sales business developmentincentive financingproposal designresidential pvsolar sales
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 signed kilowatt volumes, close rates from qualified appointments, average system size and revenue per install; ask which segment (residential rooftop, commercial PPA, battery retrofit) drove those numbers.
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 signed kW or dollar volume per quarter, close rate against set appointments, and cancellation rate before install with honest context.
02
Evaluation factor
Method and qualification
25% weight
Probe how they qualify: roof age and shading, utility bill and rate schedule, credit for loan or lease, tax credit eligibility, HOA or permitting constraints.
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
Disqualifies bad fits early using bill analysis, shading data and financing eligibility, and explains payback honestly rather than overselling savings.
03
Evaluation factor
Relationships and trust
25% weight
Assess how they handle homeowners after contract: interconnection delays, permitting setbacks, production shortfalls, and whether referrals and reviews came from those relationships.
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 customers kept informed through permitting and interconnection delays, and shows referral or review volume traceable to that follow-through.
04
Evaluation factor
Drive and resilience
15% weight
Look for stamina in a long, seasonal cycle: self-generated pipeline, door-to-door or event canvassing, rate change urgency, and response to incentive policy shifts like net metering changes.
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 rebuilding pipeline after a policy or incentive change, with concrete weekly activity targets and consistent self-sourced appointments.
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.
