You’re having an interview, nodding at the right moments, and you’ve got a good feeling about it. A week later, you’re in the debrief and you realise that what you remember most is who “had energy” and who came across as “a bit flat”. That’s when you realise just how crucial it is to take good interview notes: they are your memory, your evidence for hiring managers and your line of defence should any questions arise about the selection process.
Why interview notes often don’t stand up to scrutiny
Notes rarely go wrong because of a lack of attention, but because of the way our brain stores information. We remember striking moments and fill in the rest with our own interpretation. In recruitment interviews, this quickly leads to comments such as “comes across as reliable” or “doesn’t fit into the team”, without anyone being able to pinpoint which specific answer prompted that judgement.
There’s another factor at play: many interviews are assessed on the basis of the conversation as a whole, rather than question by question. This means you end up combining strong and weak signals into a single impression, and that impression then comes to dominate the conversation. That is precisely what you’re trying to avoid with interview hygiene.
What goes wrong with ‘emotional’ language
Words such as “likeable”, “dominant”, “stress-resistant” or “professional” are not necessarily wrong. They are simply not useful without evidence. Even if two interviewers use the same label, they may still mean something completely different.
A practical rule of thumb: if your note cannot be traced back to a quotation, a measurable result or an observable action, then it is probably an interpretation.
The basics: for each question, make a note of the facts and examples
Effective notes are linked to the structure of the interview. This means: for each question, briefly record what the candidate said and what evidence you heard of the competence you are assessing. You do not write “works well in a team”, but rather note down the behaviour and the context in which it is evident.
Would you like to find out more about data-driven recruitment?
- Recruitment using AI and data
- Takes an average of 3–8 weeks to complete
A simple note-taking structure that works
Use a mini-format for each question. Keep it brief, so that you can keep it up even under time pressure.
- Situation: What was the example about (project, client, team, fault)?
- Offer: What did the candidate do themselves (not the team)?
- Result: What was the outcome, preferably expressed as a figure or a measurable effect?
- Evidence for the score: One sentence explaining why you’re giving a 2/3/4/5.
Examples: poorly rated versus well-rated
The difference often lies in just one extra detail. Below you can see the same impression, but one version is usable and the other is not.
| Vague note | A note that stands the test of time |
|---|---|
| “Remains calm under pressure.” | “When the line came to a standstill (night shift), a safety stop was carried out first, followed by three checks in the standard order; production resumed within 25 minutes, and there were no further incidents in the following two weeks.” |
| “Not really ownership.” | “In the event of an incorrect delivery, they mainly cite planning or other factors; no specific action on their part is mentioned to investigate the cause or prevent a recurrence.” |
| “Strong in customer relations.” | “Case study: the customer wanted a discount; asked five questions about volume and timing; offered an alternative with faster delivery; deal secured with a +12% margin compared to the initial proposal.” |
Linking notes to scoring prevents discussions afterwards
Notes are only truly valuable if they are directly linked to your assessment criteria. Otherwise, you’ll have a fine report, but still no consistent decision. A scorecard or selection scorecard helps to ensure that the same standard is applied for each criterion.
If you’re already using a scorecard, add your notes as a comment next to the score. If you don’t have a scorecard yet, this is often the first step towards more objective assessment.
Internal floor: combine this with a Create a selection scorecard for hiring managers which sets out clearly, for each criterion, what constitutes ‘sufficient’ and ‘strong’ evidence. And if your interview format still varies depending on the interviewer, it ties in with How to conduct a structured interview in 8 steps.
A rule of evidence for each score (1–5) in plain language
These aren’t universal definitions, but they do provide a useful starting point for calibrating your scoring.
- 1: Dodges the question, no example given, or the example contradicts the criterion.
- 2: The example is vague, there is little personal involvement, and the outcome is unclear.
- 3: a specific example, specific actions mentioned, a logical outcome.
- 4: an excellent example with a clear approach, reflection and demonstrable impact.
- 5: a recurring pattern across multiple situations, plus improvements to processes and others.
Legal and privacy aspects: write as if someone were reading over your shoulder
Interview notes are often part of recruitment records. This means you need to be careful about what you write down and how long you keep it. Even if you don’t write down anything “out of the ordinary”, casual comments can easily be seen as unnecessary or sensitive.
You should therefore ensure that your notes are relevant to the role. Avoid making assumptions about personal characteristics and do not record any medical or private information, unless it is strictly necessary and you have a clear reason for doing so (which is rarely the case in practice).
For information on retention periods and the handling of application data, please refer to the guidelines issued by the supervisory authority, such as the Explanation from the Dutch Data Protection Authority regarding job application data.
Quick checklist: what you shouldn’t write down
- Labels without evidence: “arrogant”, “lazy”, “unreliable”, “immature”.
- Speculation: “will probably struggle with authority”, “will clash with the team”.
- Personal characteristics that are not relevant to the role (appearance, accent, family circumstances).
- Diagnoses or suspected medical conditions.
Practical tips for taking effective notes during an interview
In theory, you’d want to write everything down. In practice, you’ve got 45 to 60 minutes, a conversation that flows, and you want to listen as well. A few guidelines make it feasible.
Use standard abbreviations
- S/T/A/R for situation, task, action, result.
- # for figures (e.g. #12% margin, #25 mins’ downtime).
- ? for any unresolved issues you’d like to ask about further.
Plan micro-moments to make an impact
Give your score immediately after the answer, not at the end. That is a key principle of interview etiquette: it prevents you from giving greater weight to later answers simply because they are more recent.
If you are working with several interviewers, first let everyone make their own independent notes and scores. Only then should you discuss the evidence for each criterion. This is in line with the idea that you discuss evidence, not opinions—a point that is also highlighted in These 4 mistakes are costing you your best candidates.
Make your notes useful for follow-up and the candidate journey
Good notes aren’t just useful for deciding “yes” or ‘no’. They also help with what you do next: follow-up questions in the second round, reference checks, and even the first 90 days of onboarding. If you note down where someone’s strengths lie and where the risks are, you can assess or provide guidance in a targeted way.
An added benefit: you can provide candidates with better and more constructive feedback. Not “we didn’t click”, but “regarding criterion X, we didn’t see any examples where you demonstrated Y, even though this is required on a daily basis in this role”.
Mini-template for your interview document
- Question: …
- Competence: …
- Notes (factual): …
- Rule of evidence for scoring: …
- Score (1–5): …
- Outstanding issues for follow-up: …
Soft conclusion: keep it brief and measurable
If you want to improve this, you don’t need to completely overhaul your entire selection process straight away. Start with a single vacancy: agree that everyone should record their answers to each question in factual terms, and that each score should be backed up by a piece of evidence. After four interviews, you’ll already start to notice where confusion arises and which questions don’t yield enough evidence.
Would you like to discuss an interview structure, a scorecard and a method of note-taking that remains consistent across multiple interviewers? This fits in well with a data-driven approach such as the one FosFor employs in recruitment marketing, selection and process optimisation.