sales business developmentcold emaildeliverabilityoutbound prospectingsequence copywriting
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 volumes and outcomes they own: sends per week, positive reply rate, meetings booked, SQLs accepted by AEs, and pipeline sourced from named outbound campaigns.
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 reply and meeting rates per campaign, ties them to closed pipeline, and names the mailboxes and sending volume behind the numbers.
02
Evaluation factor
Method and qualification
25% weight
Probe list building and infrastructure: Clay or Apollo enrichment, ICP filters, domain warmup, SPF, DKIM, DMARC setup, inbox rotation, and Smartlead or Instantly sequence structure.
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
Explains deliverability hygiene and enrichment waterfalls in detail, and shows how ICP research fed personalised first lines rather than generic merge tags.
03
Evaluation factor
Relationships and trust
25% weight
Assess how they handle replies: objection handling in-thread, handoff notes to AEs, CRM hygiene in HubSpot or Salesforce, and unsubscribe or GDPR and CAN-SPAM compliance.
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 booked-call conversion from raw replies, disciplined CRM logging, and respectful opt-out handling that protected sender reputation and brand.
04
Evaluation factor
Drive and resilience
15% weight
Look for response to campaign failure: burned domains, spam placement, dead segments, and what they tested next across subject lines, offers, and sending cadence.
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
Recounts a collapsed campaign, the diagnosis (blacklist, copy, or list quality), and the rebuilt sequence with measured recovery.
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.
