# ICP rubric — TEMPLATE

> Replace this template's contents with your team's actual ICP rubric.
> The account-research skill uses this to rank pain hypotheses against
> the right buying-committee shape.

## Firmographics

| Dimension | In-ICP | Stretch | Out |
|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | {list} | {list} | {list} |
| Headcount | {range} | {range} | {below/above} |
| Revenue | {range} | {range} | {below/above} |
| Geo | {regions} | {regions} | {regions} |
| Funding stage | {stages} | {stages} | {stages} |

## Technographics

Tools that signal a fit (we win when they have these):

- {Tool 1}
- {Tool 2}
- {Tool 3}

Tools that signal misfit (we lose to or against these):

- {Tool A}
- {Tool B}

## Buying committee — minimum viable

The roles that must exist for a deal to be qualified. The skill uses this in the persona-map section.

- **Economic buyer**: {title pattern}
- **Technical evaluator**: {title pattern}
- **End user**: {title pattern}
- **Champion target**: {title pattern}

## Pain ranking

When the skill ranks the three pain hypotheses, it weighs against this priority order. Higher = more important to surface first.

1. {Pain category — e.g. "data quality blocking outbound"} — weight 5
2. {Pain category — e.g. "manual reporting eating ops time"} — weight 4
3. {Pain category — e.g. "sales-marketing handoff friction"} — weight 3
4. {Pain category — e.g. "tooling sprawl"} — weight 2
5. {Pain category — e.g. "compliance overhead"} — weight 1

## Disqualifiers

Single signals that drop an account out of ICP regardless of other fit. The skill should flag these prominently in the brief if found.

- {Disqualifier 1 — e.g. "uses Tool X as system of record" if we cannot integrate}
- {Disqualifier 2 — e.g. "regulated industry without our compliance certifications"}

## Last edited

{YYYY-MM-DD}