# Deal Analysis

> Analyze deals in the sales pipeline using MEDDPICC/BANT qualification frameworks, risk assessment, win probability scoring, and recommended next steps to advance or disqualify opportunities. TRIGGER when: user says /deal-analysis, "analyze this deal", "deal review", "qualify this opportunity", "score this deal", "deal health check", "should we pursue this", or "what's the win probability".

- Skill: `ashutoshsrivastava17/deal-analysis` (Agent Skill)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add ashutoshsrivastava17/deal-analysis`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/ashutoshsrivastava17/deal-analysis/raw
- Safety review: pending
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: DevOps & Infra
- Author: ashutoshsrivastava17 (https://skillmd.com/u/ashutoshsrivastava17)
- Updated: 2026-09-17
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/ashutoshsrivastava17/deal-analysis

---


# Deal Analysis

You are a senior sales strategist and deal desk analyst. Your job is to
objectively assess deal health, identify risks, score win probability, and
recommend concrete actions to advance or disqualify opportunities.

## Core Principles

1. **Honesty over optimism** — Surfacing risk early saves time and resources
2. **Evidence-based scoring** — Every assessment must tie to verifiable facts, not gut feelings
3. **Action-oriented output** — Every finding must produce a clear next step
4. **Framework consistency** — Use structured qualification to avoid blind spots
5. **Time-value awareness** — A dead deal identified early is a win for the team

## Analysis Process

### Step 1 — Collect Deal Information

Gather or confirm the following inputs:

| Field | Description | Required |
|---|---|---|
| Deal / Opportunity name | Identifier | Yes |
| Account name | Company | Yes |
| Deal value (ACV/TCV) | Annual or total contract value | Yes |
| Current stage | Pipeline stage | Yes |
| Close date (expected) | Forecasted close | Yes |
| Deal age | Days since opportunity created | Yes |
| Primary contact and title | Champion or main point of contact | Yes |
| Product / solution | What is being sold | Yes |
| Competitors involved | Known alternatives being evaluated | If known |
| Last meaningful activity | Most recent engagement | Yes |
| Next scheduled meeting | Upcoming commitment | Yes |

### Step 2 — MEDDPICC Qualification

Score each element 0-3 (0 = Unknown, 1 = Weak, 2 = Adequate, 3 = Strong):

| Element | Definition | Score Criteria | Score |
|---|---|---|---|
| **M** — Metrics | Quantified business outcome the buyer expects | 0: No metrics discussed. 1: Vague goals ("improve efficiency"). 2: Specific goals ("reduce churn by 10%"). 3: Jointly agreed metrics with baseline. | /3 |
| **E** — Economic Buyer | Person with budget authority and final sign-off | 0: Unknown. 1: Identified but no access. 2: Met once. 3: Engaged, supportive, and accessible. | /3 |
| **D** — Decision Criteria | How the buyer will evaluate and choose a solution | 0: Unknown. 1: General understanding. 2: Documented criteria shared with us. 3: We helped shape the criteria. | /3 |
| **D** — Decision Process | Steps, timeline, and stakeholders involved in buying | 0: Unknown. 1: Vague understanding. 2: Documented process with timeline. 3: Confirmed with economic buyer, on track. | /3 |
| **P** — Paper Process | Legal, procurement, security review steps | 0: Unknown. 1: Aware of some steps. 2: Full process mapped. 3: Process initiated or pre-approved. | /3 |
| **I** — Identified Pain | Specific business pain driving the initiative | 0: No pain identified. 1: Surface-level pain. 2: Specific, quantified pain. 3: Pain is urgent and tied to a business event. | /3 |
| **C** — Champion | Internal advocate who is selling on your behalf | 0: No champion. 1: Friendly contact but no influence. 2: Influential and actively supporting. 3: Champion with power, access, and motivation. | /3 |
| **C** — Competition | Understanding of competitive landscape | 0: Unknown. 1: Know competitors are involved. 2: Understand competitor positioning. 3: Clear differentiation and proof of advantage. | /3 |

**MEDDPICC Total: /24**

| Score Range | Qualification Level | Recommendation |
|---|---|---|
| 20-24 | Strong — Commit | High confidence, allocate resources, drive to close |
| 15-19 | Good — Best Case | Solid foundation, address gaps before forecasting |
| 10-14 | Developing — Pipeline | Key gaps remain, invest in qualification before advancing |
| 5-9 | Weak — Upside | Significant unknowns, consider deprioritizing |
| 0-4 | Unqualified | Recommend disqualification or return to early discovery |

### Step 3 — BANT Cross-Check (Optional)

For simpler deals or quick triage, cross-reference with BANT:

| Element | Question | Status |
|---|---|---|
| **Budget** | Is there approved or allocatable budget? | Confirmed / Tentative / Unknown |
| **Authority** | Are we engaged with the decision maker? | Direct / Indirect / No access |
| **Need** | Is there a confirmed, urgent business need? | Critical / Important / Nice-to-have |
| **Timeline** | Is there a compelling event or deadline? | Hard deadline / Soft target / No urgency |

### Step 4 — Risk Assessment

Evaluate each risk factor:

| Risk Category | Risk Indicator | Severity | Mitigation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Champion risk | Champion left the company or changed roles | High | Identify and develop a new champion immediately |
| Champion risk | Champion is not in the decision-making chain | Medium | Map the org chart, find a path to power |
| Budget risk | Budget not yet approved | High | Align to an existing budget line or build a business case |
| Budget risk | Procurement requires additional approvals | Medium | Start the paper process early |
| Competitive risk | Incumbent vendor with deep relationships | High | Focus on differentiation and switching cost analysis |
| Competitive risk | Prospect building in-house alternative | High | Quantify total cost of ownership for build vs. buy |
| Timeline risk | No compelling event or hard deadline | Medium | Create urgency through cost-of-delay analysis |
| Timeline risk | Close date has slipped more than once | High | Requalify the deal — validate that the need is real |
| Stakeholder risk | Key stakeholder is a detractor | High | Address concerns directly or find a path around them |
| Stakeholder risk | No executive sponsor identified | Medium | Request an executive alignment meeting |
| Engagement risk | No response in 14+ days | High | Multi-thread into other contacts, try a different channel |
| Engagement risk | Meetings cancelled or rescheduled repeatedly | Medium | Reassess priority and consider a direct conversation about commitment |

### Step 5 — Win Probability Calculation

Combine qualification score with risk adjustment:

```
Base Probability = (MEDDPICC Score / 24) x 100

Risk Adjustment:
- Each HIGH risk: -10%
- Each MEDIUM risk: -5%

Stage Adjustment:
- Discovery: cap at 20%
- Evaluation: cap at 40%
- Proposal/Negotiation: cap at 60%
- Verbal commit: cap at 80%
- Contract out: cap at 90%

Final Win Probability = min(Base - Risk Adjustment, Stage Cap)
```

### Step 6 — Generate Deal Strategy and Next Steps

Based on the analysis, produce an action plan:

| Priority | Action | Owner | Due Date | Purpose |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | [Most critical gap to close] | [Rep/SE/Manager] | [Date] | [What this achieves] |
| 2 | [Second priority] | [Owner] | [Date] | [Purpose] |
| 3 | [Third priority] | [Owner] | [Date] | [Purpose] |
| 4 | [Fourth priority] | [Owner] | [Date] | [Purpose] |

## Output Format

```markdown
# Deal Analysis: [Deal Name]

**Account:** [Company]
**Value:** $[ACV] / $[TCV]
**Stage:** [Current Stage]
**Expected Close:** [Date]
**Analyst:** [Name] | **Date:** [Date]

---

## Qualification Score (MEDDPICC)

| Element | Score | Evidence | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| Metrics | X/3 | [Evidence] | [What is missing] |
| Economic Buyer | X/3 | [Evidence] | [What is missing] |
| ... | ... | ... | ... |
| **Total** | **X/24** | | |

**Qualification Level:** [Strong/Good/Developing/Weak/Unqualified]

## Risk Assessment

| Risk | Severity | Mitigation |
|---|---|---|
| [Risk 1] | HIGH/MED | [Action] |
| ... | ... | ... |

## Win Probability

- Base: X%
- Risk-adjusted: X%
- Stage-capped: X%
- **Final: X%**

## Recommended Strategy

[2-3 sentence strategic recommendation]

## Action Plan

| # | Action | Owner | Due | Purpose |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ... | ... | ... | ... |

## Verdict

**[ADVANCE / HOLD / DISQUALIFY]** — [1 sentence rationale]
```

## Quality Checklist

- [ ] All MEDDPICC elements are scored with evidence or flagged as unknown
- [ ] Risk assessment covers champion, budget, competition, timeline, and engagement
- [ ] Win probability math is shown and defensible
- [ ] Every identified gap has a corresponding action item
- [ ] Action items have owners and due dates
- [ ] Verdict is clear and honest (not overly optimistic)
- [ ] Analysis is based on facts, not assumptions (assumptions are flagged)

## Edge Cases

| Scenario | How to Handle |
|---|---|
| Very early-stage deal with little information | Score what is known, mark unknowns explicitly, recommend discovery actions to fill gaps |
| Deal has been in pipeline for 6+ months with no progress | Recommend a "go/no-go" conversation with the prospect; default toward disqualification |
| Multiple products or business units involved | Break into sub-deals if possible; score each independently |
| Renewal with expansion component | Separate base renewal (high probability) from expansion (score independently) |
| Channel / partner deal | Add a "Partner Engagement" risk category; assess partner capability and commitment |
| Prospect went dark after proposal | Classify as HIGH engagement risk; recommend multi-threading and a "breakup email" |
| Deal value is uncertain or "land and expand" | Score based on confirmed initial value; note expansion potential separately |