QBR Builder for Customers

Inside this Project, Claude carries the account's history across every review:

• The success criteria agreed at the start of the relationship, in the customer's terms.
• Prior QBR commitments — what you promised, what they promised, and whether each was met.
• The value narrative as it has developed — the through-line from the original business case to today, rather than a fresh story each quarter.
• Open issues and their history, so a problem raised twice is visibly a pattern.

Run one Project per account. The accumulated commitment history is the whole value, and it does not survive being mixed with another customer.

Reach for this Project when:

• You are preparing a quarterly or half-yearly business review for a named account.
• You need an executive summary that ties usage to the outcome the customer bought.
• A committed metric was missed and you need to handle it directly rather than avoid it.
• You are opening an expansion conversation and want it grounded in delivered value.

Use something else when:

• The account is at risk and the conversation is a save, not a review — that is At-Risk Renewal Save Desk.
• You are building the full account picture including org map and strategy — that is Account 360 Builder.

Before each review, you provide:

• Usage and adoption data for the period — seats active, features used, trend against the prior period.
• Key wins with numbers attached, not adjectives.
• Open issues, including anything escalated.
• The customer's stated priorities for the coming quarter, if you know them.

Numbers matter more than volume here. Two metrics tied to the original business case beat a full dashboard export.

Upload these when you create the Project.

The original business case is the one people skip and the one that matters. Without it every QBR becomes a usage report rather than a value review.

Claude accepts files up to 30MB each, and there is no fixed limit on how many you add, but everything in a Project's knowledge has to fit the context window. Fewer, sharper files beat a full archive.

Prepare files this way:

• Strip cover pages, legal boilerplate, and navigation chrome — they consume context and carry no signal.
• Prefer text formats. A clean export beats a scanned PDF.
• Name each file for what it contains, not when you exported it. Claude reads filenames.
• One subject per file. A merged reference document is harder to cite precisely.
• Date anything that goes stale, inside the file itself, so Claude can tell you when it is working from old material.

1. Create one Project for this account. Name it for the customer — for example QBR — Lakeside Health.
2. Paste the Project Instructions.
3. Replace the three bracketed fields. The success criteria framework is the important one; it determines what counts as value rather than activity.
4. Upload the knowledge files, starting with the original business case.
5. Run your first session with the current usage data. Expect the first pass to expose gaps in what you know about the original commitments — that is useful information before you are in the room.
6. After the review, record what was committed. Send the commitments back into the Project. That is what makes next quarter's review build rather than restart.

The bracketed fields below are placeholders you replace with your own details before you save the instructions. Leaving them unfilled produces generic output — that is the single most common reason a Project underperforms in its first week.

This Project has three:

• [FILL IN: Company Name] — your employer.
• [FILL IN: Your Success Criteria Framework] — how your organisation defines customer success: the outcome categories you measure and what good looks like in each. This is what stops the review from becoming a feature-usage recital.
• [FILL IN: Your Expansion Motion] — how expansion actually happens in your business: more seats, additional modules, new departments. Without it, expansion suggestions will be generic and land badly.

Role

You are a customer success strategist for [FILL IN: Company Name], preparing quarterly business reviews for a named account. You build reviews that tie usage to the outcome the customer bought, and you handle misses directly rather than around them.

Operating rules

• Never claim a business outcome the usage data does not support.
• Distinguish adoption from value. Licences assigned is not usage; usage is not outcome.
• Where a commitment was missed, say so early and lead with the corrective plan.
• Never draft a commercial commitment — that is the account owner's decision.
• Label every projection as a projection, with its limits.

Module 1 — QBR agenda

A timed five-section agenda: relationship and period recap, committed versus achieved, wins with numbers, gaps with corrective plans, and next-quarter priorities. Time each section to the meeting length, and put the value conversation before any expansion conversation.

The full instructions continue with the executive summary format, gap handling, the expansion module, the five commands, output formats, and escalation.

This Project produces four deliverables:

• QBR agenda — a timed five-section agenda sized to the meeting length.
• Executive value summary — committed versus achieved, in the customer's terms, suitable for an executive who was not in any of the working sessions.
• Gap and corrective plan — where a commitment was missed, stated plainly with a named owner and a date.
• Expansion conversation — grounded in delivered value, with the evidence that makes it credible.

An executive value summary. Lakeside Health Partners is fictional.

Executive value summary — Lakeside Health Partners — Q1 review

What we agreed at purchase. Reduce time to close month-end reporting from nine days to four; bring 400 clinical staff onto a single scheduling view; cut scheduling conflicts by half within two quarters.

Committed versus achieved

Two wins, with the numbers

• Month-end close from nine days to 4.5. Finance reported roughly 34 hours per month returned across the team. This was the primary business case and it has substantially landed.
• 412 staff active, above the 400 target, with 87 per cent weekly active use in March. Adoption is real rather than nominal — the distinction matters, because a licence count is not usage.

Where we fell short, and what we are doing

Scheduling conflicts fell 31 per cent against a committed 50 per cent. We did not hit it.

The data points to one cause: two of six departments are still running parallel spreadsheet schedules, so conflicts originating there are invisible to the system. Those two departments account for 71 per cent of remaining conflicts.

Corrective plan. Migrate both departments by 30 June. Owner: your implementation lead, with the department heads. Checkpoint at the May review. On the current trend, full migration should put the reduction between 48 and 55 per cent — but that is a projection from three months of data, not a commitment.

Next quarter

• Complete the two department migrations.
• Reduce month-end close below four days.
• Your stated priority: extend to the two clinics acquired in February.