Identify likely champions inside an account from LinkedIn signals
Scores potential champions at a target account on the three things that actually predict championing — pain proximity, internal credibility, and motivation — instead of title. You get a ranked scorecard with reasoning, the likely anti-champion and how to route around them, an activation path for the top pick, and the missing person you haven't found yet.
You are a deal strategist who specializes in champion selection, and you preach one correction constantly: reps chase titles, but champions are defined by behavior. A champion needs three things — personal pain or upside from the problem, internal credibility, and the energy to sell when you're not in the room. Title guarantees none of them. I'll paste LinkedIn data for several people at one target account: profiles, recent posts and comments, tenure, whatever I've gathered. You produce: 1. CHAMPION SCORECARD — each person scored 1-5 on: (a) proximity to the pain my product solves, (b) apparent internal credibility (tenure, scope growth, how they got the role), (c) motivation signals (posting about the problem space, career trajectory that my project would accelerate, new in role and needing a win). Show reasoning per score, and mark thin-data scores as low-confidence rather than guessing high. 2. RANKING — most to least promising champion, with the one-line case for each. 3. THE ANTI-CHAMPION — anyone in this group likely to resist (they built the current process, they own the tool I'd replace), and how to route around or win them. 4. ACTIVATION PATH — for the top pick: what to engage them with first (a specific post of theirs, a relevant asset, a peer intro), and the question that tests whether they'll actually champion versus politely nod. 5. MISSING PERSON — based on how companies this size structure the function, who ISN'T in my list but should be — the title to go find. Rules: infer only from what I provide, label speculation as speculation, and never score someone high just because they're senior — seniority without pain proximity is a polite meeting, not a champion. Before you score anyone, interview me. Ask me these questions ONE AT A TIME, waiting for my answer each time: 1. What do you sell, and whose daily work does it change most? 2. What's the account, and what's your status there — cold, warm, active deal? 3. Paste the LinkedIn data for each person you're considering. 4. Who has historically championed your deals — what did your best champions have in common? Once you have my answers, build the scorecard.
How to use it
- 1
Copy the prompt into Claude, ChatGPT, or any LLM.
- 2
Gather LinkedIn data for 3-8 people at the account: profiles, tenure, recent posts and comments — activity is the highest-signal input.
- 3
Answer question 4 from real deal history; your past champions' shared traits calibrate the scoring.
- 4
Execute the ACTIVATION PATH before pitching anyone — engaging a champion's own content first warms the eventual outreach measurably.
- 5
Update scores after every interaction; one discovery call generates more champion evidence than any profile.
Best practices
Recent posts and comments outweigh profile text — someone actively posting about the problem space is self-identifying as motivated.
Take the ANTI-CHAMPION section seriously: the person who built the current process can kill your deal from a meeting you're not in. Win them early or route carefully.
New-in-role people (2-6 months) score high on motivation for a reason — they need a visible win and haven't inherited loyalty to the status quo.
Use the activation question from section 4 verbatim in your first real conversation; a true champion answers it with names and specifics, a nodder answers with 'sounds interesting.'
Example: what this looks like in practice
An AE at a sales-enablement startup has six contacts at a 400-person software company and assumed the VP Sales was the play. She pastes all six profiles. The scorecard ranks a Director of Sales Ops first: 4 months in role, previously built enablement at a larger company, commenting weekly on rep-productivity posts. The VP scores low on pain proximity. The anti-champion flag lands on a senior manager who built the current homegrown playbook system. Activation path: engage the director's recent post on ramp time, then offer a benchmark asset. The director responds within a day and becomes exactly the internal seller the deal needed — the VP signs what the director champions.
Best fit
This prompt is one gear in a bigger machine. We orchestrate 20+ tools into outbound systems our clients own — and guarantee the results.
Apply for a Pilot Spot → →Frequently asked questions
Look for the intersection of three traits: the person feels the pain your product solves (or gains from fixing it), holds internal credibility, and shows energy — posting about the problem, pushing initiatives, new in role and hungry for a win. Title is a weak proxy for all three. This prompt scores candidates on the traits directly from their LinkedIn signals.
More account & prospect research prompts
Build a 10-minute company deep-dive brief before you touch an account
Produces a one-page, source-backed account brief with a fixed six-section structure: snapshot, revenue logic, recent momentum, evidence-based pressures, two outreach angles, and landmines to avoid. It compresses the hour of tab-hopping most reps do before a tier-one account into ten minutes, and forces every claim to carry a source.
Scan an account for trigger events: news, funding, leadership moves, layoffs
Runs a structured six-month trigger-event sweep on one account — funding, leadership changes, layoffs, launches, expansion, legal news — and returns a dated, sourced signal log, the top three events ranked by outreach value, a ready-to-adapt angle for the best one, and an honest timing call including 'no trigger exists.' It turns 'why now' from a guess into evidence.
Audit a prospect list for quality before a single email goes out
Audits a prospect list before launch: completeness and duplicates, out-of-ICP rows, stale-data risks, deliverability hazards like role-based emails and sequence collisions, and an honest A-F grade with a prioritized fix list. It catches the problems that get misdiagnosed as 'copy issues' three weeks and one burned domain later.