How to compare candidates with common criteria
When each recruiter looks at different things, decisions become inconsistent. How to compare candidates with the same criteria for more consistent, defensible decisions.
Put two recruiters in front of the same five candidates and, often, they’ll choose differently. Not because one is wrong, but because each one looks at different things: one values experience, another potential, another cultural fit. Without common criteria, the decision depends on who reviewed the resume.
Why two recruiters choose differently
The inconsistency isn’t bad faith: it’s the natural consequence of assessing without a shared framework. Each person weighs differently, remembers differently, and is swayed by different signals (the order in which they saw the resumes, the last interview, a personal coincidence). The result is that the same candidate can advance or fall out depending on who looks at them.
What common criteria are
Common criteria are the role’s standard defined before looking at anyone: which competencies matter and how much each one weighs. When all candidates go through that same standard, comparisons stop being “apples to oranges.”
How a comparable signal orders the decision
When you assess candidates against the role’s criteria, each one ends up with a comparable signal of fit. That lets you order them consistently and see, within each one, where they’re strong and where it’s worth digging deeper — without depending on who did the review.
This is what the report your team gets looks like
A reference example with fictitious data to show how Kokoro organizes the information before the interview.
Role fit indicator · example
Strengths: analytical thinking, integrity. Gaps: written communication.
A (orange) vs B (gray) · reference example
- Explore in the interview: concrete examples of written communication.
- Confirm with references: experience with accounting closings.
- Leverage a strength: leading analysis under deadlines.
Reference example with fictitious candidates.
Want to compare candidates against common criteria?
Start freeComparing without losing human judgment
Common criteria don’t make the decision in your place: they give you an ordered base so that you and your team decide. The comparable signal is the starting point of the conversation, not its replacement. You still apply context, you met the candidate in the interview, and you have information no assessment captures.
In short
When several recruiters assess without a shared framework, decisions become inconsistent. Common criteria —defined before looking at candidates and applied equally to everyone— reduce that inconsistency and make decisions more comparable and defensible. See what the report looks like or review cases in clients.