Negative scoring needed in Lead scoring

[ManelAb]

Hello,

I've been testing the new lead scoring (beta) and noticed that negative scoring isn't available.

Introducing negative scoring would be beneficial, as deducting points is just as important as adding them when qualifying leads.

Thank you in advance.

[ManelAb]

Hi everyone! My name is Melody, and I'm the Product Manager for Lead Scoring. Thanks for your feedback on this! Lead Scoring now shows negative values and combined scores can now add negative fit and engagement scores. Here's the product notification and demo tutorial for more information. Thanks for your patience and let me know if you have any questions or additional feedback!

[ManelAb]

Hi everyone! My name is Hallie, and I'm a Program Manager on the CXM Team. The ability to allow lead scoring score sto go negative is currently in development by our product teams. I'll update this post again once more details are available. Thanks for your continued feedback and patience on this feature! 

[ManelAb]

Also, it would be nice to have an "Analyse" section to see if the scoring is working and where, etc.

[jeroenbeelen]

I see a negative score as a requirement for a good model

[SGHIASI]

Yes we really need a negative score as well please!!

[ECals]

Hi team, does anyone have news about this two demands : 

- negative score

- analyse section 

I have the impression that this new feature has taken away a lot of the positive aspects of native functionality.

[GR83]

Hi! joining to the conversation and the request.

In the manual lead score there is a negative score option but not for the new lead scoring (beta)?

Thank you!

[MSmit]

Agree, both negative scoring and analysis woulf be useful. 

[MoAhmed]

We have it on the old scoring metrics, so this would be super useful.

Applications would be negatively scoring students, or those from functions with no buying power or industries that are not ICP.

[MEklund]

Yes, this is really important for us. Please make this happen soon!

[Michael98]

They added it! 🙂 

[MHerschberger0]

They did! It's still a bit buggy, but better than nothing.

[MoAhmed]

I see a few times where certain events are counted twice for engagement - it would be also good if they had a criteria, e.g. up/down score members of "List X".

[CHawkins]

 There is now the option for negative points by "Subtracting" points:

[MarkNorman]

Negative scoring is now availalbe but it's flawed. We have instances of the new lead scoring model 'clamping' Event or Fit scores scores to 0 when they should be at a negative. i.e. for a Fit score, we've had a lead score 15 points for something and then wanted to take away 75 points for something else, which should result in a -60 Fit score. However, rather than taking that -60 value and adding the Engagement' score (let's say 100, to total 40 overall), it resets the Fit score to 0, and gives us a total lead score of 100. Which is miles off what it should be doing. Hubspot - I see this as a massive flaw in the new lead scoring app and needs to be solved ASAP, especially as you are sunsetting the Property based lead score tool. We will see our leads/MQLs quality be massively affected by this.

[RickDC]

So it looks like the way it currently works is that you can assign a negative value to a property with "Subtract," and a group of properties can have a negative value, but the OVERALL lead score cannot go negative--or more specifically neither the Fit score nor the Engagement score can be negative. That is kind of annoying. Check out this scatter plot showing the relationship between my old HubSpot score and the lead score I'm building with some fresh analysis and the new tool:

scatter plot

Obviously I have a bunch of scores that used to be negative that are no longer as proportionally low as they should be because they're stuck at y=0. I could correct for this by adding a starting value of +20 or +40 to every lead just for existing, but that is clunky and is an unnecessary shift in thinking for my sales team who are used to "3 is a bad score, 10 is fine, 20 is great" to switch to "20 is bad, 30 is fine, 40 is great." Would be nice if someone would tackle whatever makes this thorny to implement.

[CPossen8]

The 'group score limit' also doesn't allow a negative score

[CPossen8]

Is it in the meantime possible to create negative score on group level to limit group scoring? I am not allowed to fill in a negative 'group score limit', although int says +/- 1 is the lowest I can go, although the group is a negative scoring which substracts points rather than adding it.

[KTravison-TSL]

Allowing Lead Score to go negative is a crucial part of our current lead scoring process. It does not make any sense to have removed this functionality with the new tool. At least give accounts the option to go below 0 if they want, and others can leave the floor as 0.

Why take away functionality that has existed since HubSpot Lead Scoring was rolled out? Why make us migrate to a new tool only to have to recreate our entire Lead Scoring process? This is outrageously bad change management with implications for all companies using HubSpot Lead Scores, but especially bad for large Enterprise companies that have rigorously tested and customized our Lead Scoring process and have rolled it out to large Sales Teams.

Not to mention the surprise sunsetting of the old Lead Scoring properties, so we can't even continue using our customized process if we wanted to. At least make the transition to the new tool seamless!!

[CHawkins]

I did a LinkedIn live about how this feature is missing and some alternatives/workarounds. Here is the recording: https://www.linkedin.com/events/whathappenedtonegativescores-hu7337613476393091072/theater/

[KTravison-TSL]

Thank you CHawkins! Very much appreciate your LinkedIn live. It was incredibly timely and helpful!

[GR83]

We need the score to go negative. It makes no sense that a contact new to Hubspot has the same points as someone that we should never contact.

Also, it is ridiculous that on the combined score option, the negative points form fit did not impact engagement and the otherway round.