I've been thinking about this a lot.

RevOps loves scoring accounts to create tiers.

If > 5 qualified hits then tier-1 account.

This still relies on independent prospect events, keywords, fields.

But with LLMs we now have understanding, inference, and reasoning.

So a tier-1 account because they had 5 keywords in their job postings?

When you actually reason through it - often there's no real context, no narrative and the parsed through a reasoning model would just be discarded.

Number scoring on isolated events can lead to a lot of false positives.

Turns out there's little evidence that lead scoring actually correlates with sales outcomes.

Most evidence comes from case studies by GTM tools selling scoring models.

The citations get circular fast.

Questions being - can you actually score need?

Need is an insight. A contextual understanding. An inference.

Think about a strong lead that comes from a dinner conversation. No one's running a scoring model. They're picking up on what's said and unsaid.

That's qualitative judgment. Not arithmetic.

The goal now is to ingest more context and narrative into CRM vs traditional scoring.

Contextualizing need, reasoning, and triggering outreach when the narrative actually makes sense?