3
Strong agency leads
Qualified problem, decision path, and dated next step.
01 · Original + execution
The original scheme and what we are building now.
The original GTM scheme remains intact. This 60-day plan sits beside it as the execution layer for the dependency the July 21 meeting made clear: Peach Pilot first needs proof people trust, a community that teaches us, and a warm path to the first agency win.
An execution layer, not a rewritten history.
The original plan records the broader GTM machine. This plan makes the next 60 days runnable. Right Quote is Peach Pilot’s carrier-matching product: agents enter client facts, see likely carrier fits and reasons, then make the licensed decision. Carriers still control underwriting, availability, price, and issue decisions.
Original GTM scheme
Build the machine, then scale attention.
Buy lists, add tools, increase posting and outreach, and optimize toward 1,000 individual-agent users.
Open the original schemeWhat we are building now
Earn evidence, trust, and one agency at a time.
Prove the product at Safe Life, participate where agents already gather, and run a focused warm agency pipeline in parallel.
02 · Operating model
Three tracks. One learning loop.
Product use creates proof. Community participation exposes real problems and language. Warm agency conversations test whether that proof matters commercially.
01
Product proof
Make Safe Life referenceable through observed use, repeat behavior, resolved trust blockers, and permissioned evidence.
- Owner: Aaron
- Five intended-user feedback sessions
- Three repeat independent users
- One measurable proof artifact
02
Community learning
Join real agent conversations, identify repeated pains and trusted voices, then invite the right people to critique rough experiments.
- Owner: Joseph
- Validate five candidate communities
- Twenty-five meaningful conversations
- Validate three repeated pain themes
03
Warm agency pipeline
Use Mike and existing relationships to create near-term opportunities while the broader trust engine develops.
- Owner: Tyler
- Mario opens executive relationships
- Three qualified leads
- One onboarding begins
A name is not a strong lead.
It needs a decision-maker, a confirmed problem, access to the buying decision, and a mutually accepted dated next step.
A launch is not referenceability.
It needs repeated independent use, credible evidence, a willing reference, and no unresolved critical trust blocker.
Followers are not a community.
Members must return, exchange useful information, and help one another without Peach Pilot manufacturing every interaction.
One buyer class. Two segment hypotheses.
The buyer is an upline or agency owner. The first five warm-introduction requests test the July 21 candidate—an owner-led 5–49-agent downline—against the July 1 priority—an owner-led 50–500-agent IMO/FMO. Target three ICP-A and two ICP-B when relationships permit, then compare access, urgency, cohort feasibility, and acceptance of a dated next step by August 3.
03 · Product gate
“Safe Life is live” is not enough.
Broad promotion waits until the product can survive a credible reference conversation. These are proposed working thresholds so the team can inspect reality instead of debating adjectives.
Referenceability gate
All five signals must be true.
If the evidence does not clear this bar, the honest GTM action is product learning—not louder promotion.
1
Five intended-user feedback sessionsEach is grounded in a recent real workflow.
2
Three agents repeat the core flow independentlyReal cases, separate occasions, no teammate driving.
3
Two agents or one Safe Life leader will reference usQuote, named validation, or conversation with a prospective agency.
4
One measurable proof artifactTime saved, bad-fit submission avoided, or decision made clearer.
5
Zero unresolved critical trust blockersThe core result is safe and dependable enough to stand behind.
04 · How we do the work
Use real examples. Write down what happened.
Research can move quickly. Ask about recent real work, separate what happened from what we think it means, and let the right owner decide what changes next.
Ask what happened last time.
Have the agent show what they actually did. What someone did matters more than what they say they might do.
Keep facts and opinions separate.
Write down what happened, what the agent said, and what we think it means as three different things.
Decide every Friday.
Joseph reviews community learning. Aaron reviews product proof. Tyler looks across the whole plan and decides what moves next.
| What we need | Who owns it | When | If it is blocked |
|---|---|---|---|
| Talk to Safe Life agents | Aaron | July 22 | If Mike cannot provide access, use calls we already have permission to review and say we do not know yet. |
| Ask for five warm introductions | Mario | July 24 | Record however many real introductions we have. Do not count a cold name as a warm introduction. |
| Give every important product problem an owner | Aaron | July 22 | If nobody owns it, John assigns someone. We do not call Safe Life a reference until the important problem is fixed. |
| Keep the research notes current | Joseph | July 22 | If a conversation is not written down, it does not count toward the plan. |
Learn before we sell.
Ask active agents to show us one recent problem. Do not ask for client information. Do not recruit or turn the conversation into a surprise product pitch. Give people something useful back for helping us learn.
Before it goes public
Be honest. Get permission. Do not promise what we cannot prove.
Normal research messages can go out. If we use someone’s name, quote, or results, or if money is involved, Mario approves it first.
1
Prove what we are sayingKeep the source and do not make the result sound bigger than it is.
2
Ask before using someone’s storyGet clear permission before using a person’s name, words, or results.
3
Write down any deal involving moneyReferral, payment, or production-share terms must be clear before we talk about them publicly.
Evidence log
Sessions, observed signals, claims, permissions, and disconfirming evidence.
Community log
Surfaces, conversations, participation rules, and agent-to-agent interactions.
Field instructions
Counting rules, privacy rules, exact schemas, and de-identified filled examples.
05 · 60-day sequence
Each phase earns the next.
No community build, automation, or scale step happens merely because the calendar advanced. Every phase has a proof signal and a failure response.
July 21–August 3
Establish truth
Decision at Day 14Do we understand product readiness, community terrain, and the first warm opportunities well enough to run focused tests?
Run the Safe Life referenceability auditAaron
Five sessions logged; repeat-use and blocker evidence summarized. Mike is consulted when useful.
Define the core Right Quote proof eventAaron
Due July 24 · One observable behavior and its evidence source documented.
Validate five candidate communitiesJoseph
Due July 27 · Norms, trusted voices, recurring pains, and access path recorded.
Conduct ten agent conversationsTyler
Tyler leads the conversations. Joseph turns the notes into clear community lessons.
Request five warm introductionsTyler + Mario
Due July 24 · Test both ICP variants and log the actual relationship mix.
Activate the field logsJoseph
Due July 22 · Files already exist; confirm access and use the required schema.
Choose the first Hermes additionWhole team
Due July 22 · Choose one useful addition with a clear owner and outcome.
Pass signalClear referenceability gaps, three repeated pain themes, and one accepted warm introduction.
Failure responseNarrow the ICP and product question before creating more content or tooling.
August 4–17
Prove the wedge
Decision at Day 28Which community angle and product experiment have earned another month of investment?
Test three conversation formatsJoseph
At least one produces agent-to-agent discussion or unsolicited follow-up.
Validate three repeated problemsJoseph
Each is backed by five independent signals or observed examples.
Identify five founding personalitiesWhole team
Credibility, audience fit, relationship path, and likely incentive documented.
Run one narrow product experimentAaron
Hypothesis, behavior, result, and go/change/stop decision recorded.
Advance three qualified agency leadsTyler + Mario
Every lead meets the definition or the model is revised.
Decide what not to automateAvi
Manual work stays manual until frequency and cost justify tooling.
Pass signalOne community wedge creates interaction, one experiment creates repeat interest, and agency next steps are dated.
Failure responsePartner with an existing trusted voice instead of launching an owned space.
August 18–September 1
Form the smallest trusted cohort
Decision at Day 43Is there enough trust and product value to formalize a community or pilot cohort?
Invite a qualified feedback cohortJoseph
Members share the target experience and accept participation norms.
Run two structured sessionsJoseph
Members critique a real workflow and feedback changes decisions.
Produce the first proof artifactAaron + Joseph
Aaron owns the evidence; Joseph packages the approved claim. Mike may advise on field accuracy.
Draft the onboarding shapeTyler + Mario
Cohort, start date, responsibilities, support, and success are concrete.
Prototype only the required surfaceJoseph + Avi
Use existing tools unless their limitation has been demonstrated.
Pass signalMembers return, help one another, and proof advances at least one agency conversation.
Failure responseKeep the network distributed and continue one-to-one learning.
September 2–18
Convert evidence into a motion
Decision at Day 60What should Peach Pilot repeat, automate, stop, or fund for the next 90 days?
Begin onboarding one agencyTyler + Mario
Acceptance, owners, cohort, date, and prerequisites recorded.
Maintain three strong leadsTyler
Every lead remains qualified and has a dated next step.
Publish the Safe Life proof briefAaron + Joseph
Aaron verifies the criteria; Joseph publishes after every external claim is approved. Mike may advise on Safe Life facts.
Write the next 90-day planTyler
Scale only motions that produced evidence during this window.
Pass signalOne agency starts, three leads stay real, and a repeatable trust-to-pipeline loop is visible.
Failure responseDo not scale. Publish the learning, narrow the bet, and run another bounded proof.
06 · Operating scorecard
Measure evidence, not motion.
The PeachOS EOS scorecard and pipeline ledger remain canonical. Six measures are enough to show whether proof, community learning, and the agency pipeline are moving.
| Measure | Exact meaning | Weekly target | Day 60 | Owner | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feedback sessions | Structured review of a recent real agent workflow with a complete evidence record. | 2 | 12+ | Aaron | Evidence log |
| Repeat independent Right Quote users | Same agent completes the measured core flow on two distinct real cases without teammate control. | Inspect | 3+ | Tyler | Product events + observation |
| Safe Life criteria passed | Count of the five referenceability criteria currently passing. | Inspect | 5 of 5 | Aaron | Evidence log + Linear |
| Validated agent pain themes | One problem supported by five independent signals from at least three people. | Inspect | 3 | Tyler | Evidence + community |
| Warm introductions | A named connector introduces Peach Pilot to a target decision-maker. | 1 | 3+ | Mario | Pipeline ledger |
| Agency onboarding begun | Accepted pilot with owner, cohort, date, and prerequisites. | Inspect | 1 | Tyler + Mario | Pipeline ledger |
Green · Evidence produced
Yellow · Activity, incomplete evidence
Red · Did not occur or disproved
Unknown · Source not checked
07 · Ownership
Everyone owns a clear part.
Tyler is responsible for the overall GTM result, but not every task. Tyler leads agent conversations and the agency pipeline. Joseph owns community learning. Aaron owns product proof. Mario owns commercial decisions.
T
Tyler
GTM owner
Overall GTM result, agent conversations, warm agency pipeline, agency qualification, and decisions across the plan.
M
Mario
Executive sponsor
Mike and agency relationships, executive support, and commercial decisions.
J
Joseph
Community learning
Community mapping, turning research into repeated pain themes, cohort operations, publishing, and community decisions.
A
Avi
Tooling + evidence
Instrumentation and lightweight automation after a repeated need is proven.
A
Aaron
Product proof
Safe Life referenceability, product evidence, experiment design, and named ownership of trust-critical blockers.
J
John
VP Engineering
Assigns engineering owners, confirms product-event instrumentation, and resolves unowned technical escalations.
M
Mike
Consultant
Advises on field context and Safe Life interpretation when asked. He owns no Peach Pilot deliverable.
Choose the proof
Review scorecard and pipeline. Name one uncertainty, one test, and one commercial next step.
Inspect reality
Review use, agent conversations, and agency next steps. Remove blockers and stop low-signal work.
Decide and report
Update sources of truth. Record what changed, what stopped, and what the evidence now supports.
08 · Decision register
Protect the difference between direction and possibility.
The meeting generated strong ideas. The plan only locks what was actually decided; everything else has an owner, evidence requirement, and decision date.
Locked direction
Tyler owns Customer Success + GTMHe is accountable for the plan and outcome.Confirmed
Three strong leads + one onboardingThe commercial result for this operating window.Confirmed
Referenceability before scaleSafe Life proof is a product behavior gate, not a launch announcement.Confirmed
Community-first learningEarn trust and customer intelligence before broad product promotion.Confirmed
Warm pipeline in parallelMike and existing relationships create the immediate agency path.Confirmed
Open decisions
First community wedgeJoseph · Decide August 17 after three format tests.Testing
Founding personalitiesWhole team · Qualify two to five by September 1.Open
Revenue-share modelMario · No commitment before legal, licensing, collection, and economics review.Unvalidated
First Hermes additionWhole team · Decide today.Open
09 · Guardrails
Move quickly without borrowing trust.
These conditions keep the motion honest, protect agents and customers, and prevent premature scale.
No sensitive customer data in GTM systemsPolicyholder health, banking, SSN, and other PII stay out of community, evidence, and pipeline logs.
No unsupported customer proofNames, quotes, results, and case-study claims require evidence and permission.
No revenue-share promise yetLegal, licensing, contracting, collection, and unit economics must be reviewed first.
No empty community theaterIf only employees create interaction, partner or return to one-to-one learning.
No broad outbound before referenceabilityDo not amplify a message the product cannot yet support credibly.
No automation before repetitionIf the burden cannot be measured, the task has not earned a system yet.