Applications have arrived. Now you need to decide who is worth a conversation, run interviews that tell you something useful and keep people informed while you make the decision.
This is where a sensible brief earns its keep. If you do not know what matters in the job, it is very easy to spend an interview having a pleasant chat and still be unsure what you have learned.
Acknowledge applications and close the loop
Let people know their application has arrived and give a realistic idea of the process. An automatic acknowledgement can do the first part. It does not replace reviewing the application or communicating the eventual outcome.
If somebody is not progressing, tell them. You do not need to write an essay to every applicant, but silence is a poor way to finish a conversation someone has taken the trouble to start.
For people who have invested time in an interview, useful feedback matters more. Keep it factual and related to the requirements. Agree who will send it so the employer and agency are not each assuming the other has done it.
Use the brief, not a hunt for matching words
Compare the application with the real priorities from Parts 1 and 2. Look for evidence of the work the person has done, the problems they have handled and what they would need to learn.
A beautifully written CV is not proof that somebody can do the job. A poor CV is not proof that they cannot.
I talk about a 55% rule as a reminder to look again when there may be something useful there. Treat it as a prompt to investigate a potentially relevant person, not a scientifically validated score or a recommendation to hire someone who can only do 55% of the job.
They still need to meet genuine day-one requirements, including necessary safety, professional or legal requirements. The question is whether a short conversation could establish something the CV does not explain.
Distinguish learning your products or systems from lacking a central capability the role needs immediately. Then check whether the training you have promised is actually available.
Previous applicants can be worth another look
Someone who was not right for one vacancy may be relevant to another. Their experience may also have changed. Do not put a permanent line through a name simply because you have seen it before.
That does not mean automatically interviewing every returning applicant. Review the current evidence against the current job.
Keep recruitment records with a purpose
A CV, interview notes and an email address are personal data. Putting them in a CRM, connecting on LinkedIn or saying “we may have something later” does not remove your data-protection responsibilities.
Decide and document why you need the information and the appropriate lawful basis. Tell people how it will be used. Limit access, keep relevant records secure and keep only what is needed for a justified period. Set and follow a retention and deletion process; there is no single universal retention period for every recruitment record.
If you want to keep details for future opportunities, make that purpose clear and deal properly with the person’s rights. Do not assume an application gives unlimited permission for future use. Your process also needs appropriate safeguards for sensitive information.
Prepare an interview that tests the job
Read the application before the meeting. Agree a core set of role-related questions and what useful evidence would look like. Ask comparable core questions across candidates, then follow up the individual experience properly.
That is more useful than a rigid script which ignores what somebody has just said. It also makes later comparisons more meaningful than “I liked this one”.
Ask about work they have actually done. What was the problem? What did they personally do? Why did they choose that approach? What happened, and what would they do differently?
You are trying to understand their thinking and experience, not catch them out with a question borrowed from The Apprentice. Knowing what sort of sauce somebody thinks they are is unlikely to tell you much about the engineering job.
Where a practical assessment would help, make it relevant to the role and explain the task and assessment criteria in advance. Use it to answer a real hiring question, rather than adding another stage because it looks thorough.
Make the process fair and accessible
Tell candidates what to expect and provide a way to request reasonable adjustments. Keep selection focused on evidence relevant to the work. Friendly conversation is fine; questions about family plans or other irrelevant personal characteristics are not a useful selection method.
In Great Britain, asking about health or disability before an offer is generally restricted, with specific exceptions such as arranging assessment adjustments. Do not turn an informal chat into a medical enquiry. Check the applicable rules if unsure; Northern Ireland has a different employment-law framework.
Make sure everyone interviewing understands the agreed approach. Consistency does not mean ignoring an adjustment a candidate needs to take part fairly.
Remember that they are interviewing you too
Give the candidate a proper account of the job, manager, team and business. Let them ask questions and give answers that match what you said in the advert.
If the role involves a difficult problem, explain it. A capable person may welcome the challenge. Discovering that the job is materially different after accepting is another matter.
Discuss the package, working arrangements and expectations early enough to identify a mismatch. Do not leave an important issue until the offer because it feels awkward to raise it now.
Keep the stages purposeful
I generally prefer a process with a clear first conversation and a focused follow-up where needed. Two stages can work well, but the right number depends on the role and what you still need to establish.
Tell people the plan. Bring the actual decision-makers into the process at a sensible point. A surprise final interview with someone who can overturn the decision is frustrating for everyone.
After each stage, record the evidence against the criteria. Note uncertainties and decide how to resolve them. Experienced judgement has a place, but a gut feeling should prompt a question, not substitute for evidence or override the agreed requirements.
If the team disagrees, ask what each person observed. “They will fit in” needs unpacking. What does that mean in terms of the work and how the team operates?
Decide, explain and follow through
When you have enough evidence, make the decision. Tell people when they will hear from you and update them if that changes. Fast is helpful when the work has been done; rushed is something else.
Before moving to an offer, confirm the role, package, any conditions and the support the person will need. If your decision depends on coaching, name who will provide it and build it into the first 90 days.
A good interview process should leave both sides understanding what they are agreeing to. The offer then becomes the next sensible step, rather than a last attempt to rescue an unclear conversation.
Use the Employer Recruitment Pack alongside the agreed role brief. Next: Part 5 — making a job offer.
