hiring-rubric

Hiring Rubric Skill

This skill generates a complete structured interview scorecard and guide for any role. It reduces hiring bias, enables consistent evaluation across interviewers, and produces better hiring decisions.

Required Inputs

Ask the user for these if not provided:

• Role title and level (e.g. Senior Product Manager, Junior Data Analyst)
• Team or function (e.g. Growth, Platform, Customer Success)
• Top 3–5 things this person needs to do well (the actual job requirements, not just the JD)
• Interview format (number of rounds, length of each)
• Any known gaps or risks to probe for (optional)
• Company values or competencies (optional — if provided, include as a competency section)

Output Structure

---

Interview Scorecard: [Role Title]

Level: [Junior / Mid / Senior / Staff / Manager]

Team: [Team name]

Created: [Date]

---

Scorecard Overview

Each competency is scored 1–4:

• 4 — Strong Yes: Clear evidence of exceptional ability. Hire signal.
• 3 — Yes: Solid evidence. Meets the bar for this role.
• 2 — Lean No: Some evidence but gaps that matter for this role.
• 1 — No: Little to no evidence. Clear miss.

Hiring recommendation:

• 3+ competencies at 4, rest at 3 = Strong hire
• Majority at 3, no 1s = Hire
• Any 1s or majority 2s = No hire (unless specific mitigating factors)

---

Competencies & Scoring

For each competency (generate 4–6 based on the role):

Competency [N]: [Name — e.g. "Problem Structuring" / "Stakeholder Influence" / "Technical Depth"]

Why this matters for this role: [One sentence — connects to actual job requirements]

What 4 looks like (Strong Yes):

[Specific, observable behaviours. "Proactively decomposed an ambiguous problem into a structured approach without prompting. Could articulate tradeoffs clearly and made assumptions explicit."]

What 2 looks like (Lean No):

[Specific, observable behaviours at the lower end. "Could answer direct questions but struggled when the interviewer removed scaffolding. Required significant prompting to reach a structured answer."]

Interview Questions (2–3 per competency):

1. [Behavioural STAR question — e.g. "Tell me about a time you had to make a decision with incomplete data."]

• Good answer signals: [What a strong answer includes]
• Weak answer signals: [What a weak or scripted answer looks like]
• Follow-up probe: [One follow-up to push deeper]

1. [Situational or hypothetical question for this role]

• Good answer signals:
• Follow-up probe:

---

Role-Specific Technical Assessment (if applicable)

[If the role requires a technical screen, describe:]

• Format: [Take-home / Live coding / Case study / Portfolio review]
• Duration: [Time]
• What you're assessing: [Specific skills]
• Scoring guidance: [What distinguishes a 4 from a 2 on the technical component]

---

Culture & Values Assessment

[2–3 values-based questions aligned to company values if provided, or general culture fit questions:]

1. [Question]

• What you're listening for:

---

Red Flags to Watch For

[5–7 specific red flags relevant to this role and level:]

• [e.g. "Speaks only about individual work — no mention of collaboration or team impact"]
• [e.g. "Can't give a specific example — pivots to hypotheticals when asked for real situations"]
• [e.g. "For senior roles: no evidence of influencing without authority"]

---

Interview Panel Guide

Suggest how to divide competencies across interview rounds to avoid repetition:

| Round | Interviewer | Competencies to Assess |

|---|---|---|

| 1 — Recruiter Screen | Recruiter | Motivation, career narrative, basics |

| 2 — Hiring Manager | [Role] | [Assign 2 competencies] |

| 3 — Peer Interview | [Role] | [Assign 2 competencies] |

| 4 — Stakeholder | [Role] | [Assign 1–2 competencies + culture] |

---

Quality Checks

• [ ] Scoring descriptions are observable (behaviours, not adjectives)
• [ ] 4 vs 2 distinction is clear and specific
• [ ] Questions have follow-up probes
• [ ] Red flags are specific to this role and level
• [ ] Panel guide avoids competency overlap between rounds

Anti-Patterns

• [ ] Do not include competencies that overlap significantly — each dimension must assess a distinct quality
• [ ] Do not write behavioural questions that can be answered with a yes/no — use "Tell me about a time..." format
• [ ] Do not set a scoring bar without calibration guidance — "above bar" means nothing without concrete examples at each level
• [ ] Do not create a rubric with more than 6 competencies — panel interviews cannot reliably assess more
• [ ] Do not omit a "must-have vs. nice-to-have" distinction in the requirements — all criteria cannot carry equal weight

Example Trigger Phrases

• "Create a hiring rubric for a [role]"
• "Build an interview scorecard for [job title]"
• "Give me structured interview questions for a [level] [role]"
• "We're hiring a [role] — help me build an assessment framework"