commercial-qualification

Score and qualify B2B consulting opportunities using the BANTTD framework (Budget, Authority, Need, Timeline, Tech-fit, Decision Date). Run the P.U.D.T.F pre-filter to rapidly screen opportunities before full scoring. Produce opportunity scorecards with a Pursue/Nurture/Disqualify verdict and recommended next actions. Execute the Professional Cut protocol when disqualifying. Use when evaluating whether to invest resources in an opportunity, after a qualification meeting or discovery meeting, or during pipeline reviews to re-qualify stale opportunities.

Safety Notice

This listing is imported from skills.sh public index metadata. Review upstream SKILL.md and repository scripts before running.

Copy this and send it to your AI assistant to learn

Install skill "commercial-qualification" with this command: npx skills add piperubio/ai-agents/piperubio-ai-agents-commercial-qualification

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 — it provides the data for humans to decide

Inputs

  • qualification-meeting-notes.md — notes from the qualification meeting (primary evidence source for P.U.D.T.F and BANTTD scoring).
  • discovery-notes.md — from commercial-discovery (supplementary evidence when available).
  • prospect-profile.md — from commercial-prospecting (company and stakeholder context).
  • commercial-state.md — current pipeline context (stage, history, capacity).
  • user_input — additional intel, override context, or competitive intelligence.

Notes:

  • Meeting notes may be incomplete. Score conservatively and flag gaps.
  • Tolerate ambiguity — never invent evidence to fill scoring gaps.

Reference

  • qualification-meeting-guide.md — 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 — 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.FMaps to BANTTDKey Question
P — ProblemaNeedIs there a specific, real, acknowledged problem?
U — UrgenciaTimelineIs there urgency or a compelling event driving action?
D — DecisorAuthorityAre we talking to someone with decision-making power or a clear path to it?
T — TicketBudgetIs there budget allocated or a realistic path to it?
F — FechaDecision DateIs there a defined decision date or timeline to act?

Pre-filter verdict:

P.U.D.T.F TotalSignalAction
22-30Pass — proceed to full BANTTD scoringSchedule Discovery meeting
16-21Borderline — gaps existIdentify which dimension(s) are weak. Determine if gaps can be closed before full scoring. Consider requesting a follow-up call to address specific gaps.
< 16Fail — execute Professional CutDo 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 — BANTTD Framework

Score each dimension 0-20. Total score range: 0-120.

B — Budget (0-20)

Is there money? Is it allocated? Is the range known and consistent with our engagement model?

A — Authority (0-20)

Do we have access to the economic buyer? Is the champion identified and actively engaged?

N — Need (0-20)

Is the pain real and urgent? Is the prospect actively looking for solutions? Is the impact quantified?

T — Timeline (0-20)

Is there a defined timeline? Is there an external deadline or event driving urgency?

T — Tech-fit (0-20)

Does our expertise match their needs? Can we deliver meaningful value without excessive subcontracting?

D — 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 — Verdict Logic

Total ScoreVerdictAction
84-120PursueAdvance to next step (see Pipeline Branch below). Invest full resources.
48-83NurtureDefine nurture plan with timeline. Re-qualify in 30-90 days.
0-47DisqualifyExecute Professional Cut. Archive with documented reasons.

Confidence Level: High / Medium / Low — 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 — Professional Cut Protocol

When verdict is Disqualify, execute a Professional Cut within 24 hours. Do not ghost.

  1. Identify the primary disqualification reason (weak Budget, no Authority path, no real Need, no Timeline, poor Tech-fit, no Decision Date).
  2. 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)
  3. Execute the cut in the final minutes of the meeting or via follow-up call (same day or next day at latest).
  4. Send the follow-up email within 24 hours using the template in the meeting guide.
  5. Archive the opportunity in commercial-state.md with stage closed_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 — Holding Pattern

When verdict is Nurture:

  1. Define which dimensions need to improve and what would trigger re-qualification.
  2. Set a re-qualification date (30-60 days typical; 90 days maximum before escalating to Disqualify).
  3. Define a lightweight nurture action (1-2 touchpoints before re-qualification: article share, event invitation, check-in call).
  4. Update commercial-state.md with 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 — 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-designcommercial-proposal-writer.

Branch B — 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 — 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

SignalBranch ABranch B
Requirements clarityClear and boundedVague or multiple directions
Estimation confidence+/- 20% achievable+/- 30% or worse
Scope-changing assumptions<= 2> 3
Qualification confidenceHigh / MediumLow
Systems/domains to assess1-2, known3+, unknown
Client knows what to buildYesNo

Framework Comparison

  • BANT: Classic but misses tech-fit and decision date — both critical for consulting.
  • BANTT: Our prior framework — extended BANT with Tech-fit. Now superseded by BANTTD.
  • MEDDIC/MEDDPICC: Comprehensive but complex — 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 — Problema   |            |          |
| U — Urgencia   |            |          |
| D — Decisor    |            |          |
| T — Ticket     |            |          |
| F — 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

  1. Always run the P.U.D.T.F pre-filter before the full BANTTD scoring.
  2. Every dimension score must include specific evidence or cite information gaps.
  3. Never default to "Pursue" without strong justification — bias toward honesty.
  4. If confidence is Low, recommend information-gathering actions before final verdict.
  5. A single dimension at 0-5 should trigger concern regardless of total score.
  6. Re-qualification should happen if opportunity has been stale for 30+ days.
  7. Compare qualification against team capacity — a qualified deal we cannot staff is still a problem.
  8. Flag deals that are qualified but below minimum engagement size.
  9. A Disqualify verdict must trigger a Professional Cut within 24 hours — never ghost.
  10. Record the prospect's exact words for urgency (1-10 scale) and decision date — 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:

DimensionScoreEvidence
P — Problema4Three siloed analytics systems causing duplicate reporting and 2-week lag on cross-product metrics.
U — Urgencia3Urgency score 7/10. "Board is asking for unified view before Q1 planning." No hard external deadline.
D — Decisor3VP Engineering is champion. CTO is economic buyer, aware and supportive but not yet engaged directly.
T — Ticket4"Low six figures approved for H2." Previous consulting spend at ~$150K confirmed.
F — Fecha3"Want something in place before Q1 planning" — soft deadline, approximately 4 months out.
Total17/30Pre-filter: Borderline — proceed with BANTTD scoring but flag Authority and Decision Date gaps.

BANTTD Scores:

DimensionScoreEvidence
Budget14/20VP mentioned "low six figures" budget approved for H2. No specific allocation yet. Previous consulting spend with a competitor at ~$150K.
Authority16/20VP Engineering is champion and budget holder. CTO (economic buyer) aware and supportive but not yet directly engaged.
Need18/20Three siloed analytics systems causing duplicate reporting, 2-week lag on cross-product metrics. Board asking for unified view. Actively evaluating solutions.
Timeline12/20"Want something in place before Q1 planning" — soft deadline, no regulatory or contractual driver.
Tech-fit15/20Data platform and analytics are core capabilities. Minor gap in their specific CDP tooling — would need 1-2 sprints of ramp-up.
Decision Date10/20"Before Q1 planning" implies ~4 months. No specific date given. No hard commitment.
Total85/120

Verdict: Pursue (85/120, Confidence: Medium)

  • Key risk: CTO not yet directly engaged — authority could stall at final approval.
  • Key risk: Decision date is soft — "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.

Source Transparency

This detail page is rendered from real SKILL.md content. Trust labels are metadata-based hints, not a safety guarantee.

Related Skills

Related by shared tags or category signals.

Automation

commercial-proposal-writer

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
Automation

project-planning

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
Automation

project-stewardship

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
Automation

project-stakeholder-communication

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review