Turn the gut feeling
into a repeatable call.
The same A/B/C framework, used two ways: score a candidate right after the interview, or score an existing team member as part of a manager's quarterly review. Either way, the decision is scored and consistent — not just whoever interviewed best that day, or whoever you happened to think of first.
Not every hire — or every teammate — is an A Player
Most evaluations measure whether you liked someone. This measures whether they're an A Player — and it's worth being precise about what that means.
Top 10% performer. The kind of person you'd enthusiastically rehire the moment they walked back through the door. Demonstrates your values, takes initiative, uses good judgment, stays resilient under pressure.
Inconsistent. Real potential sitting alongside real gaps. Worth coaching — but their trajectory could go either direction, and that unpredictability is the defining trait.
Chronic underperformer. Defensive, blame-shifting, resistant to change. Left in place, they drag down team morale and slow everything down. Removed promptly, not carried.
Who leads — and who's on that team — compounds. This scorecard exists to make both decisions sharper: who you hire, and who you keep investing in.
Two paths, one framework
The four lenses and the A/B/C math stay the same. What changes is when you use it and what you're actually looking at.
Filled out by the interviewer right after the interview. The questions are scoped to what you can actually observe in that one conversation and working session.
Filled out by the manager, quarterly. The questions are scoped to what you've actually observed on the job over the quarter — not a single moment.
Four lenses, not one impression
A single conversation tells you how someone interviews. Looking at someone through four distinct lenses tells you how they'll actually work — or how they actually are working.
Behavioral / Ownership
Past behavior — in the interview, or on the job this quarter — is the clearest predictor of future behavior.
Case Study / Execution
A real problem, worked through. Reveals how someone actually thinks, not how they describe thinking.
Skills Assessment
Hands-on validation of the specific competence the role requires — no assumptions, no resume-reading.
Cultural Fit / Collaboration
Alignment with how your team actually works together — values, feedback style, and outlook under stress.
The one question that cuts through bias
Score sheets can be talked into a favorable outcome. This question is harder to rationalize around — which is why it can override the numbers on the team-member path. On the candidate path, the equivalent question is simpler: would you actually extend the offer? Either way, a strong score paired with a "no" is a real signal, not a rounding error, and this tool treats it that way.
Who are you evaluating?
This decides which questions you'll see.
Who are you evaluating?
Behavioral
Last question
Would you enthusiastically rehire this person if they left and reapplied tomorrow?
Lens breakdown
Not sure what to do with this result? Talk it through before you decide.
Talk it through with Danny →No candidates scored yet.
A Feldman Advisory instrument — saved only on this device