Feel free to ignore this if you think it is prying a bit too much.
I’m hoping that you had clearly defined criteria for each of these different methods (for each of the questions on the application form, for the work tests and trials, and for the interview questions), rather than just using a general/gestalt “how much do I like this” evaluation. Would you be able to share a bit about what criteria you used and how they were chosen?
Our team put a lot of thought into the job description which highlights the essential and desirable skills we were looking for. Each test was written with these criteria in mind, and we also used them to help reviewers score responses.[1] This helped reviewers provide scores more consistently and purposefully. Just to avoid overstating things though, I’d add that we weren’t just trying to legalistically make sure every question had a neat correspondence to previously written criteria, but instead were thinking “is this representative of the type of work the role involves?”
This is probably a bit more in the weeds than necessary, but though the initial application questions were written with clear reference to essential/desirable skills in the job description, I didn’t convert that into a clear grading rubric for reviewers to use. This was just an oversight.
Feel free to ignore this if you think it is prying a bit too much.
I’m hoping that you had clearly defined criteria for each of these different methods (for each of the questions on the application form, for the work tests and trials, and for the interview questions), rather than just using a general/gestalt “how much do I like this” evaluation. Would you be able to share a bit about what criteria you used and how they were chosen?
We did!
Our team put a lot of thought into the job description which highlights the essential and desirable skills we were looking for. Each test was written with these criteria in mind, and we also used them to help reviewers score responses.[1] This helped reviewers provide scores more consistently and purposefully. Just to avoid overstating things though, I’d add that we weren’t just trying to legalistically make sure every question had a neat correspondence to previously written criteria, but instead were thinking “is this representative of the type of work the role involves?”
This is probably a bit more in the weeds than necessary, but though the initial application questions were written with clear reference to essential/desirable skills in the job description, I didn’t convert that into a clear grading rubric for reviewers to use. This was just an oversight.
Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions. :)