Skip to content
Low activation (Only 28% of 5,000 seats activated at 90 days) Feature confusion (Users unaware of AI writing suggestions; defaulting to basic spell-check use only) Executive pressure (DAT must demonstrate ROI to university leadership at upcoming quarterly review) Stakeholder gap (No direct relationship with CIO (deal signer); renewal risk if DAT loses internal support) Mixed audience: EAL learners, neurodiverse students, faculty, and administrative staff
IT-led deployment without faculty or student champion identificationLack of role-specific communication about Grammarly's value for different user groupsThe initial deployment may have covered only one access pointAI features perceived as optional or unfamiliar, not embedded in any workflow
Ask to loop in the IT admin (to check successful deployment of the software/extension) Find champions among colleagues (2-3 people) Do focus groups for EAL and Neurodiverse students to make sure the product is implemented properly and AI features are usedPlan live sessions for specific focus groups or for faculty or students who are interested to learn more about Grammarly capabilites.
Pre-QBR working session 2 weeks prior: review data together, align on narrative, rehearse answers to CIO questionsAgree on what 'success looks like' language before the room convenesAfter QBR: send follow-up summary with agreed next steps within 24 hours
Activation reaches 70%+ and is stable for 30+ daysDAT has presented ROI data to CIO with positive reception after QBR
Achieve CIO relationship before renewal conversation beginsDocument success metrics jointly with DAT so renewal is data-driven, not relationship-dependentFlag any budget cycle or procurement timeline changes early (AU academic year planning typically Q2)
Account Plan | Northbridge University
Before building any account plan, I make it a point to start with an assessment of where the account actually stands, including any risks or red flags present from day one.
General Situation Assessment
Northbridge University is a large public university across multiple Australian campuses, with 12,000 students and staff. The deal was signed by the CIO and managed day-to-day by the Director of Academic Technology (DAT). Despite a strong strategic fit, the account is exhibiting early warning signs that require structured intervention (main issue is low activation of the product). The university is realising value from approximately 1,400 users, meaning roughly 72% of the investment is currently sitting idle.
Deal Details Table
Customer Segment
Licenses Purchased
Current Stage
Date
Higher Education
5,000
Passed onboarding (90 days)
4/23/2026
There are no rows in this table
Current Risks
When approaching a new account, I always build my hypothesis around the risks first. Rather than jumping straight to solutions, I start by identifying what could go wrong or what already has, and let that shape my thinking about the root cause. The plan follows the hypothesis, not the other way around.
Root Cause Hypothesis
Only once I have a clear picture of the situation, the risks identified and my hypothesis formed, do I move to mapping stakeholders. That sequence matters: knowing what's at risk tells me who I actually need in the room, what each person's role in solving the problem is, and where the gaps in coverage are.
Stakeholder Map & Engagement Plan
Any time a deal is signed at the executive level, I treat establishing a direct relationship with that stakeholder as a priority, not a nice-to-have. In this case, the CIO holds budget authority and made the original decision to invest in Grammarly, yet there is currently no CSM touchpoint with them. All communication runs through the Director of Academic Technology, which creates a single-thread risk: if the DAT's internal position weakens or they are unable to carry the ROI narrative upward effectively, there is no executive-level relationship to fall back on. With a quarterly review on the horizon , where adoption results will be presented to university leadership, this gap becomes time-sensitive. My approach is to request a warm introduction through the DAT, framed as a progress update, and to come prepared with a concise executive summary that makes the CIO's involvement easy and valuable. The goal is to have that relationship established well before any renewal conversation begins.
Contract term: 10 months (academic year cycle). Renewal conversation should begin no later than month 6-7 meaning the activation story needs to be convincingly reversed by month 5-6 at the latest.
DAT Engagement Plan
Date from lead assignment
Topic
Goal
Day 1-5
Discovery call (below are the sub-topics of the discovery call)
Understand their version of what went wrong with activation, what internal blockers they are aware of, what the CIO expects to see at the quarterly review, and what their personal definition of success looks like. How would the ROI look for them.
Day 5
Conduct a technical audit call (into through DAT).
The technical audit call is needed because activation being at 28% after 90 days is not always a behaviour problem it can just as easily be a technical one. I need to rule out the possibility that some users simply cannot access Grammarly properly, or do not even know it is available to them because it was never properly deployed.
Different user groups need different access points. A student writing in Google Docs needs something completely different from a professor drafting research papers in Word or an administrator writing reports in Outlook. If the initial deployment only covered one access point say the browser extension on university devices, then large portions of the user base may have simply never encountered Grammarly in their natural workflow at all.
Nominate 2-3 potential faculty champions.
A champion in this context is someone inside Northbridge University who genuinely believes in Grammarly and is willing to advocate for it internally, not because we asked them to, but because they have experienced the value themselves.
The reason they matter comes down to a simple reality: people trust their colleagues more than they trust vendors.
Examples: those who work closely with EAL students, professors in English.
Focus groups are small structured conversations, typically 6 to 10 students where we ask open questions to understand their experience, barriers, and needs rather than presenting solutions. For this account I would run two separate sessions: one for EAL students and one for neurodiverse students, since their challenges and use cases are different enough to warrant distinct conversations.
In practice the sessions would be organised through the DAT and the disability support office, who already have relationships with these student cohorts and can help recruit participants in a way that feels supportive rather than intrusive.
The three live sessions are not product demos, they are workflow-based walkthroughs where participants see Grammarly applied to tasks they already do daily. Each session opens with a real use case from that specific group to establish relevance before any feature is shown.
Day 5
Ask for a warm introduction to the CIO
Offer to draft the email, so all they need to do is forward it. For now only slight introduction that I’m a new CSM that would help them to keep the wellbeing of our partnership.
Day 21
Progress check with DAT & Align on EAL and neurodiverse focus group logistics
Review early activation data, confirm champions are identified, discuss focus groups.
Day 45
Mid-point review
Assess activation trend, adjust plan if numbers are not moving, align on messaging for broader campus communication.
Day 45
Tailoring the plan based on the results
Based on the results of the efforts, tailoring the plan to ensure the renewal after the current contract ends.
Day 75
QBR preparation session
Review all data together, build the narrative, rehearse likely CIO questions, agree on what success language to use in the room.
Month 3-4 since lead assignment
Begin renewal conversation
Check in on budget cycle, confirm contract term and any opt-out clauses, understand procurement timeline for the following academic year
Ongoing
Bi-weekly syncs
Moving to monthly once adoption stabilises
There are no rows in this table
By the time I am assigned, the contract is already 90 days old and activation is already behind benchmark, which is why the early days are so action-heavy. Tasks should be created in CRM for this plan with actions or follow-ups.
CIO Engagement Plan
Date from lead assignment
Topic
Day 7-10
Send a warm introduction email via the DAT, keep it brief, professional, and forward-looking; no mention of adoption numbers at this stage; the goal is simply to establish that there is a dedicated CSM managing the account and to put a name to the relationship.
Day 45
By this point adoption should be showing meaningful improvement; reach out directly to share a brief progress update, this can be a short email with a one-page summary rather than a call. The results do the talking :)
Day 60
If the progress update lands well, propose a short 30-minute call, by now you have a story worth telling, a relationship already started, and results that justify the conversation.
Day 70 (Pre-QBR)
Ensure the CIO has a one-page pre-read summarising adoption progress and key outcomes before the quarterly review so they are not hearing the numbers for the first time in the room.
Month 3-4
Re-engage ahead of renewal, by this point the relationship should be warm enough and the results strong enough that the renewal is a straightforward conversation rather than a negotiation.
There are no rows in this table
IT Administrator Engagement Plan
Date from lead assignment
Topic
Day 7-10
Check the right deployment of the software for different types of devices and across various campuses and roles during the audit call or through email.
Day 10
Send a written summary of all outstanding technical items with clear owners and deadlines (if needed).
Day 14
Confirm all technical blockers are resolved or have a clear resolution path.
There are no rows in this table
Faculty Champions
Date from lead assignment
Topic
Day 21
First conversations, relationship building, understand their workflow, what frustrates them about student writing quality, and how they currently support students with writing. It can be done through arranging meetings with them.
Day 28
Follow up with a short personalised email proposing a specific use case to explore together. Potentially, do the training.
Day 35-40
Co-design session, build a Grammarly use case tailored to their discipline and get their input on how enablement sessions should be structured for their department.
Day 45
Involve them in delivering or endorsing at least one live enablement session peer credibility drives uptake far more than vendor-led training.
Day 60
Feature their experience in an internal success story shared with the DAT and wider academic community.
Month 3-4
Explore whether they would participate in a case study or customer spotlight ahead of renewal.
There are no rows in this table
EAL Students Focus Group Engagement
Date from lead assignment
Topic
Day 21
Run a structured focus group of 6-10 EAL students organised through the DAT, focus on awareness, access barriers, and which features would be most relevant to their academic writing needs.
Day 28
Share insights with the DAT and use them to design targeted enablement sessions specifically for EAL learners.
Day 45
Check in through the DAT on whether EAL student activation is improving following the targeted sessions.
Month 2-3
Gather student feedback or short testimonials to strengthen the equity narrative ahead of the quarterly review and renewal.
There are no rows in this table
The same strategy should be run with neurodiverse students through their faculty staff or with my presence. I would also contact Disability Support Office (potentially) and run an introductory call with them to position Grammarly explicitly as an accessibility tool, not just a writing tool, this framing resonates with disability support professionals and makes adoption feel relevant to their work. I would keep them informed of neurodiverse student adoption progress and treat them as a long-term internal ally rather than a one-time contact.
Enablement Plan
Live session #1 – Students (45 min): what Grammarly does beyond spellcheck – AI suggestions walkthrough in Google Docs – Q&A
Live session #2 – Faculty (45 min): AI suggestions in Word/Docs – feedback mode demo – Q&A
Live session #3 – Admin Staff (45 min): tone settings – Outlook integration – clarity suggestions – Q&A
All sessions recorded and shared by DAT for async access across campuses + Focus groups will be active.
Customer Goals, Success Metrics & ROI Framework
I align every engagement to Northbridge's two stated primary use cases, mapped to measurable outcomes the DAT can present to leadership.
This is how definition of success would look like (for 6 months) – KPI:
Seat activation rate
≥ 70% (3,500 active users)
CIO relationship established
Got a direct touchpoint within 45 days
QBR outcome
Positive reception; renewal path confirmed
Customer sentiment (DAT)
NPS (Net Promoter Score) ≥ 8
Expansion conversation opened
Northbridge expands or formally commits to roadmap
There are no rows in this table
QBR Preparation
How I Prepare the DAT
Utilisation – how much of the paid value is being used
Contract Basics
Licenses
5,000
Price per seat per month
$20
Contract length
10 months
Total contract value
$1,000,000
There are no rows in this table
Current State (28% activation)
Active users
1,400
Inactive users
3,600
Value being realised
$280,000 worth of usage
Value sitting idle
$720,000
Effective cost per active user
$200 over 10 months
(1,000,00/5,000 = 200)
Per-seat price as contracted
$200 over 10 months
Overpaying per active user by
3.6x (1,000,000 / 1,400) = 714
714/200 =3,57
There are no rows in this table
Target State (70% activation)
Active users
3,500
Inactive users
1,500
Value being realised
$700,000 worth of usage
Value still idle
$300,000
Effective cost per active user
~$286 over 10 months
Overpaying per active user by
~1.4x
There are no rows in this table
Expansion & Renewal Strategy
Northbridge has 12,000 students and staff; only 5,000 are licensed. The remaining 7,000 represent a natural expansion opportunity, but only after activation and value are established.
Expansion Triggers (I will not pitch before)
At this point I can also reach out to Account Manager to finalise this growth opportunity.
Renewal Risk Mitigation
My working hypothesis is that the unlicensed population falls into three segments: postgraduate and research students not included in the initial rollout scope; faculty and academic staff in departments that were deprioritised during initial deployment, and professional and administrative staff across campuses who fall outside academic technology's primary remit.
Account Plan Risks Register
Risk name
Impact
Mitigation
DAT loses internal support before QBR
No executive sponsor, renewal risk
Accelerate CIO introduction; arm DAT with ROI story
Activation remains below 40%
Leadership loses confidence; competitor evaluation
Trigger Grammarly success team support; consider guided onboarding sprint
EAL/neurodiverse needs unmet by standard rollout
Equity use case fails, core reason for purchase undermined
Run dedicated EAL focus group, surface Grammarly accessibility features proactively
CIO replaced or restructure occurs
Loss of executive awareness of investment
Ensure documented value on file
There are no rows in this table
This account plan does not operate in isolation. At key points I will pull in internal support to ensure Northbridge gets the right expertise, not just CSM bandwidth. Northbridge is a complex, multi-campus account with a specific equity mandate, knowing when to bring in support is part of managing it well.
How would I engage with internal Grammarly team members for this account success
Example
Situation
Internal resource to engage
Technical deployment issues identified in audit
Solutions Engineer or IT onboarding specialist
EAL/neurodiverse feature questions beyond standard CS knowledge
Product specialist or accessibility-focused CS colleague
Activation remains below 40% despite enablement efforts
CS leadership, escalate for a guided onboarding sprint or executive sponsor engagement
QBR preparation and ROI narrative
CS leadership review of one-pager before it goes to the DAT
Expansion conversation opens
Hand off to Account Manager with full context; participate in first call
There are no rows in this table
Want to print your doc?
This is not the way.
This is not the way.
Try clicking the ··· in the right corner or using a keyboard shortcut (
CtrlP
) instead.