Take criteria from the person specification
Use the essential and desirable criteria marked for assessment at interview. Four to six criteria is enough for most interviews.
Free hiring template
Score every candidate against the same weighted criteria, with an anchored 1 to 4 rating scale and space for the evidence behind each score. Copy it into a document or print one per interviewer.
Blank interview scoring sheet
One sheet per interviewer, per candidate. Weights total 100%.
| Criterion | Weight | Question | Evidence notes | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [Essential criterion 1 from the person specification] | [30%] | [Question asked] | [What the candidate said and did] | [1-4] |
| [Essential criterion 2] | [25%] | [Question asked] | [Evidence] | [1-4] |
| [Essential criterion 3] | [20%] | [Question asked] | [Evidence] | [1-4] |
| [Skill or working-style criterion] | [15%] | [Question asked] | [Evidence] | [1-4] |
| [Desirable criterion] | [10%] | [Question asked] | [Evidence] | [1-4] |
Anchors stop a 3 from meaning different things to different interviewers. Read them out at the panel briefing and keep them next to the sheet.
| Score | Label | What the evidence looks like |
|---|---|---|
| 4 | Strong evidence | Specific, relevant examples that clearly meet or exceed the standard, with the candidate's own actions and results explained. |
| 3 | Good evidence | Relevant examples that meet the standard, with minor gaps in detail, scope, or outcome. |
| 2 | Limited evidence | Some relevant evidence, but general, partial, or mainly describing what a team did rather than the candidate. |
| 1 | Little or no evidence | No relevant example, or an example that does not show the criterion, even after follow-up questions. |
Weighted scores are the weight multiplied by the score. This candidate totals 315 out of 400 (about 79%) with no essential criterion scored 1. The 2 on cross-functional work becomes a specific question for the next stage rather than a hidden concern.
| Criterion | Weight | Evidence notes | Score | Weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Renewal and expansion ownership | 30% | Owned renewals for 40 mid-market accounts; described a recovery plan for a churn-risk account and the result. | 3 | 90 |
| Handling a difficult customer conversation | 25% | Clear STAR answer: escalated outage, set expectations, followed up in writing, kept the account. | 4 | 100 |
| Working with product and support teams | 20% | Mentioned raising feature requests but could not describe how they were prioritised or followed up. | 2 | 40 |
| Prioritising a large portfolio | 15% | Used health scores and renewal dates to plan the week; gave one concrete example. | 3 | 45 |
| Customer health tooling (desirable) | 10% | Two years using a customer success platform to build health dashboards. | 4 | 40 |
The scorecard should continue the criteria you used to shortlist. Start with the person specification, carry forward anything the CV screening rubric marked for follow-up, and draw questions from the competency-based question bank.
Use the essential and desirable criteria marked for assessment at interview. Four to six criteria is enough for most interviews.
Agree weights with the hiring manager so they total 100%. Weighting after the interviews invites bias towards a preferred candidate.
Use the same core questions for every candidate, with follow-up probes, so answers can be compared fairly.
Use an anchored scale so a 3 means the same thing to every interviewer. Add role-specific examples if your panel is new to scoring.
Each interviewer completes their sheet before the panel meets. Discuss large differences by reference to the evidence, then record the agreed outcome.
Panel guidance
Write evidence notes during the interview and score immediately afterwards. Memory of specific answers fades quickly and is replaced by an overall impression.
Hearing a senior colleague's view first tends to pull scores towards it. Collect sheets before the discussion starts.
A high total should not hide a score of 1 on an essential criterion. Flag it and decide explicitly whether the gap can be closed with training.
Record any adjustments made, such as extra time or questions in advance, so the process is consistent and the candidate is assessed on the criteria, not the format.
Interview notes and scores are personal data. A candidate can ask for a copy through a subject access request under UK GDPR, so keep notes factual and job-related.
If a criterion was not covered, mark it not assessed and follow up, rather than scoring it from an impression.
Set essential and desirable criteria, and how each one is assessed, before the vacancy goes live.
Copy or print a recruiter intake and screening rubric for must-haves, evidence rules, red flags, and human review.
Competency and strengths-based questions with probes and anchored scoring guidance.
Record independent, evidence-based interview feedback and a clear recommendation.
Respectful rejection emails for after CV screening and after interview, with a data retention line.
See how a hiring brief becomes a reviewed screening rubric and an evidence-backed shortlist.
Follow a synthetic example from hiring brief to a reviewed shortlist.
Test whether each criterion is role-related, evidence-based, consistent, and reviewable.
See how approved criteria become explainable candidate placements.
Marxel screens CVs against criteria you approve and shows the reasoning behind each placement, including follow-up questions for candidates whose evidence is unclear.
An interview scoring sheet, also called an interview rating sheet or scorecard, is a form interviewers use to rate a candidate's answers against agreed criteria. It records the question asked, the evidence heard, and a score for each criterion, so candidates can be compared on the same basis.
A short anchored scale works best. This template uses 1 to 4, which avoids a neutral midpoint and forces a decision about whether the evidence meets the standard. A 1 to 5 scale also works if every point has a clear written description.
Weighting helps when some criteria matter much more than others. Agree the weights before the first interview and keep essential criteria as a minimum standard, so a strong score elsewhere does not hide a gap the job cannot carry.
Multiply each score by its weight, then add the results. With weights totalling 100 and a 1 to 4 scale, the maximum is 400. For example, scores of 3, 4, 2, 3, and 4 against weights of 30, 25, 20, 15, and 10 give 315 out of 400, or about 79%.
Yes, in most cases. Interview notes and scores are usually the candidate's personal data, so they can be requested through a subject access request under UK GDPR. Write notes that are factual, relevant to the criteria, and fair to the candidate.
Discuss the specific evidence behind each score rather than averaging. If the panel still disagrees, record both views and the reason for the final decision. Large gaps often show that a criterion or anchor needs clearer wording.