Verba for sales teams
Coach the call, not the memory of it.
Recorded customer conversations assessed against the way your team is supposed to sell — what was explored, how the product was presented, what was objected to, and whether a real next step was agreed.
Every call
measured against the same definition of a good one
Not the three a manager had time for this week, and not the three a representative chose to share. Consistency is what makes one review comparable with another.
Why coaching drifts
Two managers, the same call, two different reviews.
Without written criteria, a call review records the reviewer’s priorities at least as faithfully as the representative’s performance.
The problem is rarely that managers are wrong. It is that they are differently right: one hears a discovery gap, another hears a strong close, and the representative receives two incompatible pieces of advice about the same forty minutes.
Writing the standard down changes what a review is. The requirement is fixed before the call is heard, the evidence for it is quoted from the conversation, and what the representative takes away is a passage rather than an adjective.
Review by recollection
- Different reviewers, different emphasis
- Strong calls remembered, ordinary ones not
- Feedback delivered as a general impression
- Nothing to compare across a team
Review against a written standard
- The same requirements on every call
- The passage that earned or missed each one
- Feedback that names a moment
- Results a sales operation can aggregate
What the review looks at
Focus the assessment on what your team is actually judged on.
Four areas most sales organisations care about. Which of them exist, and what each is worth, is yours to define.
Discovery quality
Were the required questions asked, and did they get answers worth acting on? Your own definition of a complete discovery conversation decides what counts as one.
Message relevance
Was the product presented against what the customer actually said they needed, and did it stay inside approved product information?
Objections and responses
What was raised, and what came back. Objections surface as findings rather than waiting for someone to notice them on a second listen.
The next step
Agreed, specific and owned — or merely mentioned. That difference is usually the difference between a pipeline entry and a forecast.
Your definition of a good conversation
A complete review, step by step.
The same five stages behind every scorecard result, whatever the conversation was about.
Company standards
What matters, what counts as success, and what earns points.
Focused evaluation
Each requirement examined on its own and explained with conversation evidence.
Completeness checks
Software confirms the required answers, permitted grades and supporting material are all present.
Precision and arbitration
Optional. A second look at the interpretation, and a way to settle a disputed score.
Calculated scores
Totals worked out from the accepted grades using your scoring rules, not written by a model.
Evidence for review. Results for action.
Who the review is for
One conversation, three people who need something from it.
The representative, the manager and the sales operation want different things out of the same forty minutes, and none of them should have to listen to it again to get them.
For the representative
The decisions, the questions raised and the actions to follow up, prepared from the same recording the review was drawn from. Follow-up stops depending on how good anyone’s notes were.
For the manager
A shared starting point. The requirement, the reason and the passage are in front of both people before the conversation about the call begins, which is what stops it becoming a negotiation about what was said.
For the sales operation
Structured results your CRM and reporting stack can read through supported APIs and exports, so a review does not stay inside the team it happened in.
In practice
Start with the way you already sell.
The methodology comes first and the configuration follows it, not the other way round.
Bring your methodology
Your discovery framework, your messaging guidance and your review criteria become the scorecard. Nothing is adopted from a template you did not write.
Evaluate a real batch
Process recorded audio or video against the meeting category and the standards that belong to it, with the analyses your workflow needs and no others.
Read it beside your own review
Compare the supporting passages with a manually reviewed sample from the same batch, then change the criteria rather than the expectations.
Elsewhere in Verba
Try it on last quarter’s calls
Bring a batch of recordings you have already reviewed, and the criteria you reviewed them against. We will configure the category and the scorecard around your methodology, and you can read the two sets of findings side by side.
Request an evaluationEdition and scopeThis page describes implemented features as of the September 2026 product description. Interface images are demonstration views: their example content and usage values are neither customer results nor commercial terms.