A hiring panel debrief brings together all interviewers to share observations, discuss ratings, and align on a final recommendation. The main goal is to ensure that every perspective is considered and that the decision is grounded in evidence, not just individual impressions.

A well-run panel discussion is guided by a facilitator (often the recruiter or hiring manager) who keeps the conversation focused and ensures everyone has a chance to contribute. When disagreements arise, the group should focus on surfacing concrete evidence from the interview rather than debating opinions. For instance, instead of relying on vague impressions, panelists should reference specific examples of candidate behavior. Throughout the discussion, it’s important to document the final decision and the rationale behind it, including any areas of disagreement and how they were resolved.

To illustrate, consider this sample exchange between two panelists:

• Chris: I rated the candidate’s problem-solving as “strong” because they described how they independently turned around a stalled deal by mapping out new stakeholders and creating a custom pitch.
• Natalie: I actually rated that as “meets expectations.” I heard the same story, but I felt they didn’t go into enough detail about their specific actions—most of it was about the team’s approach.
• Chris: That’s fair. Maybe I focused too much on the outcome. Should we agree that for a “strong” rating, we need to hear more about the candidate’s personal contribution?
• Natalie: Yes, I think that makes sense. Based on what we heard, “meets expectations” feels more accurate for this competency.

In this exchange, notice how Chris and Natalie use specific behavioral evidence to discuss their ratings, clarify expectations, and reach alignment. They avoid vague impressions and focus on what the candidate actually did, which is the foundation of a fair and effective panel debrief.

After the panel, documenting findings in a clear, structured way is crucial for calibration and future reference. A practical method is to use a shared evaluation template or scorecard for each candidate. This template should include:

• Each competency being assessed
• The rating from each interviewer
• Specific behavioral evidence cited for each rating
• A summary of the panel discussion, including any disagreements and how they were resolved
• The final agreed-upon rating for each competency, with rationale

For example, you might fill out the template as follows:

• Competency: Problem-Solving
  Interviewer A: Strong – Cited example of independently resolving a stalled deal by identifying a new stakeholder.
  Interviewer B: Meets Expectations – Noted the candidate struggled to explain their specific actions.
  Panel Discussion Summary: After reviewing the evidence, the panel agreed the candidate demonstrated initiative but lacked detail on execution.
  Final Rating: Meets Expectations

Calibration means making sure everyone is using the same standards for what “strong,” “meets expectations,” or “needs development” look like for each competency. Regularly reviewing completed templates as a team helps ensure consistency and alignment across interviewers. This approach makes your decision-making process transparent, defensible, and easy to reference in the future.

Disagreements are natural, especially when evaluating complex competencies. The key is to focus on behavioral evidence, not gut feelings or personality impressions. If a peer insists, "They crushed it," but you rated the candidate as “Needs Development,” redirect the conversation to the facts: "Let’s look at the specific example they gave for handling objections. Did they describe a clear process and outcome, or was it more general?" By comparing notes and surfacing concrete examples, you can work toward a shared understanding. If alignment isn’t possible, document the differing viewpoints and the evidence behind each in the shared template.

You’re now ready to put these collaborative skills into action. In the upcoming role-play session, you’ll practice running a panel debrief, resolving disagreements, and ensuring your hiring decisions are both fair and evidence-based.