This guide provides prompts for analyzing customer interaction data (transcripts, summaries, emails) through the lens of the SPICED sales methodology. It includes prompts for individual element analysis, scoring, and comprehensive bulk analysis/scoring.
Individual Element Analysis Prompts
Situation (S) Analysis Prompt:
Objective: Analyze the provided interaction data for [Customer Name] regarding [Your Product Name] to understand their current Situation.
Instructions:
Review the interaction data (call transcripts, email threads, meeting summaries).
Identify and extract key details describing [Customer Name]'s current environment, context, and relevant background.
Specifically look for:
Their existing processes related to the problem [Your Product Name] solves.
Current tools or solutions they are using (including relevant tech stack context).
Team structure or roles involved in the relevant area.
Recent company news or events (e.g., funding, restructuring, market shifts) mentioned or inferred that provide context.
Explicit statements about their current setup or workflow.
Summarize these findings concisely.
Output Format:Situation Analysis for [Customer Name]:
Current Process: [Describe the current process]
Existing Tools/Tech: [List relevant tools/tech stack elements]
Team/Roles Context: [Describe relevant team structure or roles]
Background/Recent Events: [Mention key contextual factors or recent news]
Other Relevant Details: [Include any other pertinent situation details]
Pain (P) Analysis Prompt:
Objective: Analyze the provided interaction data for [Customer Name] regarding [Your Product Name] to identify their Pains.
Instructions:
Review the interaction data (call transcripts, email threads, meeting summaries).
Identify and extract specific problems, challenges, frustrations, or unmet needs expressed by [Customer Name].
Distinguish between explicitly stated pains and strongly implied pains.
Look for mentions of:
Business problems they are trying to solve.
Obstacles hindering their goals.
Negative consequences of their current situation.
Dissatisfaction with current tools or processes.
Specific objections or concerns raised that indicate underlying pain.
Summarize the identified pains clearly.
Output Format:Pain Analysis for [Customer Name]:
Primary Pain Point(s): [List the most significant pain(s) identified]
Secondary Pain Point(s): [List other challenges or frustrations mentioned]
Root Cause(s) (if mentioned): [Describe any identified causes of the pain]
Explicit vs. Implied: [Note if pains were stated directly or inferred]
Impact (I) Analysis Prompt:
Objective: Analyze the provided interaction data for [Customer Name] regarding [Your Product Name] to understand the Impact of their Pains.
Instructions:
Review the interaction data (call transcripts, email threads, meeting summaries), focusing on discussions related to the consequences of identified pains.
Identify and extract descriptions of how the pains affect [Customer Name]'s business.
Look for:
Quantifiable metrics (e.g., lost revenue, wasted time, increased costs, decreased efficiency).
Qualitative consequences (e.g., team frustration, missed opportunities, strategic disadvantages, brand perception).
The "Cost of Inaction" – what happens if the pain isn't resolved?
Desired business outcomes they hope to achieve by solving the pain.
Summarize the identified impacts, prioritizing quantifiable data where available.
Output Format:Impact Analysis for [Customer Name]:
Quantifiable Impacts: [List impacts with numbers, e.g., 'Losing X hours/week', 'Costs increased by Y%']
Qualitative Impacts: [Describe non-numerical consequences, e.g., 'Low team morale', 'Inability to scale']
Cost of Inaction: [Summarize the negative consequences of not solving the pain]
Desired Business Outcomes: [List the positive results they seek]
Critical Event (C) Analysis Prompt:
Objective: Analyze the provided interaction data for [Customer Name] regarding [Your Product Name] to identify any Critical Event or compelling timeline driver.
Instructions:
Review the interaction data (call transcripts, email threads, meeting summaries).
Identify mentions of specific dates, deadlines, or events that create urgency for [Customer Name] to make a decision or implement a solution.
Look for:
Explicit deadlines (e.g., "We need a solution by Q3," "Budget cycle ends Dec 31st").
Internal events (e.g., product launch, new initiative kickoff, end of contract with current vendor).
External events (e.g., regulatory changes, major industry conference, competitor actions).
The "Why Now?" factors driving their current evaluation.
Summarize the findings regarding timing and urgency. If no critical event is mentioned, state that clearly.
Output Format:Critical Event Analysis for [Customer Name]:
Identified Critical Event(s): [Describe the specific event or deadline]
Associated Date/Timeline: [Specify the date or timeframe, if mentioned]
Reason for Urgency ("Why Now?"): [Explain the factors driving the timeline]
Certainty: [State if the event is confirmed, tentative, or inferred]
If None Identified: [State: "No specific critical event or compelling deadline was identified in the interaction data."]
Evaluation Criteria (E) Analysis Prompt:
Objective: Analyze the provided interaction data for [Customer Name] regarding [Your Product Name] to understand their Evaluation Criteria.
Instructions:
Review the interaction data (call transcripts, email threads, meeting summaries).
Identify the factors, features, requirements, or processes [Customer Name] will use to assess potential solutions, including [Your Product Name].
Look for mentions of:
Specific features or capabilities they need.
Technical requirements (e.g., integrations, security).
Budget constraints or pricing sensitivity.
Vendor requirements (e.g., support levels, company reputation).
Proof points needed (e.g., case studies, demos, trials).
Competitors being considered or compared against.
The "Why Us?" factors – what aspects of [Your Product Name]'s value proposition are resonating or being scrutinized.
Summarize the identified evaluation criteria.
Output Format:Evaluation Criteria Analysis for [Customer Name]:
Key Feature/Capability Requirements: [List specific features needed]
Technical Requirements: [List integration, security, or other tech needs]
Budget/Pricing Considerations: [Describe budget range or pricing factors]
Vendor/Support Expectations: [List requirements for the vendor/support]
Proof Points Required: [Mention demos, trials, case studies needed]
Competitors Mentioned: [List any competitors named]
Value Proposition Resonance ("Why Us?"): [Note which value props are key decision factors]
Decision Process (D) Analysis Prompt:
Objective: Analyze the provided interaction data for [Customer Name] regarding [Your Product Name] to understand their Decision Process.
Instructions:
Review the interaction data (call transcripts, email threads, meeting summaries).
Identify the people and steps involved in [Customer Name]'s process for making a purchasing decision.
Look for mentions of:
Decision Maker(s): Who has the final authority to sign or approve?
Champion(s): Who is advocating internally for a solution like [Your Product Name]?
Influencer(s): Who else has a say or provides input (e.g., technical teams, finance, legal, end-users)?
Potential Blockers/Detractors: Who might oppose the decision or raise obstacles?
Steps in the process (e.g., technical review, legal review, budget approval, procurement).
Agreed-upon next steps in the sales process.
Summarize the identified components of the decision process.
Output Format:Decision Process Analysis for [Customer Name]:
Decision Maker(s): [List names/titles, if known]
Champion(s): [List names/titles, if known]
Influencer(s): [List names/titles/teams involved]
Potential Blocker(s): [List names/titles/teams, if known, and potential reasons]
Decision Steps: [Outline the known or inferred steps in their process]
Agreed Next Steps (Sales Process): [List concrete actions committed to]
Individual Element Scoring Prompts (0-3 Scale)
Scoring Rubric:
0: Information is missing or completely absent in the interaction data.
1: Information is mentioned vaguely or hinted at, but lacks detail or confirmation.
2: Information is present and relatively clear, but missing key details or depth.
3: Information is clearly articulated, detailed, confirmed, and provides strong insight.
Situation (S) Scoring Prompt:
Objective: Score the clarity and depth of understanding regarding [Customer Name]'s Situation, based on the provided interaction data related to [Your Product Name].
Instructions:
Review the interaction data (call transcripts, email threads, meeting summaries).
Assess how well the prospect's current processes, tools, team structure, and background context related to the problem [Your Product Name] solves are understood.
Assign a score from 0 to 3 using the rubric below.
Provide a brief justification for the score.
Scoring Rubric:
0: No understanding of the current situation.
1: Vague understanding; mentions of context lack specifics (e.g., "they use some old system").
2: Fair understanding; key elements like current process or tech identified, but details are missing.
3: Clear and detailed understanding; specific processes, tools, context, and relevant background are well-documented.
Output Format:Situation (S) Score for [Customer Name]: [Score 0-3]Justification: [Briefly explain the reason for the score based on the data]
Pain (P) Scoring Prompt:
Objective: Score the clarity and depth of understanding regarding [Customer Name]'s Pains, based on the provided interaction data related to [Your Product Name].
Instructions:
Review the interaction data (call transcripts, email threads, meeting summaries).
Assess how well the prospect's specific business problems, challenges, and frustrations that [Your Product Name] can address are identified and understood.
Assign a score from 0 to 3 using the rubric below.
Provide a brief justification for the score.
Scoring Rubric:
0: No specific pains identified.
1: Vague pains mentioned (e.g., "things are inefficient") but not explored or specified.
2: Specific pains identified, but their root cause or full significance may be unclear.
3: Specific, significant pains clearly identified, explored, and confirmed by the prospect.
Output Format:Pain (P) Score for [Customer Name]: [Score 0-3]Justification: [Briefly explain the reason for the score based on the data]
Impact (I) Scoring Prompt:
Objective: Score the clarity and depth of understanding regarding the Impact of [Customer Name]'s Pains, based on the provided interaction data related to [Your Product Name].
Instructions:
Review the interaction data (call transcripts, email threads, meeting summaries).
Assess how well the business consequences (quantitative and qualitative) of the prospect's pains are understood and articulated.
Assign a score from 0 to 3 using the rubric below.
Provide a brief justification for the score.
Scoring Rubric:
0: No impact of the pain identified or discussed.
1: Vague sense of negative impact mentioned, but not quantified or detailed (e.g., "it's costing us").
2: Specific qualitative impacts identified, or attempts made at quantification without confirmation. Desired outcomes might be mentioned generally.
3: Clear understanding of impact, ideally with specific quantification (metrics, costs, time) confirmed by the prospect, or strong qualitative impacts clearly linked to strategic goals. Cost of inaction is understood.
Output Format:Impact (I) Score for [Customer Name]: [Score 0-3]Justification: [Briefly explain the reason for the score based on the data]
Critical Event (C) Scoring Prompt:
Objective: Score the clarity and confirmation level of a Critical Event driving urgency for [Customer Name], based on the provided interaction data related to [Your Product Name].
Instructions:
Review the interaction data (call transcripts, email threads, meeting summaries).
Assess whether a specific deadline, event, or compelling reason driving the timeline ("Why Now?") has been identified and confirmed.
Assign a score from 0 to 3 using the rubric below.
Provide a brief justification for the score.
Scoring Rubric:
0: No critical event or timeline driver identified.
1: Vague sense of urgency or a possible event mentioned without specifics or confirmation (e.g., "hopefully soon").
2: A potential critical event or date is mentioned but lacks confirmation or clear link to the decision.
3: A specific, confirmed critical event or deadline is identified, and its relevance to the decision timeline is clear. The "Why Now" is understood.
Output Format:Critical Event (C) Score for [Customer Name]: [Score 0-3]Justification: [Briefly explain the reason for the score based on the data]
Evaluation Criteria (E) Scoring Prompt:
Objective: Score the clarity and depth of understanding regarding [Customer Name]'s Evaluation Criteria for selecting a solution like [Your Product Name], based on the provided interaction data.
Instructions:
Review the interaction data (call transcripts, email threads, meeting summaries).
Assess how well the factors [Customer Name] will use to make their decision (features, tech, budget, vendor, competitors) are identified and understood.
Assign a score from 0 to 3 using the rubric below.
Provide a brief justification for the score.
Scoring Rubric:
0: No evaluation criteria identified.
1: Vague criteria mentioned (e.g., "needs to be easy to use," "affordable") without specifics.
2: Several specific criteria identified, but the list may be incomplete, or priorities/weighting unclear. Competitors might be known but not how they are being compared.
3: A comprehensive list of specific evaluation criteria identified, including key technical, functional, and business requirements. Priorities and competitor positioning are reasonably understood.
Output Format:Evaluation Criteria (E) Score for [Customer Name]: [Score 0-3]Justification: [Briefly explain the reason for the score based on the data]
Decision Process (D) Scoring Prompt:
Objective: Score the clarity and depth of understanding regarding [Customer Name]'s Decision Process for purchasing [Your Product Name], based on the provided interaction data.
Instructions:
Review the interaction data (call transcripts, email threads, meeting summaries).
Assess how well the key people (DM, Champion, Influencers, Blockers) and steps involved in the purchasing decision are identified.
Assign a score from 0 to 3 using the rubric below.
Provide a brief justification for the score.
Scoring Rubric:
0: No understanding of the decision process or key players.
1: Vague understanding; perhaps one contact person known, but their role (DM, influencer?) and the process steps are unclear.
2: Some key players identified (e.g., likely DM or Champion), and some steps known, but the full picture or confirmation is missing. Potential blockers might be suspected but not confirmed.
3: Key players (DM, Champion, key Influencers) identified with reasonable confidence, and the main steps in the decision process are understood and confirmed.
Output Format:Decision Process (D) Score for [Customer Name]: [Score 0-3]Justification: [Briefly explain the reason for the score based on the data]
Master Prompts for Bulk Analysis & Scoring
Master SPICED Analysis Prompt (Bulk):
Objective: Perform a comprehensive SPICED analysis based on the provided interaction data for [Customer Name] regarding [Your Product Name].
Instructions:
Thoroughly review all provided interaction data (call transcripts, email threads, meeting summaries).
For EACH element of SPICED (Situation, Pain, Impact, Critical Event, Evaluation Criteria, Decision Process), 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, clearly separating each SPICED element. Ensure the output is based solely on the provided data.
Output Format:Comprehensive SPICED Analysis for [Customer Name]:S - Situation:
Current Process: [Describe]
Existing Tools/Tech: [List]
Team/Roles Context: [Describe]
Background/Recent Events: [Mention]
Other Relevant Details: [Include]
P - Pain:
Primary Pain Point(s): [List]
Secondary Pain Point(s): [List]
Root Cause(s) (if mentioned): [Describe]
Explicit vs. Implied: [Note]
I - Impact:
Quantifiable Impacts: [List]
Qualitative Impacts: [Describe]
Cost of Inaction: [Summarize]
Desired Business Outcomes: [List]
C - Critical Event:
Identified Critical Event(s): [Describe]
Associated Date/Timeline: [Specify]
Reason for Urgency ("Why Now?"): [Explain]
Certainty: [State]
If None Identified: [State: "No specific critical event or compelling deadline was identified."]
E - Evaluation Criteria:
Key Feature/Capability Requirements: [List]
Technical Requirements: [List]
Budget/Pricing Considerations: [Describe]
Vendor/Support Expectations: [List]
Proof Points Required: [Mention]
Competitors Mentioned: [List]
Value Proposition Resonance ("Why Us?"): [Note]
D - Decision Process:
Decision Maker(s): [List]
Champion(s): [List]
Influencer(s): [List]
Potential Blocker(s): [List]
Decision Steps: [Outline]
Agreed Next Steps (Sales Process): [List]
Master SPICED Scoring Prompt (Bulk):
Objective: Score the overall clarity and depth of understanding across all SPICED elements for [Customer Name] regarding [Your Product Name], based on the provided interaction data.
Instructions:
Thoroughly review all provided interaction data (call transcripts, email threads, meeting summaries).
For EACH element of SPICED (Situation, Pain, Impact, Critical Event, Evaluation Criteria, Decision Process), assess the clarity and depth of information gathered.
Assign a score from 0 to 3 for each element, using the standard rubric:
0: Missing/Absent
1: Vague/Hinted
2: Clear but Incomplete/Unconfirmed
3: Clear, Detailed, Confirmed
Provide a brief justification for each score, referencing the data.
Present the scores in a structured format.
Output Format:Comprehensive SPICED Scoring for [Customer Name]:
Situation (S) Score: [Score 0-3]
Justification: [Brief explanation]
Pain (P) Score: [Score 0-3]
Justification: [Brief explanation]
Impact (I) Score: [Score 0-3]
Justification: [Brief explanation]
Critical Event (C) Score: [Score 0-3]
Justification: [Brief explanation]
Evaluation Criteria (E) Score: [Score 0-3]
Justification: [Brief explanation]
Decision Process (D) Score: [Score 0-3]
Justification: [Brief explanation]
Overall SPICED Score: [Sum of individual scores, e.g., X / 18]
Summary Assessment: [Optional: A brief qualitative summary of SPICED completeness based on the scores]
This guide provides a framework for leveraging AI to consistently analyze and score deals according to the SPICED methodology, automating the extraction of key insights directly from customer interactions.
