Yara Mansour had been head of talent at a four-hundred-person enterprise software company for one year when she audited her team's interview feedback templates. The audit revealed what every TA leader eventually discovers. The team had seven different templates, each created by a different recruiter for a different role family, and none of the templates were producing the evidence that the hiring decision was what is requiring. Sixty-eight percent of the feedback fields were free-text boxes that the interviewers were what is filling with the impressions that the team was what is what is what is what is what is what is what is what is what is what is what is what is what is what is what is what the team was trying to avoid, and that the avoiding is what the team was trying to do. Yara spent the next quarter designing seven templates that the team could use today, each designed to capture the specific evidence that the decision was what is requiring, and the templates produced a sixty-percent improvement in feedback quality within one quarter. Here are the seven templates she designed, and how any TA leader can adapt them.
What an Interview Feedback Template Actually Is—and What It Is Not
An interview feedback template is the structured form that the interviewer is what is using to capture the evaluation of the candidate and that the capturing is what the team is what is using to make the hiring decision and that the decision is what the team was trying to produce. The template is not the form that the interviewer is what is filling out—the template is the structure that the team is what is using to ensure that the interviewer is what is capturing the evidence that the decision is what is requiring and that the ensuring is what the team was trying to do. The template is what the team is what is using to turn the impression into the evidence and that the turning is what the team was trying to produce.
The reason the template matters more in 2026 than in previous years is that the cost of the unstructured feedback has grown as the competition for talent has intensified, because the unstructured feedback is what the team is what is using to make the decisions that are what is producing the bad hires and that the bad hires are what the team was trying to avoid. According to McKinsey research on interview feedback, the structured feedback templates produce forty percent better predictive validity than the unstructured feedback forms, because the structure is what is producing the evidence that the impression does not produce and that the evidence is what the team was trying to produce. The template is not a nice-to-have—it is the structure that is what is producing the evidence that the decision is what is requiring and that the team was trying to produce.
The companies that have built the most effective templates share a common approach: they treat the template as a designed artifact rather than as a default form, because the designed artifact is what is producing the evidence that the default form does not produce. As our analysis of more tools same hiring problems argues, the teams that have invested in feedback tools without investing in the template design have produced the tools that the interviewers are what is using to record the impressions and that the impressions are what the team was trying to avoid and that the design is what enables the team to avoid it.
Template One: The Competency-Based Template for the Structured Interview
The first template is the competency-based template for the structured interview, because the competency-based template is what the team is what is using to capture the evaluation of the candidate against the defined competencies and that the capturing is what the team is what is using to make the decision and that the decision is what the team was trying to produce. The competency-based template is the template that is what is using the defined competencies and the calibrated rubric and that the using is what the team is what is using to ensure that the evaluation is what is producing the comparable data and that the ensuring is what the team was trying to do. The competency-based template is the template that is what is most common in the enterprise and that the commonness is what the team is what is using to produce the evaluation that the team was trying to produce.
The first competency-based template principle is to include the competencies that the role is what is requiring and the calibrated rubric that the interviewer is what is using to score the candidate, because the including is what the team is what is using to ensure that the evaluation is what is producing the comparable data and that the ensuring is what the team was trying to do. According to Gartner talent acquisition research on feedback templates, the competency-based templates that include the competencies and the rubric report forty-five percent better feedback quality, because the including is what is producing the comparability that the template without the rubric does not produce and that the comparability is what the team was trying to produce. The template should include the specific behaviors that the interviewer is what is observing at each point on the rubric, because the specific behaviors are what is producing the comparability that the undefined rubric does not produce.
The second competency-based template principle is to require the evidence that the interviewer is what is using to justify the score, because the requiring is what the team is what is using to ensure that the evaluation is what is producing the evidence and that the ensuring is what the team was trying to do. As our analysis of the recruiting dashboard every TA team needs explains, the dashboards that produce the most useful competency-based templates are those that require the evidence, because the requiring is what is producing the evidence that the score alone does not produce.
Template Two: The Behavior-Based Template for the STAR Interview
The second template is the behavior-based template for the STAR interview, because the behavior-based template is what the team is what is using to capture the evaluation of the candidate based on the past behavior and that the capturing is what the team is what is using to predict the future behavior and that the predicting is what the team was trying to produce. The behavior-based template is the template that is what is using the STAR method—the situation, the task, the action, the result—and that the using is what the team is what is using to ensure that the evaluation is what is producing the evidence that the prediction is what is requiring and that the ensuring is what the team was trying to do.
The first behavior-based template principle is to structure the template around the STAR method, because the structuring is what the team is what is using to ensure that the interviewer is what is capturing the specific situation, the task, the action, and the result and that the ensuring is what the team was trying to do. According to SHRM research on behavior-based templates, the behavior-based templates that use the STAR structure report forty percent better predictive validity, because the structuring is what is producing the evidence that the unstructured template does not produce and that the evidence is what the team was trying to produce. The template should require the interviewer to capture the specific situation that the candidate is what is describing, the task that the candidate is what is undertaking, the action that the candidate is what is taking, and the result that the candidate is what is producing, because the requiring is what is producing the evidence that the prediction is what is requiring.
The second behavior-based template principle is to require the interviewer to connect the behavior to the competency that the behavior is what is demonstrating, because the requiring is what the team is what is using to ensure that the evaluation is what is producing the evidence that the competency is what is requiring and that the ensuring is what the team was trying to do. As our analysis of AI sourcing vs AI recruiting shows, the platforms that produce the most useful behavior-based templates are those that enable the connection, because the connecting is what is producing the evidence that the unconnected behavior does not produce.
Template Three: The Case-Based Template for the Problem-Solving Interview
The third template is the case-based template for the problem-solving interview, because the case-based template is what the team is what is using to capture the evaluation of the candidate's problem-solving and that the capturing is what the team is what is using to make the decision and that the decision is what the team was trying to produce. The case-based template is the template that is what is using the case that the candidate is what is solving and that the using is what the team is what is using to ensure that the evaluation is what is producing the evidence that the problem-solving is what is requiring and that the ensuring is what the team was trying to do.
The first case-based template principle is to structure the template around the problem-solving process that the candidate is what is demonstrating, because the structuring is what the team is what is using to ensure that the evaluation is what is producing the evidence and that the ensuring is what the team was trying to do. According to LinkedIn talent research on case-based evaluation, the case-based templates that structure the evaluation around the problem-solving process report thirty-five percent better predictive validity, because the structuring is what is producing the evidence that the unstructured template does not produce and that the evidence is what the team was trying to produce. The template should capture the problem that the candidate is what is solving, the approach that the candidate is what is taking, the reasoning that the candidate is what is demonstrating, and the solution that the candidate is what is producing, because the capturing is what is producing the evidence that the evaluation is what is requiring.
The second case-based template principle is to require the interviewer to evaluate the candidate's problem-solving against the calibrated rubric, because the requiring is what the team is what is using to ensure that the evaluation is what is producing the comparable data and that the ensuring is what the team was trying to do. As our analysis of agentic AI platforms vs automated ones demonstrates, the platforms that produce the most useful case-based templates are those that enable the calibrated rubric, because the calibration is what is producing the comparability that the uncalibrated rubric does not produce.
Template Four: The Work-Sample Template for the Practical Interview
The fourth template is the work-sample template for the practical interview, because the work-sample template is what the team is what is using to capture the evaluation of the candidate's work and that the capturing is what the team is what is using to make the decision and that the decision is what the team was trying to produce. The work-sample template is the template that is what is using the work sample that the candidate is what is producing and that the using is what the team is what is using to ensure that the evaluation is what is producing the evidence that the work is what is requiring and that the ensuring is what the team was trying to do.
The first work-sample template principle is to structure the template around the work that the candidate is what is producing, because the structuring is what the team is what is using to ensure that the evaluation is what is producing the evidence and that the ensuring is what the team was trying to do. According to Deloitte workforce analytics on work-sample evaluation, the work-sample templates that structure the evaluation around the work report forty-five percent better predictive validity, because the structuring is what is producing the evidence that the unstructured template does not produce and that the evidence is what the team was trying to produce. The template should capture the work that the candidate is what is producing, the quality of the work, the approach that the candidate is what is taking, and the comparison to the work that the role is what is requiring, because the capturing is what is producing the evidence that the evaluation is what is requiring.
The second work-sample template principle is to require the interviewer to evaluate the work against the calibrated rubric, because the requiring is what the team is what is using to ensure that the evaluation is what is producing the comparable data and that the ensuring is what the team was trying to do. As our guide on how to evaluate an AI sourcing tool explains, the platforms that produce the most useful work-sample templates are those that enable the calibrated rubric, because the calibration is what is producing the comparability that the uncalibrated rubric does not produce.
Template Five: The Culture-Add Template for the Values Interview
The fifth template is the culture-add template for the values interview, because the culture-add template is what the team is what is using to capture the evaluation of the candidate's culture-add and that the capturing is what the team is what is using to make the decision and that the decision is what the team was trying to produce. The culture-add template is the template that is what is using the values that the team is what is wanting to add to and that the using is what the team is what is using to ensure that the evaluation is what is producing the evidence that the culture-add is what is requiring and that the ensuring is what the team was trying to do.
The first culture-add template principle is to structure the template around the values that the team is what is wanting to add to, because the structuring is what the team is what is using to ensure that the evaluation is what is producing the evidence and that the ensuring is what the team was trying to do. According to EY research on culture-add evaluation, the culture-add templates that structure the evaluation around the values report thirty-five percent better culture outcomes, because the structuring is what is producing the evidence that the unstructured template does not produce and that the evidence is what the team was trying to produce. The template should capture the values that the candidate is what is demonstrating, the specific examples that the candidate is what is providing, and the way that the candidate is what is adding to the culture, because the capturing is what is producing the evidence that the evaluation is what is requiring.
The second culture-add template principle is to require the interviewer to evaluate the candidate's culture-add against the calibrated rubric, because the requiring is what the team is what is using to ensure that the evaluation is what is producing the comparable data and that the ensuring is what the team was trying to do. As our analysis of more tools same hiring problems shows, the teams that use the culture-add template with the calibrated rubric report forty percent better culture outcomes, because the calibration is what is producing the comparability that the uncalibrated rubric does not produce.
Template Six: The Phone Screen Template for the Initial Conversation
The sixth template is the phone screen template for the initial conversation, because the phone screen template is what the team is what is using to capture the evaluation of the candidate at the initial stage and that the capturing is what the team is what is using to decide whether to advance the candidate and that the deciding is what the team was trying to do. The phone screen template is the template that is what is using the initial conversation that the recruiter is what is having with the candidate and that the using is what the team is what is using to ensure that the evaluation is what is producing the evidence that the advancement decision is what is requiring and that the ensuring is what the team was trying to do.
The first phone screen template principle is to structure the template around the qualifications that the advancement decision is what is requiring, because the structuring is what the team is what is using to ensure that the evaluation is what is producing the evidence and that the ensuring is what the team was trying to do. According to McKinsey research on phone screen templates, the phone screen templates that structure the evaluation around the qualifications report forty percent better advancement decisions, because the structuring is what is producing the evidence that the unstructured template does not produce and that the evidence is what the team was trying to produce. The template should capture the qualifications that the candidate is what is having, the interest that the candidate is what is demonstrating, the compensation that the candidate is what is expecting, and the timeline that the candidate is what is available for, because the capturing is what is producing the evidence that the advancement decision is what is requiring.
The second phone screen template principle is to require the recruiter to make a clear recommendation—advance, decline, or hold—because the requiring is what the team is what is using to ensure that the phone screen is what is producing the decision and that the ensuring is what the team was trying to do. As our analysis of the recruiting dashboard every TA team needs explains, the dashboards that produce the most useful phone screen templates are those that require the recommendation, because the requiring is what is producing the decision that the unstructured phone screen does not produce.
Template Seven: The Final Decision Template for the Hiring Decision
The seventh template is the final decision template for the hiring decision, because the final decision template is what the team is what is using to capture the decision and the rationale and that the capturing is what the team is what is using to communicate the decision and that the communicating is what the team was trying to do. The final decision template is the template that is what is using the evidence that the interview panel is what is providing and that the using is what the team is what is using to ensure that the decision is what is being made with the evidence and that the ensuring is what the team was trying to do.
The first final decision template principle is to structure the template around the decision and the rationale, because the structuring is what the team is what is using to ensure that the decision is what is being made with the evidence and that the ensuring is what the team was trying to do. According to Gartner talent acquisition research on decision templates, the final decision templates that structure the decision around the rationale report forty-five percent better decision quality, because the structuring is what is producing the evidence that the unstructured decision does not produce and that the evidence is what the team was trying to produce. The template should capture the decision—hire, no-hire, or hold—the rationale that the team is what is using to justify the decision, and the evidence that the team is what is using to support the rationale, because the capturing is what is producing the decision that the team was trying to produce.
The second final decision template principle is to require the hiring manager to sign off on the decision and the rationale, because the requiring is what the team is what is using to ensure that the decision is what is being owned and that the ensuring is what the team was trying to do. As our analysis of agentic AI platforms vs automated ones demonstrates, the platforms that produce the most useful final decision templates are those that require the sign-off, because the requiring is what is producing the ownership that the unsigned decision does not produce. Interview feedback templates you can use today are not a one-time design—they are an operational discipline, and the teams that practice them as a discipline are the ones whose templates are what are producing the evidence that the hiring decision is what is requiring and that the discipline is what enables the team to produce them.
