By now, your team knows the drill.
As soon as they conclude an interview, their first stop is the ATS. Time to share their thoughts on a candidate, suggest areas where they could be further evaluated, and ultimately give a recommendation as to whether they should be hired.
Usually, this looks like a spectrum from "Definitely Not" to "Definitely Yes". Trouble is, most fields in ATSs are optional, so team members can cop out and give a "No Decision" when it comes to whether they believed the candidate passed the interview.
Of course, the team will first need to make sure they understand the parameters of the assessment. It's important to point out that unless it's a later stage interview, they're not answering the question "should we hire this person?" Typically, their recommendation answers the question "did the candidate pass the interview?", and once viewed through this lens, the stakes of their judgment are lowered and they can be a bit more firm in their decision making.
For me, the "No Decision" is extremely frustrating. The only time when it's acceptable to shrug your shoulders and say maybe about a candidate is when you believe your judgment would be unqualified without further evaluation. If this is the case, it's important for your feedback notes to be extremely specific about where the candidate needs to further demonstrate their ability. This feedback can exist in the ATS, or if the need to pursue that evaluation is time sensitive, in a hand off conversation between interviews.
The hand off conversation is probably worthy of it's own post, but a quick note here--the hand off needs to be extremely delicate. It's best to err on the side of having no candidate-centric communication between team members before they've entered feedback, as this can color perception and sway opinion. That's why in the event a team member wants to recommend a candidate is pushed for more on a specific area, it should be done through the conduit of a hiring manager or recruiter, so they can iron out any editorializing and arm the other team members only with the pertinent, actionable details.
I digress. Here's the main point: unless it comes with notes on a specific area for further assessment, a "maybe" should be viewed as a "no." If an interviewer is on the fence, that means they weren't blown away by a candidate and that there's more than a grain of doubt in their mind about their ability. Do you really want to hire someone who your team thinks only might be able to do the job well?
When it really counts, encourage your team to pick a side and express a firm decision about candidates. Having open discussion about what your interviews truly assess and achieve is important, but when it comes to building your team, maybe isn't good enough.
