skills/by-role/recruiter/interview-scorecard/SKILL.md
Build a structured interview scorecard for a role. Use when the user says "create an interview scorecard", "build an interview guide", "what questions should I ask for this role", "help me evaluate candidates consistently", "design the interview process", or wants to assess candidates against defined criteria - even if they don't explicitly say "scorecard". Also use when a recruiter or hiring manager wants to prevent gut-feel hiring.
npx skillsauth add qa-aman/claude-skills interview-scorecardInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
Based on Who: The A Method for Hiring by Geoff Smart and Randy Street, and Work Rules! by Laszlo Bock. Unstructured interviews are nearly random at predicting performance. Structured scorecards work because every interviewer evaluates the same competencies using the same questions and the same rubric, making calibration possible and reducing bias.
A scorecard starts with outcomes, not skills. List 3-5 things the person must accomplish to be considered a success. These come from the job description or intake meeting with [hiring manager].
Format:
Role Outcomes:
1. [Specific outcome in first 90 days]
2. [Outcome at 6 months]
3. [Strategic outcome at 12 months]
Competencies are the behaviors and capabilities that predict whether someone will hit the outcomes. Derive them from the outcomes - don't start with a generic competency list.
For each outcome, ask: "What capability does someone need to achieve this?"
Common competency categories to consider:
Cap at 6 competencies. More than 6 makes calibration impractical.
Use behavioral questions (past behavior predicts future performance) following the STAR format: Situation, Task, Action, Result.
The Mom Test principle applied to interviewing: ask about specific past events, not hypotheticals. "Tell me about a time you..." beats "What would you do if..."
Question templates by competency type:
Execution / Ownership:
Problem-solving:
Collaboration / Influence:
Leadership (senior roles):
Use a 3-point scale (A/B/C) to keep calibration fast and consistent. Avoid 5-point scales - the middle becomes a gravity well.
For each competency, define what A, B, and C look like:
Competency: [Name]
A (Strong Yes):
- Clear ownership of outcomes in past roles
- Specific, detailed examples with measurable results
- Demonstrated in multiple contexts
- Proactively identified and solved problems beyond their scope
B (Leaning Yes / Needs Discussion):
- Examples exist but are thin on detail or recency
- Achieved outcomes but with significant guidance
- One clear data point, not a pattern
C (No Hire):
- Examples are vague, hypothetical, or borrowed from team credit
- Avoids accountability ("we" language throughout)
- Cannot describe the impact of their work
- Repeated pattern of blaming external factors
Each interviewer covers 1-2 competencies, not all of them. This prevents overlap, reduces candidate fatigue, and gives each interviewer deep coverage of their area.
Scorecard assignment format:
Interviewer 1 (Recruiter - phone screen): Culture fit, communication, career narrative
Interviewer 2 (Hiring Manager): Execution, ownership, alignment to outcomes
Interviewer 3 (Peer / IC): Technical / functional competency, collaboration
Interviewer 4 (Cross-functional): Stakeholder management, communication
Deliver a scorecard document interviewers fill in after each conversation:
# Interview Scorecard: [Role Title]
Candidate: _______________
Interviewer: _______________
Date: _______________
## Competencies Assessed
### [Competency 1]
Question(s) asked:
Evidence collected (verbatim notes preferred):
Rating: A / B / C
Notes:
### [Competency 2]
[Same format]
## Overall Recommendation
[ ] Strong Yes - A hire. Would advocate strongly.
[ ] Yes - Meets bar. Would not block.
[ ] No - Does not meet bar. Would block.
[ ] Strong No - Clear concerns. Would actively recommend against.
Key reason for recommendation (1-2 sentences):
1. Using the same generic question bank for every role Bad: "Tell me about yourself. What's your greatest weakness? Where do you see yourself in 5 years?" Good: Questions tied to the specific competencies that predict success in this role and at this company stage.
2. Treating scorecard as a formality filled out after the debrief Bad: Interviewers compare notes verbally, then fill in the scorecard to match the group consensus. Good: Every interviewer submits their scorecard independently before the debrief begins.
3. Evaluating everything with one score Bad: "I'd give her a 7/10 overall." Good: Separate scores per competency. A candidate can be A on execution and C on leadership - that distinction matters.
4. Hypothetical questions Bad: "What would you do if a stakeholder pushed back on your recommendation?" Good: "Tell me about the last time a stakeholder pushed back on your recommendation. What happened?"
5. Allowing halo/horn effect Bad: One impressive answer early in the interview colors all subsequent assessments. Good: Structured questions force coverage of all competencies regardless of first impression.
development
Plan a webinar end-to-end using April Dunford's Obviously Awesome positioning framework to find the topic angle that makes the webinar obviously valuable to the right audience. Produces topic positioning, abstract, speaker brief, registration page, promotion sequence, day-of run-of-show, and post-webinar follow-up. Use when the user asks to plan a webinar, virtual event, online workshop, "we need a webinar on X", host a webinar, online masterclass, or any live virtual event with promotion and follow-up. Reads ICP, services, and brand voice from knowledge/.
development
Write long-form thought leadership articles, opinion pieces, industry POV essays, and CEO/founder bylines using the Made to Stick SUCCESs framework (Chip and Dan Heath). Use when the user asks for a long-form article, executive byline, opinion piece, industry POV, manifesto, "explain our point of view on X", or wants to publish an authority-building piece (1200-2500 words). Reads brand voice and positioning from knowledge/.
development
Plan a monthly content calendar across channels using the Content Marketing Matrix (Dave Chaffey, Smart Insights) - Entertain/Inspire/Educate/Convince. Every post gets a quadrant label. The monthly calendar must hit 40% Educate, 40% Inspire+Convince, 20% Entertain. Produces a week-by-week posting schedule with topics, formats, channels, and asset links. Use when the user says "content calendar", "social calendar", "plan next month's content", "what should we post", "content plan", "editorial calendar", "schedule posts for the month", or wants a structured posting plan for LinkedIn, Twitter, email, or blog. Reads brand voice, ICP, and past learnings from knowledge/.
development
Write SEO-optimized long-form articles targeting specific keywords using the They Ask You Answer Big 5 framework (Marcus Sheridan). Articles are categorized by Big 5 type (Cost, Problems, Versus, Best/Reviews, How-To) and structured accordingly. The "answer first" rule applies to every article. Use when the user asks for an SEO article, blog post for ranking, "rank for keyword X", organic content, search-optimized post, pillar page, or content for organic traffic. Includes keyword targeting, search intent matching, internal linking suggestions, and meta tags.