Work the best leads first
Fit scoring against your own ICP, a card when a lead crosses the bar, and a record of every enrichment that produced it.
The job
“I want to know which leads are worth calling first, and why.”
- Business development
- Marketing operations
- Sales managers
Working leads in arrival order is a defensible policy only when every lead is equally likely to convert, which is never. In practice a queue worked top-down means the best lead of the week is reached on Thursday, by which time somebody else has reached them on Tuesday.
Most scoring schemes fail not because the model is wrong but because nobody trusts it. A score that arrives as a number with no breakdown gets ignored the first time it disagrees with somebody’s instinct, and after that it is decoration.
What it moves
- MQL to SAL conversion
- Speed to lead
- Cost per opportunity
The division of labour
What RevTech does, and where you decide
In the product
How to do it
- Step 1 of 4
Write the ICP down as an artifact
The fit model is only as good as the definition behind it, and that definition belongs in your artifact library where every agent reads the same one. An ICP that exists in a slide and an ICP that exists as an artifact produce very different scoring.
- Step 2 of 4
Turn the scoring feature on for your tenant
Lead scoring is one of the features that needs configuring before it works. Until it is, the Contacts surface says so in a banner rather than showing empty scores — and an administrator can complete the setup from that banner while everybody else is offered the path to ask for it.
- Step 3 of 4
Act on the two crossing cards
A lead crossing the ICP fit threshold arrives with the breakdown behind the score, not just the score. A contact whose score or fit climbs into the hot band arrives with a personal touch drafted from their own activity. Both are time-sensitive in the way scores generally are: the band is a description of this week.
- Step 4 of 4
Use the processed record when you disagree
Every AI-processed lead keeps its revisions, so when a score looks wrong you can see what was enriched, what was researched and what the model saw. That is the thing that makes a scoring scheme survive its first disagreement, and where research has gone stale it can be re-run.
The Leads report: lead volume, ownership, quality and downstream outcomes by source, connecting marketing activity to the pipeline it actually produced. Screenshot of the RevTech application; sample data. The lead surfaces. Scores are worth having only when you can see what produced them.
What arrives
What this puts in your Action Center
| Item | What is prepared | How it resolves |
|---|---|---|
| HighFitLead | The lead scored against the ICP model, with the breakdown surfaced | The lead |
| ContactScoreImproved | A personal touch drafted from the contact’s own activity | Reach out |
| LeadAssigned | Enriched, scored and with the first touch drafted | Opens the lead’s contact record |
What to take away
- The ICP belongs in the artifact library, not in a slide. Every agent reads the same one.
- A score without a breakdown gets ignored the first time it disagrees with somebody.
- Processed leads keep their revisions, which is what makes a score arguable rather than mysterious.
- Scoring has to be configured for your tenant first; the banner says so rather than showing empty scores.
Go deeper
The material behind this
Try the demo.
See agents carry the repeatable work of GTM across sales, marketing, customer success, and RevOps. Every action prepared, reviewed, and recorded. Fictional data, real product.
Explore the demo