dedupe-merge

Dedupe Merge

The canonical owner of survivorship rules and association-preservation logic for ESCC. Every merge of duplicate CRM records — contacts, companies, deals — runs through this skill. Other skills that encounter a duplicate situation cite this skill and defer; they do not define their own survivorship logic.

This skill OWNS survivorship and association-preservation rules. Other skills cite these by name and point here. Do not define a competing merge model elsewhere.

Governing rules (DEFER for policy; this skill owns the merge mechanics): rules/common/crm-hygiene.md — CRM data standards; dedupe-first is a hygiene rule enforced here. rules/lifecycle-stages.md — a disqualify/recycle is a status + reason, NEVER a delete. No record is removed from HubSpot as a byproduct of a merge.

All merges are crm-operator writes requiring explicit approval. A merge is proposed as a review-pack (survivor + losing record + field/association resolution); crm-operator applies it only after the approval is confirmed. No merge is applied speculatively or in bulk without a review-pack.

When to Activate

Activate this skill when:

• A duplicate company or contact is found before a new record would be created (pre-creation deduplication, per rules/common/crm-hygiene.md).
• Two or more records in HubSpot represent the same real-world entity and need to be collapsed into one authoritative record.
• A routing conflict is rooted in duplicate records — two reps own different HubSpot records for the same company.
• A forecasting or reporting anomaly is caused by the same deal appearing under two records.
• Someone asks "which record survives?" and needs a principled answer, not a coin flip.
• A merge has been partially executed (e.g. one contact merged, associated deal orphaned) and needs to be completed or repaired.

Do not activate for routing a clean (non-duplicate) lead (that is lead-routing), for disqualifying or recycling a valid record (that is rules/lifecycle-stages.md), or for bulk data imports where deduplication is an ETL concern upstream of ESCC.

Survivorship rules (canonical — other skills defer here)

When two records represent the same real-world entity, one becomes the survivor (retained, enriched) and the other becomes the loser (merged in, then archived). Apply these rules in order; the first match determines the survivor.

Company survivorship (priority order)

1. More associated records wins. The company record with more associated contacts, deals, and activities is the survivor. It carries more history and is more likely to be the "real" master record.
2. Older creation date wins when association counts are equal. The earlier record is more likely to have been created deliberately; the newer one is more likely to be a duplicate entry.
3. More complete required fields wins when creation dates are close (within 30 days). Count the required fields from rules/common/crm-hygiene.md that are populated; the record with more populated required fields is the survivor.
4. Named-account record wins when one record is explicitly on a named-account list and the other is not. The named-account record carries intentional enrichment.
5. Manual override. A rep or manager may explicitly designate the survivor when the rules are ambiguous. This override is recorded in the review-pack.

Contact survivorship (priority order)

1. Associated to a deal wins. A contact linked to an open or closed deal is the survivor; an unassociated duplicate is the loser.
2. More recent meaningful activity wins when both are deal-associated. The contact with the most recent logged call, meeting, or email is the active record and is preferred as survivor.
3. More complete required fields wins when activity dates are within 14 days.
4. Do not merge contacts across different companies without explicit approval. A contact that has moved companies is a relationship update, not a duplicate merge.

Deal survivorship (priority order)

1. Later pipeline stage wins. The deal further along the funnel is the authoritative deal; the earlier-stage duplicate is the loser.
2. Higher net ACV wins when stages are equal. The larger deal is more likely to reflect complete information.
3. More MEDDPICC fields populated wins when ACV is within 10%.
4. Do not merge deals across different close-date quarters without explicit approval. A deal in Q3 and a deal in Q4 for the same company may represent genuinely separate opportunities.

Association-preservation rules (canonical)

Losing records carry history and relationships that must not be discarded. Every merge must preserve:

• All contacts associated to the losing record are re-associated to the survivor.
• All deal associations on the losing record are re-associated to the survivor.
• All activity history (calls, emails, meetings, notes) on the losing record is merged into the survivor's timeline.
• Engagement data (email opens, clicks, form submissions) is preserved on the survivor or flagged if the marketing platform handles deduplication separately.
• Custom field data from the losing record is preserved in the survivor if the survivor's equivalent field is blank. If both records have a value for the same field, the survivor's value is kept and the losing record's value is noted in the review-pack for manual review.

Association preservation is non-negotiable. A merge that orphans a deal, drops activity history, or loses a contact association is worse than leaving the duplicate in place.

The review-pack (required for every merge)

Every merge is proposed as a review-pack before crm-operator applies it. No merge happens without an explicit approval of the review-pack.

MERGE REVIEW-PACK: <object type> merge
APPROVAL REQUIRED before apply.

Survivor: <record name> (HubSpot ID: <id>)
  Created: <date> | Associations: <n contacts, n deals, n activities>
  Required fields populated: <list>

Losing record: <record name> (HubSpot ID: <id>)
  Created: <date> | Associations: <n contacts, n deals, n activities>
  Required fields populated: <list>

Survivorship rule applied: <rule name and rationale>

Field conflicts (both records have a value — survivor value kept unless noted):
  field_name: survivor value "<X>" vs losing value "<Y>" -> KEEPING: <which>
  [repeat for each conflict]

Associations being re-associated to survivor:
  - <contact name> (currently on losing record) -> survivor
  - <deal name> (currently on losing record) -> survivor
  - [etc.]

Activity history: <n> activities from losing record will merge into survivor timeline.

Ownership: survivor is currently owned by <rep name>.
  [If losing record has a different owner: flag for routing review post-merge.]

Post-merge: losing record archived, not deleted.
APPLY ONLY AFTER EXPLICIT APPROVAL.

Workflow

A. Detect and evaluate a duplicate

1. Search for the record before creating a new one. Per rules/common/crm-hygiene.md: search by company name, domain, email, and phone before creating. If a match is found, this workflow begins.
2. Pull both records via crm-operator (read). Capture all fields, association counts, and activity history for each.
3. Apply survivorship rules in order for the object type (company / contact / deal). Identify the survivor and the losing record. State the rule that applied and why.
4. Identify field conflicts. For every field where both records have a value, note the conflict. The survivor's value is kept by default; any case where the losing record's value is more complete or more recent is flagged for manual review.
5. List all associations on the losing record that must be re-associated to the survivor: contacts, deals, activities, engagement data.
6. Check for ownership conflict. If the two records have different owners, surface this before merging. Routing ownership must be resolved per lead-routing after the merge — do not silently adopt the survivor's owner without flagging it.

B. Build and submit the review-pack

1. Produce the review-pack in the format above.
2. Surface it to the approver (manager or RevOps). Do not apply the merge before approval is confirmed.
3. Record merge_approval_requested via crm-operator / governance-capture against the record.

C. Apply the merge (after approval)

1. Confirm the approval. crm-operator checks that the merge approval is on-record before applying any write. Approval must be explicit — a verbal acknowledgement is not sufficient.
2. Re-associate all losing-record associations to the survivor:
   • Re-associate contacts (crm-operator write)
   • Re-associate deals (crm-operator write)
   • Merge activity history into survivor timeline (crm-operator write)
3. Resolve field conflicts per the review-pack decisions.
4. Archive the losing record. The losing record is archived, not deleted. Its HubSpot ID is preserved in the survivor's activity log so the merge is fully traceable.
5. Log the merge. crm-operator writes to the activity log:
   • Survivor ID, losing record ID
   • Survivorship rule applied
   • Approver name and timestamp
   • List of re-associations made
   • Any field conflicts and how they were resolved
6. Read back the survivor record to confirm all associations are present. Report what was merged and verify no associations are missing.

D. Resolve a routing conflict rooted in a duplicate

1. Identify the two records and the two ownership claims.
2. Run workflow A to determine survivorship.
3. Build the review-pack, including the ownership conflict note.
4. After merge approval and apply (workflow C), route the survivor's ownership via lead-routing using the correct assignment rule (named-account / territory / round-robin from rules/routing-rules.md).

Examples

Pre-creation dedup: company match found

Rep attempts to create "Example Co Corp" (acme.example).
crm-hygiene check: search by domain acme.example.
Found: existing company "Example Co Corporation" (ID: 11111), created 2025-03-01,
  3 contacts, 1 open deal, 12 activities.
Rep's new record would be: "Example Co Corp", no associations yet.
Survivorship rule: existing record has more associations -> existing is survivor.
Action: do not create a new record. Use existing "Example Co Corporation" (ID: 11111).
  Rep's new contact is associated to the existing company.
No merge write required — creation was blocked. crm-operator logs the dedup event.

Full merge: two company records, different owners

Found: GlobalBank (ID: 22222, owner: Jordan) and Global Bank Inc (ID: 33333, owner: Dana).
  ID 22222: created 2024-11-01, 5 contacts, 2 deals, 40 activities.
  ID 33333: created 2025-01-15, 2 contacts, 0 deals, 8 activities.

Survivorship rule 1 (more associations): ID 22222 wins.
Survivor: GlobalBank (ID: 22222). Losing record: Global Bank Inc (ID: 33333).

Field conflicts:
  phone: 22222 has "+1 212 555 0100" vs 33333 has "+1 212 555 0199" -> keeping 22222 value.
    [33333 value noted in log for manual review.]
  industry: 22222 has "Financial Services" vs 33333 has "Banking" -> keeping 22222 value.

Associations from ID 33333 to re-associate:
  - Contact: Dana's champion (contact ID 44444) -> GlobalBank (ID 22222)
  - Activity: 8 call logs -> merged into GlobalBank timeline

Ownership conflict: ID 22222 owned by Jordan; ID 33333 owned by Dana.
  Post-merge ownership must be resolved via lead-routing.

REVIEW-PACK submitted. [Manager approves.]

crm-operator applies:
  1. Re-associate contact 44444 to ID 22222.
  2. Merge 8 activities into ID 22222 timeline.
  3. Resolve field conflicts per pack.
  4. Archive ID 33333 (not deleted). Log: archived ID 33333 merged into 22222.
  5. Read back ID 22222 — 7 contacts, 2 deals, 48 activities confirmed.
  6. Ownership conflict flagged to lead-routing for territory-rule resolution.

Rejected merge: deal-quarter conflict

Found: two deal records for Initech — "Initech Q2 Expansion" (stage: Proposal,
  close: 2026-06-30) and "Initech New Logo" (stage: Discovery, close: 2026-09-30).
Survivorship check: different close-date quarters.
Rule: do not merge deals across different close-date quarters without explicit approval.
Output: these may be two genuinely separate opportunities (expansion and new logo).
  Flagging for rep and manager review — not merging without explicit approval.
  [If manager confirms they are the same deal: re-submit with manual override noted.]

Anti-patterns

• Merging without a review-pack and explicit approval. Association-preservation and field conflict resolution require human review. A merge applied without approval has no audit trail and may silently drop associations or wrong-way keep a field value.
• Deleting the losing record. Archive it. A deleted record cannot be audited, recovered, or used to trace the merge history. rules/lifecycle-stages.md prohibits deletion as a cleanup action.
• Merging contacts across companies without approval. A contact at two companies is a relationship update, not a deduplication event. Auto-merging would incorrectly collapse two distinct associations.
• Defining survivorship rules in another skill. lead-routing, pipeline-hygiene, and crm-hygiene SKILL (when built) should cite this skill and defer. A competing rule set creates drift and inconsistent merge decisions.
• Applying a merge to resolve an ownership conflict without addressing routing. The merge determines the record; routing determines the owner. Both steps are required; neither substitutes for the other.
• Treating a merge as a delete. If the goal is to clean up a bad lead, the correct action is a disqualify/recycle status per rules/lifecycle-stages.md, not a merge. Merges are for genuine duplicates of the same real-world entity.
• Bulk-merging without batching through the review-pack cap. Bulk merges follow the same ESCC_BULK_SEND_MAX batch discipline as any bulk crm-operator write. Above the cap, split into approved batches.

Related

• CRM data standards and dedupe-first policy: rules/common/crm-hygiene.md.
• Lifecycle status for disqualify/recycle (not delete): rules/lifecycle-stages.md.
• Merge and association-preservation writes: crm-operator (sole write path; review-pack required; explicit approval before apply).
• Ownership resolution after merge: lead-routing.
• Pre-creation search hook: pre:crm-write-guard (also checks stage exit criteria).
• Routing conflicts that surface duplicates: lead-routing.
• Governance capture for merge approval: governance-capture.