Back to Details

evaluating-candidates

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English
🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

Evaluating Candidates

候选人评估

Scope

适用范围

Covers
  • Defining an explicit hiring bar (what “great” means for this role at this company, right now)
  • Turning interviews, work samples/trials, and references into evidence, not vibes
  • Designing job-relevant work samples (and paid trials when appropriate)
  • Running high-signal reference checks and integrating them into the decision
  • Producing a decision-ready recommendation with clear risks and mitigations
When to use
  • “Help me decide whether to hire this candidate.”
  • “Create a scorecard and decision memo based on interview notes + references.”
  • “Design a work sample / take-home (or paid trial) and a scoring rubric.”
  • “Plan and run reference checks; give me a summary and recommendation.”
  • “Calibrate our hiring bar for a <role> and compare candidates fairly.”
When NOT to use
  • You need to define the role outcomes or write the job description (use 
    writing-job-descriptions
    )
  • You need to design/run structured interviews and question maps (use 
    conducting-interviews
    )
  • You need legal/HR compliance guidance or to adjudicate high-risk employment issues (this skill is not legal advice)
  • You need compensation/offer negotiation strategy
涵盖内容
  • 定义明确的招聘标准（当前公司该岗位的“优秀”标准是什么）
  • 将面试、工作样本/试用以及背景调查转化为客观证据，而非主观感受
  • 设计与岗位相关的工作样本（适当时采用付费试用）
  • 开展高参考价值的背景调查并将其纳入决策依据
  • 生成包含明确风险及应对方案的可落地决策建议
适用场景
  • “帮我决定是否录用该候选人。”
  • “根据面试记录+背景调查结果创建评分卡和决策备忘录。”
  • “设计工作样本/带回家测试（或付费试用）及评分细则。”
  • “规划并开展背景调查；给我一份总结和建议。”
  • “校准<岗位>的招聘标准，公平对比候选人。”
不适用场景
  • 你需要定义岗位目标或撰写职位描述（请使用
    writing-job-descriptions
    工具）
  • 你需要设计/执行结构化面试及问题框架（请使用
    conducting-interviews
    工具）
  • 你需要法律/人力资源合规指导或裁决高风险雇佣问题（本工具不提供法律咨询）
  • 你需要薪酬/offer谈判策略

Inputs

输入要求

Minimum required
  • Role + level + function (e.g., “Senior PM”, “Founding AE”, “Staff ML Engineer”)
  • Company/team context and “what’s hard” (stage, constraints, velocity expectations)
  • Evaluation criteria (4–8 competencies) and any non-negotiables / red flags
  • Candidate materials available (resume/portfolio + interview notes, if already interviewed)
  • Which signals you want to include: interviews, work sample/take-home, paid trial, references
  • Constraints: timeline, confidentiality/PII rules, internal-only vs shareable output
Missing-info strategy
  • Ask up to 5 questions from references/INTAKE.md (3–5 at a time).
  • If criteria or notes are missing, propose a default criteria set and clearly label assumptions.
  • Do not request secrets. If notes contain sensitive info, ask for redacted excerpts or summaries.
最低必填信息
  • 岗位+职级+职能（例如：“高级PM”、“创始AE”、“资深ML Engineer”）
  • 公司/团队背景及“核心挑战”（发展阶段、约束条件、交付速度预期）
  • 评估标准（4–8项能力）及任何不可妥协的要求/红色预警项
  • 可用的候选人材料（简历/作品集+面试记录，若已完成面试）
  • 你希望纳入的评估信号：面试、工作样本/带回家测试、付费试用、背景调查
  • 约束条件：时间线、保密/PII规则、内部专用 vs 可共享输出
缺失信息处理策略
  • 从references/INTAKE.md中最多提出5个问题（每次3–5个）。
  • 如果缺少评估标准或记录，提出一套默认标准集并明确标注假设条件。
  • 不得索要机密信息。如果记录包含敏感内容，要求提供编辑后的摘录或总结。

Outputs (deliverables)

输出成果（交付物）

Produce a Candidate Evaluation Decision Pack in Markdown (in-chat; or as files if requested):
  1. Evaluation brief (role success definition, criteria, weights, red flags)
  2. Scorecard (rating anchors + evidence capture)
  3. Signal log (all signals normalized into one table with evidence)
  4. Work sample / take-home / paid trial plan + rubric (if used)
  5. Reference check kit (outreach, script, note form, summary)
  6. Candidate comparison (if multiple candidates)
  7. Hiring decision memo (recommendation + risks + mitigations)
  8. Risks / Open questions / Next steps (always included)
Templates: references/TEMPLATES.md
Expanded guidance: references/WORKFLOW.md
生成Markdown格式的候选人评估决策包（可在对话中展示；或按需生成文件）：
  1. 评估简报（岗位成功定义、评估标准、权重、红色预警项）
  2. 评分卡（评级锚点+证据记录）
  3. 信号记录（所有信号标准化为带证据的统一表格）
  4. 工作样本/带回家测试/付费试用计划+评分细则（若使用）
  5. 背景调查工具包（联络模板、调查脚本、记录表单、总结）
  6. 候选人对比（若有多位候选人）
  7. 招聘决策备忘录（建议+风险+应对方案）
  8. 风险/待解决问题/下一步行动（始终包含）
模板: references/TEMPLATES.md
扩展指南: references/WORKFLOW.md

Workflow (7 steps)

工作流程（7步）

1) Intake + decision framing

1) 信息收集+决策框架搭建

  • Inputs: user context; references/INTAKE.md.
  • Actions: Confirm role, level, must-haves, and the decision timeline. Identify which signals exist vs need to be created (work sample, trial, references). Record constraints (PII, internal-only, fairness).
  • Outputs: Context snapshot + assumptions/unknowns list.
  • Checks: The decision and decision date are explicit (who decides, by when, using which signals).
  • 输入: 用户提供的背景信息；references/INTAKE.md。
  • 行动: 确认岗位、职级、必备要求及决策时间线。确定已有的评估信号 vs 需要创建的信号（工作样本、试用、背景调查）。记录约束条件（PII、内部专用、公平性要求）。
  • 输出: 背景快照+假设/未知事项列表。
  • 检查: 决策内容和决策日期明确（决策者、截止时间、使用的评估信号）。

2) Define the bar + criteria (don’t improvise later)

2) 定义招聘标准+评估维度（不得临时发挥）

  • Inputs: role context; existing rubric/values (if any).
  • Actions: Choose 4–8 criteria; define what “strong / acceptable / weak” looks like with observable anchors. Add explicit red flags. Decide whether to prioritize raw ability + drive vs “years of experience” for this role.
  • Outputs: Evaluation brief + draft scorecard.
  • Checks: Every criterion is measurable via evidence; no criterion is “vibe” or “culture fit” without definition.
  • 输入: 岗位背景；现有评分细则/价值观（若有）。
  • 行动: 选择4–8项评估维度；用可观察的锚点定义“优秀/合格/薄弱”的标准。添加明确的红色预警项。决定该岗位是优先考虑原始能力+驱动力还是“工作年限”。
  • 输出: 评估简报+评分卡草稿。
  • 检查: 每个评估维度都可通过证据衡量；没有未定义的“主观感受”或“文化适配”维度。

3) Build the signal plan + evidence log

3) 构建信号计划+证据记录

  • Inputs: existing notes; planned stages.
  • Actions: Decide what each signal is responsible for (interviews = behavioral evidence; work sample = in-context execution; references = longitudinal performance). Create a single signal log so you can compare apples-to-apples.
  • Outputs: Signal plan + signal log table (empty or partially filled).
  • Checks: No single signal dominates by default; reference checks and work samples have defined weight when used.
  • 输入: 现有记录；计划的评估阶段。
  • 行动: 确定每个信号的作用（面试=行为证据；工作样本=场景化执行能力；背景调查=长期表现）。创建统一的信号记录，确保对比的公平性。
  • 输出: 信号计划+信号记录表（空白或部分填充）。
  • 检查: 默认情况下没有单一信号占主导；使用背景调查和工作样本时需明确其权重。

4) Design (or evaluate) the work sample / take-home / paid trial

4) 设计（或评估）工作样本/带回家测试/付费试用

  • Inputs: role outputs; constraints; candidate seniority.
  • Actions: Create a job-relevant task with clear deliverables and scoring rubric. If the task is >2–3 hours or resembles real work, prefer a paid trial and clarify IP/confidentiality boundaries.
  • Outputs: Work sample/trial brief + scoring rubric.
  • Checks: Task predicts real performance, is fair across backgrounds, and has objective scoring anchors.
  • 输入: 岗位产出要求；约束条件；候选人职级。
  • 行动: 创建与岗位相关的任务，明确交付物和评分细则。如果任务耗时超过2–3小时或类似实际工作，优先采用付费试用，并明确知识产权/保密边界。
  • 输出: 工作样本/试用简报+评分细则。
  • 检查: 任务能预测实际工作表现，对不同背景的候选人公平，且有客观评分锚点。

5) Run reference checks (highest-signal when done well)

5) 开展背景调查（执行到位时参考价值最高）

  • Inputs: reference targets; outreach constraints; question bank.
  • Actions: Prioritize references who worked with the candidate for extended periods and in similar contexts. Ask for specific examples, deltas over time, strengths/limits, and “how would you staff them?” Capture verbatim evidence and calibrate for bias.
  • Outputs: Reference notes + reference summary.
  • Checks: Summary contains concrete examples and clear hire/no-hire signal, not generic praise.
  • 输入: 背景调查对象；联络约束条件；问题库。
  • 行动: 优先选择与候选人长期共事且处于类似工作场景的调查对象。询问具体案例、成长变化、优势/局限，以及“你会如何安排他们的工作？”。记录原话证据并校准偏见。
  • 输出: 背景调查记录+背景调查总结。
  • 检查: 总结包含具体案例和明确的录用/不录用信号，而非泛泛的表扬。

6) Synthesize signals → recommendation + risk mitigation

6) 整合信号→决策建议+风险应对

  • Inputs: scorecard, signal log, work sample results, reference summary.
  • Actions: Write a decision memo that cites evidence, calls out disagreements/uncertainty, and proposes mitigations (onboarding plan, coaching, 30/60/90 checkpoints) if hiring.
  • Outputs: Hiring decision memo + candidate comparison (if applicable).
  • Checks: Recommendation matches the weighted evidence; red flags are explicitly addressed.
  • 输入: 评分卡、信号记录、工作样本结果、背景调查总结。
  • 行动: 撰写决策备忘录，引用证据，指出分歧/不确定性，并提出录用后的应对方案（入职计划、辅导、30/60/90天检查点）。
  • 输出: 招聘决策备忘录+候选人对比（若适用）。
  • 检查: 建议与加权证据匹配；红色预警项已明确处理。

7) Quality gate + calibration + finalize pack

7) 质量审核+标准校准+最终定稿

  • Inputs: full draft pack.
  • Actions: Run references/CHECKLISTS.md and score with references/RUBRIC.md. Add Risks / Open questions / Next steps. If uncertain, propose the smallest additional signal to resolve (targeted reference, scoped trial, specific follow-up interview).
  • Outputs: Final Candidate Evaluation Decision Pack.
  • Checks: Evidence is sufficient for the decision; limitations and fairness risks are explicit.
  • 输入: 完整的草稿包。
  • 行动: 使用references/CHECKLISTS.md和references/RUBRIC.md进行审核和评分。添加风险/待解决问题/下一步行动。若存在不确定性，提出最小化的补充信号以解决问题（针对性背景调查、限定范围的试用、特定的跟进面试）。
  • 输出: 最终版候选人评估决策包。
  • 检查: 证据足以支持决策；局限性和公平性风险已明确说明。

Quality gate (required)

质量审核（必填）

  • Use references/CHECKLISTS.md and references/RUBRIC.md.
  • Always include: Risks, Open questions, Next steps.
  • 使用references/CHECKLISTS.md和references/RUBRIC.md。
  • 必须包含：风险、待解决问题、下一步行动。

Examples

示例

Example 1 (final decision): “Here are interview notes for a Senior PM candidate. Create a scorecard, summarize signals, and write a hiring decision memo. Include risks and suggested mitigations.”
Expected: scorecard with anchors + evidence, signal log, decision memo with explicit risks.
Example 2 (work sample + references): “We’re hiring a Founding Engineer. Design a 2-day paid trial task and rubric, plus a reference check script. Then show how we should combine those signals into a hire/no-hire decision.”
Expected: trial brief + rubric, reference kit, and a synthesis framework.
Boundary example: “Tell me if this person is good. I only have their resume.”
Response: require criteria + at least one high-signal input (structured interview notes, work sample plan/results, or references); propose a minimal evaluation plan and list assumptions/unknowns.
示例1（最终决策）: “这是一位高级PM候选人的面试记录。创建评分卡，总结信号，并撰写招聘决策备忘录。包含风险和建议的应对方案。”
预期输出：带锚点+证据的评分卡、信号记录、包含明确风险的决策备忘录。
示例2（工作样本+背景调查）: “我们正在招聘创始工程师。设计一个2天的付费试用任务和评分细则，以及背景调查脚本。然后说明我们应如何结合这些信号做出录用/不录用决策。”
预期输出：试用简报+评分细则、背景调查工具包，以及整合框架。
边界示例: “告诉我这个人是否合适。我只有他们的简历。”
回应：要求提供评估标准+至少一项高参考价值的输入（结构化面试记录、工作样本计划/结果、或背景调查）；提出最小化的评估计划并列出假设/未知事项。