256 lines
11 KiB
Markdown
256 lines
11 KiB
Markdown
# Current State Rubric — 17-Section Scoring Lens
|
||
|
||
This 17-section rubric is the source of truth for Section 3 ("Current State") of every marketing plan. Score each section 0–5 from available materials, then write a 2–4 sentence "shape interpretation" that names where strengths and gaps cluster.
|
||
|
||
## How to score
|
||
|
||
**From rich materials.** When the team has shared decks, prior content audits, a brand voice doc, kickoff transcript, app store and analytics snapshots — score each section from those artifacts. Mark "scored from materials" in the section heading so the team can push back where they have better data.
|
||
|
||
**From a separately scored audit.** If the team has already run a scored current-state assessment (in any format), ingest those scores directly. Don't redo the work — note the date the rubric was scored and flag any sections where material has shifted since.
|
||
|
||
Either way, the output is the same: a 17-row scored table, a total out of 85, and a shape paragraph.
|
||
|
||
## The 17 sections (scored 0–5 each)
|
||
|
||
### 1. Positioning
|
||
**What's scored:** Clarity of category claim, differentiation, alignment across surfaces (homepage, app store, pitch deck, founder messaging).
|
||
|
||
**Score guide:**
|
||
- 0 = No positioning anywhere
|
||
- 2 = Inconsistent across surfaces; team can't articulate it on demand
|
||
- 4 = Clear, original, mostly consistent; minor surface gaps
|
||
- 5 = Distinctive, category-defining, every surface aligned
|
||
|
||
**Maps to AARRR:** Cross-cutting — feeds every stage.
|
||
|
||
### 2. Customer research
|
||
**What's scored:** Depth and recency of customer research, ICP clarity, voice-of-customer capture.
|
||
|
||
**Score guide:**
|
||
- 0 = No formal research, only founder intuition
|
||
- 2 = Some research but stale or one-off
|
||
- 4 = Active research practice, customer language captured
|
||
- 5 = Continuous research, customer language flows into copy / product / messaging
|
||
|
||
**Maps to AARRR:** Cross-cutting — feeds especially Acquisition (channel choice) and Activation (onboarding voice).
|
||
|
||
### 3. Homepage
|
||
**What's scored:** Headline clarity, voice alignment, conversion architecture, mobile experience.
|
||
|
||
**Score guide:**
|
||
- 0 = Generic / broken / off-brand
|
||
- 2 = Functional but underperforming; voice mostly absent
|
||
- 4 = Clear, voice-aligned, converting; minor optimization opportunities
|
||
- 5 = Distinctive, converts strongly, fully voice-aligned
|
||
|
||
**Maps to AARRR:** Acquisition + Activation.
|
||
|
||
### 4. Sales / product pages
|
||
**What's scored:** Existence and quality of dedicated product / pricing / feature pages. Are SKUs documented? Is pricing scannable? Are upsells visible?
|
||
|
||
**Score guide:**
|
||
- 0 = No dedicated pages
|
||
- 2 = Pages exist but are stale or off-voice
|
||
- 4 = Quality pages for primary products; gaps on secondary
|
||
- 5 = Every product, tier, and upsell has a high-converting page
|
||
|
||
**Maps to AARRR:** Acquisition + Revenue.
|
||
|
||
### 5. Conversion pages
|
||
**What's scored:** Landing pages for specific campaigns, channels, or use cases. `/partner`, `/science`, `/ambassadors`, `/eye-mask` types of pages.
|
||
|
||
**Score guide:**
|
||
- 0 = No conversion pages
|
||
- 2 = One or two exist; rest of needed pages missing
|
||
- 4 = Most needed conversion pages exist; quality is good
|
||
- 5 = Full conversion page library, each high-converting
|
||
|
||
**Maps to AARRR:** Acquisition + Activation.
|
||
|
||
### 6. Competitor comparison
|
||
**What's scored:** Existence of "vs. {competitor}" pages, comparison content. Does the brand acknowledge alternatives, or pretend they don't exist?
|
||
|
||
**Score guide:**
|
||
- 0 = Nothing — actively avoiding competitor mentions
|
||
- 2 = Some content exists but is weak or hidden
|
||
- 4 = Solid comparison pages for top 2–3 competitors
|
||
- 5 = Comprehensive comparison library; SEO-targeted; high-converting
|
||
|
||
**Maps to AARRR:** Acquisition (consideration-stage SEO + sales enablement).
|
||
|
||
### 7. Resources / content
|
||
**What's scored:** Blog, knowledge base, science page, whitepapers, research, founder essays, podcast.
|
||
|
||
**Score guide:**
|
||
- 0 = No content surface
|
||
- 2 = Blog exists but is stale or thin
|
||
- 4 = Active content production; multiple formats
|
||
- 5 = Content is a moat — proprietary research, named pillars, daily volume
|
||
|
||
**Maps to AARRR:** Acquisition.
|
||
|
||
### 8. Onboarding
|
||
**What's scored:** New user onboarding (in-app + email). Time-to-value, completion rate, brand-voice alignment.
|
||
|
||
**Score guide:**
|
||
- 0 = No onboarding flow
|
||
- 2 = Onboarding exists but is broken, off-voice, or underperforming
|
||
- 4 = Solid onboarding; clear bottlenecks identified
|
||
- 5 = Tested, optimized, on-brand; activation rate at category top quartile
|
||
|
||
**Maps to AARRR:** Activation.
|
||
|
||
### 9. Email lifecycle
|
||
**What's scored:** Existence and quality of lifecycle email programs. Welcome / onboarding / post-purchase / lapsed / win-back.
|
||
|
||
**Score guide:**
|
||
- 0 = No lifecycle email
|
||
- 2 = Some flows exist but drafted not live, or live but stale
|
||
- 4 = Core flows live and performing; gaps on secondary flows
|
||
- 5 = Full lifecycle live, segmented, performing above category benchmarks
|
||
|
||
**Maps to AARRR:** Retention (+ Activation for onboarding emails).
|
||
|
||
### 10. Sales material
|
||
**What's scored:** Sales decks, one-pagers, demos, case studies, pricing sheets. (For B2B / hybrid companies — for pure D2C, this can be marked N/A or scored low without implication.)
|
||
|
||
**Score guide:**
|
||
- 0 = No sales material
|
||
- 2 = Founder uses a deck but other material is thin
|
||
- 4 = Solid sales kit; reps can self-serve content
|
||
- 5 = Comprehensive material; updated quarterly; objection-handling library exists
|
||
|
||
**Maps to AARRR:** Acquisition + Revenue (B2B).
|
||
|
||
### 11. Messaging
|
||
**What's scored:** Voice, tone, vocabulary, message hierarchy across surfaces. Is the brand voice documented, consistent, distinctive?
|
||
|
||
**Score guide:**
|
||
- 0 = No voice documented; surfaces inconsistent
|
||
- 2 = Voice exists in founder's head but isn't operationalized
|
||
- 4 = Documented voice; mostly consistent across surfaces
|
||
- 5 = Distinctive voice; documented; every surface respects it; voice is a moat
|
||
|
||
**Maps to AARRR:** Cross-cutting.
|
||
|
||
### 12. Pricing
|
||
**What's scored:** Pricing structure clarity, packaging logic, recent pressure-testing, listed vs. effective price reconciliation.
|
||
|
||
**Score guide:**
|
||
- 0 = Pricing not pressure-tested in over a year; unclear structure
|
||
- 2 = Listed pricing exists but plan mix / discounting muddles the read
|
||
- 4 = Clear pricing; recent tests; LTV math known
|
||
- 5 = Pricing tested quarterly; packaging optimized; expansion levers known
|
||
|
||
**Maps to AARRR:** Revenue.
|
||
|
||
### 13. CRO (conversion rate optimization)
|
||
**What's scored:** Test cadence, instrumentation, A/B history, statistical rigor.
|
||
|
||
**Score guide:**
|
||
- 0 = No tests run; no instrumentation
|
||
- 2 = Some ad-hoc tests; no statistical rigor
|
||
- 4 = Regular test cadence; some wins
|
||
- 5 = Continuous testing program; experimentation culture; documented wins
|
||
|
||
**Maps to AARRR:** Cross-cutting (most impactful at Activation + Revenue).
|
||
|
||
### 14. GTM launches
|
||
**What's scored:** Quality of past launch executions. Product launches, feature launches, campaign launches.
|
||
|
||
**Score guide:**
|
||
- 0 = No structured launches; "soft launches" only
|
||
- 2 = Some launches but uneven execution
|
||
- 4 = Solid recent launches; playbook exists
|
||
- 5 = Repeatable launch motion; Product Hunt #1s; press coverage on demand
|
||
|
||
**Maps to AARRR:** Acquisition + Activation.
|
||
|
||
### 15. Ads (paid)
|
||
**What's scored:** Paid acquisition state. Active campaigns, channels, CAC tracking, creative quality.
|
||
|
||
**Score guide:**
|
||
- 0 = No paid acquisition
|
||
- 2 = Some paid but unstructured / wasteful
|
||
- 4 = Paid is firing across 2–3 channels with positive unit economics
|
||
- 5 = Sophisticated paid stack; CAC/LTV understood; creative iterated weekly
|
||
|
||
**Maps to AARRR:** Acquisition.
|
||
|
||
**Note:** For pre-seed clients with no paid budget, score this 0 *without* treating it as a weakness — it reflects the funding stage, not a marketing failure.
|
||
|
||
### 16. SEO
|
||
**What's scored:** Organic search performance. Domain rating, ranking keywords, organic traffic, content cluster strategy.
|
||
|
||
**Score guide:**
|
||
- 0 = No SEO; new domain or zero-authority
|
||
- 2 = Some content but no strategy; ranks for brand only
|
||
- 4 = Established content clusters; growing organic traffic; DR 25+
|
||
- 5 = SEO is a moat; DR 40+; thousand+ ranking keywords; consistent content production
|
||
|
||
**Maps to AARRR:** Acquisition.
|
||
|
||
### 17. Internationalization
|
||
**What's scored:** Geographic expansion, language localization, region-specific pricing.
|
||
|
||
**Score guide:**
|
||
- 0 = US/EN only; no international consideration
|
||
- 2 = International users exist but aren't served (one language, one currency)
|
||
- 4 = Multi-language, region-specific pricing, GTM playbook for new markets
|
||
- 5 = International is a strength; multi-region revenue; localized GTM
|
||
|
||
**Maps to AARRR:** Acquisition.
|
||
|
||
**Note:** For most early-stage companies, internationalization scores 0–1 and that's appropriate. Don't penalize early-stage companies for not having international playbooks yet.
|
||
|
||
## How to compute the total + read the shape
|
||
|
||
**Total = sum of all 17 scores. Out of 85.**
|
||
|
||
The total matters less than the *shape*. After the scoring table, write a 2–4 sentence "shape interpretation":
|
||
|
||
> *"High in {strong sections}, low in {weak sections}. That shape is the gap the rest of the plan closes — Sections X (AARRR stage) is the longest because that's where the gap is widest."*
|
||
|
||
## Common shapes
|
||
|
||
### "Strong voice / messaging, weak distribution"
|
||
- High: Positioning (#1), Customer research (#2), Messaging (#11)
|
||
- Low: SEO (#16), Ads (#15), GTM launches (#14)
|
||
- Translation: The founder is a strong storyteller but distribution hasn't caught up. Plan emphasizes Acquisition + paid layer prep.
|
||
|
||
### "Strong acquisition, weak conversion"
|
||
- High: SEO (#16), Resources (#7), Ads (#15)
|
||
- Low: Homepage (#3), Onboarding (#8), Conversion pages (#5), Pricing (#12)
|
||
- Translation: Traffic comes in but doesn't convert. Plan emphasizes Activation + Revenue.
|
||
|
||
### "Strong conversion, weak retention"
|
||
- High: Onboarding (#8), Homepage (#3), Pricing (#12)
|
||
- Low: Email lifecycle (#9), CRO (#13)
|
||
- Translation: Users sign up and pay but churn. Plan emphasizes Retention.
|
||
|
||
### "Strong product, weak everything-else"
|
||
- High: only Positioning (#1) and Customer research (#2) — the founder knows the customer
|
||
- Low: everything operational
|
||
- Translation: Pre-marketing stage. Plan is foundation-heavy. First quarter is bedrock fixes.
|
||
|
||
### "Strong recent revenue, weak compounding"
|
||
- High: Ads (#15), Sales material (#10), Pricing (#12)
|
||
- Low: SEO (#16), Resources (#7), Referral mechanics
|
||
- Translation: Performance marketing carries the business. Plan emphasizes building compounding channels before paid scales further.
|
||
|
||
## When scores are subjective
|
||
|
||
Some sections are easier to score from outside than others. Subjectivity tier:
|
||
|
||
- **Objective (data-driven):** SEO (#16), Ads (#15), Email lifecycle (#9), Onboarding (#8) — backed by analytics
|
||
- **Semi-objective:** Pricing (#12), CRO (#13), Conversion pages (#5), Sales material (#10) — visible artifacts to evaluate
|
||
- **Subjective (judgment call):** Positioning (#1), Messaging (#11), Customer research (#2), Resources (#7) — interpretive
|
||
|
||
For subjective sections, write the rationale into the "Note" column so the team can push back if they disagree.
|
||
|
||
## When a prior scored audit exists
|
||
|
||
If the team already has scored output from any current-state assessment, ingest those scores directly — don't redo the work. Treat that prior scoring as the ground truth for sections it covers.
|
||
|
||
If the prior scoring was done weeks ago and material has shifted since (new shipped flows, new content live, repositioning, etc.), note "scored on YYYY-MM-DD; material has shifted since" and update any specific scores you have current evidence for.
|