Chapter 10. Candidate Evaluation
Structured assessment is usually more reliable than informal judgment by feel. See Schmidt and Hunter: doi:10.1037/0033-2909.124.2.262, and the Schmidt, Oh, and Shaffer update: doi:10.1111/peps.12164.
How to use this chapter
Use this chapter before handing the candidate forward. Its job is to turn the profile, message, and call notes into a structured assessment with facts, uncertainties, and a clear recommendation.
If you have a task
| If you have a task | Go to section | What you get |
|---|---|---|
| Assess relevance | Candidate relevance scorecard | A shared scoring scale |
| Record the initial call | Post-screening notes template | Notes for handoff |
| Reduce assessment bias | Bias protection | A fact-based decision check |
Candidate relevance scorecard
| Dimension | 1 - weak | 2 - partial | 3 - strong | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Required work | No facts | Possible | Clear | |
| Environment match | Different | Adjacent | Direct | |
| Scale/level | Mismatch | Unclear | Match | |
| Transferable skills | Weak | Possible | Strong | |
| Motivation hypothesis | None | Possible | Specific | |
| Risk | High | Manageable | Low |
Decision: 15-18 - priority to message; 11-14 - message or calibrate; 7-10 - postpone; 6 or below - reject.
Post-screening notes template
| Field | Notes |
|---|---|
| Candidate | Name and source |
| Role | Target role |
| Motivation | Why open or not open |
| Must-have signals | Specific examples |
| Transferable experience | Adjacent examples |
| Gaps | Known gaps |
| Compensation/location | Expectations |
| Questions for the client | Calibration points |
| Recommendation | Advance, postpone, reject, calibrate |
What to take from the chapter / where to go next
Take the scorecard as the team's shared language. If the decision is blocked by feedback, requirements, or client speed, go to Chapter 11.
