Free structured-interview worksheet
Organize job-related interview evidence for human review
A structured scorecard helps interviewers collect the same kinds of evidence from every candidate. It does not predict future success or make the employment decision. Use this free worksheet to define criteria, record source notes, and give authorized reviewers a consistent record to examine.
Review the generated draft against the actual job, applicable law, accommodation requirements, and your company's approved hiring process before using it. This resource is general information, not legal advice.
Evidence worksheet
Same criterion. Same anchor. Reviewable note.
Criterion
Homeowner communication
Evidence
Explains an inspection step accurately
Reviewer note
Quote or work-sample observation
Enter your details
Free to use. The output is a draft evidence worksheet, not a candidate ranking or hiring recommendation.
Why structure helps
An unstructured interview can give each candidate a different test. A structured process uses the same job-related questions and evidence anchors, making the record easier to compare and audit. The U.S. Office of Personnel Management's assessment guidance describes structured interviews as one part of a broader, job-related selection process.
Structure does not make a score infallible. Reviewers still need to inspect what the candidate actually said or demonstrated, verify material claims, resolve accessibility issues, and document the decision.
Define evidence, not personality
Use observable, job-related examples. Avoid labels such as culture fit, confidence, grit, honesty, or personality. The interview questions tool can help draft consistent questions and neutral follow-ups.
Four human-review rules
- 1
Use the same core process. Give candidates the same job-related questions, instructions, time, and approved neutral follow-ups.
- 2
Cite the evidence. A rating without a response note or work-sample observation is an impression, not reviewable evidence.
- 3
Resolve gaps fairly. Technology, unclear instructions, or an accommodation issue should be marked not scorable and resolved.
- 4
Keep a person accountable. Authorized reviewers inspect the source evidence and own every employment decision; the worksheet does not decide.
Keep hiring and onboarding separate
The worksheet ends with human review; it never makes the call. After an authorized person completes the hiring process and a candidate accepts, use a 30-60-90 onboarding plan to turn confirmed development needs into training without treating interview notes as a permanent label.
Frequently asked questions
What should be on a sales candidate scorecard?
Use a short set of criteria tied to the actual job, an evidence anchor for each criterion, space for the source response or work-sample note, and a not-scorable option. Avoid personality labels, protected information, and predictions about future success.
Does the scorecard decide who should be hired?
No. It organizes comparable interview evidence for trained, authorized reviewers. It should not automatically rank, advance, reject, recommend, or hire a candidate, and a total score should never replace review of the source evidence, accommodations, verification, and company policy.
How do interviewers record evidence consistently?
Use the same core questions and approved neutral follow-ups, define what clear, partial, and missing evidence mean before interviews begin, and require a short source note for every rating. Reviewers can then compare what was actually said or demonstrated instead of comparing impressions.
What if the evidence is incomplete or the interview was inaccessible?
Mark the criterion not scorable. Clarify the instructions, address the technology or accommodation issue, and offer an equivalent way to provide the job-related evidence. Do not convert missing or inaccessible evidence into a negative rating.
Should candidates know how the interview works?
Explain the interview format, the job-related areas being reviewed, how to request an accommodation, and how technology is used. You can protect internal deliberations while still giving candidates a fair and understandable process.