# Scoring

Three components. The score decides the order the owner works the list in, which is the main thing the list is for.

```
score = (fit x 0.4) + (signal x 0.4) + (reachability x 0.2)
```

Each component runs 0 to 10. Signal is weighted equal to fit deliberately — a good-fit company with nothing happening is a cold call, and cold calls are what the owner was already doing badly.

---

## Fit — 40%

How closely the company matches the profile from `icp_method.md`.

| Score | Meaning |
|---|---|
| 9–10 | Matches every profile criterion |
| 7–8 | Matches the core criteria, off on one secondary dimension |
| 5–6 | Plausible, but missing something that matters |
| 3–4 | Adjacent — worth including only if signal is strong |
| 0–2 | Do not include it |

If the profile has a counter-pattern ("under 10 employees churns"), a company matching the counter-pattern caps at 4 regardless of everything else.

---

## Signal — 40%

Evidence something is happening right now. This is the difference between a prospect list and a directory.

| Signal | Score | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| New location, expansion, or major permit filed | 10 | They are spending and their existing vendors may not scale |
| Hiring for a role related to what the owner sells | 9 | Budget already approved |
| Leadership or ownership change | 8 | New decision-makers re-evaluate vendors |
| Funding, acquisition, or major contract won | 8 | Money and new needs at once |
| Recent poor reviews of their current provider | 8 | Active dissatisfaction, usually the warmest signal available |
| Seasonal timing matches their buying cycle | 6 | Right time, no specific trigger |
| Recent website or brand refresh | 5 | Investing, but weak evidence of need |
| Nothing found | 2 | Not disqualifying, just cold |

**A signal needs a date and a source.** "Expanding" is a rumor. "Filed a permit for a second location on Mar 14, county records" is a reason to call this week.

Never invent a signal. A prospect list with fabricated triggers destroys the owner's credibility on the first call, and they will never trust the skill again.

---

## Reachability — 20%

How directly the owner can get in front of the decision-maker.

| Route | Score |
|---|---|
| Shared customer or mutual connection who would introduce | 10 |
| Named decision-maker with a verified direct contact | 8 |
| Named decision-maker, contact inferred but unverified | 6 |
| Named person, but not the decision-maker | 4 |
| General company contact only | 3 |
| No contact route found | 1 |

**Warm paths are worth hunting for.** Cross-check target companies against the owner's existing customer list, shared associations, and overlapping geography. A referral route converts several times better than anything cold, and owners consistently underestimate how many they already have.

---

## Presenting the score

Show the rank and the reason, not the arithmetic. Owners do not want to see a weighted formula; they want to know why this company is number three.

**Bad:**
```
Ridgeline Property Group — score 8.4
```

**Good:**
```
3. Ridgeline Property Group — 6 buildings, 18 miles out.
   Filed a permit for a 7th on Mar 14. Their current HVAC vendor has
   three 2-star reviews this quarter. Contact: Dana Whitfield, Facilities
   Director, direct line verified.
```

Same score. Only one of them gets called.

---

## Ties and cutoffs

Break ties toward signal recency. A trigger from last week beats one from last quarter.

Anything scoring below 4 does not go on the list at all. Including weak rows to reach a target count is the fastest way to make the ranking meaningless, and the ranking is the product.