The lead score I inherit most often has forty rules, awards ten points for opening an email, and has never once been checked against a closed deal. Sales stopped looking at it within a month, and marketing kept reporting MQLs nobody called. A lead scoring model is a hypothesis about which attributes and behaviors predict revenue. If it has never been tested against revenue, it is a guess with a number on it. Here is the model I build instead, with the criteria, the points, and the threshold, so you can see exactly how it works and copy the parts that fit.
Two Scores, Not One
Fit and engagement answer different questions, and blending them hides both. Fit asks whether this contact could ever buy: company size, industry, role, geography. Engagement asks whether they are showing intent right now: pages, forms, replies, meetings. HubSpot’s lead scoring tool is built around exactly this split, with separate fit and engagement scores, score groups with caps, negative points, and decay that reduces the value of old interactions over time. Most platforms can do the same. Almost no one configures them that way. Configuring them that way is the first task in our automation practice.
B2B Lead Scoring Criteria Examples: The Fit Score
|
Fit criterion |
Example value |
Points |
Why |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Company size |
100 to 1,000 employees |
+20 |
Matches the deals we win; below 50 rarely closes |
|
Industry |
Manufacturing, professional services, healthcare |
+15 |
Our three strongest verticals by win rate |
|
Role |
VP or Director of Marketing, CEO, COO |
+15 |
The roles that sign in our won deals |
|
Role |
Student, consultant, agency, competitor |
-30 |
Never buys; wastes sales time |
|
Geography |
United States |
+10 |
Service footprint |
|
Email domain |
Free email provider |
-15 |
Rarely a decision-maker |
|
Fit score cap |
60 |
Fit alone should never trigger handoff |
The Engagement Score
|
Engagement criterion |
Points |
Decay |
Why |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Viewed pricing or services page |
+15 |
Halves every 30 days |
Strongest single intent signal in our deal data |
|
Requested an audit or demo |
+40 |
None |
Explicit hand-raise; triggers alert regardless of total |
|
Downloaded a bottom-funnel guide (comparison, checklist) |
+10 |
Halves every 30 days |
Evaluation-stage behavior |
|
Replied to a nurture email |
+10 |
Halves every 30 days |
Two-way engagement beats any open |
|
Visited 3+ pages in one session |
+5 |
Halves every 30 days |
Research behavior |
|
Opened an email |
0 |
Opens are unreliable and predict nothing in our data |
|
|
Unsubscribed or bounced |
-40 |
None |
Remove from active nurture |
|
No activity in 60 days |
Score decays toward 0 |
Stale interest should not look like interest |
Notice what gets zero. Email opens. Social follows. Whitepaper downloads that are top-of-funnel. I have never seen any of them predict a deal in a won-deal analysis, and every point you award a non-predictive behavior dilutes the ones that matter. The 6sense Buyer Experience Report found buyers make first contact 61 percent of the way through their journey. The behaviors that matter are the ones that happen in that last 39 percent: pricing, comparison, hand-raise, reply.
The Threshold That Triggers Handoff
A lead becomes sales-ready when fit is at least 40 and engagement is at least 40 in the same window, or when they explicitly hand-raise, which overrides everything. That is it. Two numbers, one exception. The head of sales signs off on the numbers, and we write down the response-time commitment next to them. Harvard Business Review’s well-known study of online lead response found companies that contacted a lead within an hour were nearly seven times as likely to qualify it as those that waited even an hour longer, and more than sixty times as likely as those that waited a day. A perfect score with a slow response is a wasted score.
|
State |
Rule |
Action |
|---|---|---|
|
Marketing-qualified |
Fit 40+ and engagement 40+ |
Create task for assigned rep; respond within one business hour |
|
Hand-raise |
Audit or demo request |
Immediate alert; respond within fifteen minutes during business hours |
|
Nurture |
Fit 40+, engagement under 40 |
Stage-based nurture track |
|
Disqualified |
Fit under 20 or negative role |
Suppress from sales queue; light newsletter only |
|
Recycled |
Sales marks not ready |
Back to nurture with a 90-day re-score |
How to Calibrate It
- Pull the last 50 won and lost deals. Score each contact retroactively with the model above. If won deals do not score higher than lost ones, the criteria are wrong.
- Look at what the won deals did before handoff. The behaviors that show up in most of them get points. The ones that never show up get zero, no matter how “engaged” they feel.
- Set the threshold where sales conversion jumps. Plot conversion to opportunity by score band. The knee of that curve is your threshold.
- Review quarterly. Deals change, content changes, and a score that was right in January drifts by June. I explain how this review fits into the wider program, and why lead scoring is the piece that decides whether sales trusts marketing at all, in my complete guide to B2B marketing automation.
The Mistakes That Sink Scores
Awarding points for opens. Blending fit and engagement into one number. No negative scoring, so a competitor who reads everything looks like a hot lead. No decay, so a contact who visited pricing last year still looks interested. And a threshold set by marketing alone, so sales never agreed to it and never honors it. Every one of these is fixable in an afternoon, and fixing them is the fastest credibility win an automation program can earn. It is why our marketing automation work starts with the score and the handoff before a single nurture email is written. These b2b lead scoring criteria examples are the model we start from, adjusted to each client’s won-deal data, and the handoff table above is the contract between marketing and sales that our automation engagements are built to enforce.
Frequently Asked Questions
What criteria should a B2B lead score include?
Fit criteria such as company size, industry, role, and geography, scored separately from engagement criteria such as pricing-page views, hand-raises, replies, and multi-page sessions. Include negative points for poor fit and unsubscribes, and decay for old activity.
What score should trigger a sales handoff?
The point where conversion to opportunity jumps in your own data. A common starting rule is fit of 40 or more plus engagement of 40 or more in the same period, with explicit hand-raises overriding the score.
How often should lead scoring be reviewed?
Quarterly, against the most recent won and lost deals. Re-check that won deals score higher than lost ones and adjust criteria that no longer predict.
Want your score checked against your own won deals? Request a free marketing audit and I will show you which criteria predict revenue and which are just noise.

3 views