sales business developmentcold callingcrm hygieneoutbound prospectingsales cadence
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 quota history in real numbers: meetings booked per month, SQL acceptance rate by AEs, pipeline dollars sourced, and how they ranked against team quota in Salesforce or HubSpot dashboards.
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 monthly meeting targets, attainment percentages, and accepted opportunity counts, and names the AEs and segments those numbers came from.
02
Evaluation factor
Method and qualification
25% weight
Probe their prospecting method: list building in ZoomInfo or Apollo, sequence design in Outreach or Salesloft, cold call opener structure, and how they qualify with BANT or MEDDIC before handoff.
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 live multitouch cadence, explains why a lead was disqualified, and shows discipline about what an AE will actually accept.
03
Evaluation factor
Relationships and trust
25% weight
Assess how they handle gatekeepers, multithread into buying committees, and keep cold prospects warm; ask for a nurture that converted months after the first no.
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 specific accounts revived through persistent, personalised follow up and shows AEs trusted the quality of their handoffs.
04
Evaluation factor
Drive and resilience
15% weight
Test tolerance for daily rejection: dials or emails per day, how they recover after a rough block, and what coaching or call reviews changed their conversion rate.
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
Cites sustained daily activity volumes, names a specific coaching correction they applied, and shows measurable lift after it.
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.
