Lead Scoring | Why One Number Sends Reps After the Wrong Leads

Most lead scoring models hand sales a single 0-to-100 number that is secretly answering two different questions at once: is this the right kind of buyer, and are they ready to buy now. This episode unpacks why that single score quietly misroutes your reps — sending them after a college student poking around the pricing page instead of a perfect-fit VP who went quiet — and walks through the fit-versus-intent framework that fixes it. The whole thing runs on a worked B2B SaaS example: 1,000 marketing leads a month against a five-rep SDR team that can only seriously work about 300 of them. What we cover: Why behavioral points (pricing-page visits, demo views, repeat sessions) compound while firmographic fit points stay capped — and how that skews the top of every single-score list Building the fit score from two years of closed-won data, weighted for which accounts retain, not just which ones sign Why intent is perishable — scoring behavioral signals on a decay curve so a 60-day-old pricing visit stops counting as "hot" The fit-vs-intent 2x2 and its four quadrants: Priority, Nurture, Triage, and Hold — and the play for each The SDR-capacity math: how a single-score model burns roughly 210 conversations a month on a pool that closes at 1% The reallocation — working 130 routed leads instead of 300, with the deal count holding and half the rep capacity freed Two changes to make this week: gate intent behind a real fit floor, and add decay to every behavioral signal Closing question we leave you with: if you split your current leads into this two-by-two grid today, how many of your sales team's hours are being burned chasing fake intent in the trap quadrant? Go to marketingcasebootcamp.com for hands-on case simulation practice on this exact business problem — build the routing rules and capacity math the way you would on the job. If this one helped, share with other marketer folks.