rows.

Cycle by cycle · every transition in the reporting window
Cycle	Rated	Tier changes	Share	Floor-driven	Floor-assisted	Entered	Exited	Offsetting	Order-sensitive
2025-09	172	28	16%	1	4	10	8	0	3
2025-10	173	45	26%	0	1	4	3	1	3
2025-11 re-baseline	174	32	18%	1	1	3	2	5	13
2025-12	174	28	16%	0	0	7	7	4	5
2026-01	176	33	19%	2	1	6	4	5	10
2026-02 re-baseline	177	34	19%	1	0	7	6	14	28
2026-03	177	34	19%	1	6	5	5	1	4
2026-04	179	31	17%	5	5	3	1	4	6
2026-05 re-baseline	178	32	18%	0	0	3	4	19	32
2026-06	179	35	20%	6	7	6	5	0	1
2026-07	180	33	18%	2	7	10	9	3	8

Floor-driven means the tier change happens even if the rep had moved exactly as the floor moved. Floor-assisted means it disappears once the floor's own move is stripped out of the rep's numbers. Offsetting means two causes moved the rep in opposite directions and the net tier did not change; those are not counted as tier changes but they are audited. Order-sensitive means the primary cause depends on the order the inputs are walked in, which is a property of any path decomposition and is printed rather than hidden.

Case study: the 2026-03 lead-routing change

Between the 2026-02 and 2026-04 cycles the floor's own conversion rate fell from 21.61% to 19.45%, a -10.0% decline, on a lead-routing change. Nobody on the floor changed how they work.

Held against a calibration frozen at 2026-02, the mean composite fell 1.7 points and the Tier 4 population went from 36 reps to 46. Across those cycles the audit classified 17 tier changes as floor-driven or floor-assisted: changes that would not have happened, or would have happened anyway, purely because of where the floor went.

This is the case the audit exists for. Without it, 10 additional reps go on a performance plan for a routing decision, and the next re-baseline quietly hides the evidence. With it, the cycle review opens with the routing change instead of with the reps, and the 2026-05 re-baseline is a documented response rather than a silent reset.

Every tier change in 2026-07, with its cause and its evidence
ID	Rep	Team	Tier	Score	Primary cause	Class	Dominant metric	Raw conv	Window n	Full attribution chain
NF-1000	Zane Pellford	Eastwick	Tier 2 → Tier 1	58.5 → 60.2	metric delta	floor assisted	consistency	24.0% → 24.5%	429 → 465	metric delta (2→1)
NF-1003	Adair Cormarsh	Foundry	Tier 2 → Tier 1	53.1 → 60.6	metric delta	floor assisted	conversion rate	27.0% → 30.4%	382 → 368	metric delta (2→1)
NF-1005	Halden Pellford	Aurora	Tier 3 → Tier 2	51.2 → 53.2	metric delta	floor shift	consistency	21.3% → 21.9%	541 → 581	metric delta (3→2)
NF-1023	Orin Harthorpe	Dunmore	Tier 4 → Tier 3	43.9 → 46.6	metric delta	individual	conversion rate	20.2% → 22.6%	272 → 372	metric delta (4→3)
NF-1039	Edda Zelstan	Basalt	Tier 3 → Tier 2	49.4 → 54.8	metric delta	individual	conversion rate	17.0% → 20.1%	411 → 383	metric delta (3→2)
NF-1048	Gwen Torgate	Cypress	Tier 3 → Tier 2	49.8 → 57.4	metric delta	individual	consistency	14.6% → 17.2%	583 → 524	metric delta (3→2)
NF-1068	Rhea Quenstan	Foundry	Tier 4 → Tier 3	40.9 → 46.2	metric delta	individual	conversion rate	18.5% → 22.4%	513 → 562	metric delta (4→3)
NF-1070	Gil Farmere	Eastwick	Tier 3 → Tier 2	49.7 → 52.5	metric delta	floor assisted	consistency	22.6% → 22.2%	433 → 315	metric delta (3→2)
NF-1079	Cyra Dunthorpe	Aurora	Tier 4 → Tier 3	38.5 → 45.0	shrinkage effect (floor prior drift) order-sensitive	individual	consistency	12.1% → 13.6%	528 → 530	shrinkage effect (floor prior drift) (4→3)
NF-1085	Orin Marhurst	Dunmore	Tier 3 → Tier 2	47.7 → 58.3	metric delta	individual	conversion rate	15.9% → 21.3%	296 → 296	metric delta (3→2)
NF-1086	Tova Harridge	Foundry	Tier 4 → Tier 3	43.0 → 45.0	shrinkage effect (floor prior drift) order-sensitive	individual	consistency	15.7% → 16.1%	415 → 415	shrinkage effect (floor prior drift) (4→3)
NF-1117	Yara Quenborne	Dunmore	Tier 4 → Tier 3	39.3 → 49.3	metric delta	individual	conversion rate	12.9% → 19.1%	302 → 298	metric delta (4→3)
NF-1118	Edda Embdale	Eastwick	Tier 3 → Tier 2	49.0 → 56.3	metric delta	individual	conversion rate	23.3% → 26.3%	430 → 407	metric delta (3→2)
NF-1119	Lora Ellmarsh	Cypress	Tier 4 → Tier 3	43.5 → 45.1	metric delta	floor assisted	consistency	15.5% → 15.4%	592 → 532	metric delta (4→3)
NF-1139	Adair Norcroft	Basalt	Tier 3 → Tier 2	51.3 → 55.1	metric delta	individual	conversion rate	17.0% → 23.6%	383 → 326	metric delta (3→2)
NF-1145	Gil Vandlyn	Cypress	Tier 2 → Tier 1	54.4 → 60.0	metric delta	floor assisted	conversion rate	19.2% → 22.2%	396 → 424	metric delta (2→1)
NF-1149	Cyra Quenholt	Cypress	Tier 3 → Tier 2	49.8 → 52.1	metric delta	floor assisted	consistency	15.6% → 16.2%	454 → 500	metric delta (3→2)
NF-1150	Calla Farhurst	Basalt	Tier 4 → Tier 3	44.5 → 45.1	metric delta	floor shift	quality-adjusted volume	17.4% → 17.6%	247 → 262	metric delta (4→3) → shrinkage effect (3→4) → shrinkage effect (floor prior drift) (4→3)
NF-1197	Kester Corwick	Dunmore	Tier 3 → Tier 2	49.3 → 53.3	metric delta	individual	conversion rate	13.2% → 16.8%	387 → 346	metric delta (3→2)
NF-1203	Cyra Osterdale	Cypress	Tier 2 → Tier 1	56.8 → 60.8	metric delta	individual	consistency	23.4% → 24.1%	368 → 341	metric delta (2→1)
NF-1229	Uli Torley	Cypress	Tier 3 → Tier 2	50.7 → 57.9	metric delta	individual	conversion rate	21.1% → 25.2%	270 → 448	metric delta (3→2)
NF-1238	Jem Corstan	Basalt	Tier 3 → Tier 2	51.2 → 54.2	metric delta order-sensitive	floor assisted	consistency	23.4% → 26.3%	47 → 118	metric delta (3→2)
NF-1243	Ilse Draygate	Aurora	Tier 3 → Tier 2	47.5 → 52.2	shrinkage effect (floor prior drift) order-sensitive	individual	consistency	18.2% → 25.8%	11 → 66	shrinkage effect (floor prior drift) (3→2)
NF-1035	Tova Gelmere	Cypress	Tier 1 → Tier 2	61.4 → 56.7	metric delta	individual	consistency	23.4% → 23.0%	440 → 383	metric delta (1→2)
NF-1058	Ilse Vandstead	Cypress	Tier 3 → Tier 4	45.3 → 41.4	metric delta	individual	consistency	18.0% → 17.8%	590 → 433	metric delta (3→4)
NF-1092	Gwen Vandley	Basalt	Tier 1 → Tier 2	59.8 → 55.8	metric delta	individual	consistency	21.1% → 21.6%	569 → 403	metric delta (1→2)
NF-1098	Gwen Farmarsh	Basalt	Tier 2 → Tier 3	52.0 → 47.1	metric delta	individual	consistency	19.5% → 17.6%	369 → 329	metric delta (2→3)
NF-1111	Linnea Lanwick	Eastwick	Tier 3 → Tier 4	42.4 → 41.5	metric delta	individual	conversion rate	17.6% → 15.8%	483 → 373	metric delta (3→4)
NF-1172	Finn Quendale	Cypress	Tier 1 → Tier 2	57.0 → 56.5	metric delta	individual	consistency	22.7% → 23.3%	348 → 331	metric delta (1→2)
NF-1173	Orin Selthorpe	Foundry	Tier 2 → Tier 3	49.1 → 45.4	metric delta	individual	conversion rate	18.1% → 16.4%	514 → 520	metric delta (2→3)
NF-1175	Vera Yarhurst	Eastwick	Tier 2 → Tier 3	52.4 → 46.5	metric delta	individual	conversion rate	20.4% → 18.1%	421 → 554	metric delta (2→3)
NF-1237	Kai Vandley	Dunmore	Tier 3 → Tier 4	43.8 → 39.9	shrinkage effect	individual	quality-adjusted volume	10.6% → 14.5%	47 → 124	shrinkage effect (3→4)
NF-1240	Jem Corfield	Foundry	Tier 3 → Tier 4	49.0 → 36.5	shrinkage effect order-sensitive	individual	consistency	25.0% → 10.7%	12 → 84	shrinkage effect (3→4)

Manual overrides on file
Cycle	ID	Rep	Model tier → tier of record	Recorded reason
2026-02	NF-1042	Sten Jorborne	Tier 1 → Tier 2	territory transfer mid-cycle, book handed over on day 9
2026-05	NF-1119	Lora Ellmarsh	Tier 4 → Tier 3	documented coaching plan, tier held for one cycle by agreement
2026-07	NF-1007	Vera Harmarsh	Tier 2 → Tier 2	medical leave proration, partial cycle not scored on volume

An override is not a failure of the model, it is the part of the process that knows things the model does not. It fails the gate only when it arrives without a reason, or when a tier of record appears that the override log does not contain. The override lapses after its cycle and the tier of record snaps back to the model, which the audit records as its own cause.

What this page answers: what each rep is asked to do next cycle, where the number came from, and what changed since last cycle.

Ship gate passed. Goals are written only after the mover audit closes at zero unexplained changes and the tier replay reproduces the shipped board. In the production analog this is a hard stop in the build, not a checklist item: audit.enforce(gate) raises and the goal sheet is never written.

The goal ladder · stretch above the rep's own shrunk baseline
Version	T1 conv	T2 conv	T3 conv	T4 conv	T4 consistency	T4 QAV	Attainment	Floor-adjusted	Why
v1 (2025-08)	+0.4pp	+1.0pp	+1.7pp	+2.6pp	+7.0pp	+3.6	39.3%	38.2%	opening ladder, set from the 2025-08 calibration
v2 (2026-02)	+0.2pp	+0.5pp	+0.8pp	+1.2pp	+3.0pp	+1.6	39.0%	40.8%	cut after Q3-Q4 attainment came in under 45% for Tier 3 and Tier 4

Attainment is the share of goals cleared in the cycle the goal applied to, measured on that month's own conversion rate. The floor-adjusted column moves each target by however much the floor itself moved between the cycle the goal was set in and the cycle it was graded in. The two columns disagree because the v2 ladder ran straight into the routing change: raw attainment says the re-baseline did nothing, adjusted attainment says it recovered about three points. Same confound as the mover audit, showing up in the goal process.

Attainment by tier · an open problem, printed rather than smoothed
Tier	Rep-cycles graded	Goal cleared	Current stretch
Tier 1	284	47.5%	+0.2pp
Tier 2	639	42.3%	+0.5pp
Tier 3	679	37.6%	+0.8pp
Tier 4	437	31.8%	+1.2pp

Tier 1 clears its goal 48% of the time and Tier 4 clears its goal 32% of the time. Either the Tier 4 stretch is steeper than a single cycle can deliver, or the tier is being asked to close a gap that needs coaching rather than a number. That is the next re-baseline's question. A goal ladder that nobody checks against attainment is a wish list.

Goal changes by cause, all cycles
Cause	Goal changes	Share
baseline move	1,875	100%
tier change	364	19%
cap binding	292	16%
ladder re-baseline	170	9%
new goal	64	3%

Every goal change in the reporting window resolves to one of these, because the goal is a function of exactly these inputs. A goal that moved for any other reason is an unexplained goal, and unexplained goals block the cycle.

Goal sheet for 2026-08 · set from the 2026-07 cycle
Tier	ID	Rep	Team	Shrunk baseline	Conversion goal	Consistency goal	QAV goal	Change vs last cycle	Cause of the change
Tier 1	NF-1031	Ivo Vandcroft	Eastwick	32.5%	30.9% capped	66%	104.1	+3.0pp	baseline move, cap binding
Tier 1	NF-1081	Wren Duncroft	Foundry	29.4%	29.6%	58%	77.2	-0.5pp	baseline move
Tier 1	NF-1125	Kester Torhurst	Aurora	29.0%	29.2%	56%	109.7	-0.4pp	baseline move
Tier 1	NF-1003	Adair Cormarsh	Foundry	28.7%	28.9%	58%	85.4	+2.7pp	baseline move, tier change
Tier 1	NF-1062	Dov Osterford	Foundry	28.6%	28.8%	58%	105.5	+0.4pp	baseline move
Tier 1	NF-1148	Osric Emblyn	Cypress	27.8%	28.0%	63%	97.5	-0.6pp	baseline move
Tier 1	NF-1042	Sten Jorborne	Foundry	27.8%	27.8% capped	64%	121.2	+3.0pp	baseline move, cap binding
Tier 1	NF-1209	Linnea Ostermarsh	Dunmore	27.9%	27.6% capped	61%	110.5	+3.0pp	baseline move, cap binding
Tier 1	NF-1186	Gwen Embgate	Aurora	27.3%	27.5% capped	62%	86.0	+2.3pp	baseline move, cap binding
Tier 1	NF-1043	Zane Torwick	Foundry	27.2%	27.4% capped	69%	96.2	+1.0pp	baseline move, cap binding
Tier 1	NF-1072	Edda Torlyn	Dunmore	26.7%	26.9%	69%	93.6	-1.7pp	baseline move
Tier 1	NF-1101	Osric Yarhurst	Basalt	26.6%	26.8%	58%	90.2	-0.5pp	baseline move
Tier 1	NF-1196	Mira Dunstead	Foundry	26.6%	26.8%	64%	108.1	+0.0pp	baseline move
Tier 1	NF-1154	Bree Hardale	Eastwick	25.7%	25.9%	66%	90.3	-1.1pp	baseline move
Tier 1	NF-1191	Finn Ashdale	Dunmore	25.3%	25.5%	66%	97.2	+0.1pp	baseline move
Tier 1	NF-1120	Wren Fardale	Basalt	25.2%	25.4%	58%	107.9	-0.9pp	baseline move
Tier 1	NF-1198	Zane Fencroft	Dunmore	25.1%	25.3%	62%	104.9	+1.3pp	baseline move
Tier 1	NF-1102	Doran Ellwick	Aurora	24.8%	25.0%	66%	83.7	+0.6pp	baseline move
Tier 1	NF-1180	Zane Osterdale	Eastwick	24.1%	24.3%	59%	117.4	+1.4pp	baseline move
Tier 1	NF-1013	Uli Torford	Foundry	24.0%	24.2%	64%	86.1	+1.4pp	baseline move
Tier 1	NF-1215	Ilse Farstan	Basalt	24.0%	24.2%	67%	98.1	+2.4pp	baseline move
Tier 1	NF-1000	Zane Pellford	Eastwick	23.9%	24.1%	62%	95.8	+0.2pp	baseline move, tier change
Tier 1	NF-1203	Cyra Osterdale	Cypress	23.4%	23.6%	62%	102.0	+0.3pp	baseline move, tier change
Tier 1	NF-1133	Vera Pellgate	Dunmore	23.0%	23.2%	62%	101.2	+0.8pp	baseline move
Tier 1	NF-1162	Vera Fenwick	Foundry	22.7%	22.9%	66%	116.4	+1.2pp	baseline move
Tier 1	NF-1027	Hale Torcombe	Dunmore	22.2%	22.4%	59%	111.6	-0.5pp	baseline move
Tier 1	NF-1121	Calla Caldwick	Cypress	22.1%	22.4%	61%	105.5	-0.4pp	baseline move
Tier 1	NF-1145	Gil Vandlyn	Cypress	21.9%	22.1%	64%	101.6	+2.3pp	baseline move, tier change
Tier 1	NF-1159	Doran Selgate	Foundry	21.0%	21.2%	66%	109.4	-0.3pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1040	Juna Embley	Foundry	28.7%	29.2%	55%	76.1	+2.2pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1026	Linnea Quenridge	Eastwick	28.3%	28.8%	54%	94.2	+1.1pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1217	Tova Dunborne	Dunmore	27.6%	28.1%	57%	86.4	+2.4pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1168	Halden Torridge	Eastwick	27.1%	27.5%	56%	103.0	+1.1pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1030	Ivo Gelgate	Basalt	26.4%	26.9%	57%	97.4	+2.0pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1118	Edda Embdale	Eastwick	25.3%	25.8%	59%	88.3	+2.3pp	baseline move, tier change
Tier 2	NF-1071	Hale Norholt	Eastwick	25.0%	25.5%	57%	92.4	+1.0pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1116	Cyra Ellvale	Foundry	25.0%	25.5%	54%	105.0	+1.6pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1093	Jem Jormarsh	Eastwick	24.9%	25.4%	54%	106.8	-1.8pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1176	Cyra Yarvale	Dunmore	24.7%	25.2%	54%	102.5	+1.6pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1019	Aris Harwick	Basalt	24.5%	25.0%	57%	104.5	+1.3pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1177	Calla Ellwick	Cypress	24.5%	25.0%	63%	83.6	+1.0pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1229	Uli Torley	Cypress	24.5%	24.6% capped	60%	93.8	+3.0pp	baseline move, tier change, cap binding
Tier 2	NF-1028	Mira Ravley	Dunmore	23.9%	24.4%	60%	97.5	+1.0pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1238	Jem Corstan	Basalt	23.9%	24.4%	58%	91.2	+2.4pp	baseline move, tier change
Tier 2	NF-1002	Dov Torholt	Aurora	23.8%	24.3%	54%	90.9	+1.3pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1221	Rhea Yarstead	Foundry	23.2%	23.7%	60%	95.6	-1.1pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1243	Ilse Draygate	Aurora	22.9%	23.4% capped	58%	93.7	+2.9pp	baseline move, tier change, cap binding
Tier 2	NF-1172	Finn Quendale	Cypress	22.7%	23.2%	59%	105.9	+0.8pp	baseline move, tier change
Tier 2	NF-1035	Tova Gelmere	Cypress	22.6%	23.0%	61%	98.3	-0.1pp	baseline move, tier change
Tier 2	NF-1158	Gwen Caldstan	Aurora	22.3%	22.8% capped	55%	108.4	+0.3pp	baseline move, cap binding
Tier 2	NF-1095	Kai Ashgate	Foundry	22.1%	22.6%	60%	99.5	+0.2pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1131	Aris Ravborne	Eastwick	22.1%	22.6%	65%	88.3	+2.1pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1236	Kai Marhurst	Aurora	22.1%	22.6% capped	57%	107.1	+3.0pp	baseline move, cap binding
Tier 2	NF-1070	Gil Farmere	Eastwick	21.9%	22.4%	59%	93.8	-0.6pp	baseline move, tier change
Tier 2	NF-1005	Halden Pellford	Aurora	21.7%	22.2%	57%	104.1	+0.3pp	baseline move, tier change
Tier 2	NF-1012	Mott Brenholt	Aurora	21.6%	22.1%	68%	76.6	-1.3pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1136	Dov Kellborne	Foundry	21.6%	22.1%	59%	88.3	-2.0pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1157	Calla Vandcroft	Aurora	21.4%	22.0%	59%	105.0	-1.8pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1092	Gwen Vandley	Basalt	21.4%	21.9%	62%	99.0	+0.8pp	baseline move, tier change
Tier 2	NF-1216	Edda Corcroft	Eastwick	21.3%	21.8%	62%	102.9	-0.5pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1255	Bree Osterridge	Dunmore	21.2%	21.7%	60%	91.3	held	new goal
Tier 2	NF-1004	Mira Jorcroft	Foundry	20.8%	21.3%	59%	103.7	-1.1pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1091	Juna Zelfield	Dunmore	20.8%	21.3%	62%	101.5	+1.2pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1139	Adair Norcroft	Basalt	23.0%	21.3% capped	53%	122.9	+3.0pp	baseline move, tier change, cap binding
Tier 2	NF-1151	Orin Caldstan	Foundry	20.8%	21.3%	62%	109.6	+0.9pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1021	Halden Corcroft	Aurora	20.4%	20.9% capped	63%	111.4	+1.6pp	baseline move, cap binding
Tier 2	NF-1039	Edda Zelstan	Basalt	20.2%	20.7%	60%	108.8	+2.4pp	baseline move, tier change
Tier 2	NF-1085	Orin Marhurst	Dunmore	21.1%	20.5% capped	57%	130.4	+3.0pp	baseline move, tier change, cap binding
Tier 2	NF-1251	Ivo Brenley	Eastwick	19.6%	20.1%	58%	104.1	held	new goal
Tier 2	NF-1160	Elin Normarsh	Basalt	19.4%	19.9%	63%	116.7	+0.7pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1090	Kai Lanwick	Aurora	19.3%	19.8%	65%	87.6	+0.1pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1235	Elin Harlyn	Basalt	19.3%	19.8%	63%	117.4	-0.6pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1112	Aris Fencombe	Eastwick	19.2%	19.7%	60%	103.7	+0.0pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1199	Lora Duncombe	Foundry	19.2%	19.7% capped	63%	98.4	-0.1pp	baseline move, cap binding
Tier 2	NF-1007	Vera Harmarsh	Aurora	19.1%	19.6%	62%	111.0	+1.8pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1077	Ilse Geldale	Dunmore	18.9%	19.4%	62%	103.7	+0.3pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1083	Dov Marlyn	Aurora	18.9%	19.4%	60%	124.5	+0.8pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1208	Quill Brenwick	Foundry	18.9%	19.4%	59%	103.3	-1.8pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1024	Mott Draydale	Eastwick	18.7%	19.2%	61%	100.6	-1.2pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1230	Mott Jorholt	Eastwick	18.3%	18.8%	65%	112.1	+1.6pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1130	Adair Yarstead	Eastwick	18.2%	18.7%	62%	90.1	-0.8pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1059	Vera Farlyn	Foundry	18.0%	18.5%	62%	111.1	+1.0pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1181	Hale Kellvale	Cypress	18.0%	18.5%	68%	97.0	-0.1pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1006	Ilse Harlyn	Eastwick	17.8%	18.3%	60%	126.3	+0.2pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1048	Gwen Torgate	Cypress	17.6%	18.1%	69%	99.8	+2.1pp	baseline move, tier change
Tier 2	NF-1146	Adair Brenholt	Aurora	17.5%	18.0% capped	60%	110.8	-1.5pp	baseline move, cap binding
Tier 2	NF-1197	Kester Corwick	Dunmore	17.5%	18.0%	65%	101.3	+2.9pp	baseline move, tier change
Tier 2	NF-1045	Mott Ashstan	Aurora	17.4%	17.9%	63%	115.7	+1.6pp	baseline move
Tier 2	NF-1033	Nils Lancroft	Cypress	16.9%	17.4% capped	64%	98.1	+0.2pp	baseline move, cap binding
Tier 2	NF-1244	Sten Lanmere	Eastwick	16.9%	17.4% capped	59%	101.8	-2.8pp	baseline move, cap binding
Tier 2	NF-1149	Cyra Quenholt	Cypress	16.8%	17.3%	62%	112.6	+0.2pp	baseline move, tier change
Tier 2	NF-1115	Lora Normarsh	Aurora	15.7%	16.2% capped	56%	128.5	+0.1pp	baseline move, cap binding
Tier 3	NF-1142	Edda Vandstead	Foundry	24.1%	24.9%	58%	80.8	+2.3pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1207	Pell Barthorpe	Foundry	23.2%	24.0%	55%	87.7	-1.3pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1227	Gil Normarsh	Cypress	22.6%	23.4%	54%	103.4	-0.7pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1023	Orin Harthorpe	Dunmore	22.2%	23.0%	52%	96.9	+1.7pp	baseline move, tier change
Tier 3	NF-1037	Kai Osterlyn	Eastwick	22.2%	23.0%	59%	86.8	+2.5pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1068	Rhea Quenstan	Foundry	22.2%	22.9% capped	53%	89.4	+3.0pp	baseline move, tier change, cap binding
Tier 3	NF-1195	Finn Selstead	Foundry	21.8%	22.6%	55%	93.3	+2.5pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1233	Finn Dunrick	Cypress	21.8%	22.6% capped	57%	93.4	+2.7pp	baseline move, cap binding
Tier 3	NF-1202	Doran Vandhurst	Eastwick	21.5%	22.2% capped	56%	103.3	+3.0pp	baseline move, cap binding
Tier 3	NF-1124	Quill Ashvale	Basalt	21.2%	22.0%	55%	100.7	+1.5pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1103	Cyra Corvale	Aurora	21.1%	21.9%	56%	99.6	+1.4pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1140	Gil Quenmarsh	Eastwick	21.1%	21.9%	53%	98.8	-1.0pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1192	Gil Fenrick	Eastwick	21.2%	21.9% capped	58%	100.3	+3.0pp	baseline move, cap binding
Tier 3	NF-1106	Adair Dunlyn	Eastwick	21.4%	21.8% capped	55%	99.7	+3.0pp	baseline move, cap binding
Tier 3	NF-1204	Yara Ashley	Dunmore	20.9%	21.7%	58%	101.9	+1.7pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1219	Gil Garthorpe	Dunmore	20.8%	21.6%	55%	95.3	-2.5pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1144	Kester Wendcombe	Dunmore	20.6%	21.4%	56%	92.5	+2.5pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1211	Orin Pellcroft	Aurora	20.6%	21.4%	58%	92.9	-0.9pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1096	Rhea Ellrick	Basalt	20.5%	21.3%	55%	98.2	-1.7pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1247	Gwen Jorridge	Dunmore	20.0%	20.8%	59%	94.9	held	new goal
Tier 3	NF-1020	Uli Dunhurst	Dunmore	19.8%	20.6%	55%	93.5	-2.8pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1152	Gil Norlyn	Cypress	19.8%	20.6%	56%	107.2	+0.7pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1239	Kai Ravley	Basalt	19.8%	20.6% capped	57%	97.5	+2.2pp	baseline move, cap binding
Tier 3	NF-1253	Cyra Ravridge	Foundry	19.8%	20.6%	58%	96.6	held	new goal
Tier 3	NF-1254	Hale Ellcombe	Cypress	19.8%	20.6%	59%	97.7	held	new goal
Tier 3	NF-1242	Doran Farford	Foundry	19.4%	20.2% capped	55%	90.6	-0.1pp	baseline move, cap binding
Tier 3	NF-1249	Sten Embcroft	Dunmore	19.3%	20.1%	58%	100.8	held	new goal
Tier 3	NF-1032	Calla Yardale	Cypress	19.1%	19.9%	58%	115.8	+0.3pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1060	Zane Ellridge	Foundry	19.0%	19.8%	53%	107.6	-0.7pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1064	Kai Yarlyn	Basalt	18.9%	19.7%	61%	100.3	-0.2pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1126	Kester Gelridge	Dunmore	18.9%	19.7%	56%	86.8	-1.8pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1141	Nils Brenborne	Cypress	18.9%	19.7%	53%	107.6	+0.6pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1250	Kester Norcombe	Foundry	18.9%	19.7%	58%	101.2	held	new goal
Tier 3	NF-1252	Vera Barcroft	Dunmore	18.8%	19.6%	59%	94.1	held	new goal
Tier 3	NF-1224	Nils Yargate	Basalt	18.7%	19.5%	57%	100.1	+1.9pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1222	Bex Pellvale	Cypress	18.5%	19.3%	56%	106.5	+0.2pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1175	Vera Yarhurst	Eastwick	18.4%	19.2%	58%	96.7	-1.6pp	baseline move, tier change
Tier 3	NF-1015	Wren Harrick	Eastwick	18.3%	19.1%	64%	86.5	+1.7pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1038	Nadia Ashhurst	Cypress	18.3%	19.1%	61%	94.5	+2.3pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1098	Gwen Farmarsh	Basalt	18.2%	19.0%	56%	106.5	-1.1pp	baseline move, tier change
Tier 3	NF-1150	Calla Farhurst	Basalt	18.2%	19.0%	54%	106.5	-0.2pp	baseline move, tier change
Tier 3	NF-1049	Elin Draystan	Basalt	18.1%	18.9%	62%	94.2	+1.6pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1117	Yara Quenborne	Dunmore	19.4%	18.6% capped	60%	92.4	+3.0pp	baseline move, tier change, cap binding
Tier 3	NF-1138	Kai Draydale	Foundry	17.7%	18.5%	56%	124.9	-0.6pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1147	Adair Quenmarsh	Dunmore	17.6%	18.5%	61%	95.7	-0.3pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1100	Aris Wendford	Eastwick	17.5%	18.3%	56%	101.3	+1.2pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1246	Ilse Wendhurst	Eastwick	17.3%	18.1%	58%	100.8	held	new goal
Tier 3	NF-1248	Cyra Hardale	Basalt	17.3%	18.1%	57%	100.8	held	new goal
Tier 3	NF-1056	Linnea Ellmere	Foundry	17.2%	18.0%	61%	96.2	-1.4pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1001	Aris Ravfield	Cypress	16.9%	17.7%	60%	114.9	+0.0pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1173	Orin Selthorpe	Foundry	16.9%	17.7%	59%	94.8	-1.1pp	baseline move, tier change
Tier 3	NF-1086	Tova Harridge	Foundry	16.9%	17.6%	61%	87.3	+0.1pp	baseline move, tier change
Tier 3	NF-1050	Edda Harmere	Eastwick	16.4%	17.2%	56%	111.1	-1.5pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1087	Tova Jorridge	Eastwick	16.2%	17.0%	59%	104.8	+0.5pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1119	Lora Ellmarsh	Cypress	16.1%	16.9%	58%	105.3	-0.4pp	baseline move, tier change
Tier 3	NF-1069	Halden Torgate	Foundry	16.0%	16.8% capped	53%	133.5	+0.0pp	baseline move, cap binding
Tier 3	NF-1163	Hale Torford	Basalt	16.0%	16.8% capped	58%	100.5	+0.5pp	baseline move, cap binding
Tier 3	NF-1245	Osric Lanstan	Cypress	16.0%	16.8%	57%	102.2	-1.9pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1193	Mott Harborne	Basalt	15.9%	16.7%	59%	105.9	-1.4pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1166	Linnea Harmere	Foundry	15.2%	16.0%	55%	118.3	-1.3pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1156	Linnea Wendthorpe	Basalt	15.0%	15.8%	59%	110.5	+0.0pp	baseline move
Tier 3	NF-1079	Cyra Dunthorpe	Aurora	14.5%	15.3%	61%	102.7	+1.0pp	baseline move, tier change
Tier 3	NF-1153	Gil Caldmarsh	Basalt	13.6%	14.4% capped	59%	105.9	-0.4pp	baseline move, cap binding
Tier 4	NF-1094	Pell Jorgate	Aurora	20.1%	21.3%	54%	95.0	-0.9pp	baseline move
Tier 4	NF-1155	Uli Marlyn	Aurora	19.3%	20.5%	53%	97.6	+0.8pp	baseline move
Tier 4	NF-1200	Orin Vandwick	Dunmore	18.9%	20.1%	51%	98.2	-0.2pp	baseline move
Tier 4	NF-1044	Halden Fenfield	Foundry	18.7%	19.9%	53%	97.7	+1.0pp	baseline move
Tier 4	NF-1225	Yara Dunvale	Foundry	18.5%	19.5% capped	56%	93.1	+3.0pp	baseline move, cap binding
Tier 4	NF-1058	Ilse Vandstead	Cypress	18.2%	19.4% capped	56%	88.0	+0.4pp	baseline move, tier change, cap binding
Tier 4	NF-1011	Hale Embcroft	Eastwick	18.1%	19.3%	56%	97.2	+1.8pp	baseline move
Tier 4	NF-1228	Linnea Marwick	Aurora	17.2%	18.4%	55%	89.0	-0.2pp	baseline move
Tier 4	NF-1240	Jem Corfield	Foundry	15.5%	18.4% capped	55%	90.0	-3.0pp	baseline move, cap binding
Tier 4	NF-1237	Kai Vandley	Dunmore	16.9%	18.1%	54%	98.6	+0.8pp	baseline move, tier change
Tier 4	NF-1234	Juna Selcroft	Cypress	16.7%	17.9%	55%	112.8	+1.4pp	baseline move
Tier 4	NF-1111	Linnea Lanwick	Eastwick	16.6%	17.8%	57%	92.1	-0.9pp	baseline move, tier change
Tier 4	NF-1018	Finn Ostervale	Foundry	16.4%	17.6%	50%	118.4	-0.5pp	baseline move
Tier 4	NF-1034	Vera Selford	Aurora	15.7%	16.9%	54%	106.2	+2.0pp	baseline move
Tier 4	NF-1066	Gil Barthorpe	Cypress	15.1%	16.3%	54%	100.1	+1.1pp	baseline move
Tier 4	NF-1078	Kester Kellstan	Dunmore	15.0%	16.2%	54%	101.7	+2.1pp	baseline move
Tier 4	NF-1029	Osric Kelllyn	Aurora	14.9%	16.1%	60%	90.3	+0.4pp	baseline move
Tier 4	NF-1047	Gwen Pellrick	Basalt	14.4%	15.6%	56%	105.9	+0.3pp	baseline move
Tier 4	NF-1046	Gwen Vandgate	Foundry	14.2%	15.4%	56%	116.7	+0.7pp	baseline move
Tier 4	NF-1135	Jem Garford	Cypress	14.1%	15.3%	59%	89.1	+0.3pp	baseline move
Tier 4	NF-1206	Ilse Drayrick	Dunmore	13.6%	14.8%	63%	88.4	-0.1pp	baseline move
Tier 4	NF-1074	Mira Harlyn	Basalt	12.5%	13.7%	56%	91.1	+0.8pp	baseline move
Tier 4	NF-1143	Calla Kellstan	Eastwick	12.5%	13.7%	56%	113.4	-1.2pp	baseline move
Tier 4	NF-1223	Juna Harstan	Eastwick	11.4%	12.6%	55%	98.2	-1.3pp	baseline move
Tier 4	NF-1169	Doran Garlyn	Dunmore	9.1%	10.3%	59%	108.0	+1.0pp	baseline move

Targets are built on the shrunk baseline, never on the raw rate, and no target may move more than 3.0 points in a single cycle. 31 of this cycle's goals hit that cap and were truncated; the audit records which, and the truncated step carries into the next cycle instead of disappearing.

What this page answers: what the model measures, what every constant is, and where the method stops.

Measurement contract · what each metric is, and what it is worth
Metric	Definition	Window	Prior	Nominal weight	Effective weight
Conversion rate	conversions / opportunities	trailing 3 cycles	beta-binomial, k = 80 opportunities	45%	48%
Consistency	weeks held / eligible weeks	trailing 6 cycles	beta-binomial, k = 40 weeks	35%	33%
Quality-adjusted volume	quality points / closed deal	trailing 3 cycles	variance components, k = 5 deals	20%	19%

Effective weight is the share of the composite's realized spread that each metric actually contributes after shrinkage, measured on the shipped cycle. It is not the nominal weight, and the difference is worth knowing: a metric that is mostly prior contributes mostly nothing, whatever the weight in the policy document says. Consistency is the case in point, and it is the argument for either lengthening its window again or lowering its weight at the next re-baseline.

Every constant in the model, on the page
Constant	Value	Note
Floor	180 reps	roster in the shipped cycle
Cycles generated	18	12 reported; the first 6 exist so every reported cycle has a full trailing window
Weights	45 / 35 / 20	conversion, consistency, quality-adjusted volume
Prior strength	k = 80 / 40 / 5	opportunities, weeks, closed deals
Activity floor	5 opportunities	below this a rep-cycle is unrated rather than badly rated
Week eligibility	3 opportunities	a thinner week is not judged, and is not counted as a miss
Consistency bars	70% activity, 60% rate	both measured against the rep's own trailing baseline
Score	50 + 12z, clipped to [1, 99]	z clipped at 3 standard deviations per metric
Dead band	1.5 score points	hysteresis: leaving a tier costs more than entering it did
Re-baseline	every 3 cycles	standardization and cutoffs frozen in between
Target mix	15% / 30% / 35% / 20%	hit at the calibration cycle, then allowed to drift
Goal cap	3.0pp per cycle	conversion target; consistency and QAV have their own caps

A model whose constants live only in code cannot be argued with in a meeting, which is the worst possible place to discover that one of them is wrong.

What this does and does not prove

It shows that a tier board built on raw thin-sample rates and a tier board built on shrunk estimates are different boards, that the difference concentrates exactly where the denominators are small, and that the shrunk board holds up better next cycle. The regression table on the shrinkage page is the evidence, and it is computed, not asserted.

It does not prove the tiers are right. The model ranks reps on three measured proxies for something nobody measures directly. A rep who works the hardest accounts, or carries a new hire, or holds a book nobody else can, is scored on the same three numbers as everyone else. The composite is a starting point for a conversation with a manager, not a verdict, and the override log exists because that is true.

It does not prove causation on any mover. The audit attributes a tier change to the input that produced it. That is arithmetic, not diagnosis: knowing a demotion came from the conversion metric does not say why the conversion metric moved.

The rated population is a survivor population. Reps leave, and they leave non-randomly. Every trend on this page is measured on the reps who were still there, which flatters the floor's trajectory by an amount this model does not estimate.

The consistency metric is the weakest link and the page says so. Its split-half reliability is 0.41, so most of its spread is noise, the prior swallows most of it, and its effective weight is well under its nominal 35%. It stays in the composite because week-to-week reliability is a real thing a floor manages, and it stays visible on this page because a weight nobody audits becomes a weight nobody can defend.

All data here is synthetic. The generator, the seed, and every constant are in this repository. What is real is the method.

How each slice is handled
Slice	Treatment	Why
Opportunity allocation	reported next to the tier, never scored	who gets the good leads is a management decision, and scoring it would launder that decision into a rep's performance
Tenure	no adjustment beyond the sample-size prior	a ramping rep is shrunk toward the floor because their sample is thin, not because a rule says new hires get a discount
Team effects	not modeled	team is a reporting cut only; a team-level random effect would be the natural next layer and it is not here
Deal mix	inside the quality-adjusted volume metric	the quality weight is the only channel through which what a rep sold, rather than how much, reaches the score
Seasonality	absorbed by the floor prior and the re-baseline	not modeled explicitly; a floor with hard seasonality would need it
Manager input	override log only	structured coaching notes are the obvious missing input and their absence is a limit, not a design principle

Full derivations in docs/METHODOLOGY.md. Worked walkthrough with figures in docs/WALKTHROUGH.md. Regenerate everything with python3 build.py.