This is a sample report
Generated from a fictional candidate so you can see exactly what SalesProof produces. Your candidates' reports will follow the same structure with their own scores and feedback.
Marcus Chen · Enterprise AE · Enterprise
SalesProof Verified™
A public, revocable credential with a shareable verify page. Employers get a third-party signal this rep has been benchmarked. Candidates carry it on LinkedIn.
Revenue Hiring Decision Dossier
Name
Marcus Chen
Role assessed
Enterprise AE
Segment
Enterprise
Date completed
April 14, 2025
Approaching Next-Level Benchmark
Interview Co-Pilot™
Validate Metrics depth
Scored 5/5 - strong on paper. Confirm with a real-world story it isn't just theory.
Validate Decision Criteria depth
Scored 5/5 - strong on paper. Confirm with a real-world story it isn't just theory.
Validate Identify Pain depth
Scored 5/5 - strong on paper. Confirm with a real-world story it isn't just theory.
Three-column action panel - read first, then dive deeper.
Driven by strong capability, low risk profile, high answer authenticity.
Banded against the Enterprise AE bar.
Strong pain-to-business-consequence chain. 100/100 vs role bar.
Strong qualification discipline across all 8 dimensions.
Strong on decision process and paper-process orchestration.
Strong forecast call hygiene and risk-awareness in deal commits.
Strong commitment-gaining and objection navigation.
Strong on Champion development, EB access and metric anchoring.
Calibrated to the Enterprise AE bar.
Raw weighted MEDDPICC performance.
Vs. the bar a Enterprise AE should clear.
Readiness signal for the next level up.
Approaching Strategic AE Benchmark
Performance signals exceed the Enterprise AE bar across most competencies and overlap meaningfully with the Strategic AE expectation profile.
CRO Summary
90/100
MEDDPICC composite
Strong hire
Final recommendation
87%
Top 10% Enterprise AEs
85/100
Forecast Reliability Score
~9 mo
Predicted time to quota
Low
Mis-Hire Index 11/100
93%
Engine confidence in recommendation
85/100
Exceptional
Recommendation Summary
Marcus is suitable for the Enterprise AE role at Enterprise level and performs in the top decile of candidates we've assessed. Strongest in Metrics and Decision Criteria. Weakest in Competition and Paper Process. Overall sales proficiency 90/100, enterprise readiness 85/100, forecast reliability 85/100, coachability 77/100, risk score 7/100.
Experience-Normalised Scoring Engine™
Three-layer scoring model that calibrates expectations to role complexity without lowering the bar. Same answer scores differently for an SDR than a Strategic AE that's the point.
Absolute Capability Score
100
/ 100
Raw weighted MEDDPICC performance, complexity-adjusted. How good are they, period?
Role-Normalised Score
90
/ 100
Performance vs. the bar a Enterprise AE is expected to clear. 50 = exactly meeting expectations.
Growth Potential Score
80
/ 100
Coachability + decision-process sophistication + headroom signals. Could they grow into the next role?
Performance vs. expected level
Competency-by-competency view vs. the Enterprise AE expectation profile.
Above the bar
8At the bar
0Performance is polarised no competencies sit on the line.
Below the bar
0No competencies fall below the Enterprise AE bar.
Role Benchmark Alignment
80
Readiness
Next-Level Readiness Signal™
Shows emerging strategic ae capability credible to consider for stretch Strategic AE responsibilities within 9–12 months.
Quality of Hire Index™
85
/ 100
ExceptionalProprietary composite combining capability, judgement, forecast discipline, coachability and execution readiness.
Weighted breakdown
Band: Exceptional — Top-decile candidate. Capability, judgement and execution all clear the bar with margin.
Validate next: Confirm cultural fit and compensation alignment.
Behavioural integrity signals (paste, typing cadence, time-on-task) across the candidate's open-question answers.
Authenticity
Typed naturally — no integrity concerns.
96
/ 100
Typed naturallyLive candidates show a per-answer breakdown with keystroke cadence, paste events and behavioural integrity signals. This sample is illustrative.
Marcus is suitable for the Enterprise AE role at Enterprise level and performs in the top decile of candidates we've assessed. Strongest in Metrics and Decision Criteria. Weakest in Competition and Paper Process. Overall sales proficiency 90/100, enterprise readiness 85/100, forecast reliability 85/100, coachability 77/100, risk score 7/100.
Scored against the bar a Enterprise AE is expected to clear.
Move this candidate through your pipeline and capture internal notes for your team.
Move this candidate through your hiring funnel.
No notes yet. The first note is usually a one-line debrief from the interview.
Internal comments visible to your workspace. @mention teammates to loop them in.
Viewers can read comments but can't post.
Banded against the Enterprise AE bar, what good, watch and alert look like for this role.
Enterprise Readiness
85/ 100
Meets barEnt AE · Target ≥ 70 · Alert ≤ 54
Forecast Reliability
85/ 100
Meets barEnt AE · Target ≥ 70 · Alert ≤ 54
Coachability
77/ 100
Meets barEnt AE · Target ≥ 60 · Alert ≤ 40
Risk Score
7/ 100
Within toleranceEnt AE · Target ≤ 36 · Alert ≥ 58
Candidate vs top-performer benchmark across the eight MEDDPICC categories. Green clears the bar, amber and red flag coaching gaps.
| Category | Candidate | Top performer | Gap | Signal |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Metrics | 5.0 | 4.4 | +0.6 | |
| Economic Buyer | 4.0 | 4.3 | −0.3 | |
| Decision Criteria | 5.0 | 4.2 | +0.8 | |
| Decision Process | 4.0 | 4.1 | −0.1 | |
| Paper Process | 4.0 | 4.0 | 0 | |
| Identify Pain | 5.0 | 4.4 | +0.6 | |
| Champion | 5.0 | 4.3 | +0.7 | |
| Competition | 4.0 | 4.0 | 0 |
Benchmark cohort: top-decile reps in equivalent role and segment, normalised across 18,400 historical assessments.
Advanced Insights
Powered by SalesProof Behavioural Engine v2.4 proprietary predictive modules for decision support.
Self-perception matches demonstrated capability.
Owns decision process, criteria and paper process.
Pattern resembles a closer-dominant rep who leans champion builder under pressure.
Top 10% Enterprise AEs
Aligned with top performers
Divergence from top performers
Modelled probability of hitting quota
Confidence interval shown. Y1 baseline 70% · Y2 baseline 95% (Enterprise AE). 9–12 mo ramp, multi-stakeholder cycles, delayed quota realisation.
Composite mis-hire exposure
Predicted exposure
£134k
incl. ramp salary, opportunity cost, replacement
Risk drivers
No material execution risks
0–12 month ramp risk trajectory
Cross-scenario answer coherence
Procurement handoff contradicts earlier qualification claims.
Feed an anonymised outcome into SalesProof Intelligence Loop™ to sharpen future role benchmarks.
Anonymised, aggregated patterns only. No candidate names, emails, employer names, or workspace data ever enter the benchmark model.
Each category includes the bar a Enterprise AE is expected to clear.
Builds a fully quantified business case, value, risk, cost, urgency and commercial outcome.
What good looks like, Ent AE
Builds a fully-quantified, Finance-validated business case.
Has a clear, sequenced plan to identify and meet the Economic Buyer without burning the champion.
What good looks like, Ent AE
Earns executive access, CISO, CFO or CRO meeting confirmed.
Actively shapes the criteria around customer pain and competitive advantage.
What good looks like, Ent AE
Shapes formal and informal criteria around their differentiation.
Identifies stakeholders, approvals and sequence with credible owners and dates.
What good looks like, Ent AE
Maps a 6+ stakeholder committee with a signed mutual close plan.
Maps legal, security, finance and procurement steps with realistic timing.
What good looks like, Ent AE
Treats Paper Process as a Stage 2 workstream, not a Stage 5 surprise.
Creates urgency around quantified business pain with a documented compelling event.
What good looks like, Ent AE
Quantifies business pain at executive level with a compelling event.
Validates power, influence, willingness to sell internally and personal win, and develops a backup.
What good looks like, Ent AE
Develops 2 champions with documented power, influence and personal win.
Differentiates clearly against named competitors on criteria that matter to the buyer.
What good looks like, Ent AE
Builds a competitive strategy across product, commercial and exec value.
Metrics, Exceptional (5/5)
Builds a fully quantified business case, value, risk, cost, urgency and commercial outcome.
Decision Criteria, Exceptional (5/5)
Actively shapes the criteria around customer pain and competitive advantage.
Identify Pain, Exceptional (5/5)
Creates urgency around quantified business pain with a documented compelling event.
Economic Buyer, Strong (4/5)
Has a clear, sequenced plan to identify and meet the Economic Buyer without burning the champion.
Decision Process, Strong (4/5)
Identifies stakeholders, approvals and sequence with credible owners and dates.
Paper Process, Strong (4/5)
Maps legal, security, finance and procurement steps with realistic timing.
Red flags on the left, prioritised coaching opportunities on the right.
No red flags surfaced. Standard due-diligence still applies.
Build Economic Buyer
Document the EB access plan for every open Stage 2+ deal.
Build Decision Process
Build a mutual close plan, signed by champion, for every open opportunity.
Latent Hiring Risks Detected
Behavioural patterns the engine flagged for follow-up surfaced even on strong candidates so risk is never silent.
Top Performer Gap Analysis
Champion development
−28% gapTop performers consistently raise the bar on champion development and demonstrate it earlier in the cycle.
Tell me about a time you got to an Economic Buyer your champion didn't want you to meet. How did you sequence it?
Walk me through your last mutual close plan. Who owned what, by when, and what was the exit criteria for each stage?
When in the cycle do you engage Procurement, Legal and Security, and how do you keep them from owning your close date?
Walk me through a deal you won against an incumbent. How did you build the case for change?
Walk me through a deal where you built a Finance-validated business case. What numbers did you anchor to and how did you pressure-test them?
Dynamic Interview Intelligence
Suggested Focus Areas
Validate Metrics depth
Scored 5/5 - strong on paper. Confirm with a real-world story it isn't just theory.
Validate Decision Criteria depth
Scored 5/5 - strong on paper. Confirm with a real-world story it isn't just theory.
Validate Identify Pain depth
Scored 5/5 - strong on paper. Confirm with a real-world story it isn't just theory.
Confirm strong scores aren't theoretical.
Walk me through the most quantified business case you've built. What numbers anchored it and how did you defend them in front of a CFO?
Metrics scored 5/5 - confirm depth with a real example.
Tell me about a deal where you got an EB meeting that the rest of your team couldn't. What was your approach?
Economic Buyer scored 4/5 - confirm depth with a real example.
Tell me about a deal where you reshaped the decision criteria in your favour. How did you do it without seeming biased?
Decision Criteria scored 5/5 - confirm depth with a real example.
Describe the most complex decision process you've mapped. Stages, owners, exit criteria, time per stage.
Decision Process scored 4/5 - confirm depth with a real example.
Tell me about a deal you saved from a late-stage procurement or InfoSec stall. What did you do differently next time?
Paper Process scored 4/5 - confirm depth with a real example.
Tell me about a discovery call where you uncovered a pain the customer hadn't articulated themselves. How?
Identify Pain scored 5/5 - confirm depth with a real example.
Tell me about a champion who actually moved the deal for you. How did you build that relationship?
Champion scored 5/5 - confirm depth with a real example.
Tell me about a deal you won against a stronger incumbent. What was your wedge?
Competition scored 4/5 - confirm depth with a real example.
Test developing areas under pressure.
Walk me through the last deal you closed. MEDDPICC by MEDDPICC - what was thin, what was strong?
AE-specific: tests honest deal inspection.
Tell me about a deal where you had to multi-thread quickly. How did you do it without burning the champion?
AE-specific: tests stakeholder navigation.
Run live in the room. Score what you see.
I'm the EB you've never met. You have 5 minutes to earn a 30-minute follow-up. Go.
Live test of Economic Buyer (scored 4/5).
I'm the prospect. Build me a mutual action plan in real time. Five minutes.
Live test of Decision Process (scored 4/5).
What Top Performers Would Probe Here
Economic Buyer
Top performers don't just identify the EB - they identify what the EB is held accountable for personally this quarter. Probe for that depth.
Decision Process
Top performers map exit criteria for every stage - not just dates. Probe whether the candidate does this.
Paper Process
Top performers run paper-process triage in week 1, not week 12. Probe whether the candidate front-loads risk.
Suggested 2nd Round Agenda
Open & context
Frame the session, confirm the role expectations, set tone.
Live role-play
Run one scripted role-play tied to the weakest dimension. Score live.
Candidate Q&A
Reverse the room. Quality of their questions is itself a signal.
Close & next steps
Set expectation on timing. End on a clear action.
Probability of successful ramp with first-deal and time-to-quota forecasts.
78%
probability across cohort
~149d
expected close window
~9 mo
predicted ramp horizon
Quota baseline = 100%. Anchored to historical rep outcomes across equivalent segments.
Lift over the proprietary cohort median across the metrics that drive hiring outcomes.
| Metric | This candidate | Average candidate | Lift |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 90 | 76 | +14 |
| Forecast Reliability | 85 | 69 | +16 |
| Ramp Readiness | 57 | 63 | -6 |
| Top Performer Match | 87% | 58% | +29 |
| Quality of Hire Index™ | 85 | 71 | +14 |
Commercial Risk Impact
$1,155,518
≈ $1,467,508 · 85% risk-reduction model
Modelled against the standard Enterprise AE bad-hire cost stack ($1,359,433 loaded total cost) and this candidate's mis-hire composite of 11/100.
Hand to the candidate's manager on day one.
Onboarding, deal portfolio review and baseline observation on Economic Buyer and Decision Process.
Targeted skill build on Economic Buyer (lowest score: 4/5, Strong).
Targeted skill build on Decision Process (second lowest: 4/5, Strong).
Apply both skills on live deals, measured against MEDDPICC scorecards, with weekly manager review.
Hiring Recommendation
Move forward — book the next-stage interview and validate strengths.
Key risks
Validate in interview
Decision criteria
Targeted follow-up probes
Re-scored using updated SalesProof calibration model (v2026.05.06.2).
Final recommendation
Strong hire
Overall sales proficiency
90 / 100
Download the full hiring report
Boardroom-ready PDF with scores, feedback, red flags, follow-up questions and the 30-day coaching plan.
Generate reports like this one for every sales hire. Scenario-based MEDDPICC scoring, red-flag detection, and a 30-day coaching plan in every report.