Selection Reference Evidence Separation

Separate supplied reference observations from unsupported inferences about a candidate. The download provides a specific review process. It does not make decisions or act in an account.

What to provide

Approved reference questions, job-related criteria, provided responses, source permissions and retention rules.

How it works

1. Map each response to a job-related question and exact source locator.
2. Distinguish observed behavior, referee opinion and missing evidence. Preserve disputed statements.
3. Do not infer protected traits or use absent references as adverse evidence without approved process review.
4. Return an evidence map for qualified HR review, not ranking or rejection.

The output

criterion | question | observation/opinion | source | relevance | missing evidence

Worked fictional example

Fictional referee states delivered two projects on time: timeline observation. Statement seems young is irrelevant to job criteria and not scored.

Checks and limits

Preserve source versions and original values. Unknowns stay unknown. Use a qualified reviewer for regulated, legal or hiring decisions. No send, share, account change, schedule, ledger update or payment is authorized. No live account test is claimed.

More recruiters workflows · How-to guides

Method: reviewed source. Demand lead: GSC hiring/sourcing cluster from prior full query reads, job-related selection method evidence; exact topic monthly volume unmeasured. These are site-query cluster impressions and method evidence, not exact new-topic monthly search volume or a traffic promise. Checked October 5, 2026.