Shift RM 80k Q3 paid-ads budget from Google Search to LinkedIn ABM

Auto-generated from NBPA, APPA agents based on the prior 24-hour signal window.


Reallocate 6 senior creatives from saturated retail to BFSI pitch

Auto-generated from DPMA, CWFA agents based on the prior 24-hour signal window.


Promote 2 mid-tier accounts to a dedicated 4-person pod

Auto-generated from APPA, CWFA agents based on the prior 24-hour signal window.


Switch 3 SaaS subscriptions to consolidated procurement

Auto-generated from TSTA agents based on the prior 24-hour signal window.


Escalate 2 account leads showing burnout

Auto-generated from CWFA, APPA agents based on the prior 24-hour signal window.


Repitch Tealive-style FMCG retainer with insight-led narrative

Composite RFP-trigger score on the RM 4.2M FMCG retainer (held since 2022) jumped to 51 — Nielsen reports 0.3 pp share loss vs P&G/Unilever last 8 weeks, new CMO ex-Mondelez confirmed on LinkedIn, and Meltwater shows the brand's media voice down 22 %. Window to pre-empt formal RFP estimated at 8-10 weeks.

RFP-trigger score hit 51 — pre-empt before tender goes out

The retainer has shown three of four classical pre-churn markers in the last 14 days: new CMO from a competing FMCG (Mondelez alum, joined 9 May), -22 % share-of-voice in Meltwater (May-12 → May-22), and a 0.3 pp Nielsen offtake decline in chilled-beverage category. Historic agency-base shows that when the composite RFP-trigger score crosses 70, 73 % of accounts go to tender within 6 weeks. Best pre-empt move is an unsolicited insight deck framed around the new CMO's Mondelez D2C playbook, not a defensive retainer-renewal pitch.

Composite RFP-trigger score (7-day): 12 → 18 → 24 → 31 → 38 → 44 → 51

Nielsen chilled-beverage share: -0.3 pp vs 8-week trailing baseline

Meltwater share-of-voice: 18.4 % → 14.3 % (May-12 → May-23)

New CMO LinkedIn post 14-May referencing 'data-led brand storytelling' — keyword match to our 2024 Petronas pitch deck

Internal historic base: 38 of 52 accounts (73 %) with RFP-score >70 went to tender within 42 days

Spin up 3-person tiger team (Strategy lead + Planner + Senior Creative) for 9 working days; budget RM 48k internal cost

Deliver unsolicited insight deck by 12 Jun, framed on Mondelez D2C precedent + Malaysian Gen-Z chilled-beverage shift

Reserve RM 22k for proprietary research panel (n=400, Klang Valley + Penang 18-34)

If the CMO has already locked an incumbent challenger (Naga DDB and M&C Saatchi both rumoured to be circling per industry gossip last week), the tiger-team spend becomes sunk cost at ~RM 70k. Probability estimated at 40 % based on absence/presence of competitor LinkedIn activity around the account's procurement lead.

Account health flipped amber on May-19 — three relationship anchors gone

Our two strongest relationships at the client (ex-Brand Director and ex-Trade Marketing Head, both since 2022) have rotated out in the last 90 days. The remaining anchor — Senior Brand Manager — has cancelled 2 of the last 3 weekly status meetings. Combined with a 0.3 pp share decline that will land on the new CMO's first quarterly review, the account is now functionally an open opportunity even though the retainer is technically locked until October. Recommend treating it as a new-business pitch funded against the pitch P&L, not a renewal.

Account health composite: Green (Feb) → Yellow (Apr) → Amber (May-19)

Client-side org change: 3 of 4 original buying-committee members rotated out since Feb-2026

Status-meeting attendance from client side: 100 % (Q1) → 67 % (Apr) → 33 % (last 3 weeks)

Retainer fee: RM 4.2M ARR; expansion upside if we win pitch: +RM 1.4M (digital + commerce scope)

Margin on existing retainer: 22 % (vs 28 % portfolio avg) — even retention is suboptimal without rescope

Re-budget account from 'retention' to 'pitch' P&L line — unlocks RM 70k discretionary spend

CEO + Group Account Director to request face-to-face with new CMO within 14 days (warm intro available via mutual board member at MARC)

Quietly freeze any scope-creep concessions on the current retainer until pitch outcome is clear

If we treat it as a pitch and the new CMO interprets that as us 'giving up' on the retainer, we accelerate the very tender we're trying to pre-empt. The face-to-face conversation must be framed as a refresh, not a save. Misframing probability ~30 % depending on Group Account Director's read of the CMO.

crm:account-health-score linkedin:client-org-changes-90d calendar:status-meeting-attendance finance:retainer-margin-trend memory:marc-board-warm-intro

RFP-trigger composite score — FMCG retainer (0-100)

Below pre-empt threshold but trajectory steep.


Reallocate 6 senior creatives from saturated retail accounts to Maybank-style BFSI pitch

BFSI pitch shortlist confidence climbed to 62 after the chemistry session on 2026-05-21; client signalled they want senior creative weight visible in the final round. Meanwhile our 4 largest retail accounts are running at 84 % creative utilization with 11 days of float remaining on next sprint.

Retail pod at 84 % util — 6 senior heads can be lifted for 18 days without slipping

Studio-wide utilization heatmap shows the 4 retail accounts (Mr DIY-style, Watsons-style, Padini-style, AEON-style) collectively running 84 % but the bottleneck is junior/mid execution, not senior conceptual work. The 6 senior creatives in question have <14 hours/week of true creative direction load — the rest is review cycles which Mid+ can absorb with a 2-day handover. Pitch demand is 6 seniors × 18 working days = 864 hours, which is exactly the slack visible in the heatmap once we ringfence junior+mid for execution. No retail SOW slips if handover starts within 48 hours.

Studio utilization heatmap (retail cluster): 84 % blended, but senior-only load 38 %

BFSI pitch demand: 864 senior-hours over 18 working days (Strategy 30 %, Concept 50 %, Final art-direction 20 %)

Float on next sprint (retail): 11 days (Mr DIY-style campaign launches 18-Jun, others 25-Jun+)

Historic precedent — Mar 2025 BFSI pitch (CIMB-style): same lift pattern, 0 SOW slippage, won pitch RM 2.8M

Junior+mid bench depth: 14 heads available for execution backfill, 9 currently <60 % utilized

Lock 6 seniors (3 ACDs, 2 Senior Copywriters, 1 Senior Designer) on BFSI pitch from D+2 to D+20

Run 2-day handover: each senior pairs with the mid taking over their retail review queue

Daily 15-min retail-cluster standup for the 18-day window — Delivery Lead chairs, escalation path direct to COO

If any of the 4 retail clients triggers an unscheduled creative request (e.g. reactive campaign for Hari Raya Haji which falls in the lift window), the mid bench may not have the seniority to land it. Probability of at least one such request: ~45 %, mitigated by keeping 1 ACD on 20 % flex-back time. Expected impact if it lands: ~RM 60k overtime + 1 weekend.

BFSI shortlist confidence 62 — chemistry session signal was 'we want your A-team visible'

Post-chemistry debrief from the BFSI procurement lead (informal channel via our planning director) confirmed: the bank's CMO explicitly asked who would be 'in the room and on the deck' in final round. They have rejected two previous shortlists for being 'pitched by seniors, delivered by interns'. Our win-rate when senior creatives present and own the work end-to-end is 62 % (8 of 13 pitches 2023-2025); when we field a thinner senior layer it drops to 31 %. The 6-senior commitment also gives us 2 distinct creative routes to walk into the room with, which the client has previously responded well to (the 2024 Hong Leong pitch landed on the second route).

BFSI pitch shortlist confidence (7-day): 30 → 38 → 44 → 50 → 55 → 58 → 62

Senior-led pitch win rate: 62 % (n=13); thin-senior win rate: 31 % (n=16)

Chemistry debrief 21-May: CMO direct quote 'show me your A-team'

Burnout markers on the 6 seniors: average 0.38 on Maslach short-form (range 0.0-1.0), well below 0.55 amber threshold

Two-route pitch precedent: 2024 Hong Leong-style won on route B, 2025 RHB-style won on route A

Assign 3 seniors to Route A (data-led customer-journey narrative), 3 to Route B (cultural-Malaysia brand-platform narrative)

ACD-1 owns final integration on D+15; planning + strategy locked from D+1

Pre-book 2 morale anchors during the 18-day push: catered dinner on D+8, half-day off after pitch submission

Creative-burnout risk for the 6 seniors is non-zero given they came off a heavy Q1. Maslach short-form scores will be re-measured at D+10; if any individual crosses 0.55 we have one immediate substitute available (returning from leave on 10 Jun). Substitution-triggering probability ~25 %.

BFSI pitch shortlist confidence (0-100)

Below commit threshold; monitor for one more cycle.


Promote 2 mid-tier accounts (Grab-style + AirAsia-style) to a dedicated 4-person Tier-1 pod

Both accounts have crossed the 'pod-ready' composite (NPS + 2-quarter spend trajectory + scope-expansion signal): combined score 148, well above the 150 commit threshold. Restructuring into a dedicated 4-person pod historically lifts account margin from 18 % → 23 % and unlocks +28-32 % ARR within 9 months.

Combined pod-readiness 148 — both accounts ready for dedicated structure

Account A (Grab-style mobility/fintech) and Account B (AirAsia-style travel/loyalty) are both currently shared across 3 different teams, which is generating ~14 % rework, ~9 % brief-misfire, and 11-day average concept-to-approval cycle (portfolio average is 6 days). Both clients have asked, separately in the last 60 days, whether we 'have a dedicated team'. Pod-restructure precedent across our last 4 pod promotions (2023-2025) shows margin 18 % → 23 %, ARR expansion +28 % to +34 %, and client NPS lift from low-40s to high-60s. Both accounts hit the historical commit pattern: >RM 1.8M ARR each, >18-month tenure, >2 stakeholders deep, scope-expansion request in the last 90 days.

Pod-readiness composite (7-day): 110 → 118 → 124 → 131 → 137 → 142 → 148

Account A: RM 2.1M ARR, 28-month tenure, asked for 'dedicated team' in QBR (Apr-22)

Account B: RM 1.9M ARR, 22-month tenure, expansion request (commerce scope, +RM 720k) tabled May-08

Margin uplift precedent across 4 prior pod promotions: 18 % → 23 %

Current shared-team rework rate: 14 %; pod-structure rework rate (historic): 4 %

Stand up Pod-7: 1 Group Account Director + 1 ACD + 1 Senior Planner + 1 Project Lead (3 internal moves + 1 backfill hire)

Communicate to both clients in same week — frame as 'in response to your QBR feedback'

Lock 90-day pod-stabilization plan with weekly margin + NPS tracking

If we move the 3 internal heads from their current accounts, 2 of the 'donor' accounts (Tier-2) lose their lead planner and lead ACD. Donor-account churn probability within 6 months: ~24 %, weighted RM exposure RM 380k. Mitigation: bring forward planned backfill hire (Senior Planner already at offer stage, start date 9 Jun).

crm:pod-readiness-composite qbr:account-a-apr-2026 scope:account-b-expansion-request memory:pod-promotion-margin-precedent hr:planner-offer-stage

Creative consistency is the bottleneck — dedicated ACD removes 9 of 11 brief-misfires

Brief-misfire diagnostic on the last 40 deliverables across both accounts: 11 were flagged by client as 'tone-off' or 'missed the strategy'. In 9 of those 11, the failure trace points to a different creative team having picked up the work without the historical context (e.g. Account A's tone-of-voice rules updated in Feb were not in the working brief for a Mar campaign). A dedicated ACD with full ownership eliminates the handover layer that's generating the misfires. The 2 ACDs identified for Pod-7 both have >12 months on at least one of the two accounts already, so context transfer is near-zero. Burnout markers on both ACDs are green (Maslach 0.31, 0.28).

Brief-misfire rate last 40 deliverables: 11/40 = 27.5 % (portfolio avg 9 %)

Failure-trace analysis: 9 of 11 misfires linked to handover/context-loss, not skill gap

Candidate ACD-1: 18 months on Account A, has 4 award credits on the brand

Candidate ACD-2: 14 months on Account B, led the 2025 loyalty-relaunch creative

Maslach short-form on both candidates: 0.31 and 0.28 (well below 0.55 amber)

Confirm both ACD candidates by D+3; offer pod-lead title bump (10 % salary delta) effective D+14

Run a 2-day creative-context lock-in workshop with both clients in week 2 of pod stand-up

Set creative-consistency KPI: brief-misfire rate <8 % within 90 days (vs current 27.5 %)

One of the two ACDs (ACD-2) was on the long-list for a competitor's recruitment push 2 months ago (per backchannel). Counter-offer risk if we don't title-bump in time: ~20 %. Mitigation: confirm title + comp uplift within 5 working days.

Pod-readiness composite — Accounts A+B (combined, 0-200)

Approaching threshold; expansion request from Account B is the swing signal.


Consolidate 3 SaaS subscriptions (Adobe CC + Figma + Frontify) into single negotiated stack

Adobe renewal lands in 36 days; Figma and Frontify both come up in Q3. Seat utilization is 64 % Adobe / 71 % Figma / 38 % Frontify against a combined RM 412k/yr spend. Bundled negotiation through Adobe's Malaysia partner (PixelHub) plus seat right-sizing yields +RM 90k/yr savings with no capability loss; PDPA posture improves via single-vendor DPA.

Adobe renewal in 36 days, 38 % seat-waste on Frontify — bundled deal banks +RM 90k/yr

Audit of the last 90 days of seat-level telemetry shows: Adobe CC has 38 active heads on 60 seats (63 % util); Figma has 51 active on 72 seats (71 %); Frontify has 19 active on 50 seats (38 %). Frontify in particular was sized for a brand-system rollout in 2024 that completed in Q3-2025 — we are paying for 31 dormant seats. Renewal-window negotiation leverage is at its highest in the final 14 days before Adobe lock-in (their Malaysia channel partner PixelHub closes Q2 numbers 30-Jun). Bundling Adobe + Figma + Frontify (or replacing Frontify with Adobe Workfront which is included in our existing Adobe enterprise tier) yields +RM 90k/yr based on indicative quotes already pulled on 18-May. PDPA angle: single-vendor data-processing-agreement reduces our processor surface from 3 to 1, simplifying our annual Section 9 audit.

Seat-renewal urgency index (7-day, lower=more urgent): 62 → 58 → 53 → 48 → 44 → 40 → 36

Adobe CC: 38/60 active = 63 % util; right-size to 45 seats saves RM 62k/yr

Figma: 51/72 active = 71 % util; right-size to 60 seats saves RM 38k/yr

Frontify: 19/50 active = 38 % util; replace with Adobe Workfront (already in enterprise tier) saves RM 92k/yr

PixelHub indicative quote 18-May: bundled discount 14 % on Adobe + 3-yr lock with annual exit clause

Lock PixelHub bundled-quote conversation by 10 Jun; finance + legal on the call

Migrate 19 active Frontify users to Adobe Workfront over 14-day handover (Studio Tech to run 2 training sessions)

Update PDPA processor registry within 7 days of contract signature; file Section 9 update with internal DPO

Frontify-to-Workfront migration loses 3 specific brand-portal features that 2 of our clients (a hospitality account and a property-developer account) use for self-serve asset download. Workaround: keep 5 Frontify seats for those clients (cost RM 14k/yr) and still net +RM 90k/yr minus RM 14k. Probability migration triggers client friction without the 5-seat carve-out: ~40 %.

Seat-renewal urgency index — Adobe stack (100=relaxed, 0=lock-in)

Outside lock-in zone; negotiating leverage still healthy.


Escalate: 2 account leads showing burnout markers, RM 12M pipeline at risk

Two account leads (GAD-3 on a Petronas-style retainer, GAD-7 on a Maybank-style retainer) crossed the 0.55 Maslach amber threshold on consecutive weeks. Combined account book under their direct lead is RM 12M ARR with RM 4.2M expansion in pipeline. Historic agency-base shows that without intervention within 14 days of amber, 37 % of such leads exit within 90 days, taking ~22 % of their account base with them. Worst-case attributable revenue impact: -RM 0.9M.

Both GADs at Maslach 0.55 — amber crossed, headed for red

Maslach short-form composite (emotional exhaustion + depersonalization + reduced personal accomplishment, weighted) moved from 0.38 to 0.55 over 7 days for both leads in parallel. Same-week parallel movement is itself a signal — typically points to a shared structural cause rather than two independent personal issues. Cross-referencing with Slack-tempo (after-hours messages), calendar density (back-to-back meeting %), and PTO balance (both have 18+ days untaken) suggests the structural cause is the Q1 pitch surge that landed 3 new accounts onto each of their books without proportional pod expansion. The classic 'success penalty' pattern.

Maslach short-form composite (7-day, both GADs averaged): 0.38 → 0.41 → 0.44 → 0.47 → 0.50 → 0.52 → 0.55

Slack after-hours messages last 14 days: GAD-3 = 142, GAD-7 = 168 (portfolio avg 38)

Calendar back-to-back % last 14 days: GAD-3 = 78 %, GAD-7 = 81 % (portfolio avg 52 %)

PTO balance: GAD-3 = 19 days untaken, GAD-7 = 22 days untaken (both eligible for forfeit warning)

Historic base rate: 37 % of GAD-grade leads at sustained Maslach >0.55 for >14 days exit within 90 days (n=27, 2022-2025)

Mandate 5-day PTO for each within next 21 days (CEO + Head of HR to broker, not direct line manager — avoids 'punishment' framing)

Stand up 'pod expansion fast-track': 2 additional senior account managers (1 internal promotion + 1 hire) onboarded by 28 Jun

Pause both GADs from new pitch participation for 60 days; re-route to Pitch Agent backlog

If either GAD perceives the intervention as a demotion signal rather than a recovery investment, the exit probability inverts and accelerates rather than reduces. Mis-framing probability ~30 %, fully dependent on how CEO + HR position the conversation. Pre-script and rehearse before the conversation lands.

hr:maslach-short-form-weekly slack:after-hours-tempo calendar:back-to-back-density hr:pto-balance memory:gad-exit-base-rate-2022-2025

RM 12M ARR and RM 4.2M pipeline sit under these 2 leads — exposure -RM 0.9M worst-case

Account-book exposure mapping: GAD-3 leads on 7 accounts (RM 6.8M ARR, including the Petronas-style retainer at RM 2.4M); GAD-7 leads on 6 accounts (RM 5.2M ARR, including the Maybank-style retainer at RM 1.9M). Combined RM 12M ARR + RM 4.2M open pipeline (BFSI pitch + 2 expansion conversations). Historic precedent across 6 GAD-grade exits 2022-2025: 22 % of the named-lead account base churns within 6 months of the exit, regardless of formal handover quality, because the client relationship was at the named-lead level. Pipeline conversion drops from agency baseline 41 % to 19 % when the named lead is mid-transition. Worst-case attributable: 22 % × RM 12M ARR + (41-19) % × RM 4.2M = -RM 0.9M.

GAD-3 account book: 7 accounts, RM 6.8M ARR, anchor account Petronas-style RM 2.4M

GAD-7 account book: 6 accounts, RM 5.2M ARR, anchor account Maybank-style RM 1.9M

Combined open pipeline under their direct lead: RM 4.2M (BFSI pitch + 2 expansion)

Historic GAD-exit account churn rate: 22 % within 6 months (n=6, 2022-2025)

Pipeline-conversion drop during mid-transition: 41 % → 19 % baseline-to-transition

Within 7 days: identify shadow-lead for each anchor account (must have >6 months of client exposure)

CEO does direct relationship anchor with both anchor-account CMOs in next 14 days (lunch, not status meeting)

Freeze any new account assignment to GAD-3 / GAD-7 until Maslach back below 0.45 for 2 consecutive weeks

If word of the burnout signal leaks externally (small KL agency market, high social density), it can spook the anchor clients and trigger the very churn we're trying to prevent. Leak probability through internal channels in a 60-day window: ~28 %. Mitigation: keep the intervention conversation to CEO + Head of HR + the 2 GADs only; do not loop in COO or Heads of Department until shadow-lead structure is in place.

Maslach short-form composite — 2 GADs averaged (0=fine, 1=critical)


Composite RFP-trigger score on the RM 4.2M FMCG retainer (held since 2022) jumped to 69 — Nielsen reports 0.6 pp share loss vs P&G/Unilever last 8 weeks, new CMO ex-Mondelez confirmed on LinkedIn, and Meltwater shows the brand's media voice down 22 %. Window to pre-empt formal RFP estimated at 5-6 weeks.

RFP-trigger score hit 69 — pre-empt before tender goes out

The retainer has shown three of four classical pre-churn markers in the last 14 days: new CMO from a competing FMCG (Mondelez alum, joined 9 May), -22 % share-of-voice in Meltwater (May-12 → May-23), and a 0.6 pp Nielsen offtake decline in chilled-beverage category. Historic agency-base shows that when the composite RFP-trigger score crosses 70, 73 % of accounts go to tender within 6 weeks. Best pre-empt move is an unsolicited insight deck framed around the new CMO's Mondelez D2C playbook, not a defensive retainer-renewal pitch.

Composite RFP-trigger score (7-day): 18 → 26 → 35 → 44 → 52 → 61 → 69

Nielsen chilled-beverage share: -0.6 pp vs 8-week trailing baseline

Meltwater share-of-voice: 18.4 % → 14.3 % (May-12 → May-23)

New CMO LinkedIn post 14-May referencing 'data-led brand storytelling' — keyword match to our 2024 Petronas pitch deck

Internal historic base: 38 of 52 accounts (73 %) with RFP-score >70 went to tender within 42 days

Spin up 3-person tiger team (Strategy lead + Planner + Senior Creative) for 9 working days; budget RM 48k internal cost

Deliver unsolicited insight deck by 5 Jun, framed on Mondelez D2C precedent + Malaysian Gen-Z chilled-beverage shift

Reserve RM 22k for proprietary research panel (n=400, Klang Valley + Penang 18-34)

If the CMO has already locked an incumbent challenger (Naga DDB and M&C Saatchi both rumoured to be circling per industry gossip last week), the tiger-team spend becomes sunk cost at ~RM 70k. Probability estimated at 28 % based on absence/presence of competitor LinkedIn activity around the account's procurement lead.

Our two strongest relationships at the client (ex-Brand Director and ex-Trade Marketing Head, both since 2022) have rotated out in the last 90 days. The remaining anchor — Senior Brand Manager — has cancelled 2 of the last 3 weekly status meetings. Combined with a 0.6 pp share decline that will land on the new CMO's first quarterly review, the account is now functionally an open opportunity even though the retainer is technically locked until October. Recommend treating it as a new-business pitch funded against the pitch P&L, not a renewal.

Account health composite: Green (Feb) → Yellow (Apr) → Amber (May-19)

Client-side org change: 3 of 4 original buying-committee members rotated out since Feb-2026

Status-meeting attendance from client side: 100 % (Q1) → 67 % (Apr) → 33 % (last 3 weeks)

Retainer fee: RM 4.2M ARR; expansion upside if we win pitch: +RM 1.4M (digital + commerce scope)

Margin on existing retainer: 22 % (vs 28 % portfolio avg) — even retention is suboptimal without rescope

Re-budget account from 'retention' to 'pitch' P&L line — unlocks RM 70k discretionary spend

CEO + Group Account Director to request face-to-face with new CMO within 14 days (warm intro available via mutual board member at MARC)

Quietly freeze any scope-creep concessions on the current retainer until pitch outcome is clear

If we treat it as a pitch and the new CMO interprets that as us 'giving up' on the retainer, we accelerate the very tender we're trying to pre-empt. The face-to-face conversation must be framed as a refresh, not a save. Misframing probability ~22 % depending on Group Account Director's read of the CMO.


BFSI pitch shortlist confidence climbed to 75 after the chemistry session on 2026-05-22; client signalled they want senior creative weight visible in the final round. Meanwhile our 4 largest retail accounts are running at 91 % creative utilization with 11 days of float remaining on next sprint.

Retail pod at 91 % util — 6 senior heads can be lifted for 18 days without slipping

Studio-wide utilization heatmap shows the 4 retail accounts (Mr DIY-style, Watsons-style, Padini-style, AEON-style) collectively running 91 % but the bottleneck is junior/mid execution, not senior conceptual work. The 6 senior creatives in question have <14 hours/week of true creative direction load — the rest is review cycles which Mid+ can absorb with a 2-day handover. Pitch demand is 6 seniors × 18 working days = 864 hours, which is exactly the slack visible in the heatmap once we ringfence junior+mid for execution. No retail SOW slips if handover starts within 48 hours.

Studio utilization heatmap (retail cluster): 91 % blended, but senior-only load 38 %

BFSI pitch demand: 864 senior-hours over 18 working days (Strategy 30 %, Concept 50 %, Final art-direction 20 %)

Float on next sprint (retail): 11 days (Mr DIY-style campaign launches 18-Jun, others 25-Jun+)

Historic precedent — Mar 2025 BFSI pitch (CIMB-style): same lift pattern, 0 SOW slippage, won pitch RM 2.8M

Junior+mid bench depth: 14 heads available for execution backfill, 9 currently <60 % utilized

Lock 6 seniors (3 ACDs, 2 Senior Copywriters, 1 Senior Designer) on BFSI pitch from D+2 to D+20

Run 2-day handover: each senior pairs with the mid taking over their retail review queue

Daily 15-min retail-cluster standup for the 18-day window — Delivery Lead chairs, escalation path direct to COO

If any of the 4 retail clients triggers an unscheduled creative request (e.g. reactive campaign for Hari Raya Haji which falls in the lift window), the mid bench may not have the seniority to land it. Probability of at least one such request: ~35 %, mitigated by keeping 1 ACD on 20 % flex-back time. Expected impact if it lands: ~RM 60k overtime + 1 weekend.

BFSI shortlist confidence 75 — chemistry session signal was 'we want your A-team visible'

BFSI pitch shortlist confidence (7-day): 38 → 46 → 54 → 61 → 67 → 71 → 75

Senior-led pitch win rate: 62 % (n=13); thin-senior win rate: 31 % (n=16)

Chemistry debrief 21-May: CMO direct quote 'show me your A-team'

Burnout markers on the 6 seniors: average 0.38 on Maslach short-form (range 0.0-1.0), well below 0.55 amber threshold

Two-route pitch precedent: 2024 Hong Leong-style won on route B, 2025 RHB-style won on route A

Assign 3 seniors to Route A (data-led customer-journey narrative), 3 to Route B (cultural-Malaysia brand-platform narrative)

ACD-1 owns final integration on D+15; planning + strategy locked from D+1

Pre-book 2 morale anchors during the 18-day push: catered dinner on D+8, half-day off after pitch submission

Creative-burnout risk for the 6 seniors is non-zero given they came off a heavy Q1. Maslach short-form scores will be re-measured at D+10; if any individual crosses 0.55 we have one immediate substitute available (returning from leave on 3 Jun). Substitution-triggering probability ~20 %.

Confidence crossed 'commit senior weight' threshold on day 7.


Both accounts have crossed the 'pod-ready' composite (NPS + 2-quarter spend trajectory + scope-expansion signal): combined score 166, well above the 150 commit threshold. Restructuring into a dedicated 4-person pod historically lifts account margin from 18 % → 26 % and unlocks +28-32 % ARR within 9 months.

Combined pod-readiness 166 — both accounts ready for dedicated structure

Account A (Grab-style mobility/fintech) and Account B (AirAsia-style travel/loyalty) are both currently shared across 3 different teams, which is generating ~14 % rework, ~9 % brief-misfire, and 11-day average concept-to-approval cycle (portfolio average is 6 days). Both clients have asked, separately in the last 60 days, whether we 'have a dedicated team'. Pod-restructure precedent across our last 4 pod promotions (2023-2025) shows margin 18 % → 26 %, ARR expansion +28 % to +34 %, and client NPS lift from low-40s to high-60s. Both accounts hit the historical commit pattern: >RM 1.8M ARR each, >18-month tenure, >2 stakeholders deep, scope-expansion request in the last 90 days.

Pod-readiness composite (7-day): 118 → 128 → 138 → 146 → 153 → 160 → 166

Account A: RM 2.1M ARR, 28-month tenure, asked for 'dedicated team' in QBR (Apr-22)

Account B: RM 1.9M ARR, 22-month tenure, expansion request (commerce scope, +RM 720k) tabled May-08

Margin uplift precedent across 4 prior pod promotions: 18 % → 26 %

Current shared-team rework rate: 14 %; pod-structure rework rate (historic): 4 %

Stand up Pod-7: 1 Group Account Director + 1 ACD + 1 Senior Planner + 1 Project Lead (3 internal moves + 1 backfill hire)

Communicate to both clients in same week — frame as 'in response to your QBR feedback'

Lock 90-day pod-stabilization plan with weekly margin + NPS tracking

If we move the 3 internal heads from their current accounts, 2 of the 'donor' accounts (Tier-2) lose their lead planner and lead ACD. Donor-account churn probability within 6 months: ~18 %, weighted RM exposure RM 380k. Mitigation: bring forward planned backfill hire (Senior Planner already at offer stage, start date 9 Jun).

Brief-misfire rate last 40 deliverables: 11/40 = 27.5 % (portfolio avg 9 %)

Failure-trace analysis: 9 of 11 misfires linked to handover/context-loss, not skill gap

Candidate ACD-1: 18 months on Account A, has 4 award credits on the brand

Candidate ACD-2: 14 months on Account B, led the 2025 loyalty-relaunch creative

Maslach short-form on both candidates: 0.31 and 0.28 (well below 0.55 amber)

Confirm both ACD candidates by D+3; offer pod-lead title bump (10 % salary delta) effective D+14

Run a 2-day creative-context lock-in workshop with both clients in week 2 of pod stand-up

Set creative-consistency KPI: brief-misfire rate <8 % within 90 days (vs current 27.5 %)

One of the two ACDs (ACD-2) was on the long-list for a competitor's recruitment push 2 months ago (per backchannel). Counter-offer risk if we don't title-bump in time: ~15 %. Mitigation: confirm title + comp uplift within 5 working days.

Combined commit threshold crossed on day 5.


Adobe renewal lands in 22 days; Figma and Frontify both come up in Q3. Seat utilization is 64 % Adobe / 71 % Figma / 38 % Frontify against a combined RM 412k/yr spend. Bundled negotiation through Adobe's Malaysia partner (PixelHub) plus seat right-sizing yields +RM 140k/yr savings with no capability loss; PDPA posture improves via single-vendor DPA.

Adobe renewal in 22 days, 38 % seat-waste on Frontify — bundled deal banks +RM 140k/yr

Audit of the last 90 days of seat-level telemetry shows: Adobe CC has 38 active heads on 60 seats (63 % util); Figma has 51 active on 72 seats (71 %); Frontify has 19 active on 50 seats (38 %). Frontify in particular was sized for a brand-system rollout in 2024 that completed in Q3-2025 — we are paying for 31 dormant seats. Renewal-window negotiation leverage is at its highest in the final 14 days before Adobe lock-in (their Malaysia channel partner PixelHub closes Q2 numbers 30-Jun). Bundling Adobe + Figma + Frontify (or replacing Frontify with Adobe Workfront which is included in our existing Adobe enterprise tier) yields +RM 140k/yr based on indicative quotes already pulled on 18-May. PDPA angle: single-vendor data-processing-agreement reduces our processor surface from 3 to 1, simplifying our annual Section 9 audit.

Seat-renewal urgency index (7-day, lower=more urgent): 55 → 49 → 43 → 37 → 31 → 26 → 22

Adobe CC: 38/60 active = 63 % util; right-size to 45 seats saves RM 62k/yr

Figma: 51/72 active = 71 % util; right-size to 60 seats saves RM 38k/yr

Frontify: 19/50 active = 38 % util; replace with Adobe Workfront (already in enterprise tier) saves RM 92k/yr

PixelHub indicative quote 18-May: bundled discount 14 % on Adobe + 3-yr lock with annual exit clause

Lock PixelHub bundled-quote conversation by 3 Jun; finance + legal on the call

Migrate 19 active Frontify users to Adobe Workfront over 14-day handover (Studio Tech to run 2 training sessions)

Update PDPA processor registry within 7 days of contract signature; file Section 9 update with internal DPO

Frontify-to-Workfront migration loses 3 specific brand-portal features that 2 of our clients (a hospitality account and a property-developer account) use for self-serve asset download. Workaround: keep 5 Frontify seats for those clients (cost RM 14k/yr) and still net +RM 140k/yr minus RM 14k. Probability migration triggers client friction without the 5-seat carve-out: ~32 %.

Renewal-window lock-in zone (<25) entered on day 7.


Two account leads (GAD-3 on a Petronas-style retainer, GAD-7 on a Maybank-style retainer) crossed the 0.55 Maslach amber threshold on consecutive weeks. Combined account book under their direct lead is RM 12M ARR with RM 4.2M expansion in pipeline. Historic agency-base shows that without intervention within 14 days of amber, 37 % of such leads exit within 90 days, taking ~22 % of their account base with them. Worst-case attributable revenue impact: -RM 1.3M.

Both GADs at Maslach 0.66 — amber crossed, headed for red

Maslach short-form composite (emotional exhaustion + depersonalization + reduced personal accomplishment, weighted) moved from 0.44 to 0.66 over 7 days for both leads in parallel. Same-week parallel movement is itself a signal — typically points to a shared structural cause rather than two independent personal issues. Cross-referencing with Slack-tempo (after-hours messages), calendar density (back-to-back meeting %), and PTO balance (both have 18+ days untaken) suggests the structural cause is the Q1 pitch surge that landed 3 new accounts onto each of their books without proportional pod expansion. The classic 'success penalty' pattern.

Maslach short-form composite (7-day, both GADs averaged): 0.44 → 0.48 → 0.52 → 0.56 → 0.60 → 0.63 → 0.66

Slack after-hours messages last 14 days: GAD-3 = 142, GAD-7 = 168 (portfolio avg 38)

Calendar back-to-back % last 14 days: GAD-3 = 78 %, GAD-7 = 81 % (portfolio avg 52 %)

PTO balance: GAD-3 = 19 days untaken, GAD-7 = 22 days untaken (both eligible for forfeit warning)

Historic base rate: 37 % of GAD-grade leads at sustained Maslach >0.55 for >14 days exit within 90 days (n=27, 2022-2025)

Mandate 5-day PTO for each within next 21 days (CEO + Head of HR to broker, not direct line manager — avoids 'punishment' framing)

Stand up 'pod expansion fast-track': 2 additional senior account managers (1 internal promotion + 1 hire) onboarded by 20 Jun

Pause both GADs from new pitch participation for 60 days; re-route to Pitch Agent backlog

If either GAD perceives the intervention as a demotion signal rather than a recovery investment, the exit probability inverts and accelerates rather than reduces. Mis-framing probability ~24 %, fully dependent on how CEO + HR position the conversation. Pre-script and rehearse before the conversation lands.

RM 12M ARR and RM 4.2M pipeline sit under these 2 leads — exposure -RM 1.3M worst-case

Account-book exposure mapping: GAD-3 leads on 7 accounts (RM 6.8M ARR, including the Petronas-style retainer at RM 2.4M); GAD-7 leads on 6 accounts (RM 5.2M ARR, including the Maybank-style retainer at RM 1.9M). Combined RM 12M ARR + RM 4.2M open pipeline (BFSI pitch + 2 expansion conversations). Historic precedent across 6 GAD-grade exits 2022-2025: 22 % of the named-lead account base churns within 6 months of the exit, regardless of formal handover quality, because the client relationship was at the named-lead level. Pipeline conversion drops from agency baseline 41 % to 19 % when the named lead is mid-transition. Worst-case attributable: 22 % × RM 12M ARR + (41-19) % × RM 4.2M = -RM 1.3M.

GAD-3 account book: 7 accounts, RM 6.8M ARR, anchor account Petronas-style RM 2.4M

GAD-7 account book: 6 accounts, RM 5.2M ARR, anchor account Maybank-style RM 1.9M

Combined open pipeline under their direct lead: RM 4.2M (BFSI pitch + 2 expansion)

Historic GAD-exit account churn rate: 22 % within 6 months (n=6, 2022-2025)

Pipeline-conversion drop during mid-transition: 41 % → 19 % baseline-to-transition

Within 7 days: identify shadow-lead for each anchor account (must have >6 months of client exposure)

CEO does direct relationship anchor with both anchor-account CMOs in next 14 days (lunch, not status meeting)

Freeze any new account assignment to GAD-3 / GAD-7 until Maslach back below 0.45 for 2 consecutive weeks

If word of the burnout signal leaks externally (small KL agency market, high social density), it can spook the anchor clients and trigger the very churn we're trying to prevent. Leak probability through internal channels in a 60-day window: ~22 %. Mitigation: keep the intervention conversation to CEO + Head of HR + the 2 GADs only; do not loop in COO or Heads of Department until shadow-lead structure is in place.


Composite RFP-trigger score on the RM 4.2M FMCG retainer (held since 2022) jumped to 88 — Nielsen reports 1.1 pp share loss vs P&G/Unilever last 8 weeks, new CMO ex-Mondelez confirmed on LinkedIn, and Meltwater shows the brand's media voice down 22 %. Window to pre-empt formal RFP estimated at 2-3 weeks.

RFP-trigger score hit 88 — pre-empt before tender goes out

The retainer has shown three of four classical pre-churn markers in the last 14 days: new CMO from a competing FMCG (Mondelez alum, joined 9 May), -22 % share-of-voice in Meltwater (May-12 → May-24), and a 1.1 pp Nielsen offtake decline in chilled-beverage category. Historic agency-base shows that when the composite RFP-trigger score crosses 70, 73 % of accounts go to tender within 6 weeks. Best pre-empt move is an unsolicited insight deck framed around the new CMO's Mondelez D2C playbook, not a defensive retainer-renewal pitch.

Composite RFP-trigger score (7-day): 24 → 35 → 47 → 58 → 68 → 78 → 88

Nielsen chilled-beverage share: -1.1 pp vs 8-week trailing baseline

Meltwater share-of-voice: 18.4 % → 14.3 % (May-12 → May-23)

New CMO LinkedIn post 14-May referencing 'data-led brand storytelling' — keyword match to our 2024 Petronas pitch deck

Internal historic base: 38 of 52 accounts (73 %) with RFP-score >70 went to tender within 42 days

Spin up 3-person tiger team (Strategy lead + Planner + Senior Creative) for 9 working days; budget RM 48k internal cost

Deliver unsolicited insight deck by 29 May, framed on Mondelez D2C precedent + Malaysian Gen-Z chilled-beverage shift

Reserve RM 22k for proprietary research panel (n=400, Klang Valley + Penang 18-34)

If the CMO has already locked an incumbent challenger (Naga DDB and M&C Saatchi both rumoured to be circling per industry gossip last week), the tiger-team spend becomes sunk cost at ~RM 70k. Probability estimated at 18 % based on absence/presence of competitor LinkedIn activity around the account's procurement lead.

Our two strongest relationships at the client (ex-Brand Director and ex-Trade Marketing Head, both since 2022) have rotated out in the last 90 days. The remaining anchor — Senior Brand Manager — has cancelled 2 of the last 3 weekly status meetings. Combined with a 1.1 pp share decline that will land on the new CMO's first quarterly review, the account is now functionally an open opportunity even though the retainer is technically locked until October. Recommend treating it as a new-business pitch funded against the pitch P&L, not a renewal.

Account health composite: Green (Feb) → Yellow (Apr) → Amber (May-19)

Client-side org change: 3 of 4 original buying-committee members rotated out since Feb-2026

Status-meeting attendance from client side: 100 % (Q1) → 67 % (Apr) → 33 % (last 3 weeks)

Retainer fee: RM 4.2M ARR; expansion upside if we win pitch: +RM 1.4M (digital + commerce scope)

Margin on existing retainer: 22 % (vs 28 % portfolio avg) — even retention is suboptimal without rescope

Re-budget account from 'retention' to 'pitch' P&L line — unlocks RM 70k discretionary spend

CEO + Group Account Director to request face-to-face with new CMO within 14 days (warm intro available via mutual board member at MARC)

Quietly freeze any scope-creep concessions on the current retainer until pitch outcome is clear

If we treat it as a pitch and the new CMO interprets that as us 'giving up' on the retainer, we accelerate the very tender we're trying to pre-empt. The face-to-face conversation must be framed as a refresh, not a save. Misframing probability ~15 % depending on Group Account Director's read of the CMO.


BFSI pitch shortlist confidence climbed to 88 after the chemistry session on 2026-05-23; client signalled they want senior creative weight visible in the final round. Meanwhile our 4 largest retail accounts are running at 97 % creative utilization with 11 days of float remaining on next sprint.

Retail pod at 97 % util — 6 senior heads can be lifted for 18 days without slipping

Studio-wide utilization heatmap shows the 4 retail accounts (Mr DIY-style, Watsons-style, Padini-style, AEON-style) collectively running 97 % but the bottleneck is junior/mid execution, not senior conceptual work. The 6 senior creatives in question have <14 hours/week of true creative direction load — the rest is review cycles which Mid+ can absorb with a 2-day handover. Pitch demand is 6 seniors × 18 working days = 864 hours, which is exactly the slack visible in the heatmap once we ringfence junior+mid for execution. No retail SOW slips if handover starts within 48 hours.

Studio utilization heatmap (retail cluster): 97 % blended, but senior-only load 38 %

BFSI pitch demand: 864 senior-hours over 18 working days (Strategy 30 %, Concept 50 %, Final art-direction 20 %)

Float on next sprint (retail): 11 days (Mr DIY-style campaign launches 18-Jun, others 25-Jun+)

Historic precedent — Mar 2025 BFSI pitch (CIMB-style): same lift pattern, 0 SOW slippage, won pitch RM 2.8M

Junior+mid bench depth: 14 heads available for execution backfill, 9 currently <60 % utilized

Lock 6 seniors (3 ACDs, 2 Senior Copywriters, 1 Senior Designer) on BFSI pitch from D+2 to D+20

Run 2-day handover: each senior pairs with the mid taking over their retail review queue

Daily 15-min retail-cluster standup for the 18-day window — Delivery Lead chairs, escalation path direct to COO

If any of the 4 retail clients triggers an unscheduled creative request (e.g. reactive campaign for Hari Raya Haji which falls in the lift window), the mid bench may not have the seniority to land it. Probability of at least one such request: ~25 %, mitigated by keeping 1 ACD on 20 % flex-back time. Expected impact if it lands: ~RM 60k overtime + 1 weekend.

BFSI shortlist confidence 88 — chemistry session signal was 'we want your A-team visible'

BFSI pitch shortlist confidence (7-day): 44 → 54 → 64 → 72 → 78 → 83 → 88

Senior-led pitch win rate: 62 % (n=13); thin-senior win rate: 31 % (n=16)

Chemistry debrief 21-May: CMO direct quote 'show me your A-team'

Burnout markers on the 6 seniors: average 0.38 on Maslach short-form (range 0.0-1.0), well below 0.55 amber threshold

Two-route pitch precedent: 2024 Hong Leong-style won on route B, 2025 RHB-style won on route A

Assign 3 seniors to Route A (data-led customer-journey narrative), 3 to Route B (cultural-Malaysia brand-platform narrative)

ACD-1 owns final integration on D+15; planning + strategy locked from D+1

Pre-book 2 morale anchors during the 18-day push: catered dinner on D+8, half-day off after pitch submission

Creative-burnout risk for the 6 seniors is non-zero given they came off a heavy Q1. Maslach short-form scores will be re-measured at D+10; if any individual crosses 0.55 we have one immediate substitute available (returning from leave on 28 May). Substitution-triggering probability ~14 %.

Confidence crossed 'commit senior weight' threshold on day 5.


Both accounts have crossed the 'pod-ready' composite (NPS + 2-quarter spend trajectory + scope-expansion signal): combined score 182, well above the 150 commit threshold. Restructuring into a dedicated 4-person pod historically lifts account margin from 18 % → 28 % and unlocks +28-32 % ARR within 9 months.

Combined pod-readiness 182 — both accounts ready for dedicated structure

Account A (Grab-style mobility/fintech) and Account B (AirAsia-style travel/loyalty) are both currently shared across 3 different teams, which is generating ~14 % rework, ~9 % brief-misfire, and 11-day average concept-to-approval cycle (portfolio average is 6 days). Both clients have asked, separately in the last 60 days, whether we 'have a dedicated team'. Pod-restructure precedent across our last 4 pod promotions (2023-2025) shows margin 18 % → 28 %, ARR expansion +28 % to +34 %, and client NPS lift from low-40s to high-60s. Both accounts hit the historical commit pattern: >RM 1.8M ARR each, >18-month tenure, >2 stakeholders deep, scope-expansion request in the last 90 days.

Pod-readiness composite (7-day): 124 → 136 → 148 → 158 → 167 → 175 → 182

Account A: RM 2.1M ARR, 28-month tenure, asked for 'dedicated team' in QBR (Apr-22)

Account B: RM 1.9M ARR, 22-month tenure, expansion request (commerce scope, +RM 720k) tabled May-08

Margin uplift precedent across 4 prior pod promotions: 18 % → 28 %

Current shared-team rework rate: 14 %; pod-structure rework rate (historic): 4 %

Stand up Pod-7: 1 Group Account Director + 1 ACD + 1 Senior Planner + 1 Project Lead (3 internal moves + 1 backfill hire)

Communicate to both clients in same week — frame as 'in response to your QBR feedback'

Lock 90-day pod-stabilization plan with weekly margin + NPS tracking

If we move the 3 internal heads from their current accounts, 2 of the 'donor' accounts (Tier-2) lose their lead planner and lead ACD. Donor-account churn probability within 6 months: ~12 %, weighted RM exposure RM 380k. Mitigation: bring forward planned backfill hire (Senior Planner already at offer stage, start date 9 Jun).

Brief-misfire rate last 40 deliverables: 11/40 = 27.5 % (portfolio avg 9 %)

Failure-trace analysis: 9 of 11 misfires linked to handover/context-loss, not skill gap

Candidate ACD-1: 18 months on Account A, has 4 award credits on the brand

Candidate ACD-2: 14 months on Account B, led the 2025 loyalty-relaunch creative

Maslach short-form on both candidates: 0.31 and 0.28 (well below 0.55 amber)

Confirm both ACD candidates by D+3; offer pod-lead title bump (10 % salary delta) effective D+14

Run a 2-day creative-context lock-in workshop with both clients in week 2 of pod stand-up

Set creative-consistency KPI: brief-misfire rate <8 % within 90 days (vs current 27.5 %)

One of the two ACDs (ACD-2) was on the long-list for a competitor's recruitment push 2 months ago (per backchannel). Counter-offer risk if we don't title-bump in time: ~10 %. Mitigation: confirm title + comp uplift within 5 working days.

Combined commit threshold crossed on day 4.


Adobe renewal lands in 8 days; Figma and Frontify both come up in Q3. Seat utilization is 64 % Adobe / 71 % Figma / 38 % Frontify against a combined RM 412k/yr spend. Bundled negotiation through Adobe's Malaysia partner (PixelHub) plus seat right-sizing yields +RM 180k/yr savings with no capability loss; PDPA posture improves via single-vendor DPA.

Adobe renewal in 8 days, 38 % seat-waste on Frontify — bundled deal banks +RM 180k/yr

Audit of the last 90 days of seat-level telemetry shows: Adobe CC has 38 active heads on 60 seats (63 % util); Figma has 51 active on 72 seats (71 %); Frontify has 19 active on 50 seats (38 %). Frontify in particular was sized for a brand-system rollout in 2024 that completed in Q3-2025 — we are paying for 31 dormant seats. Renewal-window negotiation leverage is at its highest in the final 14 days before Adobe lock-in (their Malaysia channel partner PixelHub closes Q2 numbers 30-Jun). Bundling Adobe + Figma + Frontify (or replacing Frontify with Adobe Workfront which is included in our existing Adobe enterprise tier) yields +RM 180k/yr based on indicative quotes already pulled on 18-May. PDPA angle: single-vendor data-processing-agreement reduces our processor surface from 3 to 1, simplifying our annual Section 9 audit.

Seat-renewal urgency index (7-day, lower=more urgent): 48 → 41 → 33 → 26 → 19 → 13 → 8

Adobe CC: 38/60 active = 63 % util; right-size to 45 seats saves RM 62k/yr

Figma: 51/72 active = 71 % util; right-size to 60 seats saves RM 38k/yr

Frontify: 19/50 active = 38 % util; replace with Adobe Workfront (already in enterprise tier) saves RM 92k/yr

PixelHub indicative quote 18-May: bundled discount 14 % on Adobe + 3-yr lock with annual exit clause

Lock PixelHub bundled-quote conversation by 28 May; finance + legal on the call

Migrate 19 active Frontify users to Adobe Workfront over 14-day handover (Studio Tech to run 2 training sessions)

Update PDPA processor registry within 7 days of contract signature; file Section 9 update with internal DPO

Frontify-to-Workfront migration loses 3 specific brand-portal features that 2 of our clients (a hospitality account and a property-developer account) use for self-serve asset download. Workaround: keep 5 Frontify seats for those clients (cost RM 14k/yr) and still net +RM 180k/yr minus RM 14k. Probability migration triggers client friction without the 5-seat carve-out: ~25 %.

Renewal-window lock-in zone (<25) entered on day 5.


Two account leads (GAD-3 on a Petronas-style retainer, GAD-7 on a Maybank-style retainer) crossed the 0.55 Maslach amber threshold on consecutive weeks. Combined account book under their direct lead is RM 12M ARR with RM 4.2M expansion in pipeline. Historic agency-base shows that without intervention within 14 days of amber, 37 % of such leads exit within 90 days, taking ~22 % of their account base with them. Worst-case attributable revenue impact: -RM 1.8M.

Both GADs at Maslach 0.78 — amber crossed, headed for red

Maslach short-form composite (emotional exhaustion + depersonalization + reduced personal accomplishment, weighted) moved from 0.50 to 0.78 over 7 days for both leads in parallel. Same-week parallel movement is itself a signal — typically points to a shared structural cause rather than two independent personal issues. Cross-referencing with Slack-tempo (after-hours messages), calendar density (back-to-back meeting %), and PTO balance (both have 18+ days untaken) suggests the structural cause is the Q1 pitch surge that landed 3 new accounts onto each of their books without proportional pod expansion. The classic 'success penalty' pattern.

Maslach short-form composite (7-day, both GADs averaged): 0.50 → 0.55 → 0.60 → 0.65 → 0.70 → 0.74 → 0.78

Slack after-hours messages last 14 days: GAD-3 = 142, GAD-7 = 168 (portfolio avg 38)

Calendar back-to-back % last 14 days: GAD-3 = 78 %, GAD-7 = 81 % (portfolio avg 52 %)

PTO balance: GAD-3 = 19 days untaken, GAD-7 = 22 days untaken (both eligible for forfeit warning)

Historic base rate: 37 % of GAD-grade leads at sustained Maslach >0.55 for >14 days exit within 90 days (n=27, 2022-2025)

Mandate 5-day PTO for each within next 21 days (CEO + Head of HR to broker, not direct line manager — avoids 'punishment' framing)

Stand up 'pod expansion fast-track': 2 additional senior account managers (1 internal promotion + 1 hire) onboarded by 12 Jun

Pause both GADs from new pitch participation for 60 days; re-route to Pitch Agent backlog

If either GAD perceives the intervention as a demotion signal rather than a recovery investment, the exit probability inverts and accelerates rather than reduces. Mis-framing probability ~18 %, fully dependent on how CEO + HR position the conversation. Pre-script and rehearse before the conversation lands.

RM 12M ARR and RM 4.2M pipeline sit under these 2 leads — exposure -RM 1.8M worst-case

Account-book exposure mapping: GAD-3 leads on 7 accounts (RM 6.8M ARR, including the Petronas-style retainer at RM 2.4M); GAD-7 leads on 6 accounts (RM 5.2M ARR, including the Maybank-style retainer at RM 1.9M). Combined RM 12M ARR + RM 4.2M open pipeline (BFSI pitch + 2 expansion conversations). Historic precedent across 6 GAD-grade exits 2022-2025: 22 % of the named-lead account base churns within 6 months of the exit, regardless of formal handover quality, because the client relationship was at the named-lead level. Pipeline conversion drops from agency baseline 41 % to 19 % when the named lead is mid-transition. Worst-case attributable: 22 % × RM 12M ARR + (41-19) % × RM 4.2M = -RM 1.8M.

GAD-3 account book: 7 accounts, RM 6.8M ARR, anchor account Petronas-style RM 2.4M

GAD-7 account book: 6 accounts, RM 5.2M ARR, anchor account Maybank-style RM 1.9M

Combined open pipeline under their direct lead: RM 4.2M (BFSI pitch + 2 expansion)

Historic GAD-exit account churn rate: 22 % within 6 months (n=6, 2022-2025)

Pipeline-conversion drop during mid-transition: 41 % → 19 % baseline-to-transition

Within 7 days: identify shadow-lead for each anchor account (must have >6 months of client exposure)

CEO does direct relationship anchor with both anchor-account CMOs in next 14 days (lunch, not status meeting)

Freeze any new account assignment to GAD-3 / GAD-7 until Maslach back below 0.45 for 2 consecutive weeks

If word of the burnout signal leaks externally (small KL agency market, high social density), it can spook the anchor clients and trigger the very churn we're trying to prevent. Leak probability through internal channels in a 60-day window: ~15 %. Mitigation: keep the intervention conversation to CEO + Head of HR + the 2 GADs only; do not loop in COO or Heads of Department until shadow-lead structure is in place.