Recording feedback against candidates on the platform

[joy-ade]

Does a candidate have more than one feedback entry on an exercise?

[joy-ade]

The requirements for this task is captured on a Figma file: https://www.figma.com/file/rTLBmK3Xwy1ZZhVlMRMpHl/%2Fadmin%2F645-Recording-Feedback?node-id=1%3A16727

Figma prototype file: https://www.figma.com/proto/rTLBmK3Xwy1ZZhVlMRMpHl/%2Fadmin%2F645-Recording-Feedback?node-id=1%3A16727&scaling=min-zoom&page-id=1%3A16726&starting-point-node-id=1%3A16727

The purpose of this task is to capture a log of the feedback process.

---

Questions:

Does a candidate have more than one feedback entry per exercise?

[mbrookeswebdev]

This is an old ticket and needs rewriting to capture latest requirements. Please disregard this comment

---

The Why We need to keep an audit of all individual feedback that candidates have requested and received on the exercises they have applied for. This will apply at both the sift and selection day stages of an exercise.

This is so operational staff, when drafting feedback, can look back at the feedback previously provided to a candidate to ensure a consistent approach is taken, and anomalies in the feedback can be explained to a candidate e.g. if on one exercise the candidate provides an example at interview that is considered strong, and then uses the same example on another exercise and this time round it is considered insufficient, we need to be able to explain the discrepancy (it could be for a variety of reasons, including how pertinent the example is to the role applied for, variances in the example from one interview to the next, passage of time rendering the example less compelling here and now etc.)

Who Individual feedback is only provided to candidates in certain instances: Following a paper sift (exceptions are: sift on eligibility only where decisions are binary; paper sifts involving a large number of applicants – in these instances an exemption can be discussed with policy) Following selection days for salaried exercises (exceptions are: fee-paid selection days with less than 10 candidates where the provision of individual feedback is considered less resource intensive than providing a generic report; ‘near miss’ candidates i.e. candidates graded C+ who are not recommended due to strength of the field in fee-paid exercises)

How To avoid the task of recording the provision of feedback become resource intensive, selection teams could select all the relevant candidates from the stages tab

Select ‘Set status'

And have additional options similar to the ‘Equal Merit Provision’ to select either ‘Feedback provided at sift’ or ‘Feedback provided post selection day’

This information should then be stored against the candidate’s account on their ‘Applications’ tab…

If information we need to record is a flag to indicate whether candidates received feedback or not, we could do it in a similar way I've done the Character Checks functionality, where teams could select multiple candidates and mark them as 'Feedback received'. Then in the Candidate->Applications view we could include another column where feedback status is shown (see screenshots below).

[joy-ade]

@mbrookeswebdev Thanks for the feedbacks, we await Matt confirmation in order to procced with this ticket.

[joy-ade]

@mbrookeswebdev the requirement for this issues has been confirmed by Matt and updated.

[warrensearle]

This ticket needs tidying up. The initial designs have been created however the ticket description and comments are messy and confusing. [ TODO either tidy this ticket or create a fresh ticket to replace it ]