One link per interviewer. One clear picture per candidate.
Stop chasing feedback across email threads and chat. Each interviewer gets their own link, scores what matters for the role, and submits once. You see every round and every interviewer side by side, then rank candidates from the evidence.
Set up an interview round→2 free actions · Unlimited with any recruiter plan
| Parameter | Interviewer A | Interviewer B | Avg |
|---|---|---|---|
| System design | 5 | 4 | 4.5 |
| Python | 4 | 4 | 4.0 |
| Debugging | 4 | 2 | 3.0differ |
| Recommendation | Strong yes | No |
Add the round and interviewers
Name the round (HR screen, Tech round, Final) and add everyone who interviews. Each person is emailed a personal link with a short summary of the candidate.
Interviewers submit their feedback
They confirm with a one-time code, score the role's requirements with comments, add their own points, give a recommendation, and optionally attach a transcript.
Review, compare and rank
See every interviewer by round, spot disagreement, and ask for an AI ranking built from the submitted feedback.
A personal link for each interviewer
Sent by email, protected by a one-time code, expiring after 21 days, and withdrawable at any time. No account needed.
Locked, versioned feedback
A submission can't be quietly changed. Changes become a new version with a reason, and you can open any earlier one from a dropdown.
Every round, side by side
Parameters by interviewer with averages, flagged where scores differ by two or more points, plus an overview across rounds.
Copied-feedback detection
Flags interviewers whose wording for the same round overlaps heavily, with an optional AI check for reworded copying.
Evidence-based ranking
A suggested order built only from submitted feedback. Disagreement is reported, not averaged away, and missing evidence is never counted as weak.
Fair by design
Interviewers can't see each other's scores before submitting. Employment gaps appear as neutral dates, and ranking uses anonymised candidates with job-related evidence only.
No. Each interviewer gets a personal link by email, confirms it's them with a one-time code sent to the same address, and can then read the candidate summary and submit feedback. The link expires after 21 days and you can withdraw it at any time.
A submitted version is locked. If an interviewer, or you, needs to change something, that creates a new version with a reason, and every earlier version stays on record. You see the latest by default and can switch to any earlier version from a dropdown.
No. An interviewer only sees their own submissions, so scores aren't anchored by what a colleague wrote. You see everyone's, side by side.
It compares the wording interviewers wrote for the same round. Near-identical or heavily overlapping text is flagged, and an on-demand AI check looks for reworded copying. It's shown as similar wording to look into, not an accusation, because shared debriefs and shared notes can produce the same text.
No. The ranking is a suggestion built only from your interviewers' submitted feedback. It marks where interviewers disagree, treats missing evidence as missing rather than weak, and never moves a candidate between stages. People decide.
As neutral dates taken from the resume, never labelled good or bad, and without guessing a reason. Gaps often have ordinary causes, so the summary reports the fact and leaves the conversation to the interviewer.
Share a candidate's summary only with people involved in the hiring decision. Links are personal to one interviewer, contact details aren't included, and a candidate's data can be deleted along with their feedback.
Make the hiring decision from the whole panel.
Collect feedback the same way every time, and see where your interviewers agree and where they don't.