Use call evidence to review lead fit
Extract evidence from sales conversations against agreed qualification criteria so marketing and sales can review lead quality consistently.
How this works
Extract evidence from sales conversations against agreed qualification criteria so marketing and sales can review lead quality consistently.
Assess lead fit from what the customer actually said. Keep need, authority, timing and budget evidence separate, and use unknown when a criterion was never discussed rather than interpreting silence or speaking style.
Before you start
Defined operating scope
Lead qualification needs explicit call evidence tied to agreed business criteria.
Required source material
Obtain Call transcripts; Explicit qualification rubric; Customer-system records. If connectors are unavailable, use authorized files with the same fields.
Decision and exception rules
Budget was not discussed. Mark unknown and propose a neutral follow-up; do not infer affordability.
Prepare the inputs
- call_id
- Required
Transcript and account reference
Preserve speaker attribution and surrounding turns.
- qualification_rubric
- Required
Criteria and allowed values
Define pass, fail and unknown separately.
- customer_record
- Required
Confirmed company and deal facts
Note dates and provenance of earlier information.
- review_owner
- Required
Sales owner
Identify who confirms the qualification result.
Implementation, step by step
Establish the working record
- Confirm the selected records, effective versions and responsible owner.
- Check call_id, qualification_rubric, customer_record, review_owner before beginning. Record the source version and the selected scope; an unavailable value stays unknown rather than becoming an inferred fact.
Checkpoint: The input record identifies the selected call_id and any missing required fields.
Read the conversation in context
- Read the conversation before scoring individual phrases and identify the purpose of the call.
- Ensure each criterion value has a supporting statement or explicit unknown marker.
Checkpoint: A saved intermediate result for: Read the conversation in context.
Extract stated needs, constraints, and relevant budget information
- Extract explicit needs, constraints and budget statements, retaining ranges and conditional wording.
- Check conditional language, negation and the date of any prior CRM fact.
Checkpoint: A saved intermediate result for: Extract stated needs, constraints, and relevant budget information.
Present evidence and uncertainties for each rubric item
- Build a criterion-by-criterion evidence table with unknowns and contradictions rather than one opaque score.
- Ensure each criterion value has a supporting statement or explicit unknown marker.
Checkpoint: A saved intermediate result for: Present evidence and uncertainties for each rubric item.
Let the sales owner confirm the qualification and correct errors
- Present the proposed fit record for the sales owner to correct and identify targeted follow-up questions.
- Check conditional language, negation and the date of any prior CRM fact.
Checkpoint: A saved intermediate result for: Let the sales owner confirm the qualification and correct errors.
Package the result and unresolved work
- Do not infer finances, personality, or intent from speaking style. Keep customer data restricted and leave consequential decisions to people.
- Do not infer finances, personality or intent from voice or speaking style.
Checkpoint: A reviewable lead-fit record linked to conversation evidence. Unresolved items remain visible in the review record.
Decisions along the way
Budget was not discussed.
Mark unknown and propose a neutral follow-up; do not infer affordability.
The customer describes a conditional timeline.
Preserve the condition instead of assigning a fixed purchase date.
CRM and call statements conflict.
Show both dated sources and ask the owner to resolve the current fact.
What you will produce
call-to-lead-fit-review-result.json
JSONA reviewable lead-fit record linked to conversation evidence. Label proposed and completed states separately.
Include: call_id · criterion · evidence · proposed_value · uncertainty · followup_question · owner_decision · status · evidence_reference · review_note
call-to-lead-fit-review-review.md
MarkdownKeep the evidence and unresolved decisions needed to apply this result, including exceptions involving review_owner.
Include: source_reference · question · owner · next_action
Check the result
- Ensure each criterion value has a supporting statement or explicit unknown marker.
- Check conditional language, negation and the date of any prior CRM fact.
- Inspect call_id and qualification_rubric in both the original and output; confirm that record identity and interpretation survived the transformation.
- Do not infer finances, personality, or intent from speaking style. Keep customer data restricted and leave consequential decisions to people.
When something goes wrong
Budget was not discussed.
Mark unknown and propose a neutral follow-up; do not infer affordability. Retain the affected evidence and recovery status.
The customer describes a conditional timeline.
Preserve the condition instead of assigning a fixed purchase date. Retain the affected evidence and recovery status.
CRM and call statements conflict.
Show both dated sources and ask the owner to resolve the current fact. Retain the affected evidence and recovery status.
A worked example
SYNTHETIC EXAMPLE · NOT A REPORTED BUSINESS RESULT
Request
Use call evidence to review lead fit for the following bounded example; prepare the result for review.
Inputs
Synthetic example: Customer C-9 needs reporting automation and says a purchase is possible after board approval. No budget or decision authority is stated.
Expected result
Synthetic expected result: Need is supported; timing is conditional on board approval; budget and authority are unknown. Draft follow-up questions address those gaps without rejecting the lead automatically.
Run a small pilot
Start small
Trial a representative batch containing the ordinary case and the exception demonstrated above.
Record the baseline
Record current preparation time, review effort and correction types for the same records.
Agree success criteria
Agree acceptable review and error limits; measure agreement with human-reviewed fit labels; missing evidence correctly left unresolved.
Stop or revise
CRM and call statements conflict. Pause affected records and apply this recovery: Show both dated sources and ask the owner to resolve the current fact.
Keep the scope clear
- Do not infer finances, personality or intent from voice or speaking style.
- The sales owner makes consequential qualification and communication decisions.
Check before using
Do not infer finances, personality, or intent from speaking style. Keep customer data restricted and leave consequential decisions to people.
Business activities
- Handle inbound enquiries
- Run sales conversations and proposals
FROM A RECIPE TO YOUR WORKFLOW
Bring the company context together.
This workflow needs reliable inputs before it needs a better prompt. Moat8 Vault brings working information into a readable archive for the AI tools you use.
For this recipe: Call transcripts · Explicit qualification rubric · Customer-system records
Start with one recurring task, agree which sources to use, and review the first result with your team.
Discuss this workflow