Interview scorecard template

Smart Home Technology Integrator interview scorecard

Evaluate Smart Home Technology Integrator candidates across 4 weighted areas: hands-on competence, safety discipline, fault finding, and reliability and conduct. Hands-on competence leads at 35%, so check hands-on depth with Control4, Crestron or Lutron programming, KNX or Rako lighting loads, Cat6A structured cabling, rack builds, and UniFi VLAN setup for AV subnets. Use the rubric to compare role-specific evidence consistently.

See AI scoring
skilled trades technical operationsav integrationcontrol4lutronstructured cabling
TL;DR
For hands-on competence, look for evidence the candidate names specific dealer certifications, describes a full rack terminate and label job, and explains driver or scene programming they wrote themselves. For safety discipline, look for evidence the candidate draws a clear line between their low-voltage scope and licensed electrical work, and cites lockout, isolation and testing steps they follow. 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 hands-on depth with Control4, Crestron or Lutron programming, KNX or Rako lighting loads, Cat6A structured cabling, rack builds, and UniFi VLAN setup for AV subnets.

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 dealer certifications, describes a full rack terminate and label job, and explains driver or scene programming they wrote themselves.

02
Evaluation factor

Safety discipline

30% weight

Probe low-voltage licensing, working safely near 240V or mains dimmer modules, ladder and loft work, isolating circuits before pulling cable, and RCD or breaker coordination with the electrician.

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

Draws a clear line between their low-voltage scope and licensed electrical work, and cites lockout, isolation and testing steps they follow.

03
Evaluation factor

Fault finding

20% weight

Test diagnosis of intermittent faults: dropped Zigbee or Z-Wave mesh nodes, HDMI handshake and EDID failures, PoE budget overload, IR versus RS-232 control loss, DHCP conflicts.

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 real fault from symptom to root cause using layer-by-layer isolation, packet or signal checks, rather than swapping parts hopefully.

04
Evaluation factor

Reliability and conduct

15% weight

Assess conduct in occupied homes: dust protection, punch lists, handover training for owners, documentation of IP schedules and as-built drawings, response on post-install service calls.

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

Describes leaving labelled documentation and a client walkthrough, plus evidence of repeat referrals or a low callback rate on completed jobs.

Evidence-led prompts

Interview questions for a Smart Home Technology Integrator

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

  1. 01

    What types of smart home technologies are you experienced in integrating?

  2. 02

    Could you describe a few past projects that you have worked on?

  3. 03

    Have you dealt with complex technology integrations in the past?

  4. 04

    How proficient are you at resolving connectivity issues and ensuring device compatibility?

  5. 05

    Could you walk me through your process for integrating a new technology into a setup?

See the complete Smart Home Technology Integrator 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