A per-call diagnosis
Which objections came up, how they were handled, what each one scored and what to say next time.
An objection is any reason the lead gives for not buying now: the price, no budget, needing to check with someone, not seeing the time to implement it. TopClosers detects the objections in each call, scores how well they were rebutted and groups them so you can see which ones keep coming back across your whole agency.
Two things at once:
A per-call diagnosis
Which objections came up, how they were handled, what each one scored and what to say next time.
An agency report
Which objections recur, which are rebutted worst and whether the team is improving week over week.
There is nothing to configure: it is part of call analysis and shows up as soon as the first call with objections is analyzed.
The call is analyzed. On top of scoring the phases of your sales manual, the AI identifies the pushbacks the lead raised and when.
The handling is scored. Each objection is rated from 0 to 100 on how it was rebutted: whether the real concern was understood, whether the answer had substance and whether the conversation moved forward afterwards.
It is mapped onto your agency’s catalogue. “It’s too expensive”, “I can’t afford that right now” and “that’s way over my budget” are not three different metrics: they roll up into the same category so you can count them together.
It accumulates in the reports. With every analyzed call, the objection ranking and its trend fill in.
Every agency has its own catalogue. It starts with the objections any sales team meets — price, no budget, “I need to think about it”, checking with someone else, bad timing, doubts about results, tried it before, looking at other options, no time to implement, doesn’t need it — in your agency’s language.
From there, the catalogue learns:
A category with no occurrences in the period is simply not shown: an empty row would read as “handled terribly” rather than “never came up”.
In the Objections and plan tab of the call detail, each objection carries:
| Element | What it tells you |
|---|---|
| The detected objection | The specific pushback the lead raised, and which catalogue category it counts under |
| How it was handled | What the closer actually did with it |
| Handling quality | The 0-to-100 score for that particular handling |
| What to say next time | A usable alternative, not a theory |
It is the most directly actionable coaching material the analysis produces: readable and practisable in five minutes.
In Statistics, the Objection handling block shows:
The block respects the same scope as the rest of the page: the owner sees the team or one specific closer; a closer sees only their own objections.
The real value is in crossing the two columns: frequency and average score.
| Frequency | Average score | What to do |
|---|---|---|
| High | Low | Your next role-play. This is the objection costing you the most money |
| High | High | Already solved. Document how it is rebutted and put it in the manual |
| Low | Low | Individual script for whoever meets it, not team training |
| Low | High | Ignore it this week |
A routine that works:
Every Monday, open Statistics on the 30-day period and look at the top two objections in the ranking.
Pick the one with the worse average of those two: high frequency plus bad handling is the expensive combination.
Pull real examples. Open two or three calls where it came up and read “How it was handled” and “What to say next time”.
Run the role-play on those concrete cases, not on invented scenarios.
Come back two weeks later and look at that objection’s trend. If it has not moved, the problem was not the script: it was the point in the sale where the objection appears.
If an objection is rebutted well consistently, that argument deserves a place in the sales manual as a criterion of the relevant phase. That way it stops depending on who is on the call.