The Sales leader is an important stakeholder. Why is it important to map technology capabilities to his interests?

Question

Options

• ATo convince other people that they should care about the solution needs
• BTo better understand the impact of meeting or missing a schedule deadline
• CTo show how the solution may balance the interests of Sales, Marketing, and Finance
• DTo count the number of features or capabilities met for each stakeholder

• A
  8% (3)
• B
  13% (5)
• C
  78% (31)
• D
  3% (1)

Explanation

Mapping technology capabilities to the Sales leader's interests reveals how the solution addresses shared concerns across interconnected business functions. Sales doesn't operate in a vacuum - their goals around revenue and pipeline directly touch Marketing (leads, campaigns) and Finance (budgets, forecasts, ROI). By mapping capabilities to the Sales leader's perspective, you surface those cross-functional trade-offs and show how the solution can satisfy competing priorities simultaneously.

Why the distractors are wrong:

• A is about persuasion and advocacy - getting others to care - which is a different activity from capability mapping itself.
• B describes schedule/deadline risk analysis, which belongs in project planning, not stakeholder capability mapping.
• D describes a feature-counting exercise, which is a superficial tally with no analytical value for understanding stakeholder interests.

Memory tip: Picture the Sales leader as the bridge between Marketing (who generates demand) and Finance (who controls budgets). Capability mapping to their interests exposes that bridge - showing balance across all three. When you see "balance" and multiple departments in an answer choice, that's your signal for stakeholder capability mapping.

No community discussion yet for this question.