46%
Recruitment errors from insufficient evaluation
3–5x
Average cost of recruitment mistake
★★★★★
Predictive validity of simulation
-40%
Error reduction with scorecard
Define evaluation criteria before anything else
The golden rule
Evaluation criteria must be defined BEFORE seeing the first CV. The most common recruitment mistake is starting to evaluate without defining what you're looking for.
The 3 types of evaluation criteria
| Type | Definition | Examples |
|---|---|---|
| Hard skills | Measurable technical abilities | Excel, programming languages, certifications |
| Soft skills | Behavioural qualities | Communication, leadership, resilience |
| Culture fit | Alignment with company values | Autonomy, teamwork, approach to authority |
The scorecard: your compass. A scorecard is the weighted list of evaluation criteria with their respective weights. Rules: maximum 8 criteria, weights total = 100%, distinguish mandatory vs desirable.
CV screening: effective method
1
First pass (30 seconds per CV)
Three piles: YES (meets mandatory criteria → interview), MAYBE (missing 1–2 criteria → review if needed), NO (doesn't meet criteria → motivated refusal).
- –Current title / last role: relevance to position
- –Industry experience: years and context
- –Key skills: presence of mandatory criteria
2
What NOT to look at (bias)
Photo, age (unless truly relevant), university (unless explicit criterion), layout (except for creative role). These trigger biases unrelated to competency.
Evaluation methods in interview
Comparison of evaluation methods
| Method | What it evaluates | Reliability |
|---|---|---|
| Behavioural questions (STAR) | Soft skills, past behaviours | ★★★★★ |
| Technical questions | Hard skills | ★★★★☆ |
| Simulation | Ability to do the job | ★★★★★ |
| Motivation questions | Fit, projection | ★★★☆☆ |
| Personality tests | Behavioural traits | ★★★☆☆ |
| Reference checks | Impression confirmation | ★★★★☆ |
Simulation: most predictive method
Do rather than say. Examples: salesman → simulated demo, manager → manage a fictional conflict, developer → debug code. It's the most predictive method because it evaluates skills in action, not ability to talk about them.
Complementary methods
Personality tests: comparative
| Test | What it measures | Scientific validity |
|---|---|---|
| Big Five (OCEAN) | 5 major personality traits | Good — most validated |
| DISC | Behavioural style | Moderate |
| MBTI | Cognitive preferences | Low — not recommended |
Reference checks are often neglected but very useful to confirm impressions. Who to call: former managers (ideally 2–3), not family or friends. What to ask: confirm dates and roles, strengths observed, areas for development, and the key question: "Would you rehire this person?"
Compare and decide objectively
Decision scenarios
| Situation | Recommended action |
|---|---|
| One candidate clearly above others | Make an offer without waiting |
| Two candidates very close | Decide on the most important criterion |
| No convincing candidate | Don't hire by default, restart search |
| Doubt on specific point | Additional interview or reference check |
Document the decision
Keep the filled scorecard, interview notes, decision and its rationale, and watch points for integration. Useful to justify if contested, learn from mistakes and capitalise for future recruitment.
Candidate evaluation FAQ
How many candidates should you interview for a position?
Generally, 3 to 5 candidates in in-depth interview are sufficient. Beyond that, decision-making becomes difficult and candidates get impatient. To reach this number, plan 5 to 10 qualifying calls (15 minutes) beforehand to filter effectively.
How to evaluate technical skills if you're not an expert?
Several approaches: (1) Involve a technical peer in the process (a developer evaluates a developer), (2) Use standardised tests (CodinGame, HackerRank for developers), (3) Ask about concrete projects and verify answer consistency, (4) Ask to present a portfolio or deliverables. As a non-expert, focus on soft skills and motivation.
Should the scorecard be shared with the candidate?
General criteria can be shared (it's even professional), but not weights or scores. Telling the candidate "we'll evaluate prospecting, negotiation and resilience" helps them prepare and makes evaluation fairer. However, grid details stay internal.
How to manage candidates who answer off-topic in behavioural questions?
Follow up systematically with STAR questions: "Can you give me a concrete example?", "What did you personally do?", "What was the measurable result?". After 2 to 3 unsuccessful follow-ups, note the lack of concrete examples — it's information about the real competency level.
Evaluate your candidates with Aurelia
Automatic scorecard generation, interview transcription and analysis, comparative reports.