OObjectionGuide

Post-call recap

Acme Logistics · May 27, 14:08-14:38

Rep: Daniel Park · 30 min · 2 objections handled · advanced to demo schedule

Duration

30:18

Objections

2

Talk ratio

42 / 58

Buying signals

6

AI summary

Strong qualification call. Marcus opened with the dispatcher pain Daniel had heard in their April demo, which Daniel anchored on cleanly. Two objections came in: price-versus-competitor at 14:19 (Daniel used the SOP 2.4 response verbatim and added the SLA-comparison send-back), and authority/multi-stakeholder at 14:26 (Daniel offered the joint walkthrough option). Marcus committed to a follow-up next Tuesday with his COO. Deal stage advanced from Qualification to Demo Scheduled.

Objections handled

14:19 · Price + competitor

SOP 2.4 retrieved in 1.2s. Daniel used the suggestion verbatim. Marcus accepted the SLA comparison offer.

14:26 · Authority / multi-stakeholder

SOP 4.1 retrieved in 1.4s. Daniel offered the joint-walkthrough option. Marcus picked it.

Next steps

  • · Send SLA comparison doc to Marcus by EOD
  • · Schedule joint walkthrough with Marcus + COO for Tuesday
  • · Update HubSpot deal stage to Demo Scheduled
  • · Loop Steve (Solutions Engineer) into Tuesday call

Coaching note for Daniel (managers only)

Daniel handled the price objection well by using the SOP verbatim. One refinement: when Marcus said “ContractorPro offered me the same thing for 40% less,” the system surfaced SLA reliability. Daniel could have anchored harder on the 200-routes-a-week math Marcus had already mentioned, making the cost-per-disruption explicit. SOP 2.4 has a sub-variant 2.4b for this; the assistant should have retrieved that over the generic 2.4. Logging this as training signal for the classifier.