mohitagw15856
128 lines
4.7 KiB
Markdown
128 lines
4.7 KiB
Markdown
---
|
||
name: hiring-rubric
|
||
description: "Generate a structured interview scorecard and interview guide for any role. Use when asked to create a hiring rubric, interview scorecard, structured interview guide, or assessment criteria for a job. Produces a scorecard with competencies, behavioural questions, and scoring guidance."
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
# Hiring Rubric Skill
|
||
|
||
This skill generates a complete structured interview scorecard and guide for any role. It reduces hiring bias, enables consistent evaluation across interviewers, and produces better hiring decisions.
|
||
|
||
## Required Inputs
|
||
|
||
Ask the user for these if not provided:
|
||
- **Role title and level** (e.g. Senior Product Manager, Junior Data Analyst)
|
||
- **Team or function** (e.g. Growth, Platform, Customer Success)
|
||
- **Top 3–5 things this person needs to do well** (the actual job requirements, not just the JD)
|
||
- **Interview format** (number of rounds, length of each)
|
||
- **Any known gaps or risks to probe for** (optional)
|
||
- **Company values or competencies** (optional — if provided, include as a competency section)
|
||
|
||
## Output Structure
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
# Interview Scorecard: [Role Title]
|
||
**Level:** [Junior / Mid / Senior / Staff / Manager]
|
||
**Team:** [Team name]
|
||
**Created:** [Date]
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## Scorecard Overview
|
||
|
||
Each competency is scored 1–4:
|
||
- **4 — Strong Yes:** Clear evidence of exceptional ability. Hire signal.
|
||
- **3 — Yes:** Solid evidence. Meets the bar for this role.
|
||
- **2 — Lean No:** Some evidence but gaps that matter for this role.
|
||
- **1 — No:** Little to no evidence. Clear miss.
|
||
|
||
**Hiring recommendation:**
|
||
- 3+ competencies at 4, rest at 3 = Strong hire
|
||
- Majority at 3, no 1s = Hire
|
||
- Any 1s or majority 2s = No hire (unless specific mitigating factors)
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## Competencies & Scoring
|
||
|
||
For each competency (generate 4–6 based on the role):
|
||
|
||
### Competency [N]: [Name — e.g. "Problem Structuring" / "Stakeholder Influence" / "Technical Depth"]
|
||
|
||
**Why this matters for this role:** [One sentence — connects to actual job requirements]
|
||
|
||
**What 4 looks like (Strong Yes):**
|
||
[Specific, observable behaviours. "Proactively decomposed an ambiguous problem into a structured approach without prompting. Could articulate tradeoffs clearly and made assumptions explicit."]
|
||
|
||
**What 2 looks like (Lean No):**
|
||
[Specific, observable behaviours at the lower end. "Could answer direct questions but struggled when the interviewer removed scaffolding. Required significant prompting to reach a structured answer."]
|
||
|
||
**Interview Questions (2–3 per competency):**
|
||
|
||
1. *[Behavioural STAR question — e.g. "Tell me about a time you had to make a decision with incomplete data."]*
|
||
- **Good answer signals:** [What a strong answer includes]
|
||
- **Weak answer signals:** [What a weak or scripted answer looks like]
|
||
- **Follow-up probe:** [One follow-up to push deeper]
|
||
|
||
2. *[Situational or hypothetical question for this role]*
|
||
- **Good answer signals:**
|
||
- **Follow-up probe:**
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## Role-Specific Technical Assessment (if applicable)
|
||
|
||
[If the role requires a technical screen, describe:]
|
||
- **Format:** [Take-home / Live coding / Case study / Portfolio review]
|
||
- **Duration:** [Time]
|
||
- **What you're assessing:** [Specific skills]
|
||
- **Scoring guidance:** [What distinguishes a 4 from a 2 on the technical component]
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## Culture & Values Assessment
|
||
|
||
[2–3 values-based questions aligned to company values if provided, or general culture fit questions:]
|
||
|
||
1. *[Question]*
|
||
- **What you're listening for:**
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## Red Flags to Watch For
|
||
|
||
[5–7 specific red flags relevant to this role and level:]
|
||
- [e.g. "Speaks only about individual work — no mention of collaboration or team impact"]
|
||
- [e.g. "Can't give a specific example — pivots to hypotheticals when asked for real situations"]
|
||
- [e.g. "For senior roles: no evidence of influencing without authority"]
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## Interview Panel Guide
|
||
|
||
Suggest how to divide competencies across interview rounds to avoid repetition:
|
||
|
||
| Round | Interviewer | Competencies to Assess |
|
||
|---|---|---|
|
||
| 1 — Recruiter Screen | Recruiter | Motivation, career narrative, basics |
|
||
| 2 — Hiring Manager | [Role] | [Assign 2 competencies] |
|
||
| 3 — Peer Interview | [Role] | [Assign 2 competencies] |
|
||
| 4 — Stakeholder | [Role] | [Assign 1–2 competencies + culture] |
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## Quality Checks
|
||
|
||
- [ ] Scoring descriptions are observable (behaviours, not adjectives)
|
||
- [ ] 4 vs 2 distinction is clear and specific
|
||
- [ ] Questions have follow-up probes
|
||
- [ ] Red flags are specific to this role and level
|
||
- [ ] Panel guide avoids competency overlap between rounds
|
||
|
||
## Example Trigger Phrases
|
||
|
||
- "Create a hiring rubric for a [role]"
|
||
- "Build an interview scorecard for [job title]"
|
||
- "Give me structured interview questions for a [level] [role]"
|
||
- "We're hiring a [role] — help me build an assessment framework"
|