Automate candidate screening preparation, then keep the hiring decision with people.

Write the rubric before the applications arrive.

The fastest way to create inconsistent screening is to start with a pile of resumes and no agreed criteria. Define the must-have evidence, nice-to-have evidence, disqualifying requirements, and questions a recruiter must answer before advancing anyone.

Strawberry can then prepare the same packet for every candidate. A shared rubric makes it easier to spot where a reviewer is relying on impression rather than role evidence.

Put the application and the evidence in one reviewable place.

Recruiters lose time switching between applicant profiles, resumes, portfolio links, interview notes, and scorecards. Assemble those inputs into a concise packet that names the source for each claim.

Greenhouse can list candidates, applications, jobs, scheduled interviews, and scorecards. Strawberry can use that context to prepare a structured recruiter note instead of asking someone to reconstruct the candidate’s story from browser tabs.

Treat ambiguity as a reason to ask, not a reason to rank.

A resume can be incomplete, a title can obscure the actual work, and a nontraditional background can contain exactly the evidence the role needs. The safe output is a question or an exception, not a confident conclusion from thin material.

Use AI to identify gaps and generate focused follow-up questions. Let a recruiter decide whether the evidence clears the bar and document the reason for that decision.

Make the screening pass repeatable without making it opaque.

Once your team agrees on a rubric and packet format, save the procedure as a skill.

A routine can prepare new screening packets at a chosen cadence, leaving recruiters a clear queue of cases to assess.

Review its outputs periodically for missing evidence, drift in the role definition, and patterns that need human correction. Consistency is valuable only when the criteria themselves remain defensible.

Frequently asked questions