Wanted to give you the honest read before we sit down. 18 calls Mon-Wed, then OOO Thu-Fri. Of the 17 calls scheduled while I was out, 5 happened (which is actually a useful signal: that work can move on without me being on every call) and 12 did not (those need a reschedule path). Reasonable for a partial week.
The clearer pattern I want to walk you through is the one underneath the call volume. The build queue is stacking. Heavy-build clients like QA Wolf are eating the hours that should be compounding at the active-builder accounts where AI-native expansion actually happens, like Achievers and Ezra. I have two anchor sessions from this week (DemandScience AI messaging and the Ezra Director of Growth workflow build) that show what the model looks like when it is working. Both produced hosted resources the team can clone. I want to use this 1-1 to talk through where we double down and what we might want to share or hand off so I can get there.
Both anchor sessions this week followed the same shape: customer is already building, we co-design the prompt + skill + connector + workflow, the session leaves a hosted resource the team can clone. The Apollo Plugin Builder we shipped this week (apollo-plugin-builder.pages.dev) packages this pipeline so any GTME on the team can run the same motion. The visual below is the pattern.
The team is evolving from single-tool work to multi-tool flows with shared context. Helping every GTME understand how to share context across tools is what opens the next layer of experimentation we can scale. Four team-facing assets are live and active:
QA Wolf is the clearest example. The build work (dedup, scoring, AUTH remediation, sequence rebuild) is steady and meaningful, but it currently sits entirely with me. When I am out, the calls stall. When I am in, those hours are not at Achievers or Ezra. Curious how you would weigh standing up a thought partner / co-owner on the heavy accounts so the build work has a second pair of hands and the customer-facing motion is not single-threaded through me.
The OOO data this week underlines the dependency: 12 of 17 scheduled calls did not happen Thu-Fri because there was no backup. The 5 that did move forward show this can work when the coverage exists.
Achievers: active sequencing work this week (Kaitlyn Gruszewski + Jessica McNamee + Brynn Dolfi + Ken Baker + Jack Hallett). Bi-monthly cadence in place. Expansion path is clear. With protected time I think we can push the build forward materially in the next two weeks.
Ezra: Director of Growth advanced workflow build with Andrew Cucinotta and the Elisa Riche team. AI-native project candidate. Already produced a hosted workflow-builder resource. Multiplying that pattern across the rest of Ezra is where the AI-native scaled impact lives.
Would love your read on whether this is the right pair to anchor protected time around, or if you would weigh another account.
The constraint: Apollo dedupe is currently capped at 50,000 records per day. On QA Wolf alone the duplicate corpus is well past that ceiling, so every account with a real duplicate problem becomes a multi-week serial process I have to babysit.
Proof point we already have ready to share: the GTME duplicate report at jason-dashboards.pages.dev/gtme-duplicate-report-2026-04-28. Worth looking at together; it makes the impact case clearer than I can in copy.
What I think we could propose to Product:
The team motion: standing up a Duplicate Tiger Team would unblock the build queue today. Cross-functional swat unit (1-2 GTMEs + Product PM + Eng + Support) that owns the dedupe motion across the book until the product surface ships.
Would love to hear: does this match what you are hearing from the rest of the team? And who would you point me at on the Product side to take the proposal to?
5 took place without me (forward motion I can build on); 12 did not happen. Thinking through the reschedule queue: active-builder calls go back on the calendar this week; standard intervention/support calls default to async resource center delivery unless the customer specifically asks for live time. Curious if you would weigh the split differently.
| Account / Topic | Action | |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Achievers (expansion build) | Push the active sequencing work forward with Kaitlyn + Jessica + Brynn + Ken + Jack. Identify the expansion path that lines up with Stephanie's read. |
| 2 | Ezra (AI-native build) | Continue Director of Growth advanced workflow motion. Andrew Cucinotta + Elisa Riche team. Multiply the pattern across other Ezra teams; ship a second resource center. |
| 3 | Dedupe product ask + Tiger Team | Take the 50K/day ceiling proposal to Product. Reference the GTME duplicate report as the impact case. Stand up a cross-functional Duplicate Tiger Team to unblock the build queue. |
| 4 | QA Wolf coverage / handoff | Identify a second GTME or thought partner. Right-size my time on dedup + AUTH-issue work. Move from single point of capacity to shared ownership. |
| 5 | Reschedule the 12 missed OOO calls | Triage by active-builder vs standard intervention. Active builders first. Standards default to async resource center. |
| 6 | Securiti renewal close | $51K Commit, May 28 (17 days). Confirm forecast holds. |
| 7 | DemandScience trial follow-through | Fri 5/16 next training cadence. Sequences + workflows + AI Contact Center deployed. Continue the active-builder model. |