# Qualification Meddpicc > - SDR has completed initial qualification call and is determining whether to schedule an AE (sales engineer / account executive) discovery meeting - Skill: `uitbreidenos/qualification-meddpicc` (Agent Skill) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add uitbreidenos/qualification-meddpicc` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/uitbreidenos/qualification-meddpicc/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Product & Planning - Author: UitbreidenOS (https://skillmd.com/u/uitbreidenos) - Updated: 2026-09-22 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/uitbreidenos/qualification-meddpicc --- # MEDDPICC Qualification ## When to activate - SDR has completed initial qualification call and is determining whether to schedule an AE (sales engineer / account executive) discovery meeting - You need to assess deal quality across all eight MEDDPICC dimensions before handoff - Evaluating whether to continue pursuing a prospect when deal signals are mixed - Building a handoff brief for the AE with documented evidence across all qualification elements ## When NOT to use - Use this after initial contact but before AE engagement — not for post-discovery or existing accounts - Do not use this for inbound leads that have already passed initial filter — use this to decide *whether* to engage AE, not to validate AE involvement - Not a replacement for active listening; use this to structure findings after the conversation, not during - Do not force-fit marginal leads through MEDDPICC scoring — if core elements are Unknown/Missing, that signals more discovery needed, not readiness for handoff ## Instructions ### MEDDPICC Framework Definition **M — Metrics**: Quantified business impact. Ask: "If you solve this problem, what does that mean in revenue, cost savings, time saved, or risk reduction? What's the financial or operational impact?" - Strong: Prospect articulated specific numbers ($X savings, Y% efficiency gain, Z revenue impact) - Partial: Prospect indicated impact but not quantified ("save money," "faster," "reduce errors") - Unknown: You asked but prospect couldn't quantify - Missing: No conversation about impact yet **E — Economic Buyer**: Who controls budget? Have you spoken to them or only an influencer? - Strong: You have confirmed conversation with person who owns budget authority - Partial: Prospect confirmed who Economic Buyer is but you haven't spoken directly; budget authority is likely - Unknown: Unclear who controls budget; prospect is deflecting - Missing: No conversation about budget ownership **D — Decision Criteria** (first D): What are the top 3–5 evaluation criteria the prospect will use to judge vendors? - Strong: Prospect explicitly named 3+ criteria in priority order (e.g., "1. integrates with Salesforce, 2. under $50k/year, 3. 24/7 support") - Partial: Prospect mentioned 1–2 criteria but not comprehensive or prioritized - Unknown: You asked but prospect was vague ("we want the best solution") - Missing: No conversation about how they'll evaluate **D — Decision Process** (second D): Who is in the buying committee? What are the steps? What's the timeline? - Strong: Prospect mapped out committee (founder, CFO, ops lead), process (RFP → demo → security review → sign-off), and timeline (4–6 weeks) - Partial: Prospect identified some stakeholders and rough timeline but process is unclear - Unknown: Prospect unclear on steps or who else is involved - Missing: No conversation about buying process **P — Paper Process**: Procurement, legal, security review, compliance sign-offs — who owns each and how long? - Strong: Prospect identified every gate (e.g., "security review takes 2 weeks, procurement is 1 week, legal is fast") - Partial: Prospect acknowledged some gates exist but not clear on owners or timelines - Unknown: Prospect unsure about procurement / legal / security rigor - Missing: No conversation about sign-off gates **I — Identify Pain**: What is the specific, quantified pain? What happens if they do nothing? - Strong: Prospect articulated specific, quantified pain ("We lose 8 hours/person/week on manual data entry") and consequence of inaction ("We'll miss Q3 forecast") - Partial: Prospect mentioned pain but not specific or quantified ("It's a headache") - Unknown: Prospect acknowledged a problem but won't quantify or articulate consequence - Missing: No discussion of pain or consequence **C — Champion** (first C): Do you have someone internally selling for you when you're not in the room? - Strong: Identified person who will evangelize, has stated commitment, has skin in the game (e.g., their workflow improves) - Partial: Identified likely champion but commitment unclear or they have mixed incentives - Unknown: Prospect suggested a possible champion but you haven't validated - Missing: No champion identified; everyone is neutral or skeptical **C — Competition** (second C): Which vendors are they evaluating? What do they love/hate about those options? - Strong: Prospect named 2+ competitors, stated what's good/bad about each vs. what they need - Partial: Prospect mentioned 1 competitor or features they like/dislike but no competitive comparison - Unknown: Prospect deflected or said "we haven't looked at alternatives" - Missing: No conversation about competitive set --- ### MEDDPICC Scoring Logic Score each element on a 0–3 scale: - **3 = Strong**: All or nearly all information present, quantified, and confirmed by prospect directly - **2 = Partial**: Some information present; may lack quantification, confirmation from decision-maker, or completeness - **1 = Unknown**: You asked but got vague or evasive response - **0 = Missing**: No conversation about this element or prospect explicitly said "we don't know yet" **SAP Score (Sales Accuracy Predictor)**: Sum all eight elements. Maximum = 24. Interpretation: - **20–24 (Excellent)**: 6–8 elements at Strong; ready for AE handoff; high close probability - **14–19 (Good)**: Mix of Strong and Partial; meets handoff threshold; AE should confirm Pain/Champion/Metrics in discovery - **12–13 (Threshold Caution)**: More Partial than Strong; handoff marginal; escalate to manager if Economics/Decision Process are weak - **0–11 (Not Ready)**: Too many Unknown/Missing; requires another discovery call before AE engagement; schedule follow-up **Handoff Threshold**: SDR must achieve **14+ SAP Score** before scheduling AE discovery. Do not schedule AE for score < 14 without manager approval. --- ### Discovery Questions by MEDDPICC Element Use these questions to probe each dimension during qualification call: **Metrics:** - "If you implement a solution to this problem, what does success look like in financial or operational terms? What's the impact in dollars, hours saved, or risk reduction?" - "How are you measuring the cost of the problem today? What's the annual burden?" - "What KPIs would change once this is solved?" **Economic Buyer:** - "Who owns the budget for a solution like this?" - "Are you the right person to speak to about budget, or should we include [their name] on our next call?" - "Who else would need to approve spend in your organization for something like this?" **Decision Criteria:** - "When you evaluate vendors, what are the top 3–5 things that matter most to you? In what order?" - "What's non-negotiable vs. nice-to-have?" - "If you had to choose between [price/integration/support], which wins?" **Decision Process:** - "Walk me through how a buying decision would unfold in your org. Who needs to sign off?" - "Are there any formal steps like an RFP, demo, security review, or legal review?" - "What's the typical timeline from first conversation to contract?" **Paper Process:** - "Do you have a procurement process? Who owns it and how long does it usually take?" - "Is there a security review or compliance sign-off? Who handles it?" - "Does legal review vendor contracts? How long does that take?" **Identify Pain:** - "What's the specific pain you're feeling today? Can you describe it in terms of what's broken or slowing you down?" - "How often does this problem occur? How long does it take to work around it?" - "What happens if you don't solve this by [target date]? What's the cost of doing nothing?" **Champion:** - "Who on your team will benefit most from solving this problem?" - "Is there anyone in your org who's been pushing for a solution to this?" - "Who would you naturally loop in when discussing a potential vendor?" **Competition:** - "Are you evaluating other solutions or vendors for this?" - "What are they looking at? Have they demoed or piloted anything?" - "What do you like or dislike about the options you're considering?" --- ### MEDDPICC Handoff Brief Template Use this format when handing off a qualified lead to AE: ``` HANDOFF BRIEF — [Prospect Company Name] Prospect: [Contact Name, Title, Email, Phone] Decision Maker: [Economic Buyer Name, Title, email] Champion: [Name, Title, why they care] MEDDPICC SCORECARD --- M — Metrics: [3/2/1/0] | [Evidence: e.g., "$2M/year cost of delays"] E — Economic Buyer: [3/2/1/0] | [Evidence: e.g., "CFO confirmed budget, not allocated yet"] D — Decision Crit: [3/2/1/0] | [Evidence: e.g., "1. Must integrate Salesforce, 2. <$100k/yr, 3. On-prem"] D — Decision Proc: [3/2/1/0] | [Evidence: e.g., "VP, CFO, Head of Ops; 4-week RFP → pilot → legal"] P — Paper Process: [3/2/1/0] | [Evidence: e.g., "Security review 2 weeks, legal 1 week, procurement 3 days"] I — Identify Pain: [3/2/1/0] | [Evidence: e.g., "12 FTE on manual reporting; risk of forecast miss if not solved by Q3"] C — Champion: [3/2/1/0] | [Evidence: e.g., "VP of Finance wants to automate; will sponsor internally"] C — Competition: [3/2/1/0] | [Evidence: e.g., "Evaluating Alteryx and Tableau; concerns about pricing"] SAP SCORE: [__/24] NEXT STEPS (AE Discovery) - Confirm metrics with CFO / Finance lead - Validate that [Champion name] will evangelize during eval - Close gap on [weakest element, e.g., Decision Process timeline] - Schedule demo for [date]; include [list attendees from decision committee] RISK FLAGS - [Any element at 0 or 1] — DO NOT ignore - [Timeline pressure, budget constraints, internal politics, etc.] CONTEXT [1–2 sentences on how you found them, what sparked interest, any objections raised] ``` --- ### Common Pitfalls & How to Avoid Them **Most Commonly Missed Element: Competition** Most SDRs skip competitive discovery because: - They fear it makes the prospect think "there are other options" (actually, most enterprises ARE evaluating multiple vendors) - They don't know how to ask without sounding defensive - They assume prospect will volunteer competitive info (they won't) **Fix:** - Ask early, frame as "understanding landscape": "Are you working with any other vendors on this right now?" - Reframe as validation of process: "Most teams I talk to evaluate 2–3 options. Who else are you looking at?" - Use prospect's answer to differentiate: "They're strong on [feature], but struggle with [feature we do well]. Is that a concern?" **Other Common Gaps:** - **Metrics Unknown**: Prospect says "save time" but won't quantify. Action: "If you save 1 hour/person/week, what's that worth in salary cost?" (prompt them, don't accept vague) - **Economic Buyer Missing**: You've only spoken to an influencer. Action: Schedule call with budget owner *before* AE handoff. Do not ask influencer to make the intro and hope it sticks. - **Decision Process Vague**: Prospect says "we'll just run it by leadership." Action: "Who specifically is on your leadership team? Who decides on software purchases?" - **Paper Process Unknown**: Prospect says "we'll handle it." Action: "Will there be a procurement team, security review, or legal review? Who owns those?" - **Champion Weak**: Prospect is neutral or you haven't identified a champion. Action: "Who on your team will feel the most impact if we solve this?" (find the person with skin in the game) --- ### Scoring Rules - **Don't inflate scores for rapport**: If a prospect is friendly but gave vague answers, score = 1 (Unknown), not 2 (Partial) - **Don't score from inference**: If prospect didn't explicitly say budget exists, don't assume Economic Buyer is Strong - **Partial ≠ Good**: Partial means you have some data but gaps remain. If two elements are Partial, that's material risk in deal progression - **Unknown ≠ Partial**: Unknown = you asked and got an evasive answer. Partial = you got some data but not all. These are different signals - **If SAP < 14, do not escalate to AE**: Schedule a second discovery call to close Critical gaps (E, I, C Champion) --- ### Decision Tree: To Handoff or Not? ``` Score all 8 elements (0–3 each) SAP ≥ 20? ├─ YES → Hand off immediately. AE confirms in discovery. ├─ NO, SAP 14–19? → Hand off. Prep AE with gaps. Flag weakest elements. └─ NO, SAP 12–13? ├─ Is E (Econ Buyer) or I (Identify Pain) at 0 or 1? → Do NOT hand off. Schedule follow-up. ├─ Is Decision Process or Paper Process at 0 or 1? → Hand off only if other 5 are 2+. Flag risk. └─ Otherwise → Manager review. If you've built rapport, might be worth one more call. SAP < 12? └─ Do NOT hand off. Schedule follow-up discovery. Prospect not ready. ``` --- ### Translation of MEDDPICC Terms for Larger Buying Committees When prospect says "we don't have one buyer," map to their structure: - **Economic Buyer** = "Budget owner" (CFO, VP Finance, Head of Procurement) - **Champion** = "Internal sponsor" or "power user" (person who'll evangelize) - **Decision Criteria** = "Evaluation framework" or "scoring rubric" - **Paper Process** = "Sign-off checklist" or "approval gates" --- ## Example **Scenario: SaaS sales intelligence tool. SDR (you) on call with Maya, a Marketing Director at a Series-B fintech.** **Call transcript (excerpts):** *You: "Maya, if we solve the challenge of getting accurate lead scoring, what does that mean for your team?"* *Maya: "Honestly, we're losing maybe 20–30% of qualified leads to bad data. If we fixed that, we'd probably add $500k in annual revenue just from improving our close rate."* → **Metrics: 3 (Strong)** — Specific impact quantified ($500k revenue) --- *You: "Who would need to approve a tool like this?"* *Maya: "That would be our CFO, James. He owns software spend. I've mentioned the problem to him but haven't formally asked about budget."* → **Economic Buyer: 2 (Partial)** — Identified but not directly confirmed; budget status unclear --- *You: "When you evaluate a solution, what matters most?"* *Maya: "We need it to integrate with Salesforce—that's non-negotiable. Second, price matters; we're bootstrapped so under $50k/year. Third, onboarding speed; we need to move fast. And honestly, the vendor's reputation in fintech helps."* → **Decision Criteria: 3 (Strong)** — Four clear criteria with priority ranking --- *You: "Walk me through how this would get approved. Are there other steps beyond James?"* *Maya: "Yeah, so James would approve spend. Our VP of Sales would need to sign off on the solution itself. And because we handle financial data, there's a security review—that usually takes 2 weeks. Then legal would do a quick contract review, maybe 1 week. Timeline? Probably 4–5 weeks from decision to go."* → **Decision Process: 3 (Strong)** — Stakeholders, timeline, and structure clear → **Paper Process: 3 (Strong)** — Security review (2 weeks), legal (1 week), procurement owners identified --- *You: "What's driving the urgency around this? What happens if you don't solve the lead-scoring problem?"* *Maya: "We're ramping sales in Q3. If we don't fix lead quality now, we'll miss our pipeline targets by probably 25–30%. James knows this is a risk."* → **Identify Pain: 3 (Strong)** — Specific quantified pain (25–30% pipeline miss) and consequence (Q3 miss) --- *You: "Who on your team would be most excited about this solution?"* *Maya: "Definitely our Head of Sales, David. He's been pushing for better data for a year. If I show him a viable solution, he'll fight for it internally."* → **Champion: 3 (Strong)** — Identified, motivated, and positioned to evangelize --- *You: "Are you evaluating other vendors for this?"* *Maya: "We looked at Clearbit last year, but their pricing jumped. We're also in early talks with [competitor X], who's cheaper but doesn't integrate as cleanly with Salesforce. Your integration story is better."* → **Competition: 3 (Strong)** — Named competitors, stated pros/cons --- **SAP SCORECARD:** ``` M — Metrics: 3 ($500k revenue impact) E — Econ Buyer: 2 (Identified but not confirmed) D — Decision Crit: 3 (4 criteria, prioritized) D — Decision Proc: 3 (Stakeholders + timeline) P — Paper Process: 3 (Security + legal + timeline) I — Identify Pain: 3 (25–30% pipeline miss, Q3 consequence) C — Champion: 3 (David, Head of Sales, motivated) C — Competition: 3 (Clearbit, Competitor X, comparison stated) TOTAL SAP SCORE: 23/24 ``` **Decision**: Hand off immediately to AE. This deal is enterprise-ready. **HANDOFF BRIEF to AE:** ``` Prospect: Maya Lopez, Marketing Director, Series-B Fintech Economic Buyer: James (CFO) — NOT YET SPOKEN TO Champion: David (Head of Sales) — Motivated, will evangelize SAP Score: 23/24 Key Metrics: $500k revenue impact from fixing lead quality; 25–30% pipeline miss if not solved by Q3 Gaps to confirm in discovery: - James' appetite for spend (Maya hasn't formally asked yet) - David's timeline for solution (must align with Q3 ramp) Next: Schedule demo with Maya + David; loop James in for budget discussion. Risk flags: None. Strong deal. ``` --- This prospect clears the handoff threshold with a 23/24 SAP. The AE's job is to lock in Economic Buyer approval and confirm timeline.