How to Score an Interview

Why most interview scoring fails

Scoring can fail for several reasons. Common ones include: the criteria are vague — “communication skills” means something different to every interviewer; the scale is unclear — is a 7 good, average or above average; and the scores are not anchored to evidence — they reflect impression rather than what the candidate actually said. Addressing these issues makes scores more useful and comparable.

Step 1: Define what you are scoring

Before the interview, write down the competencies you want to assess. These should come from the role, not from a generic list. For a Finance Director, you might score financial strategy, cash management, board communication and integrity. For a software engineer, you might score technical depth, system design, collaboration and engineering maturity. Four to six competencies is enough — more than that and the scorecard becomes unwieldy.

• Base the competencies on what the role actually requires
• Write a one-line description of what each competency means
• Share the competencies with every interviewer before the interview
• Use the same competencies for every candidate for the same role

Step 2: Choose a scoring scale

Use a 1 to 5 scale. Five points is enough to distinguish between candidates without pretending to a precision you do not have. Avoid 1 to 10 scales — they look more precise but many interviewers struggle to distinguish between adjacent points on a longer scale. Avoid 1 to 3 scales — they do not give you enough range.

• 1 — Evidence contradicts the requirement or creates a material concern
• 2 — Limited or weak evidence
• 3 — Credible evidence at the expected level
• 4 — Strong evidence with relevant depth and outcomes
• 5 — Exceptional evidence for the scope and seniority of this role
• N/E — Not enough evidence collected

Step 3: Anchor every score to evidence

A score without evidence is an opinion. A score with evidence is a judgement. For every competency, write down what the candidate said or did that led to your score. This does two things: it forces you to remember the interview rather than your impression of it, and it makes the debrief more productive because you can discuss specific evidence rather than arguing about numbers.

• Write your evidence immediately after the interview, not the next day
• Quote or paraphrase what the candidate actually said
• If there is insufficient evidence for a competency, mark it “Not assessed” and decide whether a focused follow-up is required. Do not convert missing evidence into a low score
• Do not let a strong performance in one area inflate scores in others

Step 4: Use a structured scorecard

A scorecard is not a spreadsheet — it is a shared agreement about what matters. Give every interviewer the same scorecard before the interview. The scorecard should list each competency, the scoring scale and space for evidence. After the interview, each interviewer fills in their own scores independently before the debrief. This prevents the first person to speak from anchoring the discussion.

Step 5: Compare scores in the debrief

In the debrief, go competency by competency. Ask each interviewer for their score and their evidence. Where scores differ, discuss the evidence — not the number. A 3 and a 5 on the same competency usually means the interviewers saw different things or are applying different standards. The discussion should resolve which it is.

• Share scores simultaneously, not one after another
• Discuss evidence before debating the number
• If two interviewers disagree by more than one point, dig into why
• Do not average scores blindly — a 1 and a 5 averaging to 3 hides a real disagreement

Privacy and handling of interview notes

Interview notes and scorecards may contain personal data about candidates. Store them securely, limit access to those who need it for the hiring decision, and retain them only as long as your organisation’s policy and legal obligations require. If you use AI tools to transcribe or summarise notes, check that candidates have been informed and that the tool processes data in line with your privacy obligations.

Reasonable adjustments

Some candidates may need adjustments to the interview process — for example, additional time, alternative formats for exercises, or breaks. Adjust the format while keeping the core assessment criteria consistent so every candidate is assessed on the same competencies. Ask candidates before the interview whether they need any adjustments.

Interviewer training and calibration

A scorecard is only as reliable as the interviewers using it. Brief your interviewers on the competencies and the scoring scale before the interview. Consider a calibration exercise where interviewers score the same example answer and compare their reasoning. This helps align standards before the real interviews begin.

Common scoring mistakes to avoid

• Halo effect — a strong performance in one area inflates scores across all areas
• Recency bias — the last answer weighs more than the first twenty
• Central tendency — every candidate gets a 3 because it feels safe
• Contrast effect — a weak candidate makes the next one look better than they are
• Confirmation bias — you score high because you liked the CV, not because of what was said

An example

Imagine you are interviewing two candidates for a senior engineering role. Candidate A gives a strong answer on system design but a weak answer on collaboration. Candidate B is adequate on both. Without a scorecard, the interviewer who cares about architecture hires A and the interviewer who cares about team fit hires B. With a scorecard, you can see that A scored 4 on design and 2 on collaboration, while B scored 3 on both. The decision becomes explicit: do you accept the collaboration risk for the design strength, or do you prefer the consistent performer?

A note on scoring scales

This article recommends a 1–5 scale for interviewer-completed competency scorecards. Kippler’s pre-interview candidate-assessment score is a separate product score presented out of 10.