Senior Product Designer — Growth
Decision room · Leo Martins
AI Decision Briefing
The panel's evidence consistently supports Leo's interaction craft. However, evidence about product sense is incomplete. Before deciding, review whether existing interview evidence addresses this criterion.
Where the panel agrees
- Interaction craft — Morgan recorded clear or strong evidence.
Where perspectives differ
No significant differences in recorded evidence.
Evidence gaps
- Product sense (Critical) — no submitted evidence against this criterion yet.
- Experimentation (Important) — no submitted evidence against this criterion yet.
- Pending assessments: Taylor Morgan, Casey Williams.
Questions to resolve
- Does existing interview evidence address product sense, or is a focused follow-up needed?
Suggested decision meeting agenda
- Re-confirm the agreed criteria for this role (2 min)
- Review areas of agreement and supporting evidence (5 min)
- Check for any unvoiced disagreement (3 min)
- Decide how to resolve evidence gaps (5 min)
- Hiring manager records a decision and rationale (3 min)
Provenance: Morgan Chen — submitted assessment · role rubric. Generated Nov 9, 2026 · 08:00.
Simulated, deterministic demo analysis. Summarizes evidence only — does not score, rank, or recommend hiring outcomes.
Panel feedback
| Competency | MCMorgan Submitted | TMTaylor Due Nov 12 | CWCasey Due Nov 12 |
|---|---|---|---|
Interaction craft Critical | 4 | ||
Product sense Critical | |||
Experimentation Important |
Values show evidence strength against predefined criteria (1 No evidence → 4 Strong evidence). They are not candidate scores. Dashed = assigned, awaiting evidence.