Interview scorecard template

Junior SEO Specialist interview scorecard

Evaluate Junior SEO Specialist candidates across 4 weighted areas: campaigns that performed, measurement and testing, audience and segmentation, and working with the business. Campaigns that performed leads at 30%, so ask which pages or keyword clusters they personally optimised, and what happened to impressions, clicks and average position in Google Search Console. Use the rubric to compare role-specific evidence consistently.

See AI scoring
marketing growthgoogle search consolekeyword researchseotechnical audit
TL;DR
For campaigns that performed, look for evidence the candidate names specific URLs or clusters they worked on, cites before and after clicks or position data, and explains what drove the lift. For measurement and testing, look for evidence the candidate describes a regular reporting rhythm, distinguishes correlation from cause in ranking shifts, and flags seasonality or algorithm updates before claiming wins. 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

Campaigns that performed

30% weight

Ask which pages or keyword clusters they personally optimised, and what happened to impressions, clicks and average position in Google Search Console over the following months.

Evidence to listen for

  • Names campaigns or programmes they ran, with the metric they moved and the baseline it moved from
  • Distinguishes their own work from the team's or the agency's
  • Knows the audience and the offer, not just the channel
  • Can describe a campaign that failed and why

Five-point scoring guide

1
Poor

No numbers; describes activity rather than results.

2
Needs Improvement

Vanity metrics only; attribution to their own work is unclear.

3
Satisfactory

Real campaigns with some numbers; baselines often missing.

4
Very Good

Named campaigns with metric, baseline, and clear personal ownership.

5
Excellent

Names specific URLs or clusters they worked on, cites before and after clicks or position data, and explains what drove the lift.

02
Evaluation factor

Audience and segmentation

25% weight

Probe how they build keyword sets: search intent mapping, Ahrefs or Semrush difficulty filters, SERP feature checks, and how they match queries to page types.

Evidence to listen for

  • Describes real customer segments and what differs between them, not demographic guesses
  • Has built lifecycle stages, journeys, or nurture logic that reflect actual behaviour
  • Knows where the audience data comes from and its limits
  • Writes for the segment rather than for everyone

Five-point scoring guide

1
Poor

One message for everyone; no segmentation thinking.

2
Needs Improvement

Segments by demographics only; no behavioural insight.

3
Satisfactory

Workable segmentation; lifecycle logic is basic.

4
Very Good

Behaviour-driven segmentation and lifecycle design with evidence behind it.

5
Excellent

Separates informational, commercial and navigational intent, justifies target selection with volume, difficulty and existing SERP competition.

03
Evaluation factor

Measurement and testing

30% weight

Test familiarity with GA4 organic reporting, rank tracking cadence, Screaming Frog crawls, and Core Web Vitals or index coverage diagnostics; ask what they measure weekly.

Evidence to listen for

  • Tests deliberately rather than changing everything at once
  • Understands attribution limits and does not overclaim
  • Knows what sample size and duration a test needed
  • Can name a test whose result contradicted what they expected

Five-point scoring guide

1
Poor

No testing; claims credit for correlation.

2
Needs Improvement

Runs tests but reads them badly; overclaims attribution.

3
Satisfactory

Tests sensibly; rigour drops under deadline pressure.

4
Very Good

Disciplined testing with honest attribution and a result that surprised them.

5
Excellent

Describes a regular reporting rhythm, distinguishes correlation from cause in ranking shifts, and flags seasonality or algorithm updates before claiming wins.

04
Evaluation factor

Working with the business

15% weight

Look for how they get recommendations shipped: briefing writers on outlines, filing developer tickets for redirects or schema, and handling pushback from brand or product teams.

Evidence to listen for

  • Works with sales, product, or operations rather than throwing campaigns over a wall
  • Briefs designers and writers well enough to get usable work
  • Manages agencies or freelancers to a standard
  • Reports results to leadership without spin

Five-point scoring guide

1
Poor

Works in isolation; reports only flattering numbers.

2
Needs Improvement

Limited coordination; briefs are thin.

3
Satisfactory

Coordinates adequately; reporting is honest if basic.

4
Very Good

Strong partner to sales and product; briefs and reports clearly.

5
Excellent

Recounts a fix they pushed through with developers or editors, including how the request was scoped and prioritised.

Evidence-led prompts

Interview questions for a Junior SEO Specialist

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

  1. 01

    Can you provide examples of SEO work you have implemented?

  2. 02

    Can you describe your experience with on-page and off-page work?

  3. 03

    Can you describe adjusting your approach after a search algorithm change?

  4. 04

    How do you approach keyword research?

  5. 05

    What is your approach to improving a website's loading speed?

See the complete Junior SEO Specialist 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