This guide provides AI prompts specifically designed to analyze customer interaction data (transcripts, summaries, emails) through the lens of the MEDDPICC sales qualification methodology. It enables granular analysis of individual elements, objective scoring, and comprehensive deal reviews.
This guide will help teams with designing prompts for each letter of MEDDPICC, but also help teams assign scores to MEDDPICC values and analyze a deal in the context of MEDDPICC as a whole.
You can use these guides by copying and pasting your sales transcripts, emails, and more into the LLM of your choosing. If you’d prefer to have your deals and data analyzed automatically, you can use a tool like Wiser to plug-in to your revenue systems for analyzing and syncing your AI analyses.
I. Individual Element Analysis Prompts
Metrics (M) Analysis Prompt:
Objective: Analyze the interaction data for [Customer Name] regarding [Your Product Name] to identify the specific, quantifiable Metrics impacted by their pain and the potential value of your solution.
Instructions:
Review interaction data (calls, emails, summaries).
Identify and extract mentions of specific, measurable business outcomes, KPIs, or financial implications related to the identified pain points.
Look for:
Baseline metrics describing their current performance (e.g., "Conversion rate is X%", "Cost per Y is $Z", "Time to complete Z is N hours/days").
Quantifiable negative impacts of their current situation (e.g., "Losing X revenue/month", "Wasting Y hours per employee", "Increased operational costs by Z%").
Desired quantifiable improvements or target metrics (e.g., "Need to increase efficiency by X%", "Goal is to reduce cost by Y", "Targeting Z% growth").
How they measure the success of a solution like [Your Product Name].
Potential ROI calculations or business case elements discussed.
Summarize these quantifiable findings.
Output Format:
Metrics Analysis for [Customer Name]:
Baseline Metrics: [List current performance metrics related to the pain]
Quantified Pain: [List specific financial or operational costs of the pain]
Desired Business Outcomes (Quantified): [List target metrics or improvements]
Success Measurement: [How they will measure the value/success of the solution]
ROI/Business Case Elements: [Mention any discussed elements]
Economic Buyer (E) Analysis Prompt:
Objective: Analyze the interaction data for [Customer Name] regarding [Your Product Name] to identify the Economic Buyer.
Instructions:
Review interaction data (calls, emails, summaries).
Identify the individual(s) who has ultimate budget authority and P&L responsibility relevant to this purchase. This person can authorize spending and release funds.
Look for:
Mentions of specific titles with budget oversight (e.g., VP, CXO, Director of [Relevant Department], Head of Finance).
Discussions about budget allocation, approval limits, or funding sources.
Who needs to give the final sign-off on the expenditure.
References to the person who "owns the budget" or "controls the purse strings."
Distinguish clearly between influencers, champions, and the individual with final financial authority.
Summarize the findings regarding the Economic Buyer. Note if identified, suspected, or not yet known.
Output Format:
Economic Buyer Analysis for [Customer Name]:
Identified Economic Buyer(s): [Name/Title, if known]
Evidence/Reasoning: [Why this person is believed to be the EB based on interactions]
Access Level: [e.g., Direct contact, Indirect via Champion, No access yet]
Confidence Level: [e.g., Confirmed, Suspected, Unclear]
If Not Identified: [State: "Economic Buyer not clearly identified in the interaction data."]
Decision Criteria (D) Analysis Prompt:
Objective: Analyze the interaction data for [Customer Name] regarding [Your Product Name] to understand their formal and informal Decision Criteria.
Instructions:
Review interaction data (calls, emails, summaries).
Identify the specific factors [Customer Name] will use to evaluate and compare potential solutions.
Look for mentions of:
Technical Criteria: Specific features, functionality, integration requirements, security protocols, platform compatibility.
Business/Functional Criteria: Ease of use, reporting needs, workflow alignment, ability to solve specific business pains.
Vendor Criteria: Requirements for support, training, implementation process, company viability, reputation, partnership potential.
Financial Criteria: Budget constraints, pricing models they prefer/dislike, TCO considerations, ROI expectations.
Proof points required (e.g., demos, trials, POCs, reference calls, case studies).
Explicit comparisons to competitor features or offerings.
Summarize the identified decision criteria, grouping them logically.
Output Format:
Decision Criteria Analysis for [Customer Name]:
Technical Criteria: [List specific requirements]
Business/Functional Criteria: [List specific requirements]
Vendor Criteria: [List specific requirements]
Financial Criteria: [Describe budget/pricing factors]
Required Proof Points: [Mention demos, trials, etc.]
Prioritization (if known): [Note any criteria mentioned as particularly important]
Decision Process (D) Analysis Prompt:
Objective: Analyze the interaction data for [Customer Name] regarding [Your Product Name] to understand the specific steps involved in their Decision Process to select a vendor.
Instructions:
Review interaction data (calls, emails, summaries).
Identify the sequence of events, meetings, reviews, and approvals required for [Customer Name] to choose a solution/vendor before the contracting phase.
Look for mentions of:
Specific stages or gates in their evaluation (e.g., "First, we do a technical review," "Then it goes to the steering committee").
Key stakeholders involved during the evaluation (e.g., IT review, security assessment, user testing groups, departmental heads).
Required meetings or presentations (e.g., "We'll need to present to the executive team").
How different stakeholders provide input or recommendations.
Timeline associated with these evaluation steps.
Who facilitates or manages this internal process.
Outline the known or inferred steps in the decision process. Distinguish this clearly from the Paper Process (contracting/procurement).
Output Format:
Decision Process Analysis for [Customer Name]:
Known/Inferred Steps: [Outline the sequence, e.g., 1. Initial Screening -> 2. Technical Deep Dive -> 3. User Pilot -> 4. Stakeholder Review -> 5. Vendor Selection]
Key Stakeholders Involved (Evaluation Phase): [List titles/teams and their role in the process]
Timeline Expectations (Evaluation Phase): [Mention any timing related to these steps]
Process Owner/Facilitator: [Identify who seems to be managing the process internally]
Paper Process (P) Analysis Prompt:
Objective: Analyze the interaction data for [Customer Name] regarding [Your Product Name] to understand the Paper Process required for procurement and contracting after a vendor decision is made.
Instructions:
Review interaction data (calls, emails, summaries).
Identify the steps, departments, and paperwork involved after [Customer Name] has decided to purchase a solution like [Your Product Name].
Look for mentions of:
Legal review process (e.g., "Legal needs 3 weeks," "Standard MSA review").
Procurement department involvement (e.g., "Procurement handles vendor setup," "Need to go through purchasing").
Specific documents required (e.g., Security questionnaires, vendor forms, PO process).
Signature process and required signatories (beyond the Economic Buyer, if applicable).
Typical timelines associated with contracting or procurement.
Vendor onboarding requirements.
Summarize the identified components of the paper process.
Output Format:
Paper Process Analysis for [Customer Name]:
Legal Review: [Describe process, typical duration, key contacts if known]
Procurement Steps: [Describe process, forms, key contacts if known]
Required Documentation: [List specific documents mentioned]
Signature Routing: [Describe who needs to sign and the typical sequence]
Estimated Timeline: [Mention any timeframe discussed for this phase]
If Not Identified: [State: "Specific Paper Process details not identified in the interaction data."]
Identify Pain (I) Analysis Prompt:
Objective: Analyze the interaction data for [Customer Name] regarding [Your Product Name] to Identify Pain – the significant business problems, challenges, or missed opportunities driving their need for change.
Instructions:
Review interaction data (calls, emails, summaries).
Identify and extract specific business problems, frustrations, inefficiencies, risks, or strategic goals that are unmet.
Distinguish between surface-level complaints and underlying business issues.
Look for mentions of:
Explicitly stated business problems (e.g., "We're losing market share," "Our process is too slow/costly," "We can't scale").
Negative consequences of their current state (impact on revenue, cost, risk, strategic goals).
Frustrations with existing tools or workflows.
Missed opportunities due to current limitations.
The "Why do anything?" drivers – the fundamental reasons for exploring solutions now.
Summarize the identified pains, focusing on their business significance.
Output Format:
Pain Identification Analysis for [Customer Name]:
Primary Business Pain(s): [List the most significant drivers for change]
Secondary Pain Point(s): [List other related challenges or frustrations]
Consequences Discussed: [Briefly note the business impact mentioned in relation to the pain]
Root Cause(s) (if discussed): [Describe any identified underlying causes]
Explicit vs. Implied: [Note if pains were stated directly or inferred]
Champion (C) Analysis Prompt:
Objective: Analyze the interaction data for [Customer Name] regarding [Your Product Name] to identify and assess the Champion(s).
Instructions:
Review interaction data (calls, emails, summaries).
Identify individual(s) within [Customer Name]'s organization who:
Have power and influence.
Are actively selling on behalf of [Your Product Name] internally.
Have a vested interest in the success of your solution due to its impact on their personal or professional goals.
Provide inside information, coaching, or access to key stakeholders (especially the Economic Buyer).
Look for evidence of:
Internal advocacy (e.g., "I've shared this with my boss," "I'm making the case internally").
Providing context on decision criteria, process, or politics.
Facilitating meetings with senior stakeholders.
Expressing personal gain or pain related to the solution.
Defending or promoting your solution against alternatives.
Summarize findings on potential champions and assess their strength/validity.
Output Format:
Champion Analysis for [Customer Name]:
Identified Champion(s): [Name/Title, if known]
Evidence of Champion Behavior: [List specific actions or statements indicating championship]
Power/Influence: [Assess their likely level of influence within the org]
Access to Economic Buyer: [Note if they have demonstrated access]
Vested Interest: [Describe their personal/professional motivation]
Confidence Level: [e.g., Confirmed Strong Champion, Potential Champion, Influencer (not Champion)]
If None Identified: [State: "No clear Champion identified in the interaction data."]
Competition (C) Analysis Prompt:
Objective: Analyze the interaction data for [Customer Name] regarding [Your Product Name] to identify the Competition.
Instructions:
Review interaction data (calls, emails, summaries).
Identify all alternative approaches [Customer Name] is considering or comparing against [Your Product Name].
Look for mentions of:
Direct Competitors: Specific competing vendors or products named.
Indirect Competitors: Alternative types of solutions or tools that address the pain differently.
Internal Solutions: Existing homegrown systems or plans to build a solution internally ("build vs. buy").
Status Quo: The risk of them deciding to do nothing and stick with their current process.
Incumbent vendors being replaced.
Strengths or weaknesses of competitors discussed by the customer.
How [Your Product Name] is being positioned or differentiated against these alternatives.
Summarize the competitive landscape as understood from the interactions.
Output Format:
Competition Analysis for [Customer Name]:
Direct Competitors Mentioned: [List names]
Indirect Competitors/Alternatives: [List types or names]
Internal Solution/Build Option: [Note if discussed]
Status Quo Risk: [Assess likelihood based on urgency/pain discussed]
Incumbent Vendor (if applicable): [Name]
Competitive Positioning Notes: [Mention any discussed strengths/weaknesses or differentiators]
If None Identified: [State: "No specific competitors or alternatives explicitly discussed."]
II. Individual Element Scoring Prompts (0-3 Scale)
Scoring Rubric:
0: Information is missing, completely absent, or unknown based on the data.
1: Information is mentioned vaguely, hinted at, or speculative; lacks detail or confirmation.
2: Information is present and relatively clear, but key details, confirmation, or depth are missing. Understanding is partial.
3: Information is clearly articulated, detailed, confirmed (where possible), and provides strong insight into this MEDDPICC element.
(Apply this rubric to each element below)
Metrics (M) Scoring Prompt:
Objective: Score the clarity and quantification of Metrics related to pain and value for [Customer Name], based on interaction data for [Your Product Name].
Instructions: Assess how well quantifiable impacts (baseline, pain cost, desired outcomes) and success measurements are understood and confirmed. Assign a score (0-3) and justify.
Rubric Specifics:
0: No quantifiable metrics discussed.
1: Vague impact mentioned ("it's costly," "we want improvement") without numbers.
2: Some specific numbers mentioned but unconfirmed, or only baseline/desired state known without the other. Success measurement unclear.
3: Clear, specific, and ideally confirmed metrics for baseline pain and desired outcomes. How success will be measured is understood.
Output Format:
Metrics (M) Score: [0-3] | Justification: [Brief reason]
Economic Buyer (E) Scoring Prompt:
Objective: Score the clarity of identification and access level to the Economic Buyer for [Customer Name], based on interaction data for [Your Product Name].
Instructions: Assess how well the person with ultimate budget authority is identified and if access exists. Assign a score (0-3) and justify.
Rubric Specifics:
0: No idea who the EB is.
1: Vague mention of senior roles or budget process, but EB unclear or just a guess. No access.
2: Likely EB identified (suspected based on title/role), but not confirmed. Access may be indirect or planned.
3: EB confirmed, understanding of their role/priorities, and direct or strong indirect access established.
Output Format:
Economic Buyer (E) Score: [0-3] | Justification: [Brief reason]
Decision Criteria (D) Scoring Prompt:
Objective: Score the clarity and comprehensiveness of understanding regarding [Customer Name]'s Decision Criteria, based on interaction data for [Your Product Name].
Instructions: Assess how well the technical, business, vendor, and financial criteria are known. Assign a score (0-3) and justify.
Rubric Specifics:
0: No decision criteria identified.
1: Vague criteria mentioned ("easy to use," "affordable") without specifics.
2: Several specific criteria identified across some categories (e.g., technical features), but gaps exist (e.g., vendor reqs unclear) or prioritization is unknown.
3: Comprehensive understanding of specific criteria across technical, business, vendor, and financial dimensions. Key priorities are likely understood.
Output Format:
Decision Criteria (D) Score: [0-3] | Justification: [Brief reason]
Decision Process (D) Scoring Prompt:
Objective: Score the clarity of understanding regarding [Customer Name]'s Decision Process (steps to vendor selection), based on interaction data for [Your Product Name].
Instructions: Assess how well the sequence of evaluation steps and involved stakeholders (pre-contract) are known. Assign a score (0-3) and justify.
Rubric Specifics:
0: No understanding of the steps involved.
1: Vague understanding; perhaps aware of "a review" but sequence and stakeholders unclear.
2: Some key steps and stakeholders identified, but the full sequence or specific requirements for each step are missing/unconfirmed.
3: Main steps, timeline, and key stakeholders involved in the evaluation process are clearly mapped out and understood.
Output Format:
Decision Process (D) Score: [0-3] | Justification: [Brief reason]
Paper Process (P) Scoring Prompt:
Objective: Score the clarity of understanding regarding [Customer Name]'s Paper Process (procurement/contracting steps), based on interaction data for [Your Product Name].
Instructions: Assess how well the post-decision legal, procurement, and signature steps are understood. Assign a score (0-3) and justify.
Rubric Specifics:
0: No understanding of the paper process.
1: Vague awareness ("legal needs to see it," "goes through purchasing") but specifics unknown.
2: Some specific steps identified (e.g., known legal review time, procurement contact) but the full process or key documents are unclear.
3: Clear understanding of the main steps, departments involved (Legal, Procurement), typical timelines, and key documents for contracting.
Output Format:
Paper Process (P) Score: [0-3] | Justification: [Brief reason]
Identify Pain (I) Scoring Prompt:
Objective: Score the clarity and significance of the Identified Pain for [Customer Name], based on interaction data for [Your Product Name].
Instructions: Assess how well the core business problems driving the need for change are identified and understood. Assign a score (0-3) and justify.
Rubric Specifics:
0: No specific business pain identified.
1: Vague pains mentioned ("inefficient," "outdated") but not explored or linked to business impact.
2: Specific business pains identified, but their full significance, root cause, or linkage to broader business goals may be unclear.
3: Specific, significant business pains clearly identified, explored, confirmed, and understood in the context of the customer's strategic priorities.
Output Format:
Identify Pain (I) Score: [0-3] | Justification: [Brief reason]
Champion (C) Scoring Prompt:
Objective: Score the identification and assessed strength of the Champion(s) for [Customer Name], based on interaction data for [Your Product Name].
Instructions: Assess if a true Champion (power, influence, actively selling internally) has been identified and validated. Assign a score (0-3) and justify.
Rubric Specifics:
0: No Champion identified or only basic contact known.
1: Potential Champion suspected, but lacks clear evidence of influence or internal selling actions. Might be just an interested user or influencer.
2: Champion identified with some evidence of advocacy or influence, but their full commitment, power, or access to EB may be unconfirmed.
3: Strong Champion identified and confirmed, demonstrating influence, access, vested interest, and actively working internally on your behalf.
Output Format:
Champion (C) Score: [0-3] | Justification: [Brief reason]
Competition (C) Scoring Prompt:
Objective: Score the clarity of understanding regarding the Competition facing [Your Product Name] at [Customer Name], based on interaction data.
Instructions: Assess how well the alternative solutions (direct, indirect, internal, status quo) are identified. Assign a score (0-3) and justify.
Rubric Specifics:
0: No awareness of competitive landscape or alternatives.
1: Vague mention of "other options" or "competitors" without specifics. Status quo risk might be felt but not articulated.
2: Some specific competitors named, or internal build option known, but full landscape or their positioning vs. you is unclear.
3: Clear understanding of the key competitors (direct/indirect), internal alternatives, and the risk of status quo. Awareness of their relative strengths/weaknesses.
Output Format:
Competition (C) Score: [0-3] | Justification: [Brief reason]
III. Master Prompts for Bulk Analysis & Scoring
Master MEDDPICC Analysis Prompt (Bulk):
Objective: Perform a comprehensive MEDDPICC analysis based on all provided interaction data for [Customer Name] regarding [Your Product Name].
Instructions:
Thoroughly review all provided interaction data (transcripts, emails, summaries).
For EACH element of MEDDPICC (Metrics, Economic Buyer, Decision Criteria, Decision Process, Paper Process, Identify Pain, Champion, Competition), identify and extract the relevant information as detailed in the individual analysis prompts.
Synthesize the findings for each element.
Present the complete analysis in a structured format below, clearly separating each MEDDPICC element. Base the output solely on the provided data.
Output Format:
Comprehensive MEDDPICC Analysis for [Customer Name]:
M - Metrics:
Baseline Metrics: [List]
Quantified Pain: [List]
Desired Business Outcomes (Quantified): [List]
Success Measurement: [Describe]
ROI/Business Case Elements: [Mention]
E - Economic Buyer:
Identified Economic Buyer(s): [Name/Title]
Evidence/Reasoning: [Explain]
Access Level: [State]
Confidence Level: [State]
If Not Identified: [State]
D - Decision Criteria:
Technical Criteria: [List]
Business/Functional Criteria: [List]
Vendor Criteria: [List]
Financial Criteria: [Describe]
Required Proof Points: [Mention]
Prioritization (if known): [Note]
D - Decision Process:
Known/Inferred Steps: [Outline sequence]
Key Stakeholders Involved (Evaluation Phase): [List]
Timeline Expectations (Evaluation Phase): [Mention]
Process Owner/Facilitator: [Identify]
P - Paper Process:
Legal Review: [Describe]
Procurement Steps: [Describe]
Required Documentation: [List]
Signature Routing: [Describe]
Estimated Timeline: [Mention]
If Not Identified: [State]
I - Identify Pain:
Primary Business Pain(s): [List]
Secondary Pain Point(s): [List]
Consequences Discussed: [Note]
Root Cause(s) (if discussed): [Describe]
Explicit vs. Implied: [Note]
C - Champion:
Identified Champion(s): [Name/Title]
Evidence of Champion Behavior: [List actions]
Power/Influence: [Assess]
Access to Economic Buyer: [Note]
Vested Interest: [Describe]
Confidence Level: [State]
If None Identified: [State]
C - Competition:
Direct Competitors Mentioned: [List]
Indirect Competitors/Alternatives: [List]
Internal Solution/Build Option: [Note]
Status Quo Risk: [Assess]
Incumbent Vendor (if applicable): [Name]
Competitive Positioning Notes: [Mention]
If None Identified: [State]
Master MEDDPICC Scoring Prompt (Bulk):
Objective: Score the overall clarity and depth of understanding across all MEDDPICC elements for [Customer Name] regarding [Your Product Name], based on the provided interaction data.
Instructions:
Thoroughly review all provided interaction data (transcripts, emails, summaries).
For EACH element of MEDDPICC, assess the clarity and depth using the standard 0-3 rubric.
Assign a score (0-3) for each element.
Provide a brief justification for each score, referencing the data or lack thereof.
Present the scores structured below and calculate the total score.
Output Format:
Comprehensive MEDDPICC Scoring for [Customer Name]:
Metrics (M) Score: [0-3]
Justification: [Brief explanation]
Economic Buyer (E) Score: [0-3]
Justification: [Brief explanation]
Decision Criteria (D) Score: [0-3]
Justification: [Brief explanation]
Decision Process (D) Score: [0-3]
Justification: [Brief explanation]
Paper Process (P) Score: [0-3]
Justification: [Brief explanation]
Identify Pain (I) Score: [0-3]
Justification: [Brief explanation]
Champion (C) Score: [0-3]
Justification: [Brief explanation]
Competition (C) Score: [0-3]
Justification: [Brief explanation]
Overall MEDDPICC Score: [Sum of individual scores] / 24
Summary Assessment: [Optional: Brief qualitative summary, e.g., "Strong understanding of Pain and Metrics, but significant gaps in Decision Process and Economic Buyer access." or "MEDDPICC coverage appears robust, ready for forecast."]
By implementing this MEDDPICC AI prompting guide, you empower your teams and systems to extract the crucial intelligence needed for rigorous deal inspection, accurate forecasting, and targeted coaching – ultimately driving more predictable revenue outcomes.
