By Siddharth GangalA printable sales onboarding checklist should make responsibility visible. Every row needs a task, objective or gate, owner, due date, evidence, status, blocker, reviewer, and decision. The page must show what the learner can do safely now, what still requires supervision, and what support the manager owes before the next gate.
Direct answer. Use pre-day-one for role setup, safe access, owners, materials, and support. Use days 1–30 for customer, product, process, system, and simulated practice evidence. Use days 31–60 for supervised workplace transfer. Use days 61–90 for controlled ownership and the coaching handoff. Sign a readiness decision at days 30, 60, and 90; elapsed time never creates an automatic pass.
This is the dedicated print-and-sign execution artifact. The broader sales onboarding program guide owns program architecture, competency mapping, curriculum, evaluation, and adaptation. Use that companion to design the system; use the pages below to run one learner through it without losing ownership or evidence.
Use this as the printable execution artifact
Print the checklist only after the role requirements and gates have been approved. A generic checklist cannot decide what an SDR, enterprise AE, manager, or solutions role must demonstrate. Copy the pages, remove tasks that do not apply, add role-specific tasks, and preserve the control fields on every row.
CDC’s learning-objective guidance describes objectives as learner-centered, action-oriented, specific, achievable, and measurable, aligned with goals and competencies. Write “demonstrate the approved qualification workflow in a synthetic opportunity and record the evidence” rather than “understand qualification.” The first statement can be observed and reviewed.
| Status | Meaning | Evidence rule |
|---|---|---|
| Not started | No attempt recorded | Leave evidence and reviewer blank |
| In progress | Work has begun but evidence is incomplete | Name the next artifact and date |
| Blocked | A dependency prevents completion | Name blocker, blocker owner, and due date |
| Revise | Evidence was reviewed and did not meet the criterion | Record observed gap and remediation |
| Accepted | Reviewer accepted the required evidence | Reference artifact, reviewer, date, and decision |
| Not applicable | Approved exclusion for this role or learner | Name approver and reason; never use it to hide a miss |
Do not use “complete” for attendance alone. CDC’s training-effectiveness guidance distinguishes learning from transfer into workplace application. The checklist mirrors that distinction: participation, demonstrated learning, supervised transfer, and controlled ownership are different evidence states.
Complete the control page before printing
SALES ONBOARDING CHECKLIST — CONTROL PAGE
Learner: ____________________ · role: ____________________ · segment/territory: ____________________
Manager: ____________________ · enablement owner: ____________________ · buddy: ____________________
Start date: __________ · day 30: __________ · day 60: __________ · day 90: __________
Program version: __________ · rubric version: __________ · role profile version: __________
Work location/timezone: ____________________ · primary language: ____________________
Accessibility/support contact and confidential request route: __________________________________________
Approved live-work authority at start: _________________________________________________________________
Critical gates that cannot be averaged: ________________________________________________________________
Evidence repository and access group: _________________________________________________________________
Status set: ☐ Not started ☐ In progress ☐ Blocked ☐ Revise ☐ Accepted ☐ Not applicable with approval
Record document versions because product, price, process, security, territory, and policy content changes. A learner assessed against one rubric should not be compared with another learner under a different rubric without the difference being visible. Put the version on printed pages and evidence files.
Define live-work authority at each phase: observe only, use synthetic data, draft for review, co-lead, perform with active supervision, or perform independently within a named boundary. Authority should expand through evidence, not by calendar default.
Assign owners and acceptable evidence
Use one accountable owner per row and one reviewer with authority over that criterion. The learner owns practice and evidence. That does not make the learner responsible for missing accounts, inaccessible materials, absent manager feedback, or unclear policy.
| Role owner | Owns | Acceptable evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Frontline manager | Role readiness, live supervision, feedback, authority, gate decision | Observation, rubric, signed decision, coaching handoff |
| Enablement | Objectives, curriculum, practice design, program operations | Program map, current materials, attendance, assessment record |
| RevOps or system admin | CRM and workflow access, sandbox, fields, data and reporting | Access test, permission record, synthetic workflow artifact |
| Product or subject owner | Approved use cases, limits, claims, escalation, expiry | Reviewed scenario, source reference, approval date |
| IT or security owner | Identity, device, MFA, least access, incident and support paths | Provisioning record and safe-use demonstration |
| Learner | Practice, reflection, corrections, blockers, evidence submission | Artifacts, self-review, corrected attempt |
CDC’s Quality Training Standards include assessments linked directly to objectives and name exercises, observed practice, and problem solving among assessment options. Apply that pattern to the job. A quiz may support product knowledge; a roleplay supports simulated conversation skill; a reviewed production artifact supports transfer. No one artifact proves every layer.
Print the pre-day-one checklist
PRE-DAY-ONE — PREREQUISITES AND SAFE START
Row notation: ☐ Task · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
☐ Approved role profile, outcomes, competencies, authority, and escalation boundaries · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
☐ 30/60/90 tasks, gates, rubrics, and status definitions shared with learner · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
☐ Manager time, buddy, shadow hosts, practice calendar, and gate dates reserved · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
☐ Device, identity, email, calendar, CRM, required sales systems, knowledge base, support channels, and MFA provisioned · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
☐ Permissions mapped to current role and approved; administrative access excluded unless explicitly required · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
☐ Sandbox or synthetic account, contact, activity, and opportunity records prepared · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
☐ Approved product, pricing, proof, security, legal, privacy, recording, AI, and escalation materials current · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
☐ Materials checked for keyboard access, readable structure, alternatives, captions, and usable format · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
☐ Confidential route for accessibility, accommodation, language, schedule, or equipment support communicated · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
☐ First-week schedule, meeting links, locations, timezone, breaks, and contact details confirmed · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
☐ Failure plan tested: locked account, missing tool, unavailable manager, inaccessible material, and incident escalation · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
The sales onboarding first-week guide provides a detailed schedule for the first five days. This page keeps only the tasks and controls that must appear in the signed execution record.
Days 1–30: establish safe foundations
Month one should establish safe access, contextual knowledge, system fluency, and simulated skill. Keep production authority narrow until critical access, claim, consent, and workflow behaviors are demonstrated.
DAYS 1–30 — FOUNDATION AND SIMULATED PRACTICE
☐ Explain role outcome, buyer impact, workflow boundaries, manager expectations, and support path · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision/gate ___
☐ Distinguish ICP, persona, problem, trigger, alternative, disqualifier, and unknown in representative cases · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision/gate ___
☐ Demonstrate approved product use cases, limits, proof boundaries, and safe “I do not know” escalation · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision/gate ___
☐ Apply approved pricing, discount, security, privacy, legal, accessibility, and procurement escalation rules · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision/gate ___
☐ Complete identity, MFA, data handling, synthetic-data, recording, communication, and incident exercises · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision/gate ___
☐ Navigate CRM fields, stages, activity records, ownership, next steps, dates, sources, and correction path in sandbox · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision/gate ___
☐ Map the complete role workflow from assigned input to documented handoff · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision/gate ___
☐ Observe representative outreach, call, deal, and handoff examples with pre-brief and debrief · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision/gate ___
☐ Run roleplay for opening, discovery or qualification, objection, next step, and accurate record · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision/gate ___
☐ Run failure cases: missing data, wrong contact, unsupported claim, opt-out, system outage, and escalation · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision/gate ___
☐ Self-review one attempt, identify evidence, name one correction, and complete a varied retest · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision/gate ___
☐ Complete day-30 evidence packet and manager read-back · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision/gate ___
Do not add universal call, email, meeting, or quota targets to this printable. Set role-specific activity and outcome expectations only after the team defines the sales motion, historical context, territory, opportunity, ramp policy, and data. Checklist completion is not a productivity claim.
Sign the day-30 knowledge and practice gate
DAY-30 GATE — SAFE ACCESS, KNOWLEDGE IN CONTEXT, SIMULATED SKILL
Gate 0 safe access: ☐ Accepted ☐ Revise ☐ Blocked · evidence refs ____________________ · reviewer/date ____________________
Gate 1 contextual knowledge: ☐ Accepted ☐ Revise ☐ More evidence · evidence refs ____________________ · reviewer/date ____________________
Gate 2 simulated skill: ☐ Accepted ☐ Revise ☐ More evidence · evidence refs ____________________ · reviewer/date ____________________
Critical unmet criteria: ______________________________________________________________________________
Month-two authority: ☐ Observe ☐ Draft for review ☐ Co-lead ☐ Supervised live task ☐ Other boundary __________
Required support/remediation: _________________________________________________________________________
Decision: ☐ Ready for bounded supervised work ☐ Ready with conditions ☐ More evidence required ☐ Remediate/retest
Learner comments: ___________________________________________________________________________________
Manager signature/date: ____________________ · learner acknowledgement/date: ____________________ · program owner: ____________________
“Ready with conditions” must name the condition, authority boundary, evidence, owner, and review date. It cannot function as an undocumented pass. Use the deeper sales onboarding certification guide to design rubrics, assessor calibration, retests, and decision records.
Days 31–60: apply the workflow under supervision
Month two tests whether learning transfers into representative work with active support. The learner prepares, performs within the approved boundary, records the result, self-reviews, and receives evidence-based feedback.
DAYS 31–60 — SUPERVISED WORKPLACE TRANSFER
☐ Research a real assigned account from approved sources; label facts, hypotheses, gaps, and source dates · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
☐ Draft permitted outreach with account-specific reason, claim-safe proof, and approved next step; reviewer approves before send where required · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
☐ Prepare a representative call using CRM history, current context, objective, questions, risks, and escalation · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
☐ Observe, co-lead, then lead the approved call segment under stated supervision · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
☐ Handle objection, ambiguity, missing information, and escalation without inventing a claim · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
☐ Produce reviewed notes, decisions, next steps, owners, dates, and CRM field suggestions · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
☐ Correct one deliberately seeded CRM error and explain the downstream impact · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
☐ Complete one structured shadow debrief and one reviewed live-work artifact each week · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
☐ Review opt-out, consent, recording, privacy, security, pricing, or legal escalation encountered in context · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
☐ Lead a manager review that separates fact, assumption, evidence, risk, blocker, and requested help · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
☐ Complete corrections from feedback and submit varied evidence, not the same memorized scenario · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
☐ Assemble day-60 transfer packet and proposed month-three authority · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
Sample live work should be representative, not only the learner’s best example. Adapt the sales coaching call-review rubric to the role and publish it before observation. When natural opportunity volume is limited, extend supervision or use controlled scenarios rather than inventing a fixed sample that the learner could not access.
Sign the day-60 transfer gate
DAY-60 GATE — SUPERVISED TRANSFER
Representative work sampled: ____________________ · sample plan and limitations: __________________________
Customer/product evidence: ☐ Accepted ☐ Revise ☐ More evidence · refs/reviewer _____________________________
Conversation evidence: ☐ Accepted ☐ Revise ☐ More evidence · refs/reviewer _________________________________
Workflow/CRM evidence: ☐ Accepted ☐ Revise ☐ More evidence · refs/reviewer _________________________________
Claim, data, consent, and escalation behavior: ☐ Accepted ☐ Revise ☐ Blocked · refs/reviewer __________________
Month-three authority and exclusions: __________________________________________________________________
Manager support still required: ________________________________________________________________________
Decision: ☐ Ready for controlled ownership ☐ Ready with conditions ☐ More evidence required ☐ Remediate/retest
Manager signature/date: ____________________ · learner acknowledgement/date: ____________________ · subject owner: ____________________
Days 61–90: transfer controlled ownership
Month three transfers only the work that the learner can perform within the defined authority. Continue manager sampling, add variation, and require correction behavior. Independence does not mean the absence of support or escalation.
DAYS 61–90 — CONTROLLED OWNERSHIP
☐ Own an assigned book of work with priorities, rationale, source dates, and manager-approved boundaries · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
☐ Execute the normal preparation, conversation, follow-through, and CRM loop in sampled cases · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
☐ Adapt to a second persona, segment, trigger, objection, or deal stage without leaving approved claims · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
☐ Identify when product, price, security, privacy, legal, finance, accessibility, or approval expertise is required · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
☐ Maintain opportunity owner, stage, amount, close date, next step, date, evidence, and risk in sampled records · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
☐ Lead an account, pipeline, forecast, or work review appropriate to the role · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
☐ Complete a handoff with buyer context, commitments, evidence, owner, dates, and unresolved items · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
☐ Identify one own error, correct source and downstream state, notify affected owners, and add prevention · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
☐ Demonstrate help-seeking before crossing a claim, data, consent, price, security, or authority boundary · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
☐ Complete final learner reflection: strengths, evidence, gaps, support, and next practice · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
☐ Manager completes final representative sample and documents limitations · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
☐ Create ongoing coaching plan, owner, cadence, first review, and recertification triggers · owner ___ · due ___ · evidence ___ · status ___ · blocker/owner/due ___ · reviewer/date ___ · decision ___
If the role uses Gangly, practice the documented connected workflow through Workflow Sequencer within the learner’s approved access: signal, rep-reviewed outreach, call preparation, live guidance where permitted, reviewed post-call notes, and CRM follow-through. This is workflow practice, not proof that software shortened ramp or certified readiness.
Sign the day-90 readiness and coaching handoff
DAY-90 GATE — CONTROLLED OWNERSHIP AND COACHING HANDOFF
Approved independent work: __________________________________________________________________________
Work that remains supervised or prohibited: _____________________________________________________________
Representative evidence and known limitations: __________________________________________________________
Critical claim/data/consent/security behaviors: ☐ Accepted ☐ Revise ☐ More evidence · reviewer ______________
Workflow and CRM integrity: ☐ Accepted ☐ Revise ☐ More evidence · reviewer ________________________________
Conversation and handoff: ☐ Accepted ☐ Revise ☐ More evidence · reviewer _________________________________
Final decision: ☐ Ready within stated authority ☐ Ready with conditions ☐ Evidence required ☐ Remediate/retest
Ongoing coaching focus, owner, evidence, and first review date: ____________________________________________
Recertification triggers: product/process/policy/system/role change, material error, long inactivity, other ______
Learner comments: ___________________________________________________________________________________
Manager signature/date: ____________________ · learner acknowledgement/date: ____________________
Enablement/program owner: ____________________ · other authorized reviewer: ____________________
The final decision does not set automatic quota, compensation, promotion, discipline, or employment outcomes. Those decisions belong to qualified organizational owners and applicable processes. The checklist documents work readiness within stated evidence and authority.
Track the manager cadence on the same artifact
Manager delivery is part of the checklist, not an invisible dependency. Track whether the manager supplied examples, observation, feedback, access escalation, and gate decisions on time. A learner cannot demonstrate work they were not allowed to perform.
| Cadence | Manager commitment | Printable evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Daily at start, then taper | Clear access, schedule, safety, and urgent blockers | Blocker, owner, due date, resolution |
| Weekly 1:1 | Review evidence, support, workload, and one next practice | Observed behavior and commitments |
| Weekly practice | Run or assign a varied scenario and deliver feedback | Rubric, self-review, next attempt |
| Weekly live-work sample | Observe a representative artifact within permissions | Evidence reference, limitations, correction |
| Gate review | Read evidence, decide authority, record conditions | Signed decision and remediation if required |
| Post-onboarding | Move unresolved development into normal coaching | Focus, cadence, owner, review date |
Use a weekly manager line: planned observations ___ · delivered ___ · feedback due ___ · delivered ___ · blockers accepted ___ · cleared ___ · missing examples/resources ___ · gate risk ___. Review manager delivery in the onboarding feedback loop after each cohort.
Use a remediation and retest record
Remediation should name an observable gap and a fair new chance to demonstrate the same criterion. Do not rewrite the pass rule after the attempt, repeat the same script until it is memorized, or average a failed critical safety behavior into a passing total.
REMEDIATION AND RETEST RECORD
Criterion and rubric version: _________________________________________________________________________
Attempt date, scenario, assessor: ______________________________________________________________________
Observed evidence, not trait judgment: _________________________________________________________________
Why the evidence did not meet the published criterion: ___________________________________________________
Critical impact and current work boundary: ______________________________________________________________
Support action and owner: _____________________________________________________________________________
Learner practice and evidence required: _________________________________________________________________
Retest date, varied scenario, assessor, and same criterion: ________________________________________________
Retest decision: ☐ Accepted ☐ Revise ☐ More evidence ☐ Escalate under applicable process
Learner comments/correction request: __________________________________________________________________
Manager/assessor signature: ____________________ · learner acknowledgement: ____________________
Separate causes before assigning remediation: access, instruction, example quality, practice opportunity, feedback timing, system failure, language or accessibility barrier, role clarity, workload, or demonstrated behavior. Fix the system cause when the system failed. Provide an appropriate correction or appeal route for scoring or evidence errors.
Check accessibility, access, and security
Access readiness requires both successful login and appropriate authority. The FTC’s Start with Security guide recommends avoiding unnecessary personal data in training, using fictitious information when possible, restricting sensitive data on a need-to-know basis, and limiting administrative access. Do not copy real buyer records into roleplay files merely because the learner will eventually use the CRM.
NIST’s current small-business MFA guidance explains that MFA requires more than a username and password and includes questions about limiting access to job need, removing access when needs change, and restricting administrative privileges. Use the organization’s approved identity and access process; a signed paper box is evidence to verify, not the control itself.
- ☐ Identity and MFA tested without sharing credentials or recovery codes.
- ☐ Permissions match present role tasks; high-risk or administrative rights have named approval.
- ☐ Sandbox or synthetic data is used for practice where real personal or confidential data is unnecessary.
- ☐ Recording, monitoring, AI, retention, correction, deletion, and incident paths are communicated for relevant tools.
- ☐ Access change and removal triggers are documented for role change, leave, transfer, or exit.
For digital training, W3C’s WCAG 2.2 Recommendation provides testable criteria including text alternatives, captions, adaptable structure, keyboard operation, and understandable content. It also states that the guidelines do not address every user need. Check the actual learner path, provide accessible alternatives, and keep a confidential support or accommodation route. Do not claim WCAG conformance from this checklist alone.
- ☐ Headings, reading order, labels, instructions, links, and error messages are understandable.
- ☐ Keyboard operation, visible focus, zoom, contrast, and non-color status cues are tested.
- ☐ Meaningful images have text alternatives; video has captions and required alternatives.
- ☐ Timed tasks, roleplays, schedules, and evidence formats allow approved adjustments.
- ☐ Remote learners have timezone-aware live options, accessible asynchronous materials, and reliable support; use the remote onboarding guide for delivery adaptations.
Review a worked readiness decision
The worked example demonstrates why a completion percentage cannot waive a critical criterion. “Riya” is a synthetic AE learner. At the day-30 review, seven critical rows are due. Six are accepted. The product-claim boundary roleplay is marked Revise because the learner offered an unapproved discount and presented a roadmap item as available.
| Critical row | Status | Evidence | Decision impact |
|---|---|---|---|
| Identity, MFA, role permissions | Accepted | Access test and approval record | Gate 0 evidence |
| Synthetic CRM workflow | Accepted | Created and corrected sandbox opportunity | Gate 0/2 evidence |
| ICP and disqualification | Accepted | Representative case exercise | Gate 1 evidence |
| Product use case and limitation | Accepted | Reviewed scenario | Gate 1 evidence |
| Product claim and pricing boundary | Revise | Roleplay rubric with exact observed errors | Critical Gate 1/2 remains open |
| Discovery and next step | Accepted | Varied roleplay rubric | Gate 2 evidence |
| Privacy and escalation case | Accepted | Synthetic failure scenario | Gate 0/2 evidence |
Critical-row closure is 6 ÷ 7 × 100 = 85.7%. The manager does not round that into a pass. The unmet row controls whether the learner may present product availability or negotiate price without active supervision. The day-30 decision is “ready for bounded supervised work, with product claims and pricing reviewed before buyer delivery.”
The remediation record names the two observed behaviors, assigns the product owner to provide current approved material, assigns the manager to run three varied synthetic cases, and schedules a new assessment under the same criterion. On retest, Riya distinguishes current from planned capability, states the approved price boundary, and escalates the exception. The assessor marks the row Accepted and updates the authority boundary. The example does not predict quota or productivity; it shows a reproducible evidence and decision trail.
Measure the program separately from the individual checklist. The sales onboarding metrics guide covers delivery, learning, transfer, and outcome measures without treating course completion as business impact. The onboarding technology guide helps decide which parts belong in an LMS, CRM, coaching system, or controlled document.
Print the master 30/60/90 sign-off page
MASTER 30/60/90 SIGN-OFF
Learner/role: ____________________ · manager: ____________________ · start: __________ · program/rubric version: __________
PRE-DAY ONE · role/objectives ___ · owners/calendar ___ · device/identity/MFA ___ · least access ___ · synthetic practice ___ · current materials ___ · accessibility/support route ___
DAYS 1–30 · customer/ICP ___ · product/claims ___ · process ___ · systems ___ · observation ___ · roleplay ___ · failure/escalation ___ · Gate 0 ___ · Gate 1 ___ · Gate 2 ___
Day-30 decision/authority/conditions: ___________________________________________________________________
DAYS 31–60 · research ___ · reviewed outreach ___ · call prep ___ · shadow/co-lead ___ · supervised live work ___ · notes/CRM ___ · correction ___ · Gate 3 ___
Day-60 decision/authority/conditions: ___________________________________________________________________
DAYS 61–90 · controlled book ___ · independent sampled work ___ · variation ___ · CRM integrity ___ · review/handoff ___ · correction ___ · escalation ___ · Gate 4 ___
Day-90 decision/authority/conditions: ___________________________________________________________________
MANAGER DELIVERY · checks ___ · practice ___ · observation ___ · feedback ___ · blockers ___ · gate decisions ___
ACCESS/SECURITY · permissions ___ · MFA ___ · synthetic data ___ · recording/AI ___ · incident path ___ · removal triggers ___
ACCESSIBILITY · materials tested ___ · alternatives ___ · captions ___ · keyboard ___ · support route ___ · approved adjustments ___
REMEDIATION · open criteria ___ · work boundaries ___ · support owners ___ · retests ___ · correction route ___
HANDOFF · ongoing coaching focus ___ · owner ___ · cadence ___ · first review ___ · recertification triggers ___
Final: ☐ Ready within stated authority ☐ Ready with conditions ☐ More evidence required ☐ Remediate/retest
Known evidence limits: _______________________________________________________________________________
Learner comments: ___________________________________________________________________________________
Learner acknowledgement/date: ____________________ · manager signature/date: ____________________
Enablement/program owner/date: ____________________ · authorized subject owner/date: ____________________
Print the control page, the relevant phase page, the gate sheet, and any remediation record. Keep evidence in the approved repository and write references on paper rather than printing buyer or employee data unnecessarily. Then return to the full sales onboarding program when you need to revise objectives, curriculum, evaluation, or cohort-level design.