Start with source quality
A hook is a claim about the prospect’s business context. Record where it came from, what the source actually supports, and when it was observed. A search snippet or an ambiguous third-party profile should not carry the same weight as the company’s own current material.
Separate observation from inference. “The company posted three implementation roles” is observable. “The company is struggling with onboarding” is an inference and should not be stated as fact.
Score five dimensions
Useful qualification can be simple, provided it is consistent. Score source confidence, specificity, recency, role relevance, and commercial relevance. A hook that fails role or commercial relevance should not be rescued by excellent recency.
- Source confidence: can a reviewer find the evidence?
- Specificity: is the observation distinctive?
- Recency: could the context still be active?
- Role relevance: does the recipient plausibly own the issue?
- Commercial relevance: does it lead naturally to the offer?
Define rejection rules first
Teams tend to lower standards when research is expensive. Predefined rejection rules counter that pressure. Reject sensitive personal facts, generic praise, old news presented as current, unsupported intent claims, and facts that require a strained transition.
The most valuable field in a research system may be `qualified: false`. It protects the recipient experience, the sender’s reputation, and the quality of campaign learning.