| name | customer-expansion-scoring |
| title | Customer expansion scoring |
| description | Use this skill when scoring a paying customer (closed-won account) for expansion. It evaluates product usage depth, persona quality, and expansion headroom to produce an expansion tier with short actionable reasoning. Designed as a sub-skill of your lead-scoring methodology — the parent runs the ACV assessment first and this returns a tier to it. |
| category | Deals |
Template placeholders
Replace every {{...}} before enabling. See the setup checklist reference for the full setup list.
{{PRODUCT}} — Your product name{{PARENT_SCORING_SKILL}} — The parent lead-scoring skill this returns to (runs ACV assessment before this){{CRM}} — Your CRM (e.g. HubSpot){{DEPTH_SIGNALS}} — Your product's REAL usage-depth indicators (see Signal Stack #2 — must be replaced){{AUTO_CREATED_ARTIFACTS}} — Objects your onboarding auto-creates for every account (excluded from depth){{FOUNDER_CONTENT}} — Whose LinkedIn content signals post-conversion advocacy (usually a founder){{TIER_SCALE}} — Tiers, low→high (default: Bronze / Silver / Gold / Diamond){{INACTIVITY_CAP}} — Inactivity window that caps the tier (default: 30 days → cap at Silver)
Use when the account is a paying customer (Closed Won stage).
Goal: How deeply are they using {{PRODUCT}}, and how much bigger could this
account get?
The parent skill ({{PARENT_SCORING_SKILL}}) has already run the ACV
assessment and applied the ACV tag. Reference those results here — do not
re-research ACV dimensions covered there.
Signal Stack (highest to lowest weight)
Gather all available signals from account memory, product event history, and
{{CRM}}.
-
Meeting — a completed call signals active relationship depth.
Extract: topics discussed (expansion, new use cases, additional team
members mentioned), questions and objections, action items, attendee
roles. A meeting that surfaces new departments, budget conversations, or
advanced use cases = strong expansion signal.
-
Product depth — the real indicators of depth for {{PRODUCT}} are
{{DEPTH_SIGNALS}}.
Reference implementation (an AI GTM platform) used:
- Integrations/tools connected beyond defaults — each = deliberate
setup effort
- Automations/triggers created beyond the default one — variety and
count signal how much the user is actually building on the product
- Usage credits consumed (volume = active usage)
- Multiple team members active
What does NOT count as product depth: {{AUTO_CREATED_ARTIFACTS}} —
anything your onboarding auto-creates is present on virtually every
account. Do NOT treat these as engagement or power-user signals. Judge
depth only by artifacts the customer deliberately built.
-
Chatbot / support interactions — technical or advanced use-case
questions signal active exploration
-
Website visits (post-signup) — return visits to docs, pricing (plan
upgrade signal?), or feature pages
-
LinkedIn engagement — post-conversion engagement with
{{FOUNDER_CONTENT}} signals advocacy or a deepening relationship
Persona Quality
Strong: CRO, VP Sales, Head of Sales, RevOps, GTM Engineer, Growth
Lead, CEO (small co), Agency Owner (tune to your buying committee)
Weak: Product, Engineering, Finance — requires stronger product signals
to compensate
Multiple strong personas actively using {{PRODUCT}} = significant
positive multiplier for the top tier
Persona quality reflects expansion potential. A VP Sales actively building
on {{PRODUCT}} is a more valuable expansion signal than a junior IC doing
the same. Always note the persona role in your reasoning.
Expansion Headroom
Assess how much room this account has to grow:
- Current seat count vs. total relevant org size (from the parent ACV
assessment)
- Teams or divisions not yet using {{PRODUCT}}
- Growth signals: recent funding, active hiring, new leadership joins
- Are they approaching credit, usage, or seat limits?
Hard Caps
No product usage signals in the last {{INACTIVITY_CAP}} → cap at the
second-lowest tier (churn risk takes priority over expansion scoring). Note
explicitly: "[window] inactivity — capped, churn risk flagged."
Senior Stakeholder Exception (overrides seat-count limitations):
If the registered user is a very senior stakeholder (VP, SVP, C-suite, or
equivalent Director-level executive) AND the company is high-quality
($10M+ funded OR 100+ employees OR well-known brand with a clear motion in
your market), score the second-highest tier regardless of team size or
seat count. Seniority + company quality is itself a strong expansion
signal — this person can unlock budget and teammates.
Tier Definitions
(Defaults shown for a Bronze/Silver/Gold/Diamond scale — remap to
{{TIER_SCALE}}.)
Diamond:
Deep product usage (multiple integrations connected, multiple deliberate
automations active, multi-user) + high ACV potential (per parent
assessment) + clear expansion headroom. This account could 3–5x in ARR.
Gold:
Meaningful usage (1–2 integrations connected, active workflows running) +
medium-to-high ACV potential + some expansion headroom. Nurture toward
deeper adoption.
Silver:
Active customer but shallow usage (minimal integrations, few automations,
limited engagement) OR low ACV potential with limited expansion ceiling.
Bronze:
Barely active — minimal or no usage in recent weeks, no integrations, low
ACV potential. Prioritize re-engagement or churn prevention before
expansion.
Output
Produce: tier + 2–3 sentence reasoning (usage depth, persona quality,
expansion headroom, ACV ceiling from parent).
Then return to {{PARENT_SCORING_SKILL}} and continue its remaining steps.
What good looks like
A great output is a tier plus two-to-three sentences a CSM can act on immediately, citing all four dimensions: usage depth (deliberately built artifacts only), persona quality, expansion headroom, and the ACV ceiling from the parent assessment. Inactive accounts get capped with the churn risk flagged explicitly, and senior-stakeholder exceptions are called out as such.
Mediocre looks like: a tier derived from seat count alone, depth credited for onboarding auto-created objects, ACV re-researched when the parent already assessed it, or essay-length reasoning nobody reads.
