Hi,
As you know, with the Release 6 on August 4th, 2025, we have completely changed the appearance of the Candidate evaluation report. Instead of a simple table, we transformed it into a candidate evaluation dashboard, with all requirements grouped by category and the ability to edit evaluations and scores.
This is a first step in this direction, which we plan to implement for other reports too.
Looking for feedback.
The dashboard layout is definitely more intuitive than the previous table format - it's much easier to scan through different requirement categories quickly. My team has found the grouped evaluations particularly helpful for technical screening, though we're still getting used to the new scoring interface. One suggestion would be to add some customization options for which categories display first, since we tend to prioritize certain technical skills over others.
I really like the direction you're heading with the dashboard approach - it's so much cleaner than scrolling through endless table rows when you're dealing with high-volume screening. The category grouping has been a game-changer for me since I can quickly focus on the technical competencies that matter most for our financial services roles.
One thing I'm hoping gets added is the ability to set default category weights or maybe even hide certain sections that aren't relevant to specific role types - right now I find myself manually adjusting the view for each position which adds a bit of time. Overall though, this feels like a solid step forward from the old format!
The dashboard format definitely makes bulk candidate reviews more manageable - I've been spending way less time clicking through individual profiles. Though I'm still getting used to where everything is located compared to the old table view, especially when I'm trying to quickly compare similar candidates side by side.
I'm really liking the category grouping - it's made it so much easier to focus on specific skill areas when I'm reviewing candidates for different roles. The visual layout is definitely more intuitive than scrolling through endless table rows, especially when I'm juggling multiple open positions at once.
One thing I'm still figuring out though is how to efficiently export or share specific evaluation summaries with hiring managers - is there a streamlined way to do that in the new dashboard, or am I missing something obvious?
Oh, I'm so glad you brought up the export question! I've been wrestling with that exact same thing since the dashboard rolled out. The category grouping has been a game-changer for me too - especially when I'm screening entry-level candidates where I need to quickly assess different skill buckets. But yeah, when it comes to sharing those neat, organized evaluations with hiring managers, I've been doing some awkward screenshot combinations because I haven't found a clean export feature yet. I'd love to see a "share evaluation summary" button that pulls just the key highlights by category - that would make my life so much easier when I'm trying to get quick feedback from department heads on whether we should move candidates forward.
The dashboard layout definitely helps when presenting to clients - much cleaner than scrolling through endless tables. Though I'm still manually pulling key metrics into separate docs for executive summaries since the export options feel pretty limited right now.
The dashboard redesign is a solid step forward, especially from a client presentation standpoint. We've been using it since the release, and I can definitely echo the sentiment about it being much cleaner for stakeholder meetings. The categorical grouping has been particularly helpful when we're walking C-suite through evaluation rationale - they can quickly grasp the scoring logic without getting lost in granular details.
That said, I'm experiencing similar friction with the export limitations. For our consulting practice, we often need to create custom executive briefs that pull specific evaluation metrics alongside other project data. The current export functionality feels like it was designed more for internal HR use rather than external consulting workflows. We're still doing quite a bit of manual reformatting to get the data into client-ready formats.
One thing I'd love to see improved is the ability to customize which categories are prominently displayed based on the role type. For senior executive searches, we might want leadership competencies front and center, while for technical roles, the skills assessment should take priority. Right now, it feels like a one-size-fits-all approach that doesn't quite adapt to different evaluation contexts.
The scoring visualization is helpful, though I've noticed some of our junior consultants initially struggled with interpreting the weighted scores - particularly when explaining to clients why a candidate with lower individual scores might have a higher overall rating due to role-specific weighting. A bit more intuitive visual hierarchy there could help with adoption.
Overall, it's definitely moving in the right direction. The old table format was functional but not particularly compelling when you're trying to build confidence in your evaluation process with skeptical hiring managers. This feels more sophisticated and professional, even if the backend functionality still needs some refinement for our use case.
The categorical grouping is definitely a win for my workflow - when I'm screening 50+ candidates for a single tech role, being able to quickly scan technical skills vs. soft skills vs. experience buckets saves me tons of time. I've found it particularly useful when I need to explain to hiring managers why certain candidates made it through initial screening while others didn't.
That said, I'm running into the same export issues everyone's mentioning. For high-volume recruiting, I often need to pull evaluation data into our ATS or create summary reports for multiple stakeholders, and the current export format requires way more manual cleanup than I'd like. Would love to see some bulk export options that maintain the categorical structure but in a more flexible format.
The dashboard approach is definitely more intuitive than the old table format - I've been dealing with similar volume challenges in telecom hiring where we're often evaluating candidates across multiple technical specializations simultaneously. The categorical grouping helps when I need to quickly communicate screening rationale to regional hiring managers who might not be familiar with all the technical requirements. That export functionality really needs some work though - our compliance team often requires standardized reporting formats that the current system doesn't handle well.