How Do Agencies Score Project-Based vs. Retainer Leads?
Agencies juggle high-intensity projects and longer-term retainers every day. The most effective teams use separate but connected lead scoring models that reflect deal size, predictability, fit, and delivery risk—so project opportunities don’t crowd out high-value retainers (and vice versa).
The most reliable way to score project-based vs. retainer leads is to separate the economics, but standardize the scoring framework. Start with a common rubric (fit, urgency, revenue potential, margin, strategic value, and risk), then apply different weights by engagement type—projects emphasize near-term margin and delivery risk, while retainers emphasize long-term value, strategic alignment, and expansion potential. Use a single 0–100 (or 1–5) scale, but define distinct thresholds and follow-up plays for project vs. retainer leads, then validate the model with conversion, LTV, and utilization data.
What Matters When You Score Project vs. Retainer Leads?
The Lead Scoring Playbook for Agencies
Use this sequence to build a scoring model that respects both project and retainer work—without forcing them into the same decision path.
Clarify Models → Define ICPs → Map Signals → Weight Scores → Operationalize → Optimize
- Clarify engagement economics: Document how projects and retainers differ in pricing, margin, utilization, and sales cycles. Capture what a “good” outcome looks like for each.
- Define ICPs by engagement type: Create separate profiles for project and retainer clients (firmographics, tech stack, decision-makers, buying triggers, and deal-breakers).
- Map qualification criteria: Use the same categories (fit, urgency, value, risk, strategic alignment) but define different indicators and questions for each model.
- Design weighted scoring formulas: Assign higher weights to margin, scope clarity, and delivery risk for projects, and to LTV, strategic alignment, and expansion potential for retainers.
- Integrate into your CRM & marketing automation: Build fields that clearly label engagement type and score, and route leads into the right sequences and playbooks.
- Align sales & delivery plays: Make sure project scores trigger fast scoping calls, while retainer scores kick off multi-stakeholder discovery and roadmap conversations.
- Measure & tune quarterly: Compare scores against win rates, LTV, and utilization by model; adjust weights and thresholds based on what actually drives profitable growth.
Agency Lead Scoring Maturity Matrix
| Capability | From (Ad Hoc) | To (Operationalized) | Owner | Primary KPI |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Engagement Segmentation | Projects and retainers tracked together with generic “opportunity” labels. | Every lead and deal labeled by engagement type with clear economic profiles. | RevOps / Finance | Revenue Mix (Project vs. Retainer) |
| Scoring Design | Single scoring model biased toward one type of work. | Shared framework with tailored weights for project and retainer economics. | RevOps / Sales | Win Rate by Model |
| Data & Signals | Manual notes and incomplete activity history. | Structured signals from CRM, marketing, and delivery tools feeding the score. | Marketing Ops | Signal Coverage % |
| Process Integration | Scores exist but don’t drive behavior. | Scores determine sequences, SLAs, routing, and meeting types. | Sales Leadership | Speed-to-First-Meeting |
| Financial Feedback Loop | Little connection between scoring and profitability. | Score performance tied to LTV, margin, and utilization by model. | Finance / RevOps | Profitable Win Rate |
| Continuous Optimization | Model rarely revisited and undocumented. | Quarterly reviews and testing to refine thresholds, weights, and signals. | RevOps | Lift in Retainer & Project LTV |
Client Snapshot: Balancing Project Surges with Retainer Growth
A digital agency saw project work consuming 80% of sales energy, even though retainers drove most of their profit. By separating engagement types and adjusting weights, they: lifted retainer win rates by 18%, improved average project margin by 9%, and cut “wrong-fit” proposals by nearly a third. A unified view of scores by engagement type helped them prioritize deals that supported both short-term revenue and long-term stability.
Treat lead scoring as a portfolio tool: model the economics of projects and retainers separately, then optimize the mix. When your scoring system reflects how you actually make money, sales, marketing, and delivery can prioritize the same opportunities.
Frequently Asked Questions About Scoring Project vs. Retainer Leads
Turn Lead Scoring into a Revenue Engine
We help agencies design scoring models that balance project demand with retainer growth—grounded in real revenue, not hunches.
Measure Your Revenue-Marketing Readiness Talk to an Expert