sales business developmentcrm hygienelead generationpipeline managementquota attainment
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
Ask for quota numbers by year, average deal size, close rate, and pipeline value they personally carried; check whether they ran both outbound sales and campaign-sourced leads.
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 attainment percentages, deal sizes and territory context across multiple years, and separates self-sourced revenue from marketing-generated leads.
02
Evaluation factor
Method and qualification
25% weight
Probe their qualification framework (MEDDIC, BANT, SPIN), how they score marketing qualified leads, and how CRM stages in Salesforce or HubSpot are kept accurate.
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 disciplined qualification and lead-scoring routine, with forecast calls and stage definitions they enforced across the team.
03
Evaluation factor
Relationships and trust
25% weight
Look for named accounts they grew, renewal or upsell examples, and how they handled channel partners, distributors, or a marketing team whose leads they depended on.
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
Names specific accounts and partners, describes multi-year relationships, and shows how trust converted into renewals, referrals or expanded contracts.
04
Evaluation factor
Drive and resilience
15% weight
Test how they responded to a missed quarter, a pricing squeeze, or a campaign that produced weak leads; ask what they changed the following month.
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
Describes a concrete shortfall, the diagnosis they ran, and the specific activity or messaging change that recovered the number.
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.
