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.
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.
