Beyond round-robin and territories
Most routing conversations focus on two methods: round-robin (equal distribution) and territory-based routing (geographic or segment assignment). Both decide who gets a lead based on structural rules: whose turn it is, or whose region the lead falls in.
Skills-based routing adds a different dimension: matching lead attributes to rep expertise. Instead of asking "whose turn is it?" or "whose territory is this?", it asks "who is best equipped to work this lead?"
The difference matters. A lead from a healthcare company evaluating an enterprise integration should go to the rep who knows healthcare and has closed complex deals, not whoever is next in the rotation.
How skills-based routing works
Skills-based routing maps two things together:
- Lead attributes: characteristics of the incoming lead (industry, product interest, deal size, technical requirements, language)
- Rep skills: capabilities and expertise of each rep (vertical knowledge, product certification, language fluency, deal size experience)
When a lead comes in, the routing system evaluates its attributes against the available reps' skill profiles and routes to the best match.
Example routing logic
- Lead from financial services company → route to reps tagged with
industry:financial-services - Lead interested in API integration → route to reps tagged with
technical:api-integration - Lead is a French-speaking prospect → route to reps tagged with
language:french - Lead indicates enterprise deal size ($100K+) → route to reps tagged with
deal-size:enterprise
These rules can layer: a French-speaking enterprise healthcare lead gets routed to the rep who matches all three criteria, or the rep who matches the most important criteria based on your priority order.
When you need skills-based routing
Multiple products or solutions
If your company sells multiple products that require different domain knowledge, leads expressing interest in Product A need reps who know Product A. A generalist might fumble technical questions or miss nuances a specialist would handle naturally.
Vertical-specific sales motions
Selling into healthcare is different from selling into financial services, which is different from selling into manufacturing. Each has its own compliance requirements, buying processes, and stakeholder dynamics. Reps with vertical expertise convert better because they speak the buyer's language.
Technical vs. non-technical buyers
A CTO evaluating your API documentation needs a different conversation than a VP of Marketing evaluating your dashboard. Skills-based routing can distinguish between technical and business-focused leads and match them with reps who can meet them where they are.
Multi-language support
If you serve international markets, language matching is critical. A lead who submits a form in German needs a German-speaking rep, not a round-robin assignment to someone who doesn't speak the language.
Deal size stratification
Enterprise deals require different sales skills than SMB deals. The negotiation dynamics, stakeholder management, procurement processes, and timeline expectations are fundamentally different. Routing by deal size ensures leads get reps experienced with that type of sale.
Building a skills-based routing system
Step 1: Define your skills taxonomy
Start by listing the skills that actually affect conversion. Be specific but not exhaustive. Common skill dimensions:
- Industry/vertical: healthcare, fintech, e-commerce, manufacturing
- Product expertise: specific products or solution areas
- Deal size tier: SMB, mid-market, enterprise
- Technical depth: can handle technical evaluation vs. business-focused
- Language: fluency in specific languages
- Use case: new business vs. expansion vs. renewal
Keep it to 3-5 dimensions. More than that and the system becomes too complex to maintain and too fragmented to staff.
Step 2: Profile your reps
Tag each rep with their skills across your defined dimensions. This should be a collaborative exercise with sales management:
- Which verticals has each rep closed deals in?
- Which products is each rep certified or trained on?
- What deal sizes has each rep successfully handled?
- What languages does each rep speak?
Be honest about skill levels. Tagging every rep as capable of everything defeats the purpose.
Step 3: Define matching priority
When a lead matches multiple skill requirements, which takes priority? Define the hierarchy:
- Language match (most critical; can't have a conversation without it)
- Product expertise (next priority; need to speak credibly about the product)
- Industry knowledge (nice to have; helps but isn't blocking)
- Deal size experience (helps with conversion but less critical for initial engagement)
Your priorities may differ. The point is to define them explicitly so the routing system knows what to optimize for when a perfect match isn't available.
Step 4: Define fallbacks
What happens when no rep matches the lead's skill requirements? Options:
- Partial match. Route to the rep who matches the most important criteria, even if they don't match all.
- Queue assignment. Put the lead in a team queue for manual assignment.
- Round-robin within qualified pool. If three reps match the primary skill, round-robin among them.
- Escalation. Flag for sales management to assign.
Never let a lead go unrouted because no perfect match exists. A good-enough match with fast response beats a perfect match that takes hours to arrange.
Step 5: Keep skill profiles current
Rep skills change. New hires ramp up. Existing reps get certified on new products. People leave. If your skill profiles aren't updated, your routing degrades.
Build a process for reviewing skill profiles:
- Monthly: quick check for accuracy with team leads
- Quarterly: full review aligned with territory or team changes
- On event: update immediately when reps complete training, earn certifications, or change roles
Skills-based routing vs. other methods
Skills-based routing doesn't replace other routing methods; it complements them. Here's how it fits with the others:
| Method | What it optimizes for | When to use |
|---|---|---|
| Round-robin | Equal distribution | Homogeneous leads, flat teams |
| Territory-based | Geographic/segment coverage | Defined territories, field sales |
| Skills-based | Rep-lead expertise fit | Multiple products, verticals, or deal types |
| Capacity-based | Workload balance | Uneven lead effort, varying rep capacity |
| Account-based | Account relationship continuity | Named accounts, ABM programs |
Most mature routing systems combine several of these. A common pattern:
- Check named accounts → route to account owner
- Check territory → identify the territory team
- Within the territory team, skills-match → route to the best-fit rep
- If multiple reps match equally, capacity-balance → route to the rep with the most bandwidth
Common mistakes
Over-fragmenting skills
If you create 20 skill categories with 5 levels each, you'll have so many permutations that most leads can't be matched. Keep skills coarse enough that multiple reps qualify for most lead profiles.
Ignoring availability
Skills-based routing can route a lead to the perfect rep who's on vacation. Always layer availability checks on top of skill matching. The second-best skill match who's available now is better than the perfect match who responds tomorrow.
Not measuring the impact
Track whether skills-based routing actually improves conversion. Compare conversion rates for skill-matched leads vs. non-matched leads. If there's no measurable difference for a particular skill dimension, remove it — you're adding complexity without value.
Treating skills as static
A rep who was an expert in your old product version may not be current on the new one. Skills profiles need maintenance. Stale profiles route leads to the wrong reps, which is worse than round-robin.
Is it worth the complexity?
Skills-based routing adds operational overhead. You need to define taxonomies, profile reps, maintain profiles, and build matching logic. That overhead is only worth it if matching leads to skilled reps measurably improves outcomes.
Start by measuring: are there reps who consistently convert certain lead types at higher rates? If yes, skills-based routing codifies what's already working informally. If conversion rates are similar across reps regardless of lead type, round-robin or territory routing may be all you need.
The honest answer for most growing teams: start with round-robin, add territories when you segment your team, and add skills-based routing when you have measurable evidence that rep expertise affects deal outcomes.
At RevenueTools, we're building routing that supports skills-based matching alongside territory and round-robin, so you can add complexity only when the data justifies it. See what launches March 10th.