Call report
Rep A · Regional insurer · Sep 2
- D2Value articulationStrong
- D4Stakeholder and approval pathGap
- D5Competitive positioningInsufficient evidence
+ 7 more dimensions
Key call momentI’d have to take this to our CFO.
The Noble Report
A finding you can open, check, and overturn.
Noble analyzes recorded sales calls against your own policy documents and playbooks. Every finding names the document it was evaluated against, the clause it applies, and the language that triggered it.
Nothing appears in a report without evidence behind it. That rule is enforced in the software, not in the marketing.
Flag
Arithmetic tier
- Evaluated against
- Sales Communication Standards · v1.0 · effective 2026-09-01 · §2.2
- What was said
-
“What I'd suggest instead is we run a free pilot for you — no cost, no commitment.”
Sales representative
- The rule it breaks
- Representatives must not offer discounts, free periods or no-cost pilots without prior written approval from Sales Operations.
The problem
Most call review is a sample, an impression, and a spreadsheet.
-
You see a fraction
Manual review reaches a small percentage of conversations. Everything you say about the rest is inference, and an examiner is entitled to ask which calls you actually looked at.
-
Every reviewer applies a different standard
Two managers listening to the same call reach different conclusions, and neither can show their working. Coaching diverges by desk and by region without anyone deciding that it should.
-
A score is not a defense
Tools that return a confidence number give your legal team nothing to stand on. A finding without a citation is an assertion, and it will be treated as one.
Anatomy
What a report contains
One report per call. It opens with the result, not with a dashboard, and every section is built to be read by someone who was not on the call.
-
Scope and provenance
Who spoke, when, for how long, which recording, which policy documents were evaluated and at which versions — plus the version of the engine and rule set that produced the result.
-
Screening result
The outcome of evaluating the call against your documents, with an enumerated list of what was checked and what was excluded as inapplicable — never a bare count.
-
Ranked findings
What the representative did well and what was missing, ordered by significance rather than listed exhaustively. Each finding names the specific behavior that was absent, and carries the quote behind it.
-
One coaching assignment
A single micro-skill, the exchange that justifies it, a line the rep could have said instead, and a date it gets re-measured. One, deliberately — five development items is zero development items.
-
What the buyer said
Their stated drivers, objections, requirements, constraints and commitments — each one quoted. Noble records what the other party said, and does not infer their motivations or profile them.
-
Appendix
Full results, definitions, documents evaluated and excluded, transcript coverage, and the version stamps that make the result reproducible six months from now.
Page one
Page one, as the manager sees it
Transcript analysis report
Initial discovery call · Sample from Noble Analytic's own demo account
Overall overview
Diagnostic evaluation completed. See dimension findings below for detailed assessment.
Diagnostic dimensions · 3 of 10 shown
| Code | Dimension | Status | Grounded finding |
|---|---|---|---|
| D2 | Value articulation | Strong | The rep tied the platform’s ability to produce “a consistent diagnostic on every single one” call to the buyer’s stated pain that managers coach differently across regions, and tied the policy-upload/compliance-checking capability directly to the buyer’s stated concern that they “mostly take it on faith” that reps use required language. |
| D4 | Stakeholder and approval path mapping | Gap | The buyer stated they would “have to run anything like this past our COO,” but the rep did not follow up to ask what that approval process looks like or when it would occur. |
| D5 | Competitive positioning | Insufficient evidence | No competitor or alternative solution (including current manual process specifics beyond the stated pain) was raised for comparison during the call. |
| Seven further dimensions are scored in the full report. The complete sample is available under NDA. | |||
An excerpt from a sample in Noble Analytic's own demo account: three of its ten rows. The parties are relabeled; every finding shown is the text the engine produced. The complete sample report is shared as part of an evaluation.
The taxonomy
The ten dimensions are fixed
Calls are assessed against the same ten dimensions every time, with codes and definitions that do not vary by call, by tenant, or by meeting context. Only which of them apply, and how they rank, varies. A taxonomy that changes between calls cannot be trended: two reports would not be measuring the same thing, and no comparison across them would mean anything.
Grounding
Your documents are the rules. Not a generic word list.
Keyword matching is what flags a call for the word “guarantee” when the representative was explaining that something is not guaranteed. Noble evaluates against the language you actually wrote.
What goes in
Your disclosure language, do-not-say lists, master service agreements, product bulletins, discount thresholds and sales playbooks — held in a knowledge base scoped to your organization alone.
| Document type | Produces |
|---|---|
| Compliance | Flags |
| Boundary | Flags |
| Playbook | Coaching observations, never flags |
| Reference | Context only |
A representative departing from a sales playbook is a coaching observation, not a violation. Mixing the two fills the compliance queue with noise until nobody reads it.
Findings are separated by how certain they are
Presenting an inference and an arithmetic breach as though they carry the same weight is how compliance tooling loses its audience.
- Arithmetic — A stated threshold was exceeded. Checkable. Safe to route automatically.
- Presence — Required language was not found. Nearly checkable, and sensitive to transcription quality. The report shows where it should have appeared.
- Judgment — A possible misleading claim or unauthorized commitment. This is inference. It is marked for review, routed to a person, and does not become a record until someone confirms it.
The part most tools skip
What the report says when it doesn't know.
Any system can produce a confident answer. The question worth asking a vendor is what happens when the evidence isn't there — because that is the case you will meet during onboarding, on a bad recording, and on the day a document hasn't been loaded yet.
Noble is built to report the gap rather than fill it.
No applicable document loaded
The report states that screening was not performed, and says why. It does not report a pass. A silent default here is the single most damaging thing a compliance tool can do.
Some documents evaluated, others missed
The call is marked partially screened and the gaps are enumerated. Three states, not two — because “we found nothing” and “we did not look” are different sentences.
The call doesn't contain enough to judge
A dimension returns insufficient evidence rather than a manufactured score. A short call, or one that never reached pricing, should say so.
A finding has no quote behind it
It does not render. Quotes are verified against the transcript before a report is published, and a report that fails verification is not published at all.
D5
Competitive positioning
Insufficient evidence
No competitor or alternative solution — including current manual process specifics beyond the stated pain — was raised for comparison during the call. Taken verbatim from the sample report above.
By role
Four people read this report for four different reasons.
The same analysis serves all of them, because it is built on evidence rather than on a point of view.
Compliance
“Can I defend this in front of an examiner?”
Every flag carries the document, its version and effective date, the clause, and the language that triggered it. Reports are pinned to the policy library as it stood when they ran, so updating a document never silently rewrites history.
Noble screens; it does not audit, and it does not certify a call as compliant. It tells you which conversations warrant your team's attention and why.
Technology
“Where does our conversation data actually go?”
Analysis uses third-party language model infrastructure, and we say so up front rather than letting your security review discover it.
Operations
“What does this take off my team?”
Every recorded conversation is analyzed, not a sample, so review effort shifts from listening to adjudicating an exception queue. On a clean day, the compliance queue produces nothing at all.
Coverage is reported per call, so you can see which conversations were screened, against what, and where analysis could not complete.
Sales leadership
“Will my managers actually use it?”
A manager opens a report rather than a recording, and finds one thing to coach and the exchange that justifies it. Not ten rows of equal weight.
Calls are assessed against a fixed set of dimensions that mean the same thing for every rep and every call, which is what makes movement over time worth reading.
Batch Report
Multiple call reports. One coaching conversation.
A Batch Report analyzes a rep’s calls across a selected date range and groups insights by playbook rule. Turn individual call insights into clear coaching priorities by identifying patterns across calls and focusing coaching where it matters most.
Call report
Rep A · Benefits administrator · Sep 9
- D2Value articulationDeveloping
- D4Stakeholder and approval pathGap
- D5Competitive positioningDeveloping
+ 7 more dimensions
Key call momentProcurement will want to see it before anything is signed.
Call report
Rep A · Credit union · Sep 16
- D2Value articulationStrong
- D4Stakeholder and approval pathGap
- D5Competitive positioningGap
+ 7 more dimensions
Key call momentAnything over budget goes to the board.
Batch Report · for coaching
Rep A · September 2–16, 2026
- Calls in this report
- 3
- Most frequent theme
- Map the approval pathin 3 of 3 calls
- Dimensions rated Gap most often
- D4 Stakeholder and approval pathGap in 3 of 3 calls
ThemeMap the approval pathSales Playbook v2.1 · §3.1
- Sep 2Regional insurerThe buyer named the CFO as the approver. The rep moved on without asking how or when the CFO decides.
I’d have to take this to our CFO.
- Sep 9Benefits administratorProcurement was raised as a step. No owner, timing or requirements were asked for.
Procurement will want to see it before anything is signed.
- Sep 16Credit unionA board review was mentioned for spend over budget. The rep did not ask when the board next meets.
Anything over budget goes to the board.
Recommended sales dialogue
You mentioned the CFO. What will they need to see from us, and when do they usually decide on something like this?
Sales skill drill
When a buyer names an approver, ask three things before moving on: who else signs off, what they need to see, and when they meet. Then play it back to confirm.
Compiled from the call reports above. Nothing is re-scored, and each line opens the call it came from.
Example calls, customers and wording, for illustration.
How to evaluate our analytics
Test us on calls where you already know the answer.
Send a sample of your already recorded calls and the policy documents that govern them — including conversations where you know a violation occurred, and conversations where you know none did. Noble will return findings with citations.