sales business developmentcold emaildeliverabilitysdr outreachsequence building
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 their booked-meeting numbers against quota: meetings per month, reply and positive-reply rates, show rate, and pipeline value sourced. Ask which sequences produced them.
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 monthly meeting counts, reply rates and sourced pipeline, and names the specific sequences or lists that drove each.
02
Evaluation factor
Method and qualification
25% weight
Probe how they build lists and sequences: ICP definition, Clay or Apollo enrichment, trigger events, step counts across email, calls and LinkedIn, plus qualification frameworks used.
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
Describes a repeatable list-to-cadence process with named triggers, enrichment sources and disqualification criteria applied before booking anything.
03
Evaluation factor
Relationships and trust
25% weight
Assess how they handle live cold conversations: opening lines, gatekeepers, objection patterns like "send me something", and handoff quality to account executives.
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
Shows a personal cold-call opener, handles brush-offs without scripts collapsing, and hands off notes AEs actually use.
04
Evaluation factor
Drive and resilience
15% weight
Look for dial volume and consistency, deliverability recovery after domain or spam issues (SPF, DKIM, DMARC, inbox rotation), and response to a month that missed target.
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
Sustains high daily activity, fixed a burned domain or dying sequence themselves, and describes rebuilding after a missed month.
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.
