The Win Map™: Aligning Product, Marketing, and Sales Without Workshops
A Notion-based clarity system that connects buyer research to positioning to sales assets—so everyone tells the same story about what actually wins deals.
Quick Answer: What The Win Map™ Is
The Win Map™ is a Notion-based system that aligns product, marketing, and sales around what buyers actually care about. Instead of positioning documents that die in Slack, it's a living system that connects buyer research → competitive positioning → sales assets → feedback loops. Product uses it for roadmap decisions. Marketing uses it for campaigns. Sales uses it for knowing what to say. It becomes your single source of truth for "what do we say and why does it work?"
Key Takeaway: The Win Map isn't a document. It's a system that makes alignment stick because everyone can see how buyer truth connects to what they need to do.
Why Another Positioning Doc Won't Fix Your Problem
You've tried this before:
Hired a positioning consultant → Got a 30-page strategy deck → It's sitting in Google Drive
Ran messaging workshops → Created a message framework → Sales never opened it
Built a competitive battlecard deck → Shared it in Slack → Nobody uses it → Built a custom-GPT → Still crickets
Why they all failed:
They're static deliverables, not living systems.
Here's what happens:
You create the positioning doc
You share it with the team
Everyone nods and says "great work"
Nobody changes what they're actually doing
Three months later, someone references the positioning doc and no one goes off mute
The real problem:
Positioning documents don't connect to the work people actually do:
Product doesn't know how positioning should inform roadmap priorities
Marketing doesn't know how to turn positioning into campaign messages
Sales doesn't know which parts of positioning matter in which conversations
Nobody knows how to update it when competitive landscape shifts
Key Takeaway: You don't need another document. You need a system that connects buyer truth to daily decisions.
What The Win Map Actually Is
It's a Notion workspace that holds 5 connected sections:
THE WIN MAP™
BUYER TRUTH (What buyers actually care about)
CAPABILITY MAP (Your strengths vs. competitors)
DEFENSIBLE NARRATIVE (The story that survives real conversations)
SALES ASSETS (Decks, one-pagers, talk tracks)
FEEDBACK LOOPS (Win/loss patterns, competitive shifts
Why Notion:
✅ Everything is linked (click from capability to metrics that prove it, features, use cases and the personas that care about them
✅ Everyone can access it
✅ Easy to update (no version control nightmare)
✅ Can embed research, recordings, screenshots (not just text)
✅ Connects to other tools in your tech stack
✅ Mobile-friendly (sales can pull it up in real-time)
✅ Exportable .md files for usage in customGPTs, Claude projects and Gems
Why not a Google Doc:
❌ No intuitive internal linking (can't connect research to assets)
❌ Gets stale (people don't know what changed)
❌ Hard to find (buried in folders)
❌ Can't embed rich media easily
❌ Version control mess
Key Takeaway: The system is more important than the tool—but Notion's natural knowledge base structure, built-in search, linking and native accessibility makes it convenient.
Section 1: Buyer Truth (The Foundation)
What lives here:
For each persona in your buying committee:
What they actually care about (not what you think they care about)
What pain they're trying to solve
What questions they ask in sales calls
What objections they raise
What "boring stuff" matters to them that you're not highlighting
Evidence-based, not assumptions:
Win/loss interview quotes
Sales call transcript highlights
CRM notes from stalled deals
Customer emails asking questions
Competitive intel from lost deals
Example structure
PERSONA: VP of Engineering (Buyer)
Primary Pain: "We can't afford 3 months of implementation downtime"
Decision Criteria:
Implementation speed (top priority)
Doesn't require dedicated admin (critical)
API flexibility (nice-to-have)
Objections We Hear:
"What if it breaks our existing workflow?"
"Do we need to hire someone to manage this?"
Evidence:
Win/loss quote: "We can’t afford 12 weeks of implementation, 2 weeks is manageable"
Sales call pattern: 8 of 10 ask about admin requirements upfront
Why this matters:
When product asks "should we build Feature X?", you can answer:
"VP Eng personas care about implementation speed, not that feature"
"Here's the evidence from 10 deals where that came up"
When marketing asks "what should our next campaign focus on?", you can answer:
"CFOs care about OTIF and Expedited Shipping costs; We don’t have a one-pager about that”
“Here are 3 quotes we can use to create ad copy”
Key Takeaway: Buyer Truth isn't your assumptions. It's evidence-based patterns from real deals. This is what makes the narrative defensible.
Section 2: Capability Map (Your Competitive Reality)
What lives here:
A table mapping your capabilities against competitors, tied to buyer pains:
| Capability | Competitor A | Competitor B | Buyer Benefit | Which Persona Cares | When This Wins Deals |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fast mplementation time (2 weeks) | Impossible (12 weeks) | Impossible (8 weeks) | Faster time to value | VP Eng | 80% of wins when speed matters |
| Zero admin requirements | Impossible (requires dedicated admin) | Partially possible (occasional admin) | No hiring needed | VP Eng + CFO | 65% of wins cite this |
| SOC 2 compliance | Possible (SOC 2 + ISO 27001) | Impossible (ISO only) | Good enough for mid-market | Security team | Lost 90% when ISO required |
| Transparent pricing | Impossible (custom) | Partially possible (tiered but unclear) | CFO can budget easily | CFO | 40% mention as decision factor |
Why this format works:
Shows real differentiation: Not "we're better"—specific capabilities with evidence
Ties to buyer pains: Each capability solves a specific persona's problem
Informs strategy: Product knows where to invest, Sales knows which battles to fight
Updates easily: When competitor launches feature, update one row
How teams use this:
Product and Engineering use it to prioritize roadmap:
"Should we build ISO 27001 compliance?"
→ Look at table: "We lose 90% of deals when it's required, but it's only required in 20% of deals"
Decision: "Build it if we're moving upmarket. Skip it if staying mid-market."
Sales uses it to know when to fight:
Competitor A shows up in deal
→ Look at table: "We beat them on speed and admin—lead with that. Find out early how critical ISO is right now."
Marketing uses it to build campaigns:
"What should our next competitive campaign focus on?"
→ Look at table: "Implementation speed is our strongest differentiator in 80% of wins—let’s test ads leading with that and landing pages that speaks about it in the hero.”
Key Takeaway: This is how you turn competitive intelligence into strategic decisions across all three teams.
Section 3: Defensible Narrative (The Story That Works)
What lives here
The story you tell prospects—built from Sections 1 and 2.
Not marketing speak. Defensible statements backed by evidence.
Structure
OUR NARRATIVE
Stacking our distinct capabilities, how are we positioned to help our ICP better than other alternatives? What ties it all together? How does it help them better than “the old way” of thinking? How should we reframe the problem so that we’re the only obvious solution?
THE VILLAIN
What does the “old way” solve? How does it fall short?
THE REFRAME
What problem are we naming? How are we quantifying it?
THE BORING STUFF THAT ACTUALLY MATTERS:
The unsexy capabilities buyers care about that competitors don't talk about, that we have to mention from the beginning?
WHEN WE WIN:
We beat Competitor A when: [scenario based on capability map]
We beat Competitor B when: [scenario based on capability map]
We walk away when: [scenarios where we can't win]
PROOF POINTS:
Customer quote: "[Evidence from buyer truth section]"
Product stats and metrics that prove capability (reduction in waiting times, XX% decrease in internal support tickets)
Competitive wins: "Customer X, Y, and Z others churned from [competitor] to us within a year
Example
Before Win Map™:
"AI-powered analytics platform that helps enterprises make data-driven decisions with machine learning."
Generic. Sounds like everyone. Sales used 2 slides and went rogue with the rest.
After Win Map™ (built from Buyer Truth + Capability Map):
What we do:
“We get Eng teams live with analytics in 2 weeks, not 3 months, without needing to hire and train a data engineer or build custom integrations.”
Why it matters:
Eng teams are stuck waiting 12 weeks for analytics vendors to implement, which delays product launches. We're live in 2 weeks because we don't require custom data pipelines.
From → To story, directly tied to pains and benefits
Engineering teams are forced to implement new systems from scratch and struggle to meet internal launches
Implementation delays with custom data structures that break your code → 2-week from start to go live with native integrations
Hiring and training a dedicated admin → self-serve model and a dedicated CSM
Bloated project cost and frequent delays with required professional services → Predictable cost and built-in templates that don’t slow you down
When we win:
Our platform is best suited for teams when speed matters. We beat complex competitors when "no admin needed" is critical. We walk away when enterprise security (ISO 27001) is required—we're working towards it but will not have it in the next 12 months.
Sales adoption is through the roof.
We have an angle, and we found market validation and quantifiable data points that speak to the direct cost of missing internal launches or forcing to make data infrastructure changes.
Key Takeaway: Defensible means it's built from evidence, not aspirations. If a competitor challenges you on it, you can prove it with data.
Section 4: Sales Assets (Connected to the Narrative)
What lives here:
All your sales assets—but linked to the narrative and buyer truth.
Assets you build:
Pitch deck (12 slides, not 40)
Champion deck (for internal selling to buying committee)
One-pagers per persona (CFO, VP Eng, VP Ops, etc.)
Competitive talking points (embedded, not separate battlecard)
Demo talking points (what to emphasize)
Email templates (prospecting, follow-up, multi-threading)
Traditional approach:
Deck lives in Google Drive
Competitive battlecard lives in separate folder
One-pagers are a dense feature dump
Everyone thinks the language is ‘marketing speak’
Every rep has a rouge version; CSMs have to deal with unrealistic expectations the day after the deal closes
The Win Map™ approach:
Deck starts with the defensible narrative
Slides speak to Buyer Truths
Competitive positioning is embedded
- One-pagers linked to persona pages in Buyer Truth section
- Version control is built-in (it's the same system)
Example deck structure (with Win Map links):
SLIDE 1: Title (Why X matters now) [Linked to named problem]
SLIDE 2: Market reality - backed by data and research
SLIDE 3: Consequences - quantifiable market evidence
SLIDE 4: Reframe [Linked to the narrative]
SLIDE 5: Where the old way fails [Linked to Buyer Truth - pains/benefits]
SLIDE 6: Maturity Model - competitive positioning
SLIDE 7: The new way [Linked to Capability Map and features]
SLIDE 8-9: Proof (before/after quotes, metrics and stats, case studies) [Linked to Buyer Truth and KPIs tied to capabilities]
SLIDE 10: The ecosystem - how this fits into their world
SLIDE 11-12: Objection handling - Implementation timelines, security, regulations, uptime + logos and recognition
What we’re leaving out
The Nascar slide (wall of logos)
‘About Us’ slide (no one cares - weave the important things in slides about them)
‘Why we’re different’ slide (we’re telling the story from their POV, not ours)
Obvious truths about the market (Yes we know Covid-19 changed many things. And AI. Move along)
When rep asks "why are we leading with implementation speed?"
They can see Capability Map.
They don't have to dig into battlecards or even blindly trust marketing. They system is that clear they can see the thought process for themselves.
Key Takeaway: Assets work when they're connected to the why. The Win Map™ makes the reasoning visible and the assets easy to update.
Section 5: Feedback Loops (How It Stays Current)
What lives here:
Win/loss patterns updated regularly:
Which competitors are we beating/losing to?
What's changed in objection patterns?
New buyer pains emerging?
Competitive landscape shifts?
How it works:
CRMs are updated by sales or AI agents
New conversations logged into win-loss (if available)
Monthly review: Pull new data and look for patterns (AI with a human)
Update Win Map sections:
New buyer pain discovered? → Add to Buyer Truth
Competitor launched new feature? → Update Capability Map
New objection pattern? → Update Defensible Narrative
Win rate shift? → Investigate why
Key Takeaway: The Win Map™ is a living system that updates as competitive reality changes.
How The Win Map Gets Built (The Process)
Phase 1: Diagnosis (Weeks 1-2)
Strategic conversations with customer-facing teams to find where alignment breaks and hidden buyer truths
Audit win-loss, calls, CRM, existing assets, ICP, messaging and positioning to speed up on the current story, identify what’s working, and gaps
Research competitive, market and personas in the buying committee
Output: Draft of Sections 1-2 (Buyer Truth + Capability Map)
Phase 2: Build (Weeks 3-4)
Connect capability map to benefits, features, and metrics
Sync to discuss findings from diagnosis
Build Defensible Narrative together (based on evidence, not opinions)
Get agreement on what we're saying and why
Output: Draft of Section 3 (Defensible Narrative)
Phase 3: Asset Creation (Weeks 5-8)
Build core sales assets - everything is built from the Win Map™
Sync to review assets and get feedback
Output: Section 4 complete (Sales Assets connected to narrative)
Phase 4: Launch + Feedback (Week 9+)
Win Map™ training for sales, marketing and product
Walk through the system (not just "here's a deck")
Show the evidence behind the narrative
Train on when to use each asset
Set up feedback loop
CRM tagging for competitive encounters
Monthly win/loss review process
Aligning on update thresholds (decide when anecdotes become a trend)
Output: Section 5 active (Feedback Loops running)
Total timeline: 6-12 weeks depending on scope
Total investment: $31k-$50k depending on complexity
Key Takeaway: Building the system takes time. But once it's live, alignment happens automatically because everyone can see the same truth.
What This Looks Like in Practice
Before The Win Map™
Product's reality:
- "We should build ISO 27001 compliance—competitors have it"
- No idea if it actually wins deals
- Building features based on competitor checklist
Marketing's reality:
- "Let's create a campaign about our AI capabilities"
- No idea if buyers care
- Creating content based on “everyone’s talking about it so we have to catch up”
Sales's reality:
- "Marketing doesn't understand what buyers actually want"
“No one actually talks like that”
- Creating their own pitch decks
- Losing deals, blaming product being behind
Result:
- Everyone is working hard
- Alignment theater in session - endless slacks and meetings but no deep pattern recognition of what moves the needle and what levers to pull
- Win rate is declining
After The Win Map™:
Product's reality:
- Opens Capability Map: "ISO compliance required in 20% of deals, we lose 90% of those, so we’re leaving $Xm on the table every year. But 80% of our wins are speed-based."
- Decision: "Deprioritize ISO, double down on speed and admin advantages. Revisit in 12 months to see if ICP changed or sooner if speed-based wins are declining”
- Roadmap aligned with what actually wins
Marketing's reality:
- Opens Buyer Truth: "CFOs care about ROI timeline and consolidation, not AI"
- Decision: "Run ABM play retargeting CFOs, not with AI campaign but with ROI calculator and consolidation comparison page"
- Campaigns aligned with buyer pains
Sales's reality:
- Opens Defensible Narrative before calls: Knows exactly what to say and why it works
- Opens Capability Map when competitor shows up: Knows which battles to fight
- Using assets because they match real conversations
Result:
- Win rate improves
- Sales adoption triples
- Content, campaigns, assets and selling motion tell the same story
Key Takeaway: The Win Map doesn't add more work. It eliminates wasted work by aligning everyone on what actually matters.
Common Questions About The Win Map
Q: This sounds like a lot of work to maintain. Who owns keeping it updated?
A: Product Marketing owns the system. But updates take ~2 hours/month. Much less work than constantly explaining "why did we lose that deal?" to leadership. And, it is possible to extend the engagement on advisory basis to assist with maintenance.
Q: What if our team doesn't use Notion? Can we build this in other tool?
A: Technically, yes. But Notion's linking and simplicity is what makes this work. Another option is to export the system into a custom GPT, train it and update the source files as part of the maintenance.
Q: Do we need to hire you to build this, or can we DIY it?
A: You can DIY if:
- You have someone who can run the diagnosis objectively (usually requires outside perspective)
- You have access to good win/loss data
- You know how to spot patterns across deals
Most teams struggle with the diagnosis, narrative and translating them to effective assets - not with the Notion build part.
Q: How is this different from our existing positioning doc?
A: Your positioning doc tells you what to say. The Win Map™ shows you:
- Why to say it (evidence from buyers)
- When to say it (which scenarios)
- How to say it (assets ready to use)
It’s also simple and intuitive enough for teams outside product marketing to use. It's not a replacement for positioning—it's the system that makes positioning work stick.
Q: What if our competitive landscape changes dramatically?
A: That's exactly why you need this system. When Competitor A launches a new feature:
1. Update one row in Capability Map
2. Check if it changes Defensible Narrative
3. Update affected sales assets (linked, so easy to find)
4. Alert sales via Slack
Without The Win Map™, you'd spend weeks updating battlecards that aren’t tied to a narrative; possibly without zooming out to understand if the change even matters.
Q: Can we use this for multiple products or just one?
A: One Win Map™ instance in Notion could support different use cases or products, but every set of assets should be tied to a specific use case. We could filter the Capability Maps per product or use case. This would impact the scope (timeline and cost) but if you prefer one joint system it’s possible, if there’s no concern it might confuse your team when they reference it.
Q: What's the difference between this and a sales playbook?
A: Sales playbooks focus on process (how to run discovery, how to demo).
The Win Map™ focuses on substance (what to say, why it works, what wins deals).
They're complementary. Best teams have both.
What to Do Next
If this is you:
Sales isn't using your positioning or messaging
Everyone tells a different story about differentiation
Assets aren’t being used
Competitive landscape keeps shifting and you're always reacting
Product/Marketing/Sales aren't aligned on strategy
You need The Win Map.
Option 1: See how it works
Read about the 3-step diagnostic that finds what's broken before building The Win Map.
[Link to "Why Sales Assets Fail" article]
Option 2: Book a diagnostic call
I'll review your current state and tell you if The Win Map™ would solve your problem (or if you need something else).
30-minute call. No pitch. Just diagnosis.
Related Resources
Why Sales Assets Fail (And the 3-Conversation Fix): How diagnosis works before building The Win Map
3 Conversations vs. 7 Workshops: Why speed matters in getting to alignment - coming soon
Competitive Intelligence Beyond Battlecards: How the Capability Map section turns CI into strategy - coming soon
About The Win Map
Origin: The Win Map system emerged from 18 years of fixing misalignment across enterprise (HP), military intelligence (high-stakes diagnosis), and startups (resource-constrained teams that need clarity fast).
Why it works: Because it's a system, not a document. Static docs die in Google Drive. Living systems become the single source of truth teams actually use.
Last Updated: January 2026
Author: Talya Heller, Down to a T
