Interview scorecard template

Carpenter interview scorecard

Evaluate Carpenter candidates across 4 weighted areas: hands-on competence, safety discipline, fault finding, and reliability and conduct. Hands-on competence leads at 35%, so check the range of work: stud framing, roof trusses, staircases, formwork, second fix joinery. Ask which saws, routers and jigs they own and what tolerances they hold. Use the rubric to compare role-specific evidence consistently.

See AI scoring
skilled trades technical operationscarpentryframingjoinerysite safety
TL;DR
For hands-on competence, look for evidence the candidate names specific builds (hipped roof cuts, geometric stairs), works to millimetre tolerances, and describes tooling and setup without prompting. For safety discipline, look for evidence the candidate cites current cards and training, describes on-tool extraction and guard discipline, and recalls stopping work over unsafe scaffold or edge protection. 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

Hands-on competence

35% weight

Check the range of work: stud framing, roof trusses, staircases, formwork, second fix joinery. Ask which saws, routers and jigs they own and what tolerances they hold.

Evidence to listen for

  • Names the equipment, materials, and tolerances they work to
  • Can describe a job start to finish without hand-waving the hard parts
  • Holds the tickets, licences, or certifications the work requires, and they are current
  • Knows what they are not qualified to touch

Five-point scoring guide

1
Poor

Cannot describe the work concretely; lacks required tickets or licences.

2
Needs Improvement

Basic familiarity; needs supervision on routine tasks.

3
Satisfactory

Competent on standard work; slower or unsure on unfamiliar jobs.

4
Very Good

Skilled and independent across the normal range of the role.

5
Excellent

Names specific builds (hipped roof cuts, geometric stairs), works to millimetre tolerances, and describes tooling and setup without prompting.

02
Evaluation factor

Safety discipline

30% weight

Probe CSCS or equivalent cards, working at height, dust extraction on mitre and track saws, silica and wood dust controls, plus how they handle site RAMS.

Evidence to listen for

  • Treats procedure as protection rather than paperwork
  • Can describe a time they stopped work and why
  • Knows the specific hazards of this trade and the controls for each
  • Reports near misses instead of hiding them

Five-point scoring guide

1
Poor

Casual about safety; describes shortcuts with pride.

2
Needs Improvement

Follows procedure when watched; cannot name the hazards that matter.

3
Satisfactory

Sound safety habits; less certain on unfamiliar hazards.

4
Very Good

Safety is instinctive; can describe stopping work over a real concern.

5
Excellent

Cites current cards and training, describes on-tool extraction and guard discipline, and recalls stopping work over unsafe scaffold or edge protection.

03
Evaluation factor

Fault finding

20% weight

Test how they handle out-of-square walls, sagging joists, rot behind trim, or door frames that will not close, and how they decide repair versus replace.

Evidence to listen for

  • Has a method for narrowing a fault rather than swapping parts
  • Reads schematics, manuals, or error codes and acts on them
  • Knows when to escalate rather than guess
  • Can describe a fault that took real work to find

Five-point scoring guide

1
Poor

Parts-swapper; no diagnostic method.

2
Needs Improvement

Fixes symptoms; cannot explain how they found the cause.

3
Satisfactory

Solid on familiar faults; less structured on new ones.

4
Very Good

Clear systematic method with a real hard-fault story.

5
Excellent

Walks through measuring, probing for moisture or movement, tracing root cause, then explains a fix that holds and its cost impact.

04
Evaluation factor

Reliability and conduct

15% weight

Look for evidence of turning up for staged programmes, coordinating with plasterers and electricians, snag list closure, and how they treat client property and finishes.

Evidence to listen for

  • Turns up, on time, prepared
  • Handles shift work, callouts, or travel as the role requires
  • Documents work so the next person can pick it up
  • Deals with customers or site staff professionally

Five-point scoring guide

1
Poor

Unreliable attendance; unprofessional on site.

2
Needs Improvement

Inconsistent; documentation is an afterthought.

3
Satisfactory

Dependable; paperwork is adequate.

4
Very Good

Consistently reliable, documents well, professional with customers.

5
Excellent

Gives references and repeat clients, hits programme dates, leaves clean sites, and flags delays to the site manager early.

Evidence-led prompts

Interview questions for a Carpenter

Use these prompts to surface evidence for the weighted factors above and compare candidates against the same role-specific criteria.

  1. 01

    Which types of carpentry work are you most experienced with?

  2. 02

    Can you describe your experience with structural carpentry such as framing?

  3. 03

    Do you have experience installing fittings such as windows and doors?

  4. 04

    How familiar are you with the safety regulations and standards on site?

  5. 05

    Have you had any accidents on the job? What were the circumstances?

See the complete Carpenter question set
Put this rubric to work

Score every candidate against the same standard

Add these weighted factors to Hirevire and let AI evaluate recorded answers against your rubric.

Explore AI Scorecards