Side by side
Ops Manager role — two shortlisted candidates
This preview uses illustrative data. In the app, evidence strength is derived from the interviews the recruiter conducted.
| Competency | A Candidate A — Maya R. | B Candidate B — Jordan T. |
|---|---|---|
| Problem Solving | Strong evidence Three measurable examples across two roles. | Limited evidence Only one example, without measurable outcome. |
| Ownership (Hungry) | Strong evidence Repeatedly volunteered for stretch work. | Moderate evidence One clear example; otherwise general statements. |
| Coachability (Humble) | Moderate evidence Described feedback but limited change described. | Strong evidence Cited two specific behaviours changed after feedback. |
| Stakeholder Communication (People Smart) | Limited evidence Topic barely explored — recommend follow-up. | Strong evidence Described a difficult customer resolution in detail. |
Recommendation Strength
A five-step ladder — never a hire/no-hire decision
The AI proposes a recommendation strength with supporting evidence and missing evidence. The recruiter approves, edits, or overrides it before anything is shared.
Strong evidence across all core competencies; no contradictions.
Strong evidence on most competencies; minor gaps.
Encouraging signals; specific gaps should be closed in a further interview.
Too many limited or insufficient areas to recommend today.
Interview did not surface enough job-related evidence.
Supporting evidence
Cites the specific interview answers behind the recommendation.
Missing evidence
Lists competencies without enough evidence, plus suggested follow-up questions.
Recruiter comments
The recruiter adds context, adjusts weighting, and approves before sharing.
Human approval before sharing with employers
Reports are never sent automatically. The recruiter remains responsible for the final recommendation.