03Operations · 7 min · 2026-03-28

Rubric grading, practically.

Why "looks good" isn't a quality control system — and a practical rubric template for content teams that want to compound.

By UnionEleven Team

"Looks good" is the most expensive sentence in marketing operations. Every team using it has a quality bar that lives in one person's head — and a content engine that depends on that person being available, in a good mood, and remembering what they decided last time.

What a rubric replaces

A rubric replaces taste calls with a list of criteria, weights, and pass/fail thresholds. It doesn't remove judgment — it makes judgment auditable, teachable, and consistent across the four people who all said "looks good" but meant four different things.

A starter rubric for content

  • Brand voice match — does this sound like our last 30 approved pieces? (0–25)
  • Hook strength — does the first line earn the second? (0–20)
  • Specificity — does this say something only our team could say? (0–20)
  • Proof — at least one concrete claim with a citable source? (0–15)
  • CTA clarity — is the next action obvious and one-tap? (0–10)
  • Compression — could it lose 20% of words without losing meaning? (0–10)

Memory makes it compound

A rubric without memory is a checklist. A rubric with memory is a learning system. Encode the approved pieces, the rejected pieces, and the reviewer comments — and the next draft starts further along the curve.

Takeaway

You can't scale taste. You can scale a rubric — and a rubric with memory is the closest thing to a content quality system that compounds.

Outcomes > output

Stop publishing.
Start compounding.

See the system on your own data. Bring a campaign or a quarter of CRM — we'll show you the brief, the assets, the test plan, and what the loop would ship in week one in 30 minutes.

30 min · with your data · no slideware
0
content channels per cycle
0D
lead scoring · fit · engagement · intent
0
live data adapters · GA4 · GSC · Firecrawl · Mailgun · LinkedIn
Daily
crew run cadence