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 hands-on breadth: board-level laptop teardowns, hinge and screen swaps, thermal paste reapplication, RAM and NVMe upgrades, BIOS flashing, and Windows MAR or OEM reimaging throughput per day.
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 cosmetic grading tiers, imaging tools such as Clonezilla or FOG, and realistic daily unit counts across desktops, laptops and thin clients.
02
Evaluation factor
Safety discipline
30% weight
Probe data sanitisation and site safety: ESD wrist straps and mats, Blancco or DBAN certificates of erasure, swollen lithium battery handling, WEEE and R2 or ADISA audit requirements.
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
Treats erasure certificates and chain of custody as non-negotiable, and describes isolating puffed batteries and CRT or PSU capacitor hazards correctly.
03
Evaluation factor
Fault finding
20% weight
Test diagnostic sequence on a dead or unstable unit: POST codes, MemTest86 passes, SMART attributes in CrystalDiskInfo, PSU swap testing, and deciding repair versus harvest for parts.
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 a logical isolation path, cites a specific fault they traced (for example intermittent DC jack or failing SSD), and justifies scrapping economically.
04
Evaluation factor
Reliability and conduct
15% weight
Look for consistency in stock handling: asset tagging, serial logging into inventory or ERP, meeting refurb targets, warranty return rates, and honest cosmetic grading for resale listings.
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
Tracks own RMA or return rate, logs every serial accurately, and grades units so customer complaints stay near zero.
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.
