Criteria chart toolkit

This guide is intended for the search chair, search committee, and hiring manager. Using agreed-upon criteria among the search committee, the search chair, in collaboration with the hiring authority/manager’s HR professional or HR associate, should lead in developing the criteria chart. This chart can be used to evaluate applicants' skills and qualifications. Effective and appropriate use of a criteria chart makes the screening process more objective, systematic, and effective. The selection criteria in the chart must be carefully defined and directly related to the requirements of the position. Listed below are examples of what can be included when preparing a criteria chart.

• Educational requirements
• Years of experience requirements (note: it is important to consider that professionals earlier in their careers may possess qualifications that make them strong candidates)
• Most important job duties or responsibilities of the position
• Most critical technical skills or competencies required for the position
• Most critical interpersonal skills required for the position
• Dedication to fairness, acceptance, and community
• Demonstration of leading teams with varied perspectives
• Professional affiliations
• Veteran status: Eligible veteran status must be considered, consistent with state and institutional policy, when the applicant meets the minimum/required qualifications for the position. See details in the Veteran's Preference Guidelines. 

Exercise discretion when using criteria charts, and do not “rank” candidates or assign them a numerical value. It is also important to note that not all evaluative criteria should be weighted equally. For example, a specialized degree may not be “equal” to years of experience. It is advised to evaluate candidates based on areas of perceived strength related to the position description, areas of perceived weakness related to the position description, and areas where more clarification on the candidate’s skills and qualifications can be provided. Review sample evaluation tools.

Throughout the search, the chair and support team should ensure that documentation is retained containing:

• Major criteria used to select applicants beyond initial screening
• Major criteria used to select finalists for interviews
• Major criteria used to select the successful applicant
• Specific reasons for rejection of candidates interviewed but not selected

Ensure all documents retained contain factual, job-related information, not opinions or preferences of the committee that are not grounded in fact.

This guide is intended for the hiring manager, search chair, and search committee. It will be helpful to utilize this document when building out screening matrices or leading candidate evaluation screening meetings.

To ensure that applicants are evaluated fairly, remember to be open-minded about:

• Interruptions in degree programs or work careers
• The reputation of degree-granting or employing institutions. Institutional reputation alone, however well deserved, should not preclude consideration of applicants from other schools
• Careers that started in or include government, business, voluntary service, or other non-academic settings. Consider the value and transferability of skills and experience acquired in these varied settings.
• Stereotyping (myths and first impressions)
• Desiring to “clone” your ideal employee or the current incumbent
• Relying on opinions and not facts
• Evaluating candidates prematurely

When evaluating candidates, be aware of the following:

• Gendered adjectives (“Dr. Sarah Gray is a caring, compassionate physician with patients” –vs. – Dr. John Gray has been very successful with his patients”)
• Doubt raisers or negative language (“although they have not been in the field very long” or “while not the strongest interviewer, they are very qualified for...”)
• Potentially negative language (“They require only minimal supervision” or “They are totally intolerant of overly verbose emails”)
• Hedges (“They respond well to negative feedback”)

To ensure that each applicant’s knowledge and experience is evaluated thoroughly and objectively, consider the following best practices during your review process.

Focus on Achievements, Not Just Responsibilities

Rather than solely listing job duties, give weight to demonstrated outcomes and accomplishments. For example, instead of “Managed a research project,” consider whether the applicant provides evidence of impact, such as “Led a research project that resulted in a publication in a top-tier journal.”

Evaluate Research Skills

• Publications: Consider the quality, relevance, and impact of the applicant’s publications, including journal rankings and citation metrics.
• Research Projects: Assess the scope and depth of their contributions, including any funding secured, interdisciplinary collaborations, and project outcomes.
• Technical Proficiency: Look for demonstrated expertise in relevant methodologies, tools, or technologies related to their field of research.

Identify Field-Relevant Language and Terminology
Pay attention to discipline-specific terminology and keywords that reflect familiarity with current trends, standards, or innovations in the field.

Consider Career Trajectory
Review patterns of advancement and professional growth, which may indicate sustained performance, leadership potential, and increasing responsibility over time.

Validate Claims Thoughtfully
Approach vague or broadly stated achievements with healthy scrutiny. When appropriate, seek clarification through follow-up questions or reference checks to confirm specific contributions or outcomes.

Evaluate Interpersonal and Transferable Skills
In addition to academic credentials, assess soft skills such as communication, problem-solving, leadership, and adaptability, which contribute significantly to success in academic and collaborative environments.

Evaluate Academic Background
Review the applicant’s academic history as it relates to the requirements of the position. Consider the relevance of degrees earned, fields of study, and any additional academic indicators where appropriate.

Consider Evidence of Ongoing Professional Development
Look for signs of continued growth and engagement in the field, such as participation in workshops, professional certifications, continuing education, or involvement in academic and professional conferences.

Review in Context
Always evaluate application materials within the context of the specific role and institutional needs. An applicant’s experiences should be considered relative to the expectations and opportunities of the position in question.

Source: SHRM