commercial-qualification
npx skills add https://github.com/piperubio/ai-agents --skill commercial-qualification
Agent 安装分布
Skill 文档
Commercial Qualification
Purpose
- Systematically qualify consulting opportunities to ensure the pipeline contains real deals worth pursuing.
- Prevent the team from wasting time on unwinnable or unprofitable deals.
- Produce a defensible, data-backed qualification verdict using the BANTTD framework.
- Execute graceful disqualifications (Professional Cut) to preserve relationships and pipeline hygiene.
Scope
-
This skill WILL:
- Run the P.U.D.T.F pre-filter to screen opportunities before full BANTTD scoring
- Score opportunities across six dimensions (Budget, Authority, Need, Timeline, Tech-fit, Decision Date)
- Produce a qualification scorecard with verdict and confidence level
- Identify key risks, information gaps, and recommended next actions
- Update pipeline state with qualification results
- Flag deals below minimum engagement thresholds
- Trigger re-qualification for stale opportunities (30+ days)
- Execute the Professional Cut protocol for disqualified opportunities
-
This skill WILL NOT:
- Design solutions or estimate effort (that is
solution-design) - Conduct discovery meetings (that is
commercial-discovery) - Make final go/no-go business decisions â it provides the data for humans to decide
- Design solutions or estimate effort (that is
Inputs
- qualification-meeting-notes.md â notes from the qualification meeting (primary evidence source for P.U.D.T.F and BANTTD scoring).
- discovery-notes.md â from
commercial-discovery(supplementary evidence when available). - prospect-profile.md â from
commercial-prospecting(company and stakeholder context). - commercial-state.md â current pipeline context (stage, history, capacity).
- user_input â additional intel, override context, or competitive intelligence.
Notes:
- Meeting notes may be incomplete. Score conservatively and flag gaps.
- Tolerate ambiguity â never invent evidence to fill scoring gaps.
Reference
- qualification-meeting-guide.md â Full meeting script (30-40 min), P.U.D.T.F operational guide, budget calibration techniques, decision date extraction scripts, Professional Cut protocol, red/green flags, and Branch B transition script.
Step 1 â P.U.D.T.F Pre-Filter
Before running the full BANTTD scoring, apply the P.U.D.T.F pre-filter. This is a rapid in-meeting or post-meeting screen (5 dimensions, 1-5 each, total /30). It maps directionally to BANTTD dimensions and provides an early signal.
| P.U.D.T.F | Maps to BANTTD | Key Question |
|---|---|---|
| P â Problema | Need | Is there a specific, real, acknowledged problem? |
| U â Urgencia | Timeline | Is there urgency or a compelling event driving action? |
| D â Decisor | Authority | Are we talking to someone with decision-making power or a clear path to it? |
| T â Ticket | Budget | Is there budget allocated or a realistic path to it? |
| F â Fecha | Decision Date | Is there a defined decision date or timeline to act? |
Pre-filter verdict:
| P.U.D.T.F Total | Signal | Action |
|---|---|---|
| 22-30 | Pass â proceed to full BANTTD scoring | Schedule Discovery meeting |
| 16-21 | Borderline â gaps exist | Identify which dimension(s) are weak. Determine if gaps can be closed before full scoring. Consider requesting a follow-up call to address specific gaps. |
| < 16 | Fail â execute Professional Cut | Do not invest further resources. Follow the Professional Cut protocol in the meeting guide. |
Single-dimension hard block: A score of 1 on any P.U.D.T.F dimension (no problem, no decision maker access, no budget signal, no urgency, no timeline) is a hard red flag regardless of total score. Escalate to human judgment before proceeding.
For detailed scoring guides per dimension (1-5 scales with examples), see qualification-meeting-guide.md.
Step 2 â BANTTD Framework
Score each dimension 0-20. Total score range: 0-120.
B â Budget (0-20)
Is there money? Is it allocated? Is the range known and consistent with our engagement model?
A â Authority (0-20)
Do we have access to the economic buyer? Is the champion identified and actively engaged?
N â Need (0-20)
Is the pain real and urgent? Is the prospect actively looking for solutions? Is the impact quantified?
T â Timeline (0-20)
Is there a defined timeline? Is there an external deadline or event driving urgency?
T â Tech-fit (0-20)
Does our expertise match their needs? Can we deliver meaningful value without excessive subcontracting?
D â Decision Date (0-20)
Is there a specific date by which the prospect expects to make a decision? Is it tied to a business event? Is it near-term enough to drive action?
For detailed scoring rubrics with criteria at each 5-point increment, see references/scoring-models.md.
Step 3 â Verdict Logic
| Total Score | Verdict | Action |
|---|---|---|
| 84-120 | Pursue | Advance to next step (see Pipeline Branch below). Invest full resources. |
| 48-83 | Nurture | Define nurture plan with timeline. Re-qualify in 30-90 days. |
| 0-47 | Disqualify | Execute Professional Cut. Archive with documented reasons. |
Confidence Level: High / Medium / Low â based on information completeness across all dimensions.
Critical override: A single dimension at 0-5 should trigger concern regardless of total score (e.g., no budget = hard to pursue even if need is 20/20).
Disqualify / Nurture Flow
Disqualify â Professional Cut Protocol
When verdict is Disqualify, execute a Professional Cut within 24 hours. Do not ghost.
- Identify the primary disqualification reason (weak Budget, no Authority path, no real Need, no Timeline, poor Tech-fit, no Decision Date).
- Select the appropriate Professional Cut script from qualification-meeting-guide.md:
- Script 1: No Budget / Not the Right Time
- Script 2: No Decision Maker Access
- Script 3: Problem is Not Real or Not Urgent Enough
- Script 4: Catch-All (multiple weak signals)
- Execute the cut in the final minutes of the meeting or via follow-up call (same day or next day at latest).
- Send the follow-up email within 24 hours using the template in the meeting guide.
- Archive the opportunity in
commercial-state.mdwith stageclosed_lost, documented disqualification reason, and a re-engage trigger date if applicable.
Principle: A respectful, honest disqualification preserves the relationship. The prospect may return when timing changes, or refer others. A ghosted prospect never does either.
Nurture â Holding Pattern
When verdict is Nurture:
- Define which dimensions need to improve and what would trigger re-qualification.
- Set a re-qualification date (30-60 days typical; 90 days maximum before escalating to Disqualify).
- Define a lightweight nurture action (1-2 touchpoints before re-qualification: article share, event invitation, check-in call).
- Update
commercial-state.mdwith nurture plan, weak dimensions, and re-qualification trigger.
Pipeline Branch Recommendation
When verdict is Pursue, immediately determine which commercial branch to follow. This decision drives the next skill to invoke.
Branch A â Direct Implementation Proposal
Use when ALL of the following are true:
- Scope can be defined with estimation accuracy +/- 20% or better.
- Requirements are clear and bounded.
- Client knows what they want to build (or discovery already clarified it).
- Scope-changing assumptions are 2 or fewer.
- Qualification confidence: High or Medium with low ambiguity.
Next step: invoke commercial-solution-design â commercial-proposal-writer.
Branch B â Discovery Service Proposal
Use when ANY of the following is true:
- Scope cannot be reliably estimated (uncertainty > +/- 30%).
- Client has vague requirements or multiple undecided directions.
- Technical complexity requires investigation before architecture can be proposed.
- Multiple systems, domains, or stakeholder groups need assessment before scoping.
- Client has a problem but does not know what solution they need.
- Qualification confidence: Low, or scope-changing assumptions > 3.
Next step: invoke commercial-discovery-proposal to create a paid Discovery engagement.
Note: The Discovery engagement is an independent commercial opportunity â it has its own proposal, negotiation, and close cycle. Implementation is a separate, subsequent opportunity that may or may not stay with us after Discovery closes.
For the Branch B transition script (how to explain Discovery to the prospect), see qualification-meeting-guide.md.
Branch Decision Table
| Signal | Branch A | Branch B |
|---|---|---|
| Requirements clarity | Clear and bounded | Vague or multiple directions |
| Estimation confidence | +/- 20% achievable | +/- 30% or worse |
| Scope-changing assumptions | <= 2 | > 3 |
| Qualification confidence | High / Medium | Low |
| Systems/domains to assess | 1-2, known | 3+, unknown |
| Client knows what to build | Yes | No |
Framework Comparison
- BANT: Classic but misses tech-fit and decision date â both critical for consulting.
- BANTT: Our prior framework â extended BANT with Tech-fit. Now superseded by BANTTD.
- MEDDIC/MEDDPICC: Comprehensive but complex â BANTTD captures the essentials for consulting.
- P.U.D.T.F: Operational in-meeting filter (1-5 scale, /30). Used as a pre-filter before BANTTD, not a replacement.
- CHAMP: Good but less structured scoring.
- ANUM: Budget-first approach may miss good nurture opportunities.
BANTTD extends BANTT with Decision Date to address a critical gap: a well-qualified deal with no clear decision date cannot be forecast reliably and tends to stall.
Outputs (contract)
1. New File: qualification-scorecard.md
Per opportunity, containing:
# Qualification Scorecard: {Company Name}
## Opportunity Summary
- **Opportunity ID**:
- **Company**:
- **Opportunity description**:
- **Qualification Date**: YYYY-MM-DD
## P.U.D.T.F Pre-Filter
| Dimension | Score (1-5) | Evidence |
|-----------|------------|----------|
| P â Problema | | |
| U â Urgencia | | |
| D â Decisor | | |
| T â Ticket | | |
| F â Fecha | | |
| **Total** | **/30** | |
**Pre-filter verdict**: Pass (>=22) | Borderline (16-21) | Fail (<16)
## Urgency Score (1-10)
- **Score**: X/10
- **Prospect's exact words**:
- **Compelling event (if any)**:
## BANTTD Scores
| Dimension | Score (0-20) | Evidence |
|-----------|-------------|----------|
| Budget | | |
| Authority | | |
| Need | | |
| Timeline | | |
| Tech-fit | | |
| Decision Date | | |
| **Total** | **X/120** | |
## Verdict: {PURSUE / NURTURE / DISQUALIFY}
**Confidence Level**: {High / Medium / Low}
### Justification
[2-3 sentences explaining the verdict based on scores and evidence]
### Key Risks
- [Risk 1]
- [Risk 2]
### Missing Information
- [What we still need to learn]
### Recommended Next Actions
- [ ] Action 1
- [ ] Action 2
## Deal Estimate
- **Size estimate**: $X - $Y
- **Probability**: X%
## Pipeline Branch
- **Recommended branch**: A (Direct Proposal) | B (Discovery Service)
- **Branch rationale**: [1-2 sentences explaining why this branch was selected]
- **Next skill to invoke**: `commercial-solution-design` | `commercial-discovery-proposal`
2. Updated: commercial-state.md
Update opportunity stage, probability, and notes based on qualification verdict.
Guardrails
- Always run the P.U.D.T.F pre-filter before the full BANTTD scoring.
- Every dimension score must include specific evidence or cite information gaps.
- Never default to “Pursue” without strong justification â bias toward honesty.
- If confidence is Low, recommend information-gathering actions before final verdict.
- A single dimension at 0-5 should trigger concern regardless of total score.
- Re-qualification should happen if opportunity has been stale for 30+ days.
- Compare qualification against team capacity â a qualified deal we cannot staff is still a problem.
- Flag deals that are qualified but below minimum engagement size.
- A Disqualify verdict must trigger a Professional Cut within 24 hours â never ghost.
- Record the prospect’s exact words for urgency (1-10 scale) and decision date â these are the most reliable forecasting inputs.
Example
Scenario: Mid-market fintech (200 employees) wants to build a data platform to unify customer analytics across three product lines. Qualification meeting completed with VP Engineering.
P.U.D.T.F Pre-Filter:
| Dimension | Score | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| P â Problema | 4 | Three siloed analytics systems causing duplicate reporting and 2-week lag on cross-product metrics. |
| U â Urgencia | 3 | Urgency score 7/10. “Board is asking for unified view before Q1 planning.” No hard external deadline. |
| D â Decisor | 3 | VP Engineering is champion. CTO is economic buyer, aware and supportive but not yet engaged directly. |
| T â Ticket | 4 | “Low six figures approved for H2.” Previous consulting spend at ~$150K confirmed. |
| F â Fecha | 3 | “Want something in place before Q1 planning” â soft deadline, approximately 4 months out. |
| Total | 17/30 | Pre-filter: Borderline â proceed with BANTTD scoring but flag Authority and Decision Date gaps. |
BANTTD Scores:
| Dimension | Score | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Budget | 14/20 | VP mentioned “low six figures” budget approved for H2. No specific allocation yet. Previous consulting spend with a competitor at ~$150K. |
| Authority | 16/20 | VP Engineering is champion and budget holder. CTO (economic buyer) aware and supportive but not yet directly engaged. |
| Need | 18/20 | Three siloed analytics systems causing duplicate reporting, 2-week lag on cross-product metrics. Board asking for unified view. Actively evaluating solutions. |
| Timeline | 12/20 | “Want something in place before Q1 planning” â soft deadline, no regulatory or contractual driver. |
| Tech-fit | 15/20 | Data platform and analytics are core capabilities. Minor gap in their specific CDP tooling â would need 1-2 sprints of ramp-up. |
| Decision Date | 10/20 | “Before Q1 planning” implies ~4 months. No specific date given. No hard commitment. |
| Total | 85/120 |
Verdict: Pursue (85/120, Confidence: Medium)
- Key risk: CTO not yet directly engaged â authority could stall at final approval.
- Key risk: Decision date is soft â “before Q1 planning” could slip.
- Missing: Specific budget figure, CTO meeting, specific decision date (day/week).
- Next actions: Schedule CTO introduction meeting. Request specific decision date. Prepare capability deck on data platform work. Confirm budget range before solution-design.