Why every applicant deserves a thoughtful first conversation

Give the first round a clear purpose

A résumé is a useful introduction, but it is an incomplete account of someone’s work. Job titles vary between organisations. Career breaks have many explanations. A person may have solved the problem you care about without ever having held the title you expect. A first conversation creates space to understand that context.

Before adding another screening stage, decide what you need to learn from it. The objective is not to decide whether you would enjoy having coffee with someone. It is to gather enough job-relevant evidence to decide whether a deeper conversation is worthwhile. Write that objective down so the recruiter and hiring manager are evaluating the same thing.

Choose evidence, not familiar signals

Start with the work the person will actually do. For a customer support role, an example of explaining a difficult issue may be more useful than the prestige of a previous employer. For a project role, ask how the candidate handled uncertainty, dependencies, and competing priorities.

Agree on a small set of essential criteria before reviewing applications. Separate what someone must know on day one from what they can learn with support. This avoids quietly turning a long wish list into a set of unspoken rejection rules.

• Describe the first few meaningful outcomes expected in the role.
• Identify the skills those outcomes depend on.
• Choose one open question for each essential skill.
• Record what evidence would justify moving to the next stage.

Leave room for a different kind of answer

Ask a question that invites an example rather than a polished slogan. “Tell me about a time you had to explain a complicated problem” gives someone a starting point. Follow up with “What did you do?” and “How did you know it helped?” to separate the candidate’s own contribution from the team’s result.

Useful experience can come from paid employment, volunteering, study, caring responsibilities, or an independent project. The source matters less than its relevance to the criterion. Explain that candidates can choose an example from the context that best demonstrates their thinking, while applying the same evidence standard to everyone.

Respect the time on both sides

A broad opportunity to be considered does not require an endless interview for every application. Keep the first stage proportionate to the role. Tell candidates what the conversation covers, roughly how long it takes, what technology is involved, and how to request an alternative or accommodation.

Avoid collecting the same information at every stage. When a candidate has already explained a relevant project, the next interviewer should build on that context rather than start again. A clear handoff respects their effort and lets the team spend its limited time on unanswered questions.

Review who progresses—and why

After a hiring round, look at the reasons behind progression decisions. Are reviewers referring to the agreed criteria, or relying on phrases such as “not quite the right fit”? Where two reviewers disagree, ask which evidence each used. Differences can reveal an unclear question or a rubric that needs work.

Treat screening as a process you can improve, not a judgement machine that becomes objective simply because it is consistent. Human review, candidate feedback, and attention to accessibility remain important. The goal is a better-informed next conversation, with fewer assumptions standing between a person and a fair consideration.