Solutions
Add sites without splitting your hiring criteria
The same background is rated differently at different sites. Share one set of questions and evaluation criteria and that stops happening.
Challenge
Add sites and the criteria will drift apart
Nobody changes them on purpose; they drift through day-to-day practice. The result is that hiring quality can no longer be compared across sites.
- Different interviewers at each site
- Applicant pools differ by region, and each site develops its own sense of the going rate
- Head office can set the standard, but whether it is applied in the room is up to the interviewer
01
Designed at head office
Decide the questions and criteria
02
The same setup at every site
The standard is built in, not handed out
03
AI interviews at each site
Candidates take them when it suits them
04
Scores on one shared standard
Generated for each criterion
05
Comparable across sites
Each site’s hiring team decides
The three shaded steps are automated. The pass-or-fail decision is made by a person.
Solution
Build the standard in, rather than hand it out
Every site uses the same questions and evaluation criteria designed at head office. Because the scores come from the same criteria, results line up across sites.
- Every site uses the same questions and criteria
- Comparable on one shared standard
- A new site can adopt the existing setup as-is
- Company and job briefings play the same at every site
Related pages
More detail, by topic
Differences between sites come both from how the criteria are set and from how they are read.
Set the criteria first and narrow the spread between interviewers.
When interviewers read the criteria differently, the same answer earns different scores →
Use gaps between human and AI scores to find where readings split, and fix them.
Staffing registration interviews →
Take registration interviews around the clock, with the same checks at every branch.
Frequently asked questions
Can the evaluation summary be produced in English?
The evaluation summary can be switched between Japanese and English, and the two can be viewed side by side.
Can some criteria differ by site?
You register a job title and job description per role and set questions and criteria against it. Whether sites share one setup or split it by site or role is designed around how you operate.
Can we see differences in evaluation between sites?
Scores are recorded per criterion, so the distribution shows which criteria judgement diverges on. The AI evaluation and a human reviewer’s can also be recorded side by side.
Does the candidate need to prepare anything?
A browser is all they need. It works on desktop, smartphone and tablet, with no app to install, and no need to travel to a branch.
Tell us how practice differs between your sites
We will show what to standardise and what to leave with each site. Free, about 30 minutes.