The problem
Interviewer training can stay abstract when it is separated from the interviews people actually conduct. Without a structured way to review their own conversations, interviewers have little visibility into what they do well, where they lose useful evidence, and what to improve next.
What I built
Interview Evaluator reviews an interview transcript and gives the interviewer structured feedback on their strengths and areas for improvement. I built it as part of my interviewer training program so development could continue through the work itself.
The tool examines how the conversation was structured, how evidence was gathered, and where judgment may need more support. The feedback gives interviewers something concrete to practise in their next interview while helping hiring teams build a more consistent approach to assessment.
How I use the feedback
I review the tool’s feedback with the interviewer against the role standard. Where did a follow-up uncover useful evidence? Where did the conversation move on before we understood the candidate’s contribution? What conclusion does the record support, and what remains unanswered? That gives the interviewer one or two things to practise in the next conversation.
A worked coaching example shows the wider practice. Advisory explains how I develop the role standard before interviews begin.
The framework work around the tool
The newer framework work defines the evidence a role requires, gives each interviewer an area to examine, and records confirmed evidence, unanswered questions, and demonstrated gaps separately. For AI-building roles, the inquiry follows a system through real use: what the person shipped, owned, operated, measured, and learned.
This framework is being developed separately from the transcript tool. The newer criteria are not presented as implemented automated scoring features. Interviewers and hiring leaders still interpret the evidence and own the decision.
Explore my approach to finding and assessing AI builders and building interview frameworks.
Design decision
The tool supports interviewer development rather than replacing the interviewer or making the hiring decision. Explicit bias safeguards help surface moments where an assessment may rely on pattern matching rather than evidence.
In the wider TA Operating System, that coaching sits alongside the role bar, interviewer feedback, and calibration. The transcript tool supports the interviewer’s development; the hiring team remains responsible for the candidate assessment and decision.