---

name: yepai-sales-deal description: >- MEDDPICC deal qualification, competitive positioning, Challenger messaging, multi-threading strategy, and deal inspection methodology. user-invocable: false disable-model-invocation: false metadata: {"openclaw":{"emoji":"♟️"}} tags: [sales] license: MIT-0

Deal Strategy Criteria

When qualifying deals, assessing pipeline risk, or building competitive positioning, apply these frameworks.

MEDDPICC Framework

Every opportunity scored against all eight elements. A deal without all eight answered is a deal you don't understand.

• Metrics: Quantifiable business outcome. Not "better reporting" — "reduce onboarding from 14 days to 3." If buyer can't articulate, help them or qualify out.
• Economic Buyer: Controls budget, can say yes when everyone says no. Test: can they reallocate budget from another initiative?
• Decision Criteria: Specific technical, business, commercial criteria. If you're guessing, the competitor who helped write them is winning.
• Decision Process: Actual sequence from evaluation to signed contract. Every unmapped step is where deals die silently.
• Paper Process: Legal, procurement, security — where "verbally won" deals die. Discover early. A 6-week procurement cycle found in week 11 kills the quarter.
• Identify Pain: Quantified business problem. Pain has a cost — in revenue, risk, time, or reputation. No quantified cost = no urgency = deal stalls.
• Champion: Has power, access, and personal motivation. Test: ask them to do something hard. If they won't, they're a coach at best.
• Competition: Direct competitors, internal build, or do-nothing. Map where you win, battle, and lose. Shrink losing zones' importance.

Red Flags That Kill Deals

• Single-threaded to one contact who isn't the economic buyer
• No compelling event or consequence of inaction
• Champion who won't grant access to the EB
• Decision criteria mapping to a competitor's strengths
• "Just need a demo" with no discovery completed
• Procurement timeline unknown or undiscussed

Competitive Positioning

• Winning Zone: Your differentiation is clear and valued. Amplify, make weighted heavier.
• Battling Zone: Both credible. Shift to adjacent factors — implementation speed, TCO, ecosystem.
• Losing Zone: They're stronger. Don't attack. Reposition: "They're excellent at X. Our customers find Y matters more at scale."
• Landmine questions: Legitimate questions during discovery that surface requirements where you're strongest.

Deliverable: Opportunity Assessment

# Deal Assessment: [Account Name]

## MEDDPICC Score: [X/40] (5-point scale per element)
| Element | Score | Evidence | Gap / Risk |
|---------|-------|----------|------------|
| Metrics | | | |
| Economic Buyer | | | |
| Decision Criteria | | | |
| Decision Process | | | |
| Paper Process | | | |
| Identify Pain | | | |
| Champion | | | |
| Competition | | | |

## Deal Verdict: [WINNING / BATTLING / LOSING] — [rationale]
## Next Actions:
1. [Action with owner and deadline]
2. [Action with owner and deadline]

Deliverable: Competitive Battlecard

# Battlecard: [Competitor Name]

## Positioning: [Winning / Battling / Losing]

### Where We Win
- [Differentiator]: [Why it matters] | Talk Track: "[Exact language]"

### Where We Battle
- [Shared capability]: [How to separate] | Talk Track: "[Exact language]"

### Where We Lose
- [Their strength]: [Repositioning strategy] | Talk Track: "[Reframe]"

### Landmine Questions
- "[Question surfacing requirement where we're strongest]"