Evaluate Broadcaster candidates across 4 weighted areas: body of work, craft and technique, reliability and process, and presence with an audience. Body of work leads at 35%, so ask for links to aired shows, podcasts or packages: station, slot, format, audience size. Look for range across live desk-driven hours, pre-recorded features. Use the rubric to compare role-specific evidence consistently.
creative performancebroadcastlive radiostudio deskvoice work
TL;DR
For body of work, look for evidence the candidate supplies dated clips from named stations or networks, with slot, listenership figures and clear ownership of the output. For craft and technique, look for evidence the candidate describes hitting the top of the hour cleanly, back-timing to a jingle, and editing their own actuality without a producer.
Apply the written 1–5 anchors to every answer, record the evidence behind each rating, and use the factor weights to reach a consistent overall assessment.
Complete evaluation framework
What to assess and how to score it
Review the evidence signals before interviewing. Then use the anchored descriptions—not instinct alone—to choose the score that best matches each answer.
01
Evaluation factor
Body of work
35% weight
Ask for links to aired shows, podcasts or packages: station, slot, format, audience size. Look for range across live desk-driven hours, pre-recorded features and outside broadcasts.
Evidence to listen for
Has work that exists publicly and can be checked
States what they made versus what they contributed to
Can talk about range as well as their signature style
Knows how the work was received and by whom
Five-point scoring guide
1
Poor
Nothing finished or public; describes intentions rather than output.
2
Needs Improvement
Small or unverifiable body of work; unclear personal contribution.
3
Satisfactory
Real output with adequate range; reception described vaguely.
4
Very Good
Substantial verifiable work with clear ownership and range.
5
Excellent
Supplies dated clips from named stations or networks, with slot, listenership figures and clear ownership of the output.
02
Evaluation factor
Craft and technique
25% weight
Test microphone technique, ad-libbing to a hard clock, and self-driving kit such as Myriad, RCS Zetta, ENCO or Adobe Audition editing on deadline.
Evidence to listen for
Can discuss technique concretely rather than in terms of feel or vibe
Names influences and what they took from each
Explains a deliberate choice and the effect it was for
Knows their own weak areas and what they do about them
Five-point scoring guide
1
Poor
No technical vocabulary; cannot discuss choices behind the work.
2
Needs Improvement
Talks in generalities; choices sound accidental.
3
Satisfactory
Solid craft with some ability to explain decisions.
4
Very Good
Articulate about technique and deliberate about effect.
5
Excellent
Describes hitting the top of the hour cleanly, back-timing to a jingle, and editing their own actuality without a producer.
03
Evaluation factor
Reliability and process
25% weight
Probe prep habits: running orders, guest briefs, contingency for a no-show caller, and dead air recovery. Check punctuality across breakfast or overnight shifts.
Evidence to listen for
Meets deadlines and briefs, with evidence
Handles revisions and direction without ego
Describes how they work when the brief is vague or changes late
Has repeat clients, bookings, or collaborators
Five-point scoring guide
1
Poor
Misses commitments; cannot take direction.
2
Needs Improvement
Inconsistent delivery; defensive about revisions.
3
Satisfactory
Reliable on clear briefs; struggles when direction shifts.
4
Very Good
Consistently delivers and adapts; repeat collaborators.
5
Excellent
Shows a repeatable prep routine, arrives well before a live shift, and names how they recovered from a technical failure on air.
04
Evaluation factor
Presence with an audience
15% weight
Judge listener connection: phone-ins, live reads, interviewing a hostile guest, and staying within Ofcom or equivalent compliance on impartiality and offence.
Evidence to listen for
Comfortable performing or presenting on demand, including cold
Reads a room and adjusts
Handles a bad night, a difficult client, or a hostile crowd without unravelling
Represents the employer well in front of others
Five-point scoring guide
1
Poor
Cannot perform or present on request; unravels under pressure.
2
Needs Improvement
Rigid delivery; no read of the room.
3
Satisfactory
Competent in familiar settings; less adaptable in new ones.
4
Very Good
Strong presence and adapts to the room.
5
Excellent
Holds an audience through unscripted moments, controls interviews without dominating, and cites compliance limits they have worked inside.
Evidence-led prompts
Interview questions for a Broadcaster
Use these prompts to surface evidence for the weighted factors above and compare candidates against the same role-specific criteria.
01
Can you give details of your previous broadcasting experience?
02
Which broadcast media have you worked in?
03
Do you have experience writing broadcast material?
04
Can you handle high-pressure situations such as live reporting or breaking news?
05
How would you rate your improvisation skills on air?
