Disc Buying Committee Map

---
name: disc-buying-committee-map
description: Maps the roles in a client's buying decision, producing who signs, funds, uses, can block and wrote the brief, what each role needs to hear, and the roles you have not met with the question to reach them. Use for "run disc-buying-committee-map", "who decides on this deal", "map the buying committee", "I only talked to one person", "the decision maker never saw our pitch", "who else is involved in this decision", "stakeholder map for this proposal", part of the Claude for Winning Proposals Pack by Polar Bear.
---

# Buying Committee Map

## When To Use
You pitched to an influencer and the decision maker never saw you. Run this when one friendly contact is your only window into the client and you need to know which roles will decide, and what each one needs to hear.

## When Not To Use
If you are still unsure the opportunity is worth any effort, run MEDDIC Qualification first. When the map is done and the client needs a neutral page to decide with, that is Client Decision Brief; this map is your private preparation.

## Inputs
- Your notes, emails and the client's brief: anything that names a role, a step or a concern.
- What your contact has told you about how decisions like this get made.
If you have none of this, I start from the six standard roles and your contact's job title, and mark the map as a first draft full of questions. Works in any chat.

## Approach
Buying research describes decisions made by a group of roles, not one person, and classic decision analysis asks who owns the choice and what each party needs to see. The map works the client's side the way a good decision process works your own: each role's view is recorded separately, in their words, before anyone writes a "group view". Rows are roles, never personalities. The failure it prevents is the proposal written for your contact's priorities that reaches a signer who wanted something else.

## Workflow
1. Ask at most three questions: who have you spoken to and in what role, what did your contact say about how this will be decided, and is there a written process (procurement, legal review, a committee date).
2. Set the rows as roles: signs, funds, uses the result, can block (legal, procurement, IT, data protection), wrote the brief, will run the work after you leave. One person can hold two roles; a role can be empty.
3. For each role, record what they need to hear, in their stated words where you have them, and what they have said so far with its source. Keep each role's view apart; one person repeating another's concern is not a second voice.
4. Mark every need "stated" (they said it, to you or in writing) or "assumed" (your guess to test). Most first maps are mostly assumed, and that is the useful finding.
5. Mark met yes or no. For each unmet role, write one action routed through your contact: the question to ask, or the introduction to request. Never go around your contact.
6. Note where roles may pull in different directions (the user wants speed, the blocker wants risk covered) as questions to explore, not as verdicts on anyone.
7. Stop at the list of gaps. You decide who to ask for, in what order and when; I never rank people by influence or power.

## Output Format
```markdown
# Buying Committee Map
Client: [company] | Your contact: [role] | Updated: [date]
## Roles
| Role | Who (public role) | What they need to hear | Stated or assumed | Said so far (source) | Met |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Signs | [role or unknown] | [need] | [stated / assumed] | [words] ([call on date]) | [yes / no] |
| Funds / Uses / Can block / Wrote the brief / Runs it after | ... | | | | |
## Gaps and actions
| Unmet role | Question for your contact or introduction to ask for | By when |
|---|---|---|
| [role] | [action] | [date] |
## Tensions to explore
- [Role] needs [x]; [role] needs [y]. Question: [question]
## Decision
[Your name] decides which introductions to request, in what order, by [date].
```

## Done When
- Every standard role has a row, even if it reads "unknown".
- Every need is marked stated or assumed, and every stated need has a source.
- Each unmet role has one action that goes through your contact.
- The Decision names you and a date.

## Quality Bar
- Public role and words said in the deal only; no research into a person's private life.
- No power or interest grid, no influence ranking, no personality labels.
- Assumed needs are never written as if the client said them.
- Roles and stated needs only; no profiles, no ratings of people, and you choose who to approach.

## Next
Run disc-bid-no-bid (Bid/No-Bid Decision) to decide whether the opportunity is worth the pursuit.

## About the makers

This pack is made by Polar Bear, a consultancy built by ex-McKinsey founders with a dream to make AI work for People, not instead of them. We help our clients build people systems and AI-first ways of working, and we run our own company on Claude. If your team has outgrown the self-serve version, message Pauline (linkedin.com/in/paulinebertry).