| Course | MT453 Professional Selling |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 2 |
| Paper type | Prospecting plan |
| Length | About 920 words, 6 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | BS in Business Administration |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for MT453 Unit 2
Thirty-One Plants, Eight Hours a Week: An MT453 Unit 2 Prospecting Plan for a Food Plant Sanitation Supplier
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
MT453: Professional Selling
Unit 2 Prospecting Plan
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
Pellston Hygiene, the plants, the scores and the territory are composite; the sources cited are real.
The Offering and the Territory
I am the South Texas territory representative for Pellston Hygiene, a composite supplier of food plant sanitation programs. We sell a package rather than a product: cleaning chemistry, foam and dosing equipment, training for sanitation crews and swab verification that shows a surface is clean before production restarts. Our programs pay off where cleaning time limits production, so prospecting starts by finding plants where that is true.
The Ideal Customer Profile
The ideal customer is a food plant that cleans with water, called wet cleaning, employs 80 to 600 people, is audited by a third party under a food safety certification scheme and runs allergen changeovers, where a line must be cleaned and verified before switching from a product containing an allergen to one that does not. Plants smaller than 80 employees rarely have a sanitation crew large enough to change how they work. Plants above 600 usually buy through corporate contracts the territory cannot reach. Without third-party audits, plants have less reason to pay for verification. Without allergen changeovers, cleaning time seldom limits output.
Where the Names Come From
Three sources supply the list. The state's register of licensed food manufacturers gives every plant's address and product type. A regional food processors' association directory adds employee counts and contacts. News of plant expansions, building permits and job postings, gathered from local business journals and job boards, shows which plants are changing. Together they produce 52 plants in the territory that make food with water-cleaned equipment.
Screening Before Scoring
Table one screens all 52 plants on the must-haves: wet cleaning, size, third-party audit and allergen changeovers. Twenty-one fail. Dry-cleaned bakeries and snack plants fail on cleaning method, since their equipment is brushed and vacuumed rather than washed. Several small tortilla makers fail on size, and two plants fail because they run a single product with no allergens. The screen comes first so that the weighted scoring spends its effort on real candidates; scoring a plant that cannot use the offering wastes time and inflates the list.
Weighted Scoring
Table two scores the 31 remaining plants on five criteria, each rated from 1 to 5 and weighted.
Allergen changeovers carry 30 percent of the score, because they are where cleaning time turns into lost production: every hour spent cleaning and verifying is an hour the line is not running. Capacity pressure carries 25 percent, since a plant that is sold out feels every lost hour, while one with idle capacity barely notices. Trigger events carry 20 percent. Contract timing with the plant's current chemical supplier carries 15 percent, because a plant near the end of a contract can switch without penalty. A reachable contact carries 10 percent: a name and a route to that person.
Trigger Events
Trigger events deserve a full paragraph, because they change when an account is worth calling. A posted job for a sanitation supervisor suggests the plant is rebuilding its cleaning program. A building permit for an expansion means new lines will need procedures written from scratch. A new contract with a grocery chain often brings a stricter audit standard and more product changeovers. Rackham (1988) observed that large sales move only once a buyer sees a problem worth the cost of solving, and a trigger often marks the moment that recognition arrives; a plant with every other quality and no trigger may simply not be ready to listen this year.
The Results
Salado Creek Foods, a San Antonio maker of queso and bean dips, scores 4.55 of 5. It runs dairy and non-dairy products on the same two lines, so it performs allergen changeovers several times a week. It has filed a permit to expand its warehouse and has just signed to supply a regional grocery chain. Its current chemical supplier's agreement is rumored to end within the year. A cold-brew coffee bottler follows at 3.70, with strong capacity pressure but fewer changeovers.
The highest-scoring plant cleans for an allergen several times a week and has just signed a contract that will make every hour of cleaning cost more.
Tiers and Hours
The 31 plants fall into three tiers. Tier one, the six plants scoring above 3.5, gets four of the eight weekly prospecting hours: research, calls and visits aimed at a first meeting within the quarter. Tier two, ten plants scoring between 2.8 and 3.5, gets three hours: a monthly touch, such as sending a short note on changeover time with a relevant article, and watching for triggers. Tier three, the remaining fifteen, gets one hour: quarterly checks of news and job postings, with any trigger moving a plant up a tier.
Reviewing the Plan
Moncrief and Marshall (2005) describe how the selling process has shifted from finding any prospect to qualifying the right ones, because selling time is the scarcest resource a representative has. The plan is reviewed monthly: trigger events are rescored, plants that convert or decline leave the list and the weights themselves are revisited after the first quarter, using the plants that agreed to meetings as evidence of which criteria predicted interest. Weitz et al. (1986) found that sellers who adapt their approach to each customer perform better, and a scored list is where that adaptation begins.
References
Moncrief, W. C., & Marshall, G. W. (2005). The evolution of the seven steps of selling. Industrial Marketing Management, 34(1), 13-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2004.06.001
Rackham, N. (1988). SPIN selling. McGraw-Hill.
Weitz, B. A., Sujan, H., & Sujan, M. (1986). Knowledge, motivation, and adaptive behavior: A framework for improving selling effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 50(4), 174-191. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224298605000404
The Purdue Global MT453 Unit 2 instructions
MT453 Unit 2 calls for a prospecting plan for a defined territory and offering. Describe what you sell in a sentence or two, then define the ideal customer with criteria you can check from outside the account. Explain where the names come from. Screen every candidate on pass-or-fail requirements before scoring, so the weighted ranking spends effort only on plausible buyers. Choose four to six weighted criteria and justify each weight in a sentence. Trigger events, which change when an account is worth calling, deserve their own discussion. Report the results with the top accounts explained, then divide your available prospecting time among tiers. A note on how the plan will be reviewed shows that the weights are open to evidence. Five pages with a screening table and a scoring table is a common scope, and a composite list is often acceptable when labeled.
How this MT453 Unit 2 example is built
Pellston's plan opens by describing the program it sells, chemistry, equipment, training and verification, and why it pays where cleaning limits production. The ideal customer profile follows with a reason for each criterion. Three sources supply 52 plants. A screening section removes 21, with dry-cleaned bakeries and small tortilla makers as examples. The five weights are explained one by one. Trigger events get a paragraph, with Rackham on when buyers recognize problems. Results come next: Salado Creek at 4.55 with its reasons, under a highlighted line on why every cleaning hour will soon cost more there, and a cold-brew bottler at 3.70. Tiers and hours follow. A review section, citing Moncrief and Marshall on qualification and Weitz and colleagues on adapting to each customer, closes the plan with a monthly rescore.
Where the points sit in the MT453 Unit 2 rubric
Prospecting plans in this course earn their marks by narrowing before ranking and by justifying choices. Instructors credit an ideal customer profile with criteria that can actually be checked, rather than descriptions like growing companies. A pass-or-fail screen before weighted scoring shows method. Weights explained in a sentence each, tied to where the offering creates value, are rewarded over equal weights chosen for convenience. Trigger events are a frequent marking point because they show the student understands timing as part of qualification. Results explained account by account, not just listed, demonstrate that the scoring means something. A time allocation by tier turns the ranking into a plan. A review step shows the plan can learn. Clear tables let the grader check the arithmetic, and named sources for the prospect list add credibility.
MT453 Unit 2 help: mistakes that cost points
The commonest Unit 2 weakness is a long list of companies with no criteria explaining why they were chosen. Another is scoring every company on the list, including ones that could never buy the offering. Weights are often equal or unexplained. Students frequently skip trigger events, treating every account as equally ready. Results tend to show a ranking without saying what made the top account score highest. Time allocation is usually missing, so the plan does not say what the seller will do on Monday. Before submitting, check that your top three accounts each have at least one trigger event and one reachable contact. If one does not, either your weights are off or that account belongs lower. Then make sure every weight has a one-sentence reason tied to where your offering pays off.
Get an MT453 Unit 2 example written to your instructions
Your Unit 2 assignment probably names an offering and a territory, or asks for one of your choosing. Send that description, your region if one is set, and the rubric; a custom prospecting plan with its screen, weights and tiers built for your market follows within 24-48h. Nothing is charged for a first sample. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.
More MT453 papers and BS in Business Administration samples
- MT453 Unit 1: Discovery Selling Board Post
- MT453 Unit 3: Buying Center Analysis
- MT453 Unit 4: Pre-call Plan
- MT453 Unit 5: Discovery Question Set
- MT453 Unit 6: Seminar Reflection
- MT453 Unit 7: Role-play Script
- MT453 Unit 8: Value Proposition Memo
- MT453 Unit 9: Sales Proposal
- MT453 Unit 10: Account Plan
- MT451 Unit 2: Battery Mowing Life Cycle Analysis
- MT450 Unit 2: Fountain Pen Brand Audit
- MT438 Unit 2: Order Data Quality Audit
MT453 Unit 2 questions, answered
Can the prospect list be invented?
Many sections accept a composite or hypothetical list when the offering is hypothetical, but the reasoning must be realistic. Real sources, such as state business registrations or industry directories, make the plan more convincing even if the company names are changed. Check your prompt; some instructors want real companies in a named region and will expect you to cite where each was found.
How many criteria should the scoring use?
Four to six is typical. Fewer makes every account look alike, and more tends to hide which factor actually drives the ranking. Each criterion should trace back to something the offering changes for a buyer. If you cannot explain in one sentence why a criterion predicts a sale, it probably belongs in the qualification step instead.
Is BANT enough for qualification?
Budget, authority, need and timing remain a useful checklist, and many texts still teach it. In a complex sale it can mislead, because budgets are often created once a problem is costed and authority is spread across several people. A plan that turns each letter into a question for the specific account, and admits what is still unknown, reads stronger than the acronym alone.
Where can I find a free MT453 Unit 2 sample paper?
This page holds the full MT453 Unit 2 plan, screening 52 Texas food plants, ranking 31 on five weighted criteria and dividing eight weekly prospecting hours.
Why do allergen changeovers carry the most weight in the MT453 Unit 2 sample?
They are where cleaning time turns into lost production, which is exactly where the supplier's sanitation program pays off.