sinapse-ai 1.0.0

package/squad-commercial/tasks/design-abm-strategy.md

@@ -0,0 +1,123 @@
+---
+task: design-abm-strategy
+responsavel: "@cs-funnel-architect"
+responsavel_type: Agent
+atomic_layer: Task
+elicit: false
+
+Entrada:
+  - campo: context
+    tipo: object
+    origem: "workflow ou manual"
+    obrigatorio: true
+
+Saida:
+  - campo: resultado
+    tipo: document
+    destino: "stakeholders"
+
+Checklist:
+  - "[ ] Validar inputs e pre-condicoes"
+  - "[ ] Executar steps conforme documentado"
+  - "[ ] Verificar criterios de qualidade"
+  - "[ ] Gerar output no formato especificado"
+---
+
+# Task: Design ABM Strategy
+
+## Metadata
+- **Squad:** squad-commercial
+- **Agent:** Cascade (cs-funnel-architect)
+- **Complexity:** Advanced
+
+## Objetivo
+Desenhar estrategia Account-Based Marketing (ABM) — tiering de contas, personalizacao por tier, orchestracao multi-channel e metricas de account engagement.
+
+## Entrada
+- ICP profile (from define-icp-profile)
+- Target account list
+- Budget and resources
+- Sales team input on key accounts
+
+## Passos
+
+### 1. ABM Tiering Framework
+| Tier | Accounts | Approach | Budget/Account | Personalization |
+|------|---------|---------|---------------|----------------|
+| **1:1 (Strategic)** | 5-15 | Fully custom campaigns per account | High | 100% custom |
+| **1:Few (Cluster)** | 20-50 | Shared campaigns by segment/vertical | Medium | 70% custom |
+| **1:Many (Programmatic)** | 100-500 | Scaled, personalized at segment level | Low | 30% custom |
+
+### 2. Account Selection Criteria
+| Criterion | Weight | Scoring |
+|----------|--------|---------|
+| ICP fit score | 30% | From ICP scoring model |
+| Revenue potential | 25% | Estimated ACV |
+| Strategic value | 15% | Reference potential, brand, expansion |
+| Win probability | 15% | Based on engagement, intent signals |
+| Sales input | 15% | Rep confidence and relationship |
+
+### 3. Tier 1 (1:1) Playbook
+```
+STRATEGIC ABM — Per Account
+
+Research Phase (Week 1-2):
+  □ Company deep dive (10K, news, org chart)
+  □ Stakeholder mapping (4-6 key contacts)
+  □ Pain point hypotheses
+  □ Competitive landscape for this account
+  □ Personalized value proposition
+
+Engagement Phase (Week 3-8):
+  □ Custom content piece (article, video, or report)
+  □ Personalized outreach to each stakeholder
+  □ LinkedIn engagement program (comment, share, connect)
+  □ Direct mail or gift (physical touchpoint)
+  □ Custom landing page / microsite
+  □ Executive-to-executive introduction
+
+Acceleration Phase (Week 8-12):
+  □ Custom event or workshop invitation
+  □ ROI model specific to their business
+  □ Reference call with similar company
+  □ Proposal tailored to their specific needs
+```
+
+### 4. Tier 2 (1:Few) Playbook
+```
+CLUSTER ABM — Per Segment (e.g., "Mid-market SaaS in LatAm")
+
+Shared assets:
+  □ Industry-specific content (blog, webinar, guide)
+  □ Segment landing page with relevant case studies
+  □ Email sequence personalized by segment pain points
+  □ LinkedIn ad targeting by company list
+
+Per-account touches:
+  □ Personalized first email (company-specific opening)
+  □ LinkedIn connection with tailored message
+  □ Account-specific insights in follow-ups
+```
+
+### 5. Metrics by Tier
+| Metric | Tier 1 | Tier 2 | Tier 3 |
+|--------|--------|--------|--------|
+| Account Engagement Score | Per-account | Per-cluster | Per-segment |
+| Meetings Booked | By account | By cluster | By segment |
+| Pipeline Generated | $ per account | $ per cluster | $ per program |
+| Win Rate | By account | vs non-ABM | vs non-ABM |
+| Deal Size | vs non-ABM | vs non-ABM | vs non-ABM |
+| Sales Cycle | vs non-ABM | vs non-ABM | vs non-ABM |
+
+## Saida
+- ABM strategy document with tiering
+- Account list with tier assignments
+- Playbooks per tier (1:1, 1:Few, 1:Many)
+- Engagement scoring model
+- Budget allocation per tier
+
+## Validacao
+- [ ] Accounts tiered with clear criteria
+- [ ] Each tier has specific playbook
+- [ ] Budget allocated per tier
+- [ ] Metrics defined for ROI measurement

package/squad-commercial/tasks/design-advocacy-program.md

@@ -0,0 +1,114 @@
+---
+task: design-advocacy-program
+responsavel: "@cs-client-success"
+responsavel_type: Agent
+atomic_layer: Task
+elicit: false
+
+Entrada:
+  - campo: context
+    tipo: object
+    origem: "workflow ou manual"
+    obrigatorio: true
+
+Saida:
+  - campo: resultado
+    tipo: document
+    destino: "stakeholders"
+
+Checklist:
+  - "[ ] Validar inputs e pre-condicoes"
+  - "[ ] Executar steps conforme documentado"
+  - "[ ] Verificar criterios de qualidade"
+  - "[ ] Gerar output no formato especificado"
+---
+
+# Task: Design Advocacy Program
+
+## Metadata
+- **Squad:** squad-commercial
+- **Agent:** Bond (cs-client-success)
+- **Complexity:** Standard
+
+## Objetivo
+Desenhar programa de advocacy — transformar Promotores em defensores ativos que geram referrals, testimonials, case studies e social proof.
+
+## Entrada
+- NPS data (Promoters identified)
+- Health Score data (Green accounts)
+- Client relationship history
+- Marketing content needs
+
+## Passos
+
+### 1. Advocacy Ladder
+| Level | Activity | Ask | Reward | Difficulty |
+|-------|---------|-----|--------|-----------|
+| 1 | Online review (G2, Clutch) | Low | Recognition | Easy |
+| 2 | Testimonial quote | Low | Co-marketing | Easy |
+| 3 | Case study participation | Medium | Publication credit | Medium |
+| 4 | Reference call for prospect | Medium | Priority support | Medium |
+| 5 | Speaking engagement / co-webinar | High | Thought leadership | Hard |
+| 6 | Active referral (intro) | High | Referral reward | Hard |
+
+### 2. Advocate Qualification
+| Criteria | Required | Source |
+|----------|---------|-------|
+| NPS Promoter (9-10) | Yes | NPS survey |
+| Health Score Green (80+) | Yes | Health dashboard |
+| Tenure > 6 months | Yes | CRM |
+| ROI demonstrated | Preferred | QBR data |
+| Active champion | Yes | CSM assessment |
+
+### 3. Referral Program
+```
+REFERRAL PROGRAM DESIGN
+
+Mechanism:
+  □ Advocate makes introduction (email or meeting)
+  □ CSM facilitates warm handoff to sales
+  □ Referral tracked in CRM with source attribution
+
+Reward Structure:
+  Option A: Cash/credit reward per qualified referral
+  Option B: Service credits or upgrades
+  Option C: Charitable donation in their name
+  Option D: Exclusive access/events
+
+Tracking:
+  - Referrals submitted: [count]
+  - Referrals qualified: [count] ([%])
+  - Referrals closed: [count] ([%])
+  - Revenue from referrals: R$ [total]
+  - Avg deal size (referral vs non): R$ vs R$
+```
+
+### 4. Advocacy Content Pipeline
+| Content Type | Source | Frequency | Owner |
+|-------------|--------|----------|-------|
+| Case studies | Advocacy interviews | Quarterly | Bond → @content |
+| Testimonial videos | Advocate recordings | Monthly | Bond → @content |
+| G2/Clutch reviews | Review request campaigns | Quarterly | Bond |
+| Co-webinars | Advocate speakers | Quarterly | Bond → @content |
+| Social proof quotes | QBR extracts | Ongoing | Bond |
+
+### 5. Advocate Engagement Metrics
+| Metric | Target |
+|--------|--------|
+| % of Green accounts as advocates | 30%+ |
+| Reviews generated per quarter | 5+ |
+| Referrals per quarter | 3+ |
+| Revenue from referrals | 10%+ of new logo |
+| Advocate retention rate | 95%+ |
+
+## Saida
+- Advocacy program design document
+- Advocate qualification criteria
+- Referral program mechanics
+- Content pipeline plan
+
+## Validacao
+- [ ] Advocacy ladder defined with clear asks
+- [ ] Qualification criteria objective and measurable
+- [ ] Referral tracking configured in CRM
+- [ ] Content pipeline planned with @content-intelligence

package/squad-commercial/tasks/design-call-review-process.md

@@ -0,0 +1,226 @@
+---
+task: design-call-review-process
+responsavel: "@cs-sales-enablement"
+responsavel_type: Agent
+atomic_layer: Task
+elicit: false
+
+Entrada:
+  - campo: context
+    tipo: object
+    origem: "workflow ou manual"
+    obrigatorio: true
+
+Saida:
+  - campo: resultado
+    tipo: document
+    destino: "stakeholders"
+
+Checklist:
+  - "[ ] Validar inputs e pre-condicoes"
+  - "[ ] Executar steps conforme documentado"
+  - "[ ] Verificar criterios de qualidade"
+  - "[ ] Gerar output no formato especificado"
+---
+
+# Task: Design Call Review Process
+
+## Metadata
+- **Squad:** squad-commercial
+- **Agent:** Edge (cs-sales-enablement)
+- **Complexity:** Standard
+
+## Objetivo
+Desenhar processo de call review — framework de coaching baseado em análise de calls reais para desenvolver skills da equipe comercial com feedback estruturado e actionable.
+
+## Entrada
+- Sales methodology (from audit-sales-methodology)
+- Discovery framework (from design-discovery-framework)
+- Call recordings (Gong, Chorus, or equivalent)
+- Performance data per rep
+
+## Passos
+
+### 1. Call Review Philosophy
+```
+COACHING PRINCIPLES (Mark Roberge — Sales Acceleration Formula)
+
+1. DIAGNOSE BEFORE PRESCRIBE
+   "Don't tell reps what to do — help them see what happened."
+   Listen to the call first, then ask them what they noticed.
+
+2. ONE SKILL AT A TIME
+   "Trying to fix everything at once fixes nothing."
+   Each review session focuses on ONE improvement area.
+
+3. POSITIVE BEFORE CONSTRUCTIVE
+   "Start with what went well — build on strengths."
+   2:1 ratio (2 positives for every constructive point).
+
+4. BEHAVIOR-BASED, NOT RESULTS-BASED
+   "You can't coach outcomes. You can only coach behaviors."
+   Focus on what they DID, not just the result.
+
+5. PRACTICE, NOT JUST DISCUSS
+   "Knowing what to do vs. doing it are different skills."
+   Every review ends with a practice exercise.
+```
+
+### 2. Call Scoring Framework
+```
+CALL REVIEW SCORECARD — [Rep Name] — [Date]
+Call Type: Discovery / Presentation / Negotiation / Other
+Prospect: [Company]
+Duration: [min]
+Reviewer: [Manager/Peer]
+
+DIMENSION 1: PREPARATION (10 pts)
+  □ Pre-call research evident (2)
+  □ Agenda set at opening (2)
+  □ Hypothesis or insights prepared (2)
+  □ Relevant materials ready (2)
+  □ CRM notes from prior interactions referenced (2)
+  Score: ___ / 10
+
+DIMENSION 2: DISCOVERY QUALITY (20 pts)
+  □ Situation questions (context mapped) (3)
+  □ Problem questions (pain identified) (4)
+  □ Implication questions (impact quantified) (5)
+  □ Need-Payoff questions (value articulated by prospect) (5)
+  □ Active listening demonstrated (paraphrase, reflect) (3)
+  Score: ___ / 20
+
+DIMENSION 3: METHODOLOGY ADHERENCE (15 pts)
+  □ MEDDIC elements explored (3)
+  □ Champion tested or developed (3)
+  □ Decision process mapped (3)
+  □ Next steps with specific commitment (3)
+  □ Qualification criteria applied correctly (3)
+  Score: ___ / 15
+
+DIMENSION 4: COMMUNICATION SKILLS (15 pts)
+  □ Talk/listen ratio appropriate (<60% talk) (3)
+  □ Questions are open-ended (not leading) (3)
+  □ No feature dumping or premature pitch (3)
+  □ Confident but not arrogant tone (3)
+  □ Silence used effectively (comfortable pauses) (3)
+  Score: ___ / 15
+
+DIMENSION 5: OBJECTION HANDLING (10 pts)
+  □ Objection acknowledged (not dismissed) (2)
+  □ Clarifying question asked (Sandler reverse) (3)
+  □ Framework response applied (ARB/FFF/Reframe) (3)
+  □ Resolution confirmed with prospect (2)
+  Score: ___ / 10
+
+DIMENSION 6: CLOSE & NEXT STEPS (10 pts)
+  □ Summary of key findings provided (2)
+  □ Value recap before asking for next step (2)
+  □ Specific next step proposed (not vague) (2)
+  □ Stakeholder mapping advanced (2)
+  □ Timeline confirmed (2)
+  Score: ___ / 10
+
+TOTAL: ___ / 80
+
+Rating:
+  70-80: Exceptional
+  55-69: Strong
+  40-54: Developing
+  25-39: Needs improvement
+  <25: Requires immediate coaching intervention
+```
+
+### 3. Review Session Structure
+```
+CALL REVIEW SESSION — 30 min
+
+BEFORE SESSION (5 min):
+  Manager:
+    □ Listen to full call
+    □ Score using framework
+    □ Identify 1 primary coaching opportunity
+    □ Find 2 positive moments to highlight
+
+  Rep:
+    □ Re-listen to call (or relevant sections)
+    □ Self-assess: "What went well? What would I do differently?"
+
+SESSION FLOW:
+
+  [0-5 min] SELF-REFLECTION
+  "Before I share my thoughts, what's your take on this call?"
+  → Let rep self-diagnose
+  → Often they'll identify the same issue
+  → If they do: "Exactly right. Let's talk about how to fix it."
+  → If they don't: "I noticed something else too..."
+
+  [5-10 min] POSITIVE REINFORCEMENT
+  "Here's what I thought you did really well..."
+  → Play specific clip from call
+  → Name the skill: "That was an excellent implication question."
+  → Connect to methodology: "That's textbook SPIN — the prospect
+     quantified the impact themselves because of how you asked."
+
+  [10-20 min] COACHING OPPORTUNITY
+  "Here's the one thing that could elevate your game..."
+  → Play the relevant clip
+  → Ask: "What were you trying to do here?"
+  → Explain the gap (behavior, not character)
+  → Model the alternative: "Here's how I might approach it..."
+  → Practice: Role-play the scenario with improvement
+
+  [20-25 min] PRACTICE
+  "Let's try it again. I'll be the prospect."
+  → Role-play the specific moment
+  → Rep applies the coaching
+  → Feedback: "That's it. Did you feel the difference?"
+
+  [25-30 min] ACTION PLAN
+  "So for your next 3 calls, here's the focus..."
+  → One specific behavior to practice
+  → How to self-assess (what to notice)
+  → "I'll listen to your [next call] and we'll check progress."
+```
+
+### 4. Review Cadence
+| Activity | Frequency | Participants | Focus |
+|---------|----------|-------------|-------|
+| 1:1 Call Review | Weekly | Manager + Rep | Individual skill development |
+| Peer Review | Bi-weekly | 2 reps (paired) | Learn from each other |
+| Team Call of the Week | Weekly | Full sales team | Celebrate great call, learn collectively |
+| Ride-Along (live) | Monthly | Manager joins call live | Real-time observation |
+| Self-Review | After every call | Individual rep | Self-score, identify own patterns |
+
+### 5. Call Library
+| Category | Criteria | Purpose | Curator |
+|----------|---------|---------|---------|
+| "Hall of Fame" | Score 70+ | Best-in-class examples per stage | Edge |
+| "Discovery Master" | Perfect discovery score | Template for new hires | Edge |
+| "Objection Judo" | Excellent objection handling | Objection response examples | Edge |
+| "The Close" | Exceptional closing moment | Closing technique gallery | Edge |
+| "Learning Moments" | Anonymized improvement examples | What NOT to do (constructive) | Edge |
+
+### 6. Call Review Metrics
+| Metric | Target | Tracking |
+|--------|--------|---------|
+| Calls reviewed per rep per month | ≥ 4 | Review log |
+| Average call score trend | ↑ over time | Scorecard data |
+| Talk/listen ratio improvement | <60% talk | Call analytics |
+| Discovery score improvement | ↑ per quarter | Scorecard data |
+| Self-review completion rate | 100% of calls | Self-report |
+| Time from call to review | <7 days | Review log |
+
+## Saida
+- Call scoring framework (80-point scorecard)
+- Review session structure (30-min format)
+- Review cadence schedule
+- Call library categories
+- Coaching metrics dashboard
+
+## Validacao
+- [ ] Scorecard covers all methodology dimensions
+- [ ] Review session structure follows coaching best practices
+- [ ] Cadence realistic and sustainable
+- [ ] Call library organized and curated
+- [ ] Metrics track improvement over time

package/squad-commercial/tasks/design-discovery-framework.md

@@ -0,0 +1,218 @@
+---
+task: design-discovery-framework
+responsavel: "@cs-sales-enablement"
+responsavel_type: Agent
+atomic_layer: Task
+elicit: false
+
+Entrada:
+  - campo: context
+    tipo: object
+    origem: "workflow ou manual"
+    obrigatorio: true
+
+Saida:
+  - campo: resultado
+    tipo: document
+    destino: "stakeholders"
+
+Checklist:
+  - "[ ] Validar inputs e pre-condicoes"
+  - "[ ] Executar steps conforme documentado"
+  - "[ ] Verificar criterios de qualidade"
+  - "[ ] Gerar output no formato especificado"
+---
+
+# Task: Design Discovery Framework
+
+## Metadata
+- **Squad:** squad-commercial
+- **Agent:** Edge (cs-sales-enablement)
+- **Complexity:** High
+
+## Objetivo
+Desenhar framework de discovery — processo estruturado de diagnóstico comercial que combina SPIN Selling com Gap Selling para identificar dor real, medir impacto e construir business case irrefutável.
+
+## Entrada
+- Sales methodology audit (from audit-sales-methodology)
+- ICP profile (from Cascade)
+- Service portfolio (from Mint)
+- Win/loss patterns (from Vault)
+- Top performer call analysis
+
+## Passos
+
+### 1. Discovery Philosophy
+```
+CORE PRINCIPLE: Discovery is not interrogation — it's diagnosis.
+
+The goal is NOT to find a way to sell our services.
+The goal IS to understand their world so deeply that
+the right solution becomes obvious to THEM.
+
+"People don't buy what you do; they buy WHY it matters
+to THEM." — adapted from Sinek + Rackham
+
+THREE OUTCOMES OF GREAT DISCOVERY:
+  1. Client feels deeply understood (Trust Equation: ↑ Intimacy)
+  2. Pain is quantified in their language (Gap Selling: Current → Future State)
+  3. Business case writes itself (SPIN: Need-Payoff → Clear ROI)
+
+ANTI-PATTERNS TO AVOID:
+  ✗ Pitching during discovery ("Let me tell you about our services...")
+  ✗ Leading questions ("Wouldn't you agree that...")
+  ✗ Feature dumping ("We also do X, Y, Z...")
+  ✗ Premature prescription ("What you need is...")
+  ✗ Surface-level discovery ("What keeps you up at night?")
+```
+
+### 2. Three-Phase Discovery Model
+```
+PHASE 1: CONTEXT MAPPING (Before the call)
+═══════════════════════════════════════════
+Time: 15-30 min prep per prospect
+Goal: Walk into the call more informed than they expect
+
+Research Checklist:
+  □ Company: Revenue, employees, growth trajectory, funding
+  □ Industry: Trends, challenges, competitive landscape
+  □ Digital presence: Website audit, social channels, content quality
+  □ Key people: LinkedIn profiles, career history, recent posts
+  □ Trigger event: What prompted the meeting? News, job posting, competitor move
+  □ Hypothesis: 3 informed guesses about their problems
+
+Sources:
+  - LinkedIn (company + individuals)
+  - Company website, blog, careers page
+  - Press releases, news mentions
+  - G2/Glassdoor (culture signals)
+  - SimilarWeb/SEMrush (digital performance signals)
+  - Annual reports (if public)
+
+Output: 1-page Pre-Call Brief
+
+PHASE 2: DIAGNOSTIC CONVERSATION (The call)
+═══════════════════════════════════════════
+Time: 45-60 min
+Goal: Map current state, future state, and the gap between them
+
+Structure:
+  Part A — Rapport & Agenda (5 min)
+  Part B — Situation & Context (10 min) [SPIN: Situation]
+  Part C — Problems & Frustrations (15 min) [SPIN: Problem + Gap: Current State]
+  Part D — Impact & Implications (10 min) [SPIN: Implication + Gap: Impact]
+  Part E — Desired Future State (5 min) [SPIN: Need-Payoff + Gap: Future State]
+  Part F — Next Steps & Alignment (5 min)
+
+PHASE 3: SYNTHESIS & BUSINESS CASE (After the call)
+═══════════════════════════════════════════
+Time: 30 min post-call
+Goal: Convert conversation into structured diagnosis
+
+Output: Discovery Summary Document
+  → Sent to prospect within 24h
+  → Demonstrates you LISTENED
+  → Frames the problem in business terms
+  → Sets up the proposal naturally
+```
+
+### 3. Question Bank by Phase
+
+#### Part B: Situation Questions
+| Area | Question | What You're Mapping |
+|------|---------|-------------------|
+| Team | "Walk me through how your [marketing/digital/brand] team is structured today." | Resource capacity |
+| Process | "Take me through a typical campaign from idea to execution — how does that flow?" | Workflow maturity |
+| Stack | "What tools and platforms are you using? How well are they integrated?" | Tech ecosystem |
+| Partners | "Are you working with any external partners today? How's that going?" | Competitive positioning |
+| Metrics | "What metrics does your leadership look at to evaluate success?" | Success criteria |
+| Budget | "Without getting into specific numbers yet, how do you typically approach investment in this area?" | Budget signal |
+
+#### Part C: Problem Questions
+| Area | Question | What You're Mapping |
+|------|---------|-------------------|
+| Performance | "Where are you seeing the biggest gap between where you are and where you want to be?" | Primary pain |
+| Friction | "What's the most frustrating part of your current setup?" | Emotional pain |
+| Attempts | "What have you tried to solve this? What worked, what didn't?" | Sophistication level |
+| Constraints | "What's holding you back from fixing this internally?" | Capability gaps |
+| Urgency | "How long has this been a problem? What's changed recently?" | Trigger identification |
+
+#### Part D: Implication Questions
+| Area | Question | What You're Mapping |
+|------|---------|-------------------|
+| Revenue | "If [problem] continues for another 12 months, what's the impact on revenue?" | Financial cost |
+| Opportunity | "What opportunities are you missing because of [problem]?" | Opportunity cost |
+| Competitive | "How does [problem] affect your position vs competitors?" | Strategic risk |
+| Team | "How does [problem] impact your team's morale and retention?" | People cost |
+| Cascading | "What other areas of the business are affected when [problem] persists?" | Systemic impact |
+
+#### Part E: Need-Payoff Questions
+| Area | Question | What You're Mapping |
+|------|---------|-------------------|
+| Vision | "If we could wave a magic wand, what does the ideal state look like in 12 months?" | Desired outcome |
+| Metrics | "What numbers would tell you 'this was worth it'?" | Success metrics |
+| Priorities | "Of everything we've discussed, what would you solve first?" | Priority ranking |
+| Decision | "How will you evaluate whether a partner is the right fit?" | Decision criteria (MEDDIC) |
+| Value | "If you achieved [desired state], what would that mean for you personally?" | Personal win |
+
+### 4. Gap Analysis Canvas
+```
+GAP SELLING CANVAS — [Prospect Name]
+
+CURRENT STATE                              FUTURE STATE
+═══════════════                            ═══════════════
+Business results: ___________              Business results: ___________
+Technical environment: ______              Technical environment: ______
+Processes: _________________              Processes: _________________
+Team capabilities: _________              Team capabilities: _________
+Customer experience: ________              Customer experience: ________
+
+                    THE GAP
+                ═══════════════
+  Business Impact: R$ _____________ / year
+  Opportunity Cost: R$ ____________ / year
+  Risk of Inaction: _____________________
+  Root Causes:
+    1. _________________________________
+    2. _________________________________
+    3. _________________________________
+
+MINIMUM VIABLE CHANGE                     FULL TRANSFORMATION
+═══════════════════════                   ═══════════════════════
+Investment: R$ ____________               Investment: R$ ____________
+Timeline: _________ months               Timeline: _________ months
+Expected ROI: ____x                       Expected ROI: ____x
+```
+
+### 5. Discovery Quality Scorecard
+| Dimension | Score (1-5) | Evidence |
+|-----------|-------------|---------|
+| Pre-call preparation quality | | Research depth, hypotheses |
+| Rapport and trust established | | Client comfort, openness |
+| Pain identified and quantified | | Specific $ or metric impact |
+| Implication depth explored | | Cascading effects mapped |
+| Future state articulated by client | | In their words, specific |
+| Decision process mapped | | MEDDIC elements captured |
+| Compelling next step secured | | Specific, time-bound |
+| Discovery summary sent < 24h | | Written, sent, confirmed |
+| **TOTAL** | /40 | |
+
+**Scoring Thresholds:**
+- 35-40: Excellent — ready for proposal
+- 28-34: Good — minor gaps to fill
+- 20-27: Adequate — follow up to deepen
+- <20: Insufficient — re-engage before proposing
+
+## Saida
+- Three-phase discovery framework
+- Question bank by category (40+ questions)
+- Gap Analysis Canvas
+- Discovery quality scorecard
+- Pre-call brief template
+
+## Validacao
+- [ ] Discovery philosophy clearly articulated (diagnosis, not interrogation)
+- [ ] Three phases cover pre-call, call, and post-call
+- [ ] Questions organized by SPIN + Gap Selling hybrid
+- [ ] Gap Analysis Canvas connects current state to future state quantitatively
+- [ ] Quality scorecard enables coaching and self-assessment