This essay is a part of a five-part series that delves into the process of querying literary agents to represent a novel draft. If you missed the introduction and part 1, please read those first. Then head back over here.
Part 1 — The Pipeline
Before pivoting careers, I worked in sales and marketing. In sales, I learned how to build pipelines and how to use A/B testing and how to do sales outreach in tranches / waves.
Sales is a very transferable idea and the metaphor applies neatly to querying.
Even if you’re unfamiliar with sales, the analogy is useful; just go with me here. Let’s logically extend the metaphor.
Agent = Prospective Client
Manuscript = Product
Query Letter = Pitch
Revise and Resubmit = Negotiation
Contract Review = Contract Review
Closed = Closed
First, I created a list of prospects. You can find more info on prospecting in the section dedicated to Prospect Identification. Then I built a pipeline.
Here’s a screenshot of the pipeline. I’ve scrubbed and anonymized it for obvious reasons. You can find information on how to identify and track prospects in the research post.
Here’s a link to an empty pipeline file. You can also find this in the list of compiled resources for querying.
The idea is to move your prospects through the pipeline until you’ve closed a deal.
How to use the pipeline file:
First you identify a prospect.
Then you rank that prospect.
Tip: Don’t put all your high-ranked prospects in your first wave. Querying is a skill. Practice querying with some agents who aren’t your dream agents just so you get those initial nerves out of the way.
Move your prospect from your prospect spreadsheet into your pipeline sheet. Then fill out the columns from left to right after each step.
The first three columns — Name, Agency, Submission Guidelines — should come directly from your prospect spreadsheet.
- Prepare your email query letter.
- Identify any peripherals you may need (bio, synopsis etc).
- Choose a wave / tranche.
- Mark the pipeline after it’s sent and note the date.
- When you receive a reply, mark the outcome.
- Make a note if there’s a next step.
- Hopefully, you get some partial requests, some full requests, some Revise + Resubmits, and ultimately, secure representation with an agent who cares about bringing your voice into the world.
The pipeline achieves several goals:
- You don’t get lost in the information. You can resume your querying after a period of time but know, at a glance, where you stand. I took all of August off from querying and when I returned, because of the pipeline, I could recommence immediately.
- You don’t duplicate efforts.
- You can identify trends. For example, you would want to see more partial requests building as you improve at querying. Querying is a skill and the more you practice, hopefully, the better your yield becomes.
But this form of external infrastructure also supports your internal infrastructure.
This process helps to de-personalize querying, improve resilience, and, to some extent, gamify the process. Of course, it really sucks when there’s a lot of red on the sheet. But here’s the thing: this is sales with a twist. We aren’t looking for as many clients as possible. We just need 1!
Commit to the process. Track your progress. The more you put into the pipeline, the greater your chance of closing. If you’re receiving more full and partial requests, you know something’s working. The pipeline also lets you stay on top of reminders and secondary communication.
Part 2 — Tranches / Waves
In sales, we do a lot of A/B testing. We have two versions of the same pitch and we test them out, compare the results, modify and move forward.
As writers, we put a lot of pressure on the query letter. But it helps to have two versions. That tends to make them easier to generate as well since it no longer has to be this perfect Holy Grail, key-to-everything Query Letter
You then prepare your waves so that one Query Letter draft is going out as Wave 1, and another as Wave 2.
I actually did something that is total anathema in the querying world. I sent out different versions of my manuscript with different beginnings just to test which fish were biting.
Tranches and waves give you data that your pipeline should allow you to track. You can see that I did this in Column E. Then you can modify your process, whether that’s your query letter or your manuscript itself.
As I mentioned before, most people (agents and agented authors) say you shouldn’t revise while querying. However, I should share that I revised A LOT while querying. At one stage, after receiving vital feedback from a trusted reader, I took a month to do a comprehensive revision; but other times it was just revising as I was going along. It was hard not to go back to the product. You feel like it’s flawed when you get rejections. That’s why it’s important to work on your internal infrastructure. This will help prevent unnecessary tinkering with your manuscript because I did a lot of that, too.
Tranches and waves also give you a way to feel like you’re making progress at least in terms of refining your process. Yes, you’re still getting rejected. But it’s not Groundhog Day. You’re improving at the core skill of querying.
Part 3 — Peripherals & Information Management
As you’ve probably noticed, some agents want third-person bios, some want synopses, some want synopses that are a certain length, others want your immunization records (just kidding). The point I’m trying to make is that you need to have a centralized information repository (a.k.a. a folder) where you store the latest versions of all these documents and make sure they’re clearly labeled for purposes of version control. Don’t let information management be the roadblock to a good querying session.
Remember this affirmation: I manage the information, I manage the pipeline. It doesn’t manage me.
If you’re losing your hair trying to keep up with your process and tracker and pipeline and waves, then revisit and simplify your process. It should work for you. It should not be another dreaded task that takes more than it gives.
