Candidate Evaluation Matrix
Compare a shortlist against weighted criteria and rank it on what actually matters — not on whoever interviewed best on the day. One matrix, one comparable score per candidate, a decision you can defend.
- Weighted scoring
- For 2–5 candidates
- Print or fill on screen
Turn a roomful of opinions into one comparable decision
Built for recruiters, HR teams and hiring managers who have to choose between good candidates — and explain the choice.
Reach for the matrix when you're comparing people, not assessing one
It earns its place the moment a decision involves more than one credible candidate.
- You're comparing two or more candidates for the same role and need to rank them fairly.
- A panel or committee has to align — independent scores reconcile faster than opinions.
- The role is senior or high-stakes, and the decision has to be defensible.
- Gut-feel debates keep stalling your debriefs.
- You're weighing internal candidates or a promotion and want an even-handed process.
- You're assessing a single candidate — use the Interview Scorecard instead.
- You haven't defined the role's criteria yet — start with the Hiring Request Brief.
Everything you need to score a shortlist in one page
Ready to use as-is, or adapt the criteria and weights to your role in minutes.
- 01A ready-to-use weighted scoring matrix — criteria down the side, candidates across the top
- 02A weight column that makes your priorities explicit and must total 100%
- 03A 1–5 scoring scale with anchored definitions, so a 4 means the same to everyone
- 04A weighted-total row that turns scores into a single comparable number per candidate
- 05A starter library of example criteria with suggested weights by role type
- 06A worked example that shows how weighting can change which candidate wins
- 07Print-ready A4, or fill it in on screen — in English and Persian
Weighted scoring, explained
A plain average treats every criterion as equal — but real roles aren't. The technical depth that makes or breaks an engineering hire shouldn't count the same as a nice-to-have. Weighted scoring fixes that: you decide how much each criterion matters, and the maths does the rest.
The result is a single number per candidate that reflects your actual priorities, so the person who wins on what matters most wins overall — not the one who is merely well-rounded.
| Criterion | Weight | Candidate A | Candidate B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Technical depth | 35% | 5 | 3 |
| Problem solving | 30% | 5 | 3 |
| Communication | 20% | 2 | 5 |
| Culture add | 15% | 2 | 5 |
| Weighted total | 3.95 | 3.70 | |
| Simple average | 3.5 | 4.0 |
Score them equally and Candidate B wins (4.0 vs 3.5). But this role lives or dies on technical depth and problem-solving — so weighting reveals Candidate A (3.95) as the stronger hire. Same scores, different answer. That is the entire point of weighting.
Example criteria and suggested weights
A starting library — keep what fits the role, drop what doesn't, and tune the weights to your priorities. The ranges assume a five-to-seven-criterion matrix.
Get the Candidate Evaluation Matrix
Fill it in on screen and save it as a PDF, or print it and score by hand. Free, no sign-up — English and Persian, ready for your next shortlist.
Candidate Evaluation Matrix
Weighted total = Σ (weight × score) ÷ 100
| Criterion | Weight % | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Weighted total | |||||
Weights must total 100%. Score each candidate 1–5, then compute the weighted total per candidate.
Questions teams ask
How is this different from an interview scorecard?
A scorecard captures one interviewer's read of one candidate at one stage. The matrix sits above that: it brings every candidate's scores together against the same weighted criteria so you can compare a shortlist and rank it. Use scorecards during the process, and the matrix at the decision.
How do I decide the weights?
Start from the role's must-haves. Ask which two or three things most predict success — those carry the most weight, and everything else shares the rest. Sanity-check that the column sums to 100%, and agree the weights before you score anyone, so the priorities aren't quietly bent to fit a favourite.
What scoring scale should I use?
A 1–5 scale with short anchored definitions (1 = well below the bar, 3 = meets it, 5 = clearly exceeds). Avoid 1–10 — it invents precision you don't have and makes interviewers argue over a point that carries no real evidence.
Can the weighted total be misleading?
Yes — treat it as a structured input, not a verdict. A narrow gap between two candidates is effectively a tie; don't let a 0.1 decide a hire. And a single dealbreaker — a failed reference, a values red flag — should override any score, however high the total.
Who should fill it in, and how?
The people who assessed the candidates. Where you can, have each panellist score independently first, then reconcile — comparing independent scores surfaces disagreement you would otherwise talk past. One shared matrix, filled together at the debrief, keeps everyone honest.
Hiring for more than one seat?
Our consultants build weighted evaluation into every shortlist we run — and can tailor the criteria to your roles and your market.