Question Handling

Assess the Representative’s Ability to Address Questions & Objections

In sales conversations, the representative’s skill at handling questions and objections can make or break the deal. By evaluating how effectively they respond to inquiries, clarify misunderstandings, and reassure the prospect, teams gain insights into the representative’s ability to build trust and guide the conversation toward a positive outcome.

Who Benefits:

• Project Managers & Team Leads: Identify whether representatives are confidently addressing questions and managing objections, informing focused coaching sessions.
• Sales & CX Teams: Ensure prospects receive clear, direct answers, reducing frustration and increasing confidence in the offered solution.
• Business Managers & Strategists: Recognize patterns in objection handling to refine messaging, product positioning, and training materials.
• Compliance Officers: Confirm that representatives follow guidelines when addressing sensitive inquiries, avoiding misleading or non-compliant responses.

Value Proposition:

• Clarity & Trust-Building: Structured evaluations highlight if the representative effectively resolves doubts and builds credibility.
• Continuous Improvement: Pinpointing where question handling falters enables targeted feedback and performance enhancement.
• Operational Efficiency: Machine-readable JSON output integrates easily with dashboards, analytics, and reporting tools for streamlined monitoring.

Data Dictionary

Objective:

Evaluate how well the representative handles questions and objections from the prospect. Assess clarity, accuracy, and reassurance in responses. Convert this assessment into a structured JSON output, providing a numeric score, a summary, and optional feedback.

Required JSON Schema:

{
  "criteria": [
    {
      "name": "Question Handling",
      "score": <number>,
      "summary": "<string>",
      "feedback": {
        // optional improvement suggestions
      }
    }
  ]
}

Data Dictionary:

If Criterion Not Applicable or No Data:
If no relevant questions or objections were raised, score may be 0.0 or the criteria array might note no applicable data. If no criteria at all apply, return an empty criteria array.

Determining Score & Thresholds

Confidence and Scoring:

• Checklists & Priorities:
  Define this criterion’s checklist items and priorities in a separate configuration. For example:

  JSON

  {
    "id": "Question_Handling",
    "name": "Question Handling",
    "type": "managed",
    "checklist": [
      { "text": "Did the representative clearly answer the prospect’s questions?", "priority": "high" },
      { "text": "Did the representative handle objections without evasiveness?", "priority": "high" },
      { "text": "Did the representative provide clarifications as needed?", "priority": "medium" },
      { "text": "Did the representative reassure and confirm understanding?", "priority": "medium" }
    ]
  }

• Priority Weights (example):

  • High = 3
  • Medium = 2
  • Low = 1 (if any low priority items are added later)

• Scoring Method:

  1. Assign partial scores (0.0-1.0) to each checklist item based on evidence in the transcript.
  2. Compute weighted average using priorityWeights.
  3. Convert the weighted average (0.0-1.0) into a percentage (0.0 to 100.0).
  4. Return the final score with a summary and optional feedback.

Iterative Improvement & Calibration:

• Initial Testing: Validate the scoring against known calls to ensure it reflects true question handling effectiveness.
• Refine Priorities: Adjust priority weights as business objectives shift (e.g., focus more on objection handling vs. simple Q&A).
• Add/Remove Checklist Items: Update the criterion definition to adapt to evolving requirements or newly discovered call patterns.
• Stakeholder Feedback: Incorporate insights from sales leads or compliance officers to refine definitions and improve relevance.

Prompt Construction & Instructions

Role Specification & Reiteration:

• Cast the system as a “highly experienced assistant” evaluating the representative’s ability to handle questions/objections.
• Reiterate instructions on scoring methods, priority weights, and strict JSON formatting.

No Hallucination:

• Only assign scores based on the transcript. If uncertain whether a question was answered well, assign a moderate partial score.
• If no questions asked, score may be 0.0 or reflect no data scenario.

Strict Formatting:

• Return only the JSON object.
• If no improvement needed, feedback can be empty or omitted.

Prompt for Implementation

System Message (Role: System):
"You are a highly experienced assistant specializing in evaluating the 'Question Handling' criterion. You have:

• A transcript of a call.
• A known criterion ('Question_Handling') with a defined checklist and priorities.
• Instructions specifying scoringMethod and priorityWeights.

Your task:

1. For each checklist item, assign a partial score (0.0-1.0) based on the transcript.
2. Compute a weighted average using the provided priorityWeights.
3. Convert that to a 0.0-100.0 final score.
4. Provide a summary and optional feedback.
5. Return only JSON, with no additional commentary.

Instructions & Variables (example):

{
  "instructions": {
    "scoringMethod": "weighted_average",
    "priorityWeights": {
      "high": 3,
      "medium": 2
    }
  },
  "criterion": {
    "id": "Question_Handling",
    "name": "Question Handling",
    "type": "managed",
    "checklist": [
      { "text": "Clearly answer prospect’s questions?", "priority": "high" },
      { "text": "Handle objections directly and confidently?", "priority": "high" },
      { "text": "Provide clarifications as needed?", "priority": "medium" },
      { "text": "Reassure and confirm understanding?", "priority": "medium" }
    ]
  }
}

User Message (Role: User):
"Analyze the following transcript and apply the 'Question Handling' criterion:

[TRANSCRIPT_JSON][TRANSCRIPT_JSON]"

Expected Output Format:

{
  "criteria": [
    {
      "name": "Question Handling",
      "score": <number>,
      "summary": "<string>",
      "feedback": {
        // optional suggestions
      }
    }
  ]
}