reph

Templates · People

Hiring debrief template

Structured hiring debrief: independent panel scores recorded before discussion, evidence by competency, concerns, a bias check and the hire or no hire decision

Start with this template →Sign in

Opens on reph with the template ready to start. No account needed; sign in to keep your document.

Use it when

Every interviewer has submitted a scorecard and the panel meets to reach a hire or no hire decision based on evidence rather than the loudest voice

Who it's for

RecruiterManagerEngineering managerTech lead

Part of a kit

Hiring and onboarding, step 3 of 4. Job description, interview scorecard, hiring debrief and a 30/60/90 onboarding plan.

Filled example

The template filled in for a made-up company, so you can see what good looks like.

Senior backend engineer debrief

Candidate: C-2026-041 · Role: Senior backend engineer (L5) · Facilitator: Hana Moreau · Date: 2026-09-30

Panel scores (submitted before discussion)

Interviewer Focus area Score Recommendation Submitted before debrief
Felix Grant System design 3 Hire Yes
Aiko Mori Coding 4 Strong hire Yes
Ben Castillo Collaboration 2 Lean no hire Yes
Hana Moreau Hiring manager 3 Hire Yes

Evidence by competency

Competency Evidence for Evidence against Panel view
System design Designed a sharded queue with clear failure modes; asked about write volume before choosing storage Skipped capacity numbers until prompted At level
Coding Clean solution in 30 minutes, wrote tests unprompted, refactored when edge cases appeared None noted Above level
Collaboration Described mentoring two juniors at Northwind with concrete examples Interrupted Ben twice during the pairing exercise; dismissed one suggestion without explaining Mixed
Ownership Led an incident review end to end and shipped the fixes None noted At level

Concerns

  • Collaboration under pressure: the pairing exercise showed interruptions. Could be nerves; the mentoring examples point the other way. A reference check with a former peer could resolve it.

Score changes after discussion

Interviewer From To Reason
Ben Castillo 2 2 Kept his score; agreed the reference check should decide it

Bias check

Decision record

Decision Hire, conditional on references
Level L5
Decided by Hana Moreau
Date 2026-09-30
Dissent noted Ben leans no hire on collaboration; asked that one reference be a former peer
Next step Two references (one peer) by Oct 7, then offer

The template

Show the blank template

Hiring debrief

Candidate: [code, e.g. C-2026-041] · Role: [role and level] · Facilitator: [your name] · Date: [date]

Use the candidate code only. No names, photos, ages or personal details in this doc.

Panel scores (submitted before discussion)

Copied from scorecards as submitted. Scale: 1 no evidence, 2 some evidence with gaps, 3 clear evidence at level, 4 above level.

Interviewer Focus area Score Recommendation Submitted before debrief

Evidence by competency

Specific things the candidate said or did. Opinions without evidence do not count.

Competency Evidence for Evidence against Panel view
[Competency 1]
[Competency 2]
[Competency 3]

Concerns

Each concern with the evidence behind it, and whether a reference check or follow-up could resolve it.

Score changes after discussion

If anyone changes a score, record the old score, new score and the evidence that changed it.

Interviewer From To Reason

Bias check

Run through before the decision.

Decision record

Decision Hire / No hire
Level
Decided by
Date
Dissent noted
Next step [offer, references, reject with feedback]

Questions

Why record scores before the discussion?
So the first or most senior opinion cannot anchor the others; changed scores are noted separately with a reason
Why a candidate code instead of a name?
It keeps personal data out of a shared doc and keeps the discussion on evidence
Who makes the final call?
The hiring manager decides, with the panel's evidence recorded and any dissent noted

Fill it with your agent

Connect Claude to reph over MCP, then paste this. The draft arrives as suggestions you accept or reject section by section. How to connect Claude.

Find my reph doc "Hiring debrief" with search_docs, then read it with read_doc. Fill the panel table only from the scorecards I paste, as scored before the debrief, and summarize evidence by competency. Use the candidate code only, copy no personal details, and leave decision and bias check to the panel. File it with suggest_edit, one replace_section op per section (heading line kept) so each can be accepted alone. Ask each open question (competencies with thin or conflicting evidence) with add_comment quoting that section's heading line, then call request_review with a one-line summary.

Related templates

Job description

Role summary, responsibilities, requirements and benefits

RecruiterManagerFounder

Interview scorecard

Structured evaluation against role competencies

RecruiterManagerEngineering managerTech lead

Onboarding plan

30/60/90 day plan for a new teammate

ManagerEngineering managerTech leadOperations

1:1 notes

Recurring 1:1 agenda: wins, blockers, growth, action items

ManagerEngineering managerTech lead

Performance review

Self and manager review against goals and values

ManagerEngineering managerTech lead

Team charter

A team's mission, scope, members and roles, ways of working, rituals, decision rights and how to reach them

ManagerEngineering managerTech leadAnyone

Start with this template →Sign in