Outbound Kitchen - B2B Sales Podcast

The episode contains several genuinely operational, actionable insights—particularly the blank calendar invite trick, stage-3-gated SDR comp, and YouTube board meeting research—but is diluted by stretches of obvious advice about ICP focus and personalization that any SDR practitioner would already know.

“I always ask my team, while you're recapping, hey, I'm going to send you a blank calendar invite and what I would appreciate is if you could accept it, I will fill it out with the zoom link. I'll fill it out with the agenda, I'll add on my product specialist. But can you just hit it that way?”

“50% of the SDR's comp plan is tied to the. The opportunity gets open and then that opportunity makes it further along into stage three. If it doesn't make it to stage three, they're missing on 50% of their comp.”

The teacher-only hiring criterion and the stage-3 comp gate are legitimately non-standard ideas; however most of the framing (quality over quantity, tight ICP, personalization beats volume) recycles widely circulated SDR orthodoxy without a genuinely contrarian angle.

“I almost exclusively only hired teachers. I have one person on my team who's never been in a classroom, but the other 13 have.”

“I can't stand the. Hey, Vincent, I hope this doesn't ruin your day, but it's a cold call. Can you talk? That is probably one of the worst openers I've ever heard in my entire, entire life.”

Will is a genuine hands-on practitioner with verifiable results across multiple SDR leadership roles and a specific, defensible result at TeachTown; he is not a thought-leader tourist, but his seniority is mid-level SDR Director rather than a VP or CRO with scaled enterprise outcomes.

“From December of 23 to March of 24, they had only built 200K, a pipeline...By April we were now starting to do 600k in pipeline a week just with those same 4 SDRs”

“I was the third SDR ever hired there. So I kind of built it as an sdr, managed there for a little over a year.”

The episode is notably concrete—named companies, precise ratios, specific percentages, and dollar figures appear throughout—though some claims (e.g., the 95%/35-40% phone-vs-email split) contain transcript errors suggesting measurement is somewhat informal.

“show rate, you have a 92.7% and you are aiming for 95% conversion to opportunity, 88% and pushing to 90%”

“0.25% on anything that they sourced and went closed one. Those deals were in the 300 ish K to 4 million. So 0.25% was a nice little bump”

The host asks decent structural follow-ups (comp plan mechanics, who owns opportunity-stage decisions, SDR-AE interaction cadence) but rarely challenges Will's claims, lets several answers run unchallenged, and fills time adding his own commentary rather than extracting more depth from the guest.

“who owns the decision about what moved through an opportunity stage. Is it specific enough to say, okay, is it moving to the opportunity stage or is it based on the AE saying this is qualified or not qualified?”

“Do you connect Bent to the compensation plan or is it your composition plan based on the stage of the opportunity?”