sales business developmentcoaching programsenrollment callshigh ticket closingobjection handling
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 closed revenue on calls priced above 5k: monthly cash collected, close rate on booked calls, show rate, and average program price they sold.
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 verified numbers such as 40 percent close on 60 discovery calls monthly at 8k average, with cash collected figures.
02
Evaluation factor
Method and qualification
25% weight
Probe their call framework: discovery depth, qualifying on budget and readiness, payment plan versus pay in full, and how they log outcomes in Close, HubSpot, or GoHighLevel.
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 repeatable enrollment call structure and disqualifies unsuitable prospects rather than pushing every lead to a payment link.
03
Evaluation factor
Relationships and trust
25% weight
Assess how they handle refund requests, buyer remorse, and spouse or partner objections; ask about follow-up cadence with unclosed leads and student outcomes post-enrollment.
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 ethical enrollment decisions, low refund and chargeback rates, and named clients who completed programs after they closed them.
04
Evaluation factor
Drive and resilience
15% weight
Look for tolerance of high call volume and no-shows: daily dials, pipeline rebuilding after a slow week, and comfort with commission-heavy compensation.
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 8 to 12 calls daily through slumps, tracks personal metrics weekly, and treats variable pay as motivating rather than risky.
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.
