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.
**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.
**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?
**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
**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.
- 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.
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.
