# Structured Interviewing: practice workbook
Talent Engineering Academy | An education initiative by Vitae
Edition 2026.09 | Updated 2026-09-24
Course: https://talentengineering.org/courses/structured-interviewing

Design consistent interviews, probe for evidence and run a disciplined panel debrief.

## Your deliverable
An interview guide, anchored scorecard and debrief protocol.

Use fictional information. Keep your completed work in your own secure notes. Exercises and capstone work are self-directed, not independently assessed.

## 1. Criteria allocated to this interview

Your notes:



## 2. Core questions and allowed probes

Your notes:



## 3. Candidate preparation and adjustments

Your notes:



## 4. Evidence notes and independent ratings

Your notes:



## 5. Debrief order and disagreement handling

Your notes:



## 6. Decision, gaps and communication

Your notes:



## Lesson exercises

### 1. Design the interview around evidence gaps

Build a 45-minute interview plan covering three criteria and candidate questions.

Your response:


Worked example: A panel assigns incident diagnosis to one interviewer and cross-shift communication to another. Each uses an agreed question and anchors, then shares evidence after independent scoring.

Self-review guidance: Allocate time realistically and name what each question should reveal. Include a consistent opening, accessible participation arrangements and a closing explanation of next steps.

### 2. Probe without leading the answer

Write five neutral probes for a vague example of leading change.

Your response:


Worked example: A candidate describes resolving a production defect. The interviewer asks which data they examined and what changed after the intervention, rather than praising the story and moving on.

Self-review guidance: At least one probe should distinguish the person’s contribution from the team’s, and one should test how the outcome was verified. Remove questions that signal the desired response.

### 3. Take notes and score independently

Turn six impression-based notes into evidence notes and score a fictional response.

Your response:


Worked example: The note candidate was nervous is replaced with the specific evidence: identified two plausible causes, requested missing sensor data and explained an escalation threshold. The score follows the diagnostic criterion.

Self-review guidance: Keep only job-relevant observations. If the original note has no supporting evidence, label the gap rather than inventing a justification. Record your rating before comparing with a colleague.

### 4. Run an evidence-first debrief

Write a debrief agenda and decision note for a split panel.

Your response:


Worked example: A senior panel member prefers one candidate, but the debrief first reviews each criterion. A missing technical example leads to the same short follow-up opportunity offered to comparable candidates, rather than an informal extra conversation for the favourite.

Self-review guidance: Show individual evidence before the overall recommendation. Record the reason for any follow-up and how comparable candidates are treated. End with a decision owner and communication action.

## Portfolio review
Check that your work is internally consistent, distinguishes facts from assumptions, names decision owners and explains its limitations. Revise gaps before using the method in real work.

## Further reading
- [CIPD: Selection methods](https://www.cipd.org/uk/knowledge/factsheets/selection-factsheet/): Professional context for selection methods and their limitations.
- [GOV.UK: Discrimination in recruitment](https://www.gov.uk/employer-preventing-discrimination/recruitment): UK legal context. Obtain advice for your jurisdiction and circumstances.

Original educational scenarios. References provide further reading and do not imply endorsement. Check current official rules and appropriate professional advice for real legal, financial or regulated decisions.