A values-alignment rubric that scores observable behavior against your stated values β values add, not culture fit β with anchors designed to keep likability out of the score.
This scorecard evaluates whether {{Candidate name}} demonstrates the behaviors behind {{Company name}}'s stated values β not whether you would enjoy having lunch with them. The question is never do they fit in; it is would they raise our standard on the things we say we value, and bring perspective we lack. Fit-based scoring reliably filters for sameness and calls it culture.
| Value | Behavioral anchor β strong (3β4) | Behavioral anchor β weak (1β2) | Score (1β4) | Evidence notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| {{Company value 1}} | Describes a real situation where honoring this value cost them something β time, comfort, status β and they did it anyway. | Endorses the value in the abstract but cannot produce a single lived example, or their example contradicts it. | {{Score}} | {{Situation and quotes}} |
| {{Company value 2}} | Their story shows the behavior chosen when nobody was watching or rewarding it. | Behavior appears only when incentivized or instructed. | {{Score}} | {{Situation and quotes}} |
| {{Company value 3}} | Can describe a time they disagreed with how this value was applied and engaged productively rather than performing agreement. | Treats the value as unquestionable doctrine β a signal of performance, not conviction. | {{Score}} | {{Situation and quotes}} |
| Values add | Brings a perspective, background, or working style the current team lacks and explains how it has improved past teams. | Main appeal is resemblance to people already on the team. | {{Score}} | {{What do they add?}} |
| Field | Entry |
|---|---|
| Recommendation (strong no / no / yes / strong yes) | {{Recommendation}} |
| Strongest values evidence | {{One sentence}} |
| What this person adds that the team lacks | {{One sentence}} |
| Concern to validate elsewhere in the loop | {{One sentence}} |
If after the interview your notes contain more adjectives about the person than quotes from the person, discard the adjectives and score only the quotes.
Not legal advice
This template is provided for general informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Laws differ by jurisdiction and change over time β have a qualified professional review any document before you rely on it.
30 vetted interview questions for an Account Executive, grouped by competency β discovery, pipeline, demos and value selling, negotiation, forecasting, and coachability β with what-good-looks-like guidance.
Thirty vetted interview questions for Backend Engineer candidates covering API design, data modeling, performance, reliability, and collaboration, with strong-answer guidance.
A competency-based rubric for behavioral rounds: five competencies with calibrated anchors, past-behavior evidence rules, and a no-averaging recommendation section.
Twenty-eight vetted interview questions for Brand Designer candidates covering brand strategy, identity craft, systems, collaboration, and feedback, with strong-answer guidance.
A cross-stage evaluation matrix that combines individual scorecards into one weighted decision view, with rules for setting weights before interviews and handling gaps and vetoes.
A touchpoint-by-touchpoint checklist that keeps candidates informed and respected from application to decision, with response-time standards and the failures that cost offers.