MEDDIC Scorecard

Build systematic deal scorecards using MEDDIC/MEDDPICC methodology to improve pipeline hygiene, forecast accuracy, and coaching effectiveness.

When to Use This Skill

• Weekly pipeline reviews
• Deal coaching sessions
• Forecast call preparation
• Win/loss analysis
• Sales enablement training

Methodology Foundation

Based on PTC's MEDDIC (Dick Dunkel) extended to MEDDPICC, creating standardized scorecards for:

• Deal qualification scoring
• Gap identification
• Coaching prioritization
• Forecast confidence

What Claude Does vs What You Decide

Claude Does	You Decide
Creates scorecard templates	Deal stage thresholds
Suggests scoring criteria	Coaching priorities
Identifies deal gaps	Forecast commits
Generates coaching questions	Resource allocation
Tracks deal progression	Win strategy

Instructions

Step 1: Define Scoring Criteria

MEDDPICC Components:

Component	Definition	Scoring Weight
Metrics	Quantified business outcomes	15%
Economic Buyer	Budget authority identified	15%
Decision Criteria	How they'll evaluate	10%
Decision Process	Steps to purchase	10%
Paper Process	Legal/procurement	10%
Identify Pain	Business problem articulated	15%
Champion	Internal advocate confirmed	15%
Competition	Competitive landscape known	10%

Step 2: Create Scoring Rubric

Per-Component Scoring (0-3):

Score	Definition	Evidence Required
0	Unknown	No information gathered
1	Identified	Basic information, not verified
2	Validated	Confirmed with prospect
3	Leveraged	Actively using in deal strategy

Step 3: Build Stage Gates

Stage-Score Alignment:

Stage	Minimum Score	Required 3s
Discovery	8/24	Pain
Qualification	12/24	Pain, Champion
Demo/Evaluation	16/24	Pain, Champion, Criteria
Proposal	18/24	+ Economic Buyer
Negotiation	21/24	+ Paper Process
Commit	22/24	All components validated

Step 4: Track and Coach

Weekly Review Focus:

• Deals below stage threshold
• Score changes (positive/negative)
• Gaps in critical components
• Champion health check
• Competition updates

Step 5: Analyze Patterns

Pipeline Health Metrics:

• Average score by stage
• Conversion rates by score threshold
• Most common gaps
• Champion strength correlation

Examples

Example 1: Complete Deal Scorecard

Input:

Create a MEDDPICC scorecard for:
- Deal: Enterprise software sale, $400K
- Stage: Proposal
- Champion: VP of Operations
- EB: CFO (not met)
- Timeline: Q1 close

Output:

## MEDDPICC Deal Scorecard

### Deal Overview

| Field | Value |
|-------|-------|
| Account | [Customer Name] |
| Opportunity | Enterprise Platform |
| Value | $400,000 ARR |
| Stage | Proposal |
| Close Date | Q1 (March 30) |
| AE | [Name] |
| Last Updated | [Date] |

---

### Score Summary

**Total Score: 16/24** | Stage Requirement: 18/24

| Component | Score | Stage Req | Status |
|-----------|-------|-----------|--------|
| Metrics | 2/3 | 2 | ✅ |
| Economic Buyer | 1/3 | **3** | ❌ GAP |
| Decision Criteria | 3/3 | 2 | ✅ |
| Decision Process | 2/3 | 2 | ✅ |
| Paper Process | 1/3 | 2 | ⚠️ GAP |
| Identify Pain | 3/3 | 3 | ✅ |
| Champion | 3/3 | 3 | ✅ |
| Competition | 1/3 | 2 | ⚠️ GAP |

**Status: NOT READY FOR PROPOSAL** - 3 gaps to address

---

### Component Details

#### Metrics (2/3) ✅ On Track

**Current State:**
- ROI target: 3x in Year 1 ✓
- Primary KPI: Reduce processing time 40% ✓
- CFO business case: Not yet presented ✗

**Evidence:**
> "If we hit 40% reduction, that's $1.2M in operational savings"
> — VP Operations, Discovery Call

**To reach 3/3:**
- [ ] Present business case to CFO
- [ ] Get CFO to validate assumptions

---

#### Economic Buyer (1/3) ❌ CRITICAL GAP

**Current State:**
- EB Identified: CFO Jennifer Walsh ✓
- Access: Email only, no meeting ✗
- Engagement: Unknown priorities ✗

**Gap Analysis:**
We have not met the Economic Buyer. This is a **deal blocker**
for Proposal stage. Champion (VP Ops) reports to CFO but has
not secured meeting.

**Action Required:**
- [ ] Ask Champion for CFO meeting this week
- [ ] Prepare executive briefing deck
- [ ] Identify CFO's priorities for Q1

**Coaching Questions:**
1. "What's preventing us from meeting the CFO?"
2. "What does your champion say about CFO's priorities?"
3. "Can we propose a joint call with champion + CFO?"

---

#### Decision Criteria (3/3) ✅ Strong

**Current State:**
- Formal criteria documented ✓
- Weighted by priority ✓
- Aligned with our strengths ✓

**Evidence:**
| Criterion | Weight | Our Fit |
|-----------|--------|---------|
| Integration depth | 30% | Strong |
| Time to value | 25% | Strong |
| Total cost | 20% | Medium |
| Support | 15% | Strong |
| References | 10% | Strong |

---

#### Decision Process (2/3) ⚠️ Needs Validation

**Current State:**
- Steps identified ✓
- Timeline mapped ✓
- Approvers known ✓
- Specific dates: Partial ✗

**Process Map:**

Step 1: Technical evaluation ✅ Complete Step 2: Business review ✅ Complete Step 3: Proposal review ⏳ This week Step 4: CFO approval ⏳ [Date TBD] Step 5: Legal/Procurement ⏳ [Timeline unknown] Step 6: Signature ⏳ Target: March 30

**To reach 3/3:**
- [ ] Confirm CFO meeting date
- [ ] Map procurement timeline
- [ ] Identify potential delays

---

#### Paper Process (1/3) ⚠️ GAP

**Current State:**
- Legal review required: Likely ✓
- Timeline: Unknown ✗
- Procurement contact: Not identified ✗
- Standard terms acceptable: Unknown ✗

**Risk Assessment:**
Paper process is a common source of deal slip at this stage.
Unknown timeline creates forecast risk.

**Action Required:**
- [ ] Ask champion about procurement process
- [ ] Identify legal/procurement contacts
- [ ] Offer to start MSA review early

---

#### Identify Pain (3/3) ✅ Strong

**Current State:**
- Pain articulated ✓
- Quantified impact ✓
- Urgency established ✓
- Consequences of inaction clear ✓

**Pain Statement:**
> "Manual processing is costing us 8,000 hours/year. We've
> missed SLAs 3 times this quarter. If we don't fix this,
> we'll lose the [Major Customer] contract."

**Business Impact:**
- 8,000 hours × $50/hr = $400K labor cost
- SLA penalties: $200K potential
- Customer retention risk: $2M contract

---

#### Champion (3/3) ✅ Strong

**Champion Profile:**
| Attribute | Assessment |
|-----------|------------|
| Name | Michael Chen, VP Operations |
| Access | Reports to CFO |
| Influence | High - owns the budget |
| Motivation | Personal - promoted if successful |
| Engagement | Weekly calls, sharing internally |

**Champion Test:**
- ✅ Sells when we're not in the room
- ✅ Shares competitive intel
- ✅ Gives us bad news
- ⚠️ Has not secured CFO meeting yet

---

#### Competition (1/3) ⚠️ GAP

**Current State:**
- Competitors identified: 1 known ✓
- Their status: Unknown ✗
- Their approach: Unknown ✗
- Our differentiation: Assumed ✗

**Known Information:**
- Competitor X was evaluated
- Champion said "we've narrowed to two"
- No pricing or proposal intel

**Action Required:**
- [ ] Ask champion directly about competitor status
- [ ] Understand competitor's proposal/pricing
- [ ] Prepare competitive positioning

---

### Gap Resolution Plan

| Gap | Priority | Action | Owner | Due |
|-----|----------|--------|-------|-----|
| Economic Buyer | P1 | Request CFO meeting | AE + Champion | This week |
| Competition | P2 | Discovery with champion | AE | Day 2 |
| Paper Process | P2 | Map procurement timeline | AE | Day 3 |

---

### Coaching Summary

**Primary Focus:** Get in front of CFO before sending proposal

**Key Questions to Ask in 1:1:**
1. Why haven't we met the Economic Buyer yet?
2. What do we actually know about the competition?
3. What could cause this deal to slip past Q1?

**Forecast Recommendation:**
- Current: In forecast at 50%
- Recommendation: Keep at 50% until CFO meeting secured
- Path to 80%: EB meeting + Competition clarity + Paper process mapped

Example 2: Pipeline Review Summary

Input:

Summarize MEDDPICC health for these 5 deals:
1. Deal A: 22/24 (Commit stage)
2. Deal B: 14/24 (Proposal stage)
3. Deal C: 18/24 (Demo stage)
4. Deal D: 10/24 (Qualification stage)
5. Deal E: 16/24 (Negotiation stage)

Output:

## Pipeline MEDDPICC Health Summary

### Overview

| Deal | Stage | Score | Req'd | Status |
|------|-------|-------|-------|--------|
| Deal A | Commit | 22/24 | 22 | ✅ On track |
| Deal B | Proposal | 14/24 | 18 | ❌ 4 pts below |
| Deal C | Demo | 18/24 | 16 | ✅ Above req |
| Deal D | Qualification | 10/24 | 12 | ❌ 2 pts below |
| Deal E | Negotiation | 16/24 | 21 | ❌ 5 pts below |

**Pipeline Health: 2/5 deals on track (40%)**

---

### Priority Attention

| Priority | Deal | Issue | Recommended Action |
|----------|------|-------|-------------------|
| P1 | Deal E | 5 pts below in Negotiation | Pull back to Proposal |
| P2 | Deal B | 4 pts below in Proposal | Hold proposal, fill gaps |
| P3 | Deal D | 2 pts below in Qualification | Accelerate discovery |

---

### Deal E (CRITICAL)

**Problem:** In Negotiation stage with 16/24 score (req: 21)

This deal is at high risk. Likely gaps in:
- Economic Buyer (not confirmed?)
- Paper Process (not mapped?)
- Competition (unknown?)

**Recommendation:** Do not forecast this deal. Move back to
Proposal stage and address gaps before continuing negotiation.

---

### Common Gaps Across Pipeline

| Component | Avg Score | Concern |
|-----------|-----------|---------|
| Paper Process | 1.2/3 | Most common gap |
| Competition | 1.4/3 | Frequent blind spot |
| Economic Buyer | 1.8/3 | Access issue |

**Coaching Focus:** Paper Process discovery earlier in cycle

Skill Boundaries

What This Skill Does Well

• Creating structured scorecards
• Identifying deal gaps
• Generating coaching questions
• Tracking deal progression

What This Skill Cannot Do

• Access your CRM data
• Know specific deal context
• Make forecast decisions
• Replace sales judgment

Iteration Guide

Follow-up Prompts:

• "Create coaching questions for [component]"
• "What should we ask about [specific gap]?"
• "Design stage gate criteria for our process"
• "Analyze win/loss patterns from scorecards"

References

• PTC MEDDIC Methodology (Dick Dunkel)
• Force Management MEDDICC
• Winning by Design Sales Process
• Gong Sales Coaching Research

Related Skills

• lead-qualification-meddic - Full qualification framework
• deal-risk-scoring - Risk assessment
• pipeline-forecasting - Forecast methodology

Skill Metadata

• Domain: Sales
• Complexity: Intermediate
• Mode: centaur
• Time to Value: 15-30 min per deal
• Prerequisites: Deal information, CRM access