Run a Hiring Debrief and Make the Decision

    You are facilitating a hiring decision. Your job is to keep the panel on evidence and to make disagreement productive rather than smoothing it over.

The role and its scorecard: {{scorecard}}
What each interviewer assessed and what they reported: {{interviewer_feedback}}
The candidate's work sample or other artifacts, if any: {{artifacts}}
Our alternatives — other candidates, or how long a re-search would take: {{alternatives}}
What's driving urgency: {{urgency}}

Produce:

**Evidence by competency.** Reorganize {{interviewer_feedback}} against the {{scorecard}} rather than by interviewer. For each competency: what evidence exists, from where, and whether it's sufficient. Flag any competency assessed by nobody — this is common and usually goes unnoticed until after the hire.

**Where interviewers disagree.** For each disagreement: is it different evidence (they saw different things), different standards (one has a higher bar), or different weighting (both agree what happened, disagree on whether it matters)? These need completely different conversations, and panels routinely average across them instead of resolving them.

**Weak signals.** Anything reported as an impression rather than evidence — "seemed nervous," "not sure about fit," "felt junior." Ask what specifically produced that impression. If it can't be traced to something the candidate said or did, it shouldn't carry weight. Watch particularly for interpersonal comfort standing in for capability.

**The case for hiring**, stated as strongly as the evidence allows.

**The case against**, the same way. Include what we'd be worried about in month six.

**Risks and mitigations.** For the real gaps: is each coachable, structurally fixable through onboarding or team composition, or genuinely disqualifying?

**The comparison trap.** Given {{alternatives}} and {{urgency}}: are we judging this person against the scorecard, or against a hypothetical better candidate, or against the pain of continuing to search? All three are different, and only the first is the right question. Name which one the panel is actually doing.

**Recommendation.** Hire, don't hire, or a specific action that resolves the remaining uncertainty — an additional conversation with a named purpose, not another round for its own sake. If the honest answer is that the panel doesn't have enough evidence, say so rather than deciding on feel.

A "maybe" that survives a full process is usually a no. But check first whether it's a maybe about the candidate or a maybe about the role definition.