Interview scorecard template

Business Development Career Sprint interview scorecard

Evaluate Business Development Career Sprint candidates across 4 weighted areas: track record, method and qualification, relationships and trust, and drive and resilience. Track record leads at 35%, so check what they actually closed or sourced: quota attainment percentages, number of qualified meetings booked per month, average deal size, and whether numbers came. Use the rubric to compare role-specific evidence consistently.

See AI scoring
sales business developmentbusiness developmentcrm hygieneoutbound prospectingpipeline generation
TL;DR
For track record, look for evidence the candidate quotes concrete figures (for example 118% of a 40k quarterly quota, 22 SQLs monthly) and names the pipeline they inherited versus built. For method and qualification, look for evidence the candidate walks through a real deal using a named framework, showing where they disqualified and why, not just reciting the acronym. Apply the written 1–5 anchors to every answer, record the evidence behind each rating, and use the factor weights to reach a consistent overall assessment.
Complete evaluation framework

What to assess and how to score it

Review the evidence signals before interviewing. Then use the anchored descriptions—not instinct alone—to choose the score that best matches each answer.

01
Evaluation factor

Track record

35% weight

Check what they actually closed or sourced: quota attainment percentages, number of qualified meetings booked per month, average deal size, and whether numbers came from named CRM reports.

Evidence to listen for

  • Gives numbers: quota, attainment, deal size, client roster
  • Explains the market and buyer they sold to, not just the product
  • Distinguishes what they closed from what the team closed
  • Can describe a deal they lost and why

Five-point scoring guide

1
Poor

No numbers; cannot describe what they actually sold or to whom.

2
Needs Improvement

Vague attainment; credit for team results is unclear.

3
Satisfactory

Real record with some numbers; attribution occasionally fuzzy.

4
Very Good

Clear numbers and ownership, including honest losses.

5
Excellent

Quotes concrete figures (for example 118% of a 40k quarterly quota, 22 SQLs monthly) and names the pipeline they inherited versus built.

02
Evaluation factor

Method and qualification

25% weight

Probe their qualification framework in practice: MEDDIC, BANT or SPICED, how they disqualify early, and what discovery questions surface budget and decision authority.

Evidence to listen for

  • Has a repeatable approach to qualifying and progressing deals
  • Can walk a real deal from first contact to close
  • Handles objections with questions rather than scripts
  • Knows when to disqualify

Five-point scoring guide

1
Poor

No method; pitches at everyone and hopes.

2
Needs Improvement

Weak qualification; deals stall with no diagnosis.

3
Satisfactory

Workable method; inconsistent on complex or long cycles.

4
Very Good

Clear repeatable method; disqualifies early and deliberately.

5
Excellent

Walks through a real deal using a named framework, showing where they disqualified and why, not just reciting the acronym.

03
Evaluation factor

Relationships and trust

25% weight

Assess how they build trust with cold prospects and champions: multi-thread strategies, follow-up cadences in Outreach or HubSpot, and referrals or renewals they personally earned.

Evidence to listen for

  • Has clients or talent who came back or referred them
  • Manages a difficult conversation without damaging the relationship
  • Represents the client's interest, not only the commission
  • Builds rapport across seniority levels

Five-point scoring guide

1
Poor

Transactional; burns relationships for a close.

2
Needs Improvement

Builds rapport but does not sustain relationships.

3
Satisfactory

Solid relationships; less tested in conflict.

4
Very Good

Repeat business and referrals; handles conflict without damage.

5
Excellent

Describes named accounts where they reached multiple stakeholders and cites referrals or expansions that came from relationships they maintained.

04
Evaluation factor

Drive and resilience

15% weight

Look for evidence of sustained activity through rejection: daily call and email volume, response to a lost deal, and what they changed after a bad quarter.

Evidence to listen for

  • Handles rejection and a bad quarter without unravelling
  • Self-directed on pipeline rather than waiting for leads
  • Coachable on feedback
  • Honest in how they represent the product and themselves

Five-point scoring guide

1
Poor

Gives up easily; blames leads, product, or market.

2
Needs Improvement

Motivation depends on momentum; resistant to coaching.

3
Satisfactory

Steady; recovers from setbacks with support.

4
Very Good

Self-motivated, coachable, and steady through bad stretches.

5
Excellent

Owns a missed target without excuses, states the specific behaviour they changed, and shows steady activity metrics through the slump.

Evidence-led prompts

Interview questions for a Business Development Career Sprint

Use these prompts to surface evidence for the weighted factors above and compare candidates against the same role-specific criteria.

  1. 01

    Can you describe a deal or partnership you helped secure?

  2. 02

    Can you describe your previous experience in business development?

  3. 03

    Can you talk about a time when you implemented a new approach?

  4. 04

    What is your process for identifying new business opportunities?

  5. 05

    How familiar are you with market analysis and research?

See the complete Business Development Career Sprint question set
Put this rubric to work

Score every candidate against the same standard

Add these weighted factors to Hirevire and let AI evaluate recorded answers against your rubric.

Explore AI Scorecards