A lot of SEs operate like guests in the AE's pipeline. They wait to be invited to meetings. They take the briefings they're given. They show up when called and do the technical work in front of the customer. Then they go back to waiting.
That dynamic isn't just uncomfortable. It's a real risk to the number.
The SE mapped to an AE's territory has a stake in that territory. The deals that close or stall directly shape what kind of year it's been. SEs who make their number consistently know this and they act on it. They don't wait to be briefed. They go find out what the plan is, and they help build it.
But how you start that conversation matters more than most SEs realize.
The question that starts a fight
Imagine walking up to your AE and asking: "Hey, what's your plan to hit 100% against your quota this year?"
The AE hears that as another pipeline review from someone who doesn't manage them and doesn't carry the same pressure they do. The question puts them on the defensive before anything useful can happen. Even with a good relationship, it creates the wrong dynamic. You've positioned yourself as an auditor, not a partner.
SEs sometimes avoid this conversation entirely because they sense it could go badly. That instinct isn't wrong. The conversation can go badly. It just doesn't have to.
One change that makes it a different conversation
The best SEs make one shift before they open their mouth: they change the ownership.
Instead of asking about the AE's plan, they invite a conversation about a shared one. Something like: "Can we sit down and talk about what our plan looks like to hit our number in our accounts this year?"
Our plan. Our number. Our accounts.
That's not just softer language. It's a signal about how the SE sees the relationship. The AE isn't being reviewed. They're being invited to co-design something with a partner who has skin in the game too. That framing opens the door to a much more honest and productive conversation.
What to actually talk about
The conversation isn't a forecast call and it shouldn't feel like one. The goal is alignment: making sure both people leave with the same mental map of where to focus, what to build, and what risks are already baked into the plan.
Prioritization. Which accounts and deals are must-wins? Not everything in the pipeline gets equal SE time, and pretending otherwise is how critical moments get missed. When the SE understands which deals the plan genuinely depends on, they can make the right calls when conflicts come up. That meeting that retires 75% of the number if the deal closes? The SE needs to know it exists so they treat it that way when the calendar invite arrives.
Technical plan fit. The SE is often the only person in the room who knows whether the product can actually do what the plan assumes. If an AE is counting on a specific capability to close a major account and that capability is still on the roadmap, the SE can catch that before it becomes a problem in front of the customer. The best time to fix a plan is before it's in motion, and the SE has the product knowledge to do that check.
Opportunity scale. The SE's technical fluency often reveals something the AE can't see from their seat: how deep and broad a deployment could actually go. AEs work from the commercial context they have, which is real and valuable, but a customer's technical environment tells its own story. The SE who understands how the product maps to that environment can spot expansion potential the AE hasn't considered, or flag where a plan is built on assumptions about usage that won't hold up. Both directions matter. The plan should reflect the real ceiling, not just the obvious ask.
Proactive preparation. Not every risk is a roadmap miss. Sometimes the feature shipped last month and no one on the SE team has gone deep on it yet. If a deal depends on a capability that's brand new, the SE now knows to go find the PM, get a technical deep-dive, and be the most knowledgeable person in the room when it matters. That's not reactive SE work. That's plan-driven preparation.
Relationship gaps. Where does the SE need to build new connections inside the account? Executive sponsors, technical evaluators, internal champions. These relationships take time and they don't build themselves. Understanding which accounts need that investment, and how soon, lets the SE start early rather than scrambling when a deal starts to stall.
Proof of value pipeline. How many PoVs or technical evaluations might realistically be needed to support the plan? Knowing this early helps the SE think about capacity and sequencing rather than getting surprised in Q3 when three PoVs land at the same time across the accounts they share.
The plan doesn't have to be perfect
Good AEs aren't offended by this conversation. They appreciate it. They know their plan has holes and they know an SE who understands the territory is one of the best resources they have for filling them.
The goal isn't to walk in and critique the AE's forecast. The goal is to build something together that neither person could build alone. The AE brings the commercial context, the customer relationships, and the read on what's real in the pipeline. The SE brings the product knowledge, the technical credibility, and the ability to see the plan through a lens the AE simply doesn't have.
A plan that starts as co-owned tends to stay co-owned. Both people are more invested in making it work. Both people are more likely to communicate when something changes.
When to have it
Start of the fiscal year is the obvious moment but it's not the only one. A new AE mapping, a territory reshuffle, the start of a new quarter when the prior one closed short: all of these are natural triggers. The SE who makes a habit of initiating this conversation at the right moments stops operating like a guest and starts operating like someone who actually owns the outcome.
Keep the plan alive
The initial conversation is the starting point, not the deliverable. Real plans get tested by reality. Deals slip. New opportunities emerge. What looked like a must-win in January looks different in March. The SEs who sustain strong AE partnerships treat the pipeline conversation as a cadence, not a one-time event.
Internal QSRs and QBRs are the natural checkpoints. Most SEs sit in these reviews as observers, watching the AE navigate questions from their RD while taking notes. The SE who has genuinely co-designed the plan has a bigger role to play. They stand alongside. They know the accounts well enough to add context, take some of the weight off the AE, and answer the technical questions before the RD even has to ask. The AE shouldn't feel alone in that room.
The aspirational version: if the AE is suddenly unavailable, the SE should be able to walk into that QSR and deliver the plan. The full plan. That level of mutual understanding is rare, and most partnerships never get there, but it's the right direction to build toward. It's also the clearest possible signal to an AE that they have a real partner, not a resource.
Many sales leaders have pulled SE participation from pipeline reviews for good reason. When an SE who doesn't really know the plan shows up and steers the conversation toward technical details that have nothing to do with the quarter, it wastes everyone's time. That's where the reluctance comes from. But it's a solvable problem. The SE who has co-designed the plan, who knows which deals the quarter depends on, and who understands the commercial context well enough to speak to it, is a different presence in that room entirely. Not a note-taker. A co-owner.
That's the shift worth making. Ask about our plan, not their plan. The number you're trying to hit is the same one.