Account qualification evidence review before pipeline entry

Start this account qualification workflow when a new request, changed record, meeting event, or policy queue creates an item. The coordinator may collect legal identity, business problem, urgency, buying process, consent, and the submitted qualification source and describe what the records show. The qualification owner decides questions of authority, ownership, customer meaning, and policy interpretation.

Use a passing case and a stopped case to teach the boundary. In a passing case, firmographic and problem statement have identifiable sources and the permitted action is administrative. In a stopped case, a fit claim cannot be tied to an identified account or submitted source; preserve the governed value and write the unresolved question for the qualification owner.

Open the packet with the received timestamp, record key, request wording, and source locations. For account qualification, place legal identity, business problem, urgency, buying process, consent, and the submitted qualification source in an order that lets the checker distinguish urgency from authority. Preserve original attachments or links instead of paraphrasing away the qualifying detail.

Build a qualification chronology from legal identity, problem statement, authority evidence, and consent context. Separate submitted facts from interpretations that still need owner confirmation.

Compare submitted qualification material with the account identity and authority evidence, then record the unresolved entry question.

The stop condition for this route is simple: a fit claim cannot be tied to an identified account or submitted source. When it occurs, label the item blocked, preserve budget, and send one focused question to the qualification owner. Do not close the queue item merely because a plausible answer is available from memory.

Use the qualification queue to inspect submitted identity and fit material; keep authority and pipeline-entry decisions with the qualification owner.

Capture the prior qualification state, submitted evidence, authority question, reviewer, and pipeline consequence before any field change.

Sample one ordinary account qualification case, one missing-source case, one conflict, and one handoff. A second checker should reproduce the result from firmographic, problem statement, and urgency. Track whether disagreement came from a missing definition, an unavailable source, or an unauthorized request.

Review missing identity, authority, and fit evidence as separate causes; change the intake checklist only after the qualification owner confirms its boundary.

Qualification handoff: attach the identity check, submitted fit evidence, authority gap, and pipeline-entry question for the qualification owner.

For this account qualification route, close accepted work by recording firmographic, problem statement, the rule version, and the reviewer. Close stopped work by retaining urgency, naming the qualification owner, and dating the follow-up. This keeps fit evidence useful for audit and future procedure changes without turning authority into an invented business conclusion.

Route-specific scenario: begin with firmographic and problem statement, then test whether urgency is supported by the source before interpreting authority. If budget is missing, preserve consent and mark domain as unresolved. The qualification owner should receive the exact question, the relevant pipeline entry, and the proposed administrative next step. This sequence keeps account qualification grounded in its own record rather than borrowing a conclusion from another queue.