Interview scorecardReviewed by Adroit Staffing editorial reviewPractice guidance, no data claims6 min read
The short answer
Assess closing by walking through two real deals in detail - one won, one lost - and scoring the mechanics: who signed and why, what the mutual plan looked like, what was traded in negotiation and how accurately they forecast the outcome. Closing technique language is the weakest evidence available; deal mechanics are the strongest.
Key facts
- Exercise
- Two deal walkthroughs: one won, one lost
- Score
- Deal mechanics, mutual plan, negotiation, forecast honesty
- Ask for
- Names of roles involved, dates and decision points
- Ignore
- Rehearsed closing techniques with no deal behind them
Closing skills scorecard
Run both deal walkthroughs in the same conversation, won deal first, and score after each. Ask for specifics: roles, dates, decision points. Vagueness is itself a score.
Scores and notes stay in this tab. Copy, print or download the sheet — nothing is uploaded.
Closing skills — interview scorecard
Adroit Staffing — adroitstaffing.co.uk
Dimension 1
Deal mechanics
Tests: Whether they understood the buying group or got carried by a champion.
“Take me through your last significant win: who was involved, who signed, and what each person needed.”
Strong answers show
- Maps roles: champion, economic buyer, blockers, users
- Knows what each stakeholder cared about individually
- Can explain why it closed when it did
Weak answers sound like
- One contact carried the whole deal
- Cannot say who signed or on what basis
- Timeline is vague or shifts under questioning
Follow-up prompts
- “Who did you never get to meet, and what did that cost you?”
- “What nearly derailed it?”
Dimension 2
Mutual planning
Tests: Whether the path to signature was agreed with the buyer or assumed.
“What did you and the buyer agree, in writing, about how the decision would be made?”
Strong answers show
- Describes a plan the buyer contributed to
- Legal, security and procurement anticipated early
- Updated the plan when dates moved
Weak answers sound like
- Plan existed only in the CRM close date
- Procurement appeared as a surprise
- Chased for signature without a shared process
Follow-up prompts
- “What slipped, and how did you find out?”
- “What would you have put in the plan earlier?”
Dimension 3
Negotiation judgement
Tests: Whether they trade deliberately or discount reflexively.
“What did you give away in that deal, and what did you get in return?”
Strong answers show
- Traded term, scope or timing rather than price alone
- Knew their authority and used it late
- Can describe a deal they let go on principle
Weak answers sound like
- Discount was the first and only lever
- Gave concessions without asking for anything
- Cannot recall what was traded
Follow-up prompts
- “Who had to approve that, and how long did it take?”
- “What would you refuse to concede?”
Dimension 4
Forecast honesty
Tests: Whether their commitments could be relied on by a manager.
“When did you first tell your manager that the lost deal was in trouble?”
Strong answers show
- Flagged risk early with specific reasons
- Distinguished hope from evidence in their forecast
- Track record of calling their own quarter accurately
Weak answers sound like
- Deal stayed in commit until the final week
- Blames the buyer entirely for the loss
- Cannot describe how they forecast at all
Follow-up prompts
- “What was the earliest signal you now recognise?”
- “How would you have graded that deal a month before it died?”
Average score: not scored yet
A candidate who cannot walk through a lost deal honestly scores 2 or below on forecast honesty, whatever their attainment. That dimension predicts how much you can trust their pipeline in month three.
The 1–5 scoring language
Agree the wording with the panel before the first interview. Most disagreement in a debrief is two people using the same number to mean different things.
- 1 — No evidence
- Could not give a real example, or the example contradicted the claim.
- 2 — Weak evidence
- General answer, or evidence that belonged to someone else on the team.
- 3 — Meets the bar
- Specific example, owned by them, holds up under one follow-up.
- 4 — Strong
- Specific and measured, plus a clear account of what they would change.
- 5 — Exceptional
- Evidence you could hand to the board, and they taught you something.
How this maps to the Adroit Five Stage Screening Process
Deal walkthroughs are part of the structured evidence stage of the Adroit Five Stage Screening Process, and the reference stage is where we verify what a candidate told us about a deal. We surface the evidence; the closing decision remains with your panel.
Why the lost deal tells you more
Won deals are rehearsed stories. A lost deal, walked through honestly, shows how the candidate thinks: where they misread the buying group, when they knew, what they did about it, and whether they can say the words I got that wrong. Candidates who cannot produce a lost deal in detail are usually protecting something.
What a mutual action plan reveals
- Whether the buyer's internal process was mapped or assumed.
- Whether legal, security and procurement were in the plan or a surprise.
- Whether dates were agreed with the buyer or set by the seller alone.
- Whether the plan was updated when things slipped, or abandoned.
Common questions
- Is closing a separate skill from discovery?
- Related, but not the same. Strong discovery makes closing easier, and plenty of good questioners never build the buying-group map that gets a contract signed. Score both.
- How do we compare candidates from very different deal sizes?
- By scoring mechanics rather than value. A well-run twenty thousand pound deal shows more skill than a six-figure deal that closed because the buyer was already committed.
Sources and review
- Written by
- Adroit Staffing
- Reviewed by
- Adroit Staffing editorial review
- First published
- Last reviewed
This page is practice guidance from our own Sales and GTM recruitment work. It makes no claims about current market data, so it cites no external figures.