sales business developmentdiscovery callspresalesproof of conceptsolution demos
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 which deals they supported to close: ARR influenced, POC win rate, RFP/RFI response volume, and named platforms they demoed (Salesforce, Snowflake, ServiceNow, custom APIs).
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
Cites specific won deals with ARR figures, POC pass rates, and the exact product surface they demoed to technical buyers.
02
Evaluation factor
Method and qualification
25% weight
Probe their discovery method: MEDDICC or SPICED use, how they scope a POC with success criteria, and when they disqualified a technically unfit prospect.
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
Runs structured discovery, writes signed POC success criteria upfront, and walks away from deals where the product cannot meet requirements.
03
Evaluation factor
Relationships and trust
25% weight
Assess how they earn trust with engineers and security reviewers: handling SOC 2 questionnaires, architecture whiteboarding, and admitting product gaps without losing the deal.
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 technical champions they built, answers gaps honestly with roadmap or workaround, and survives security and architecture review scrutiny.
04
Evaluation factor
Drive and resilience
15% weight
Look for stamina across long enterprise cycles: rebuilding after a failed demo, live environment breaking mid-call, or a competitor bake-off loss they later reversed.
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
Recovers visibly from broken demos and bake-off losses, keeps multi-quarter pursuits alive, and shows what they changed afterwards.
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.
