Free hiring tool
Design an interview process you could defend
Most early stage interview processes are improvised, which is why two candidates get two different assessments and nobody can explain the decision afterwards. Set the stages, say what each one must prove, name who runs it, and print the scorecard.
Every stage earns its place
Each stage states what it must prove. If you cannot write that sentence, drop the stage.
Named owners
Interviews without an owner get rescheduled. Put a name against each one.
Consistent and comparable
Same core questions, same evidence areas, written down before you meet anyone.
Yours to print or share
Print it, or copy a link for the panel. Nothing is saved and nothing is sent to us.
1. The role
Pick a starting pattern, then change everything. These are common sequences in small technology teams — they are not validated formats for any particular discipline, and the right process is the one that proves what this role actually needs.
Loading a pattern replaces the stages below. Your role title and notes are kept.
2. The stages
0 stages · 0 minutes of candidate time
No stages yet. Choose a role type above and load a default pattern, or add a stage and write your own.
3. How the decision gets made
Agree this before the first interview. Deciding the rule after you have met someone you like is how inconsistent hiring happens.
Your interview process
0 stages · 0 minutes of candidate time
| Stage | Owner | Must prove |
|---|
Structured evaluation reminders
- Ask every candidate for a role the same core questions, in the same order, so answers can be compared.
- Write evidence down during or immediately after the stage — not after the debrief has formed a view.
- Score against the evidence areas you agreed before you met anyone, not against a favourite candidate.
- Only assess what the role genuinely requires. If a criterion would not change the decision, drop it.
- Never ask about age, health or disability, race or nationality, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender reassignment, marriage or civil partnership, pregnancy, maternity or caring responsibilities. Ask about the work instead.
- If an adjustment is needed for a candidate to show their ability, make it — and keep the evidence bar the same.
Related reading
Guides from the resource hub that cover the thinking behind this page. Each one is written by us and reviewed before publication.
- Interviews & scorecards
Building an evidence-based technical interview scorecard
A practical way for small teams to score technical interviews: four to six dimensions, each mapped to a stage and the evidence that proves it, agreed before you meet anyone.8 min read · Reviewed 15 August 2026 - Interviews & scorecards
Interview scorecards small teams can actually run
A lightweight structured interview framework for startups: four criteria, defined evidence, independent scoring and a decision rule agreed before you meet anyone.6 min read · Reviewed 15 August 2026 - Technical & deep-tech hiring
Must-have versus learnable skills in early-stage technical hiring
How to split a requirements list into what must be true on day one and what can be learned after joining — and why that decision sets the size of your pool.7 min read · Reviewed 15 August 2026
Before and after the interviews
- Technical hiring briefWrite the role down first — this tool can import the level and evidence areas from it.
- Hiring toolkitsBlank scorecards, evidence matrices and candidate briefing templates to fill in.
- Technical hiring playbookThe thinking behind evidence-based assessment, before you design the stages.
- Hiring readiness checkCheck interview ownership, pay sign-off and speed before you go to market.
- Arrange a conversationTalk through the role and how we would run the search alongside your process.
