An open standard for verifiable sales performance credentials.
Website »
·
Read the Spec »
·
API Reference »
·
Examples »
Professional reputation in sales is broken.
- Résumés are inflated. 78% of candidates misrepresent themselves on applications.
- Certifications prove knowledge, not performance. A Salesforce certification doesn't tell you if someone can actually close deals.
- Performance data is siloed. When a top performer leaves a company, their track record stays behind — locked in a CRM they no longer have access to.
- Verification is manual and slow. Hiring managers rely on reference calls and self-reported numbers with no way to independently verify.
There is no credit score for sales professionals — no universal, verifiable, portable measure of sales ability.
The Sales Reputation Protocol (SRP) is an open standard that enables organizations to issue, and professionals to hold, cryptographically verifiable credentials about sales performance.
Think of it as FICO for sales — but open, portable, and privacy-preserving.
┌──────────────┐ ┌──────────────┐ ┌──────────────┐
│ ISSUER │ │ HOLDER │ │ VERIFIER │
│ │ │ │ │ │
│ CRM/Company │────>│ Salesperson │────>│ Employer/ │
│ issues │ │ holds │ │ Recruiter │
│ credential │ │ credentials │ │ verifies │
│ │ │ in wallet │ │ claims │
└──────────────┘ └──────────────┘ └──────────────┘
- A sales event occurs — a deal closes, a quota is met, a ranking is achieved.
- The employer/platform validates the event against CRM data, payment records, or other evidence.
- A verifiable credential is issued — a digitally signed, tamper-proof record of the achievement.
- The professional holds and controls their credentials — sharing them selectively with prospective employers, clients, or partners.
- Anyone can verify the credential — cryptographically, without contacting the issuer.
| Property | Description |
|---|---|
| Verifiable | Every credential is cryptographically signed. Tampering is detectable. |
| Portable | Credentials belong to the professional, not the platform. They work across jobs, companies, and countries. |
| Privacy-Preserving | Prove "I exceeded $1M in annual sales" without revealing the exact number. Zero-knowledge selective disclosure. |
| Interoperable | Built on W3C Verifiable Credentials 2.0 and compatible with Open Badges 3.0. |
| Open | No vendor lock-in. Any platform can issue, hold, or verify SRP credentials. |
| Decentralized | No single authority controls the protocol. Credential integrity is anchored on-chain. |
A company issues a credential after a salesperson closes their 100th deal:
{
"@context": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/credentials/v2",
"https://salesreputationprotocol.org/context/v1"
],
"id": "urn:uuid:a1b2c3d4-5678-90ab-cdef-1234567890ab",
"type": ["VerifiableCredential", "SalesReputationCredential"],
"issuer": {
"id": "did:web:acme-corp.com",
"name": "Acme Corporation"
},
"validFrom": "2026-03-09T00:00:00Z",
"credentialSubject": {
"id": "did:key:z6MkhaXgBZDvotDkL5257faiztiGiC2QtKLGpbnnEGta2doK",
"type": "SalesAchievementSubject",
"achievement": {
"type": "SalesAchievement",
"name": "Century Club",
"description": "Closed 100+ verified deals",
"criteria": {
"narrative": "Complete 100 or more CRM-verified closed-won deals"
},
"salesCategory": "deal_milestone",
"industry": "saas"
},
"evidence": [{
"type": "CRMRecord",
"source": "salesforce",
"verifiedAt": "2026-03-08T23:59:59Z"
}]
}
}The protocol defines a composite Sales Reputation Score (SRS) — a standardized measure of sales ability based on verified credentials.
Score Range: 300 – 850
┌─────────────────────────────────────┐
│ PERFORMANCE 30% │ Quota attainment, win rate, deal volume
│ RELIABILITY 25% │ Forecast accuracy, follow-through, consistency
│ CLIENT IMPACT 20% │ Retention, NPS, referrals
│ PROFESSIONAL GROWTH 15% │ Certifications, training, skill development
│ PEER TRUST 10% │ Endorsements, collaboration, mentoring
└─────────────────────────────────────┘
The score uses:
- Time-windowed calculation — 90-day primary window with exponential decay on historical data
- Wilson score correction — prevents small sample sizes from inflating scores
- Anti-gaming mechanisms — daily caps, anomaly detection, multi-source validation
Read the full scoring specification →
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ APPLICATION LAYER │
│ CRMs · Sales Platforms · HR Systems · Recruiting Tools │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ PROTOCOL LAYER (SRP) │
│ Events · Credentials · Scoring · Verification · Privacy │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ IDENTITY LAYER │
│ DIDs (did:web, did:key) · W3C Verifiable Credentials 2.0 │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ TRUST LAYER │
│ On-chain anchoring (EAS) · IPFS · Issuer Registry │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
The protocol is defined across these documents:
| Document | Description |
|---|---|
| Overview | Protocol vision, principles, and architecture |
| Events | Sales event taxonomy and data model |
| Credentials | Credential format, issuance, and lifecycle |
| Scoring | Sales Reputation Score calculation model |
| Verification | Cryptographic verification and trust model |
| Privacy | Selective disclosure and data protection |
The protocol defines a standard REST API that any implementation MUST support:
POST /v1/events Submit a sales event
POST /v1/credentials/issue Issue a reputation credential
POST /v1/credentials/verify Verify a credential
GET /v1/scores/{agentDid} Get a reputation score
GET /v1/issuers/{issuerDid} Look up a registered issuer
POST /v1/presentations/create Create a verifiable presentation
"Show me candidates with a verified SRS above 700 who have closed enterprise SaaS deals."
"I'm a real estate agent with 200+ verified transactions. Here's my portable reputation."
"Only agents with verified top-performer credentials qualify for the President's Club trip."
"This training completion is a verifiable credential — not just a PDF certificate."
"What's the average SRS for insurance agents in the Southeast region?"
The protocol is designed to work across all sales verticals:
| Industry | Key Metrics | Current Gap |
|---|---|---|
| SaaS / B2B | ARR, quota attainment, win rate | Data locked in CRM silos |
| Real Estate | Transactions, volume, days-on-market | Fragmented across 500+ MLSs |
| Insurance | Policies written, retention, loss ratio | Carrier-specific, not portable |
| Financial Services | AUM, client retention | FINRA BrokerCheck covers compliance, not performance |
| Automotive | Units sold, CSI scores, F&I | Dealership-specific tracking |
| Retail | Sales/hour, upsell rate, basket size | POS-locked, high turnover |
SRP builds on established open standards rather than reinventing the wheel:
| Standard | How SRP Uses It |
|---|---|
| W3C Verifiable Credentials 2.0 | Core credential data model |
| W3C Decentralized Identifiers | Identity layer for issuers and holders |
| Open Badges 3.0 | Achievement credential compatibility |
| BBS+ Signatures | Zero-knowledge selective disclosure |
| Ethereum Attestation Service | On-chain credential anchoring |
| JSON Schema 2020-12 | Event and credential validation |
- v0.1.0 — Protocol specification draft
- v0.2.0 — Reference implementation (TypeScript SDK + API server)
- v0.3.0 — Issuer registry and trust framework
- v0.4.0 — On-chain anchoring (EAS on Optimism/Base)
- v0.5.0 — Zero-knowledge selective disclosure (BBS+)
- v1.0.0 — Stable release with conformance test suite
We welcome contributions from the sales tech community, credential experts, and protocol designers.
See CONTRIBUTING.md for guidelines, and GOVERNANCE.md for how decisions are made.
To propose a significant change, submit an RFC.
- Website: salesreputationprotocol.org
- Discussions: GitHub Discussions
- Issues: GitHub Issues
- RFCs: rfcs/
This specification is licensed under Apache License 2.0.
Documentation is licensed under CC BY 4.0.
- Felipe Santos — Creator — @felipeplay2sellcom
Professional reputation should be earned, verified, and owned by the professional.
Built with conviction that sales professionals deserve better than unverifiable résumés.