Use weights and thresholds carefully
Course overview · 4 min reading + 12 min practice, estimated
Principles and method
Weights communicate priorities but can create false precision. Explain why a criterion has more influence and check whether small weighting changes reverse the decision. Essential conditions may need a threshold that cannot be offset by strengths elsewhere. Do not invent thresholds after seeing candidate results. If several assessors score the same evidence, preserve individual ratings before discussion. A total score should support a reasoned decision, not conceal a material weakness or replace judgement. Record exceptions and the authority to approve them where exceptions are legitimate.
Worked example
A candidate scores highly on presentation but cannot demonstrate a required safety-critical competence. A weighted average cannot legitimately hide the unmet essential requirement. The panel identifies the evidence gap and determines the appropriate next step.
Put it into practice
Compare two fictional candidates under equal and weighted criteria, then test sensitivity.
Use fictional information and keep your work in your own notes.
Compare your approach: self-review guidance
Show whether the ranking changes and why. Keep essential thresholds visible outside the total. If a small arbitrary weight change determines the outcome, seek better evidence rather than overstating precision.
Sources and further reading
Original Academy teaching and fictional examples. These references provide context, not endorsement. Edition 2026.09; updated 2026-09-24.
- CIPD: Selection methods
Professional context for selection methods and their limitations.
- GOV.UK: Discrimination in recruitment
UK legal context. Obtain advice for your jurisdiction and circumstances.