Overview

Competencies are the behaviors and capabilities that predict whether someone will hit the outcomes. Derive them from the outcomes - don't start with a generic competency list.

For each outcome, ask: "What capability does someone need to achieve this?"

Common competency categories to consider:

• Technical / Functional: Domain knowledge, craft skills, tool fluency
• Problem-solving: Analytical rigor, structured thinking, ambiguity tolerance
• Execution: Ownership, delivery track record, bias for action
• Collaboration: Stakeholder management, communication, influence without authority
• Leadership: Team development, strategic thinking, driving alignment (for senior roles)

Cap at 6 competencies. More than 6 makes calibration impractical.

Step 3: Write 2-3 Structured Questions per Competency

Use behavioral questions (past behavior predicts future performance) following the STAR format: Situation, Task, Action, Result.

The Mom Test principle applied to interviewing: ask about specific past events, not hypotheticals. "Tell me about a time you..." beats "What would you do if..."

Question templates by competency type:

Execution / Ownership:

• "Tell me about the project you're most proud of shipping. Walk me through what you owned end-to-end."
• "Describe a time you missed a deadline. What caused it and what did you do?"

Problem-solving:

• "Walk me through the hardest technical problem you've solved in the last 12 months. How did you structure your approach?"
• "Tell me about a decision you made with incomplete information. What was your process?"

Collaboration / Influence:

• "Describe a time you had to convince someone senior to change direction. What was the situation and how did you approach it?"
• "Tell me about a conflict with a peer or cross-functional partner. How did you resolve it?"

Leadership (senior roles):

• "Tell me about someone you developed who went on to do something bigger than you expected. What did you do specifically?"
• "Describe a time you changed the strategy of a team or function. What triggered it?"

Step 4: Build the Scoring Rubric

Use a 3-point scale (A/B/C) to keep calibration fast and consistent. Avoid 5-point scales - the middle becomes a gravity well.

For each competency, define what A, B, and C look like:

Competency: [Name]

A (Strong Yes):
- Clear ownership of outcomes in past roles
- Specific, detailed examples with measurable results
- Demonstrated in multiple contexts
- Proactively identified and solved problems beyond their scope

B (Leaning Yes / Needs Discussion):
- Examples exist but are thin on detail or recency
- Achieved outcomes but with significant guidance
- One clear data point, not a pattern

C (No Hire):
- Examples are vague, hypothetical, or borrowed from team credit
- Avoids accountability ("we" language throughout)
- Cannot describe the impact of their work
- Repeated pattern of blaming external factors

Step 5: Assign Interviewers to Competencies

Each interviewer covers 1-2 competencies, not all of them. This prevents overlap, reduces candidate fatigue, and gives each interviewer deep coverage of their area.

Scorecard assignment format:

Interviewer 1 (Recruiter - phone screen): Culture fit, communication, career narrative
Interviewer 2 (Hiring Manager): Execution, ownership, alignment to outcomes
Interviewer 3 (Peer / IC): Technical / functional competency, collaboration
Interviewer 4 (Cross-functional): Stakeholder management, communication

Step 6: Define the Final Scorecard Template

Deliver a scorecard document interviewers fill in after each conversation:

# Interview Scorecard: [Role Title]
Candidate: _______________
Interviewer: _______________
Date: _______________

## Competencies Assessed

### [Competency 1]
Question(s) asked:
Evidence collected (verbatim notes preferred):
Rating: A / B / C
Notes:

### [Competency 2]
[Same format]

## Overall Recommendation
[ ] Strong Yes - A hire. Would advocate strongly.
[ ] Yes - Meets bar. Would not block.
[ ] No - Does not meet bar. Would block.
[ ] Strong No - Clear concerns. Would actively recommend against.

Key reason for recommendation (1-2 sentences):

Anti-Patterns

1. Using the same generic question bank for every role Bad: "Tell me about yourself. What's your greatest weakness? Where do you see yourself in 5 years?" Good: Questions tied to the specific competencies that predict success in this role and at this company stage.

2. Treating scorecard as a formality filled out after the debrief Bad: Interviewers compare notes verbally, then fill in the scorecard to match the group consensus. Good: Every interviewer submits their scorecard independently before the debrief begins.

3. Evaluating everything with one score Bad: "I'd give her a 7/10 overall." Good: Separate scores per competency. A candidate can be A on execution and C on leadership - that distinction matters.

4. Hypothetical questions Bad: "What would you do if a stakeholder pushed back on your recommendation?" Good: "Tell me about the last time a stakeholder pushed back on your recommendation. What happened?"

5. Allowing halo/horn effect Bad: One impressive answer early in the interview colors all subsequent assessments. Good: Structured questions force coverage of all competencies regardless of first impression.

Quality Checklist

• Scorecard has 4-6 competencies (not more)
• Each competency derives from a role outcome, not a generic list
• Every question is behavioral ("Tell me about a time...") not hypothetical
• A/B/C rubric is written out explicitly for each competency
• Interviewers are assigned specific competencies, not the full list
• Scorecards are submitted independently before the debrief
• Overall recommendation uses a 4-point scale (Strong Yes, Yes, No, Strong No)