Interview Evaluation Report

By Lillian Diaz,2014-09-24 18:57
11 views 0
Interview Evaluation ReportInterv

    Interview Evaluation Report



    Candidate Name: Hire Now

    Interviewer Name(s): Consider for Future Opening Date: Do Not Hire


    Instructions: Check the rating next to the numeric score that best represents the candidate’s proficiency level in each competency area based on the applicant’s responses. Write appropriate comments below.

    Tally the numeric scores in the right-hand column.

    Adaptability 1 2 3 4 5 Building Trust 1 2 3 4 5 Collaboration 1 2 3 4 5 Communication 1 2 3 4 5 Continuous Learning 1 2 3 4 5 Cultural Competence 1 2 3 4 5 Decision Making/ 1 2 3 4 5 Problem Solving

    Stress Tolerance 1 2 3 4 5 Total Score Comments:


Functional/Technical Skills

    Instructions: In the space provided, indicate the candidate’s score for each category, using only the

    highest score for that category. (For example, if a candidate has both a BSW and MSW, the Education

    Score would be four points, not seven.)

    As evidenced from answers to interview questions. (Use the 5-point scale above.) Education (MSW = 4 BSW = 3 Masters in Human Services Area = 3 Bachelors = 2) Experience

    Public/Private Agency Child Welfare Case Manager = 4

    Other Professional Child Welfare = 3 Paraprofessional Child Welfare = 2

    Child Welfare Field Placement or Intern = 2

    Child Welfare Volunteer Work = 1

    License (Any state license/professional certification = 2) Total Score: Comments:


Possible Disqualifiers

    Appearance: (Sloppy, Disheveled, Poor Grooming, Inappropriate Dress)

Poise: (Very awkward, No social skills)

Interpersonal Skills: (Hostile, Defensive, Resistant, Evasive, Argumentative, Cold, Snobbish, “Chip on

    Shoulder, Lacks enthusiasm)

Commitment: (Shows little interest in position, only interested in “a job”)

Writing Ability (Disorganized, Poor Grammar, Poor Sentence Structure)


    Guidelines: Interview Evaluation Report

    Each candidate in the interview process deserves to be scored carefully, using the same criteria

    for each applicant. Criteria fall into three separately-scored categories:

1. Evaluation of the Competencies

    2. Evaluation of Education, Experience, Special Knowledge and Skills (E&E)

    3. Disqualifiers

    The scoring of the first two categories is intended to evaluate applicants relative to each other

    not to combine them for an overall evaluation score.

    Evaluating Competencies

    ; Asking each applicant the same competency-based behavioral questions will ensure a fair evaluation of the applicants on the same set of competencies. ; Having an interview panel of three interviews offers a good check and balance during the scoring process.

    ; Have the definitions of the competencies in front of the interviewers during the interview and scoring process this will help assess proficiency levels.

    1. Assign each applicant a score for each competency using the five-point rating scale in

    the Interview Evaluation Report.

    2. Focus on the proficiency level evident in the

    applicant’s answer.

     Tip: 3. In assessing the proficiency level of the applicant, ask yourself questions such as: In many instances, applicants answering ; How recent was the example the a question on one competency will applicant described? provide insight into their proficiency in

    ; How relevant is the example to the kind of others as well. During the scoring of one

    job being applied for? competency, you will find yourself

    looking back into other parts of your ; How well did the applicant handle the

    notes to refresh your memory about situation described relative to the

    expectations of our agency? information relevant to the competency

    you’re currently scoring. ; How large was the applicant’s role in the

    situation described?

    ; Was the outcome described by the

    applicant a desirable one given the circumstances?

    ; For middle and top-management level positions, what were the impact and scope of

    the applicant’s examples?


Evaluating Education, Experience, Special Knowledge and Skills

    Your applicants have presumably met the education, experience and other minimum requirements for the job in order to qualify for an interview. The purpose of scoring these characteristics is to objectively compare applicants within this category.

    ; You can find parts of the E&E scores from the application/resume (degrees, years of

    experience, and specialized skills).

    ; The score for Technical/Professional Knowledge and Skill is based, in part, on answers

    to the specific questions asked during the early part of the interview.

    ; In most instances, applicants with work experience will use many work-related examples

    as they answer the behavioral questions. Information from those answers should be

    factored into the E&E score.


    ; Occasionally applicants present themselves in a way during the interview that raises a

    red flag such that they disqualify themselves irrespective of their scores in the other two


    ; Examples might include a person who uses inappropriate profanity, who is obnoxiously

    overbearing, or who is seriously unkempt and disheveled.

    ; Some agencies require applicants to complete a writing exercise on agency premises

    when they appear for the interview. If the job requires the ability to write reasonably well,

    and applicants are unable to demonstrate their ability, they are disqualified from further

    consideration on that basis alone.

Final Evaluation and Selection

Once you’ve tallied your applicants’ scores, you can easily compare them to help make your

    selection decision. The way you use the scores depends on your situation.

    The example on the next page illustrates how you can use the scoring to help make your selection decision. In this example:

    ; The maximum score on Competencies is 35 (7 competencies with a maximum score of 5

    points each).

    ; The maximum score for E&E is 15 (see Interview Evaluation Report).

    ; The agency has two vacancies to fill.


    Summary: Applicant Interview Scores

    Second Choice: Little experience, but great A 33 4 37 potential

    B 32 12 44 First Choice: High scores in both areas.

    May have been third choice if there was a mix C 31 4 35 of experience levels on staff

    May have been third choice. Requires detailed D 29 7 36 check of interview notes

    May have been third choice if all other staff had E 27 10 37 little experience

    Probably wouldn't hire because of marginal F 24 7 31 competency scores

    Lots of experience, but poor competency G 23 14 37 scores wouldn't hire

    H 22 4 26 Wouldn't hire

    ; Applicants A and B both have high competency scores, but B scored much higher on Experience and Education. Applicant B is offered and accepts the job. ; The second position is offered to Applicant A who has little experience, but based on the competency scores has the potential to be a great employee after getting some training and experience.

    ; Had applicant B turned down the job offer, Applicant C would have been offered the job if there had been a good mix of experience levels on the staff. Applicant C has little, if any experience, but has good competency scores. Had all of the other staff been new, the agency might consider offering the job to D or E. (The agency may not want to offer both jobs to inexperienced applicants when employees currently on the staff are also inexperienced.) Although E’s competency scores are somewhat marginal, E has more experience. This would be a difficult decision for the agency, because the short-term benefit of hiring E might be short sighted. A year from now, C has the potential of being a better employee. The agency may want to go back and take a closer look at the scores

    by competency for applicants C, D and E before making the final decision.

    ; Applicant G had the highest E&E scores and the second highest total score (the misleading result of mixing apples and oranges) of all the applicants. Under a more traditional hiring approach, G may have been the first choice. However, under the competency-based, behavioral interviewing model, the agency would not consider G for hiring because of the low competency score.


Report this document

For any questions or suggestions please email