Interview report: how to document evidence beyond “I liked the candidate”
How to write an interview report with evidence by criterion, quotes and situations, rating scale scores, information gaps and a decision grounded in the work.
An interview report communicates the basis for a decision
After several interviews, it’s easy to mix up the answers. A short report helps you compare candidates using the same criteria and discuss disagreements between interviewers in concrete terms.
Recording a conversation doesn’t authorize collecting extra data. Include only what’s needed for the decision about the role, and respect access and retention rules. This article does not replace internal HR procedures or legal review.
Use separate fields for facts, interpretation and ratings
Record the interview context
Include the role, question set version, participants and format. Keep logistical information out of the assessment of skills. If part of the interview didn’t take place, note that limitation.
Gather evidence for each criterion
Record actions, decisions and results from the candidate’s specific examples. Shorten the wording without changing its meaning. Verify any important quote against the recording and keep the timestamp in the internal materials.
Use the common rating scale
Compare the evidence with the levels defined in advance. When evidence is missing, don’t assign a middle score just to complete the table. Say what remains unanswered and whether it can be checked later.
State the decision and risks
Summarize the scores once all criteria have been addressed. Note strengths, risks and conditions that matter to the job. The decision should follow from the table, without introducing a new opinion in the final row.
Fictional answer about conflicting priorities
This is a fictional training example. The names, circumstances and outcomes are included solely to explain the method.
I got the owners of both tasks together, showed how the deadlines depended on each other, and proposed releasing the required part first and moving the other back a week. Both managers approved the decision.
Fact for the report: the candidate compared dependencies, proposed an option and secured approval from those involved. Interpretation: the candidate can bring a conflict of priorities into the open and look for a solution people can agree on.
We don’t know how the candidate communicated the changes to the people doing the work or what happened afterward. If that matters to the role, flag the gap rather than writing “excellent communicator.”
| Criterion | Evidence | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Prioritization | Showed the deadline dependency | Supported by the answer |
| Alignment | Secured a decision from both owners | Supported by the answer |
| Communication | How the team was told | No information |
| Outcome | What happened afterward | Needs follow-up |
Interview report template
Use only approved criteria and follow the access rules for the material.
Role / candidate / date: Interviewers: Question and scale version: Criterion: Brief evidence: Quote or timestamp if needed: Score and rationale: What we couldn’t establish: How to check the gap: Logistical facts, separately: Strengths for the role: Risks for the role: Final decision and rationale: Access and retention under company rules:
Check the result before using it
- All scores relate to criteria for the role.
- Evidence is separate from interpretation.
- Gaps in the information are stated explicitly.
- The decision contains no new, unsupported claims.
A closer look
Can we write “didn’t like the candidate”?
That doesn’t explain how the assessment relates to the job. Identify a specific criterion and supporting evidence, or acknowledge that the assessment isn’t supported.
What if interviewers disagree?
Compare the facts and how the scale was applied for each criterion. Discuss the specifics before considering any vote.