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 commissioning of VSAT and LEO terminals: dish peaking with a spectrum analyzer or Birdog, cross-pol isolation, BUC/LNB swaps, iDirect or Newtec modem line-up.
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 terminals and modems commissioned, quotes achieved Eb/No or SQF figures, and describes obtaining transponder line-up approval from the NOC.
02
Evaluation factor
Safety discipline
30% weight
Probe RF exposure discipline near feed horns and BUCs, lockout before transmit, rooftop and tower work at height, plus grounding and lightning protection to local code.
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 transmit inhibit and RF hazard zones as non-negotiable, cites height certification, and recounts stopping an install over unsafe mount or grounding.
03
Evaluation factor
Fault finding
20% weight
Test fault isolation across the chain: rain fade versus pointing error, latency and packet loss on TCP acceleration, cable and connector faults, iBGP or NAT misconfiguration at the remote.
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
Works outward from modem statistics and receive signal levels, separates space segment issues from LAN faults, and gives a concrete diagnosis with resolution time.
04
Evaluation factor
Reliability and conduct
15% weight
Assess field conduct: remote-site truck rolls, as-built documentation and site survey photos, SLA and uptime targets, and handover notes left for the NOC or the customer.
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
Shows consistent closeout paperwork, met restoration SLAs at isolated sites, and communicates clearly with non-technical customers during outages.
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.
