Fair evaluation and controlled access often require different people to see different versions of the same candidate record.
Reducing exposure can also remove context that people rely on to complete, explain, and audit decisions.
Who you’d be doing this for
“I need to prove interviewers saw only what they should, without making every review impossible to explain.”
Simon Simon · Compliance Recruiting Manager
Supports enterprise hiring programs where access to candidate information is closely governed and regularly audited.
What is at stake
In audit samples, interviewers saw context that some customers do not permit, and the migration runs one way. You have to keep scorecards structured and auditable while narrowing what interviewers see.
Why it isn’t already fixed
Every obvious fix costs something else. That’s the part you’d have to decide.
- least-privilege access vs. evaluative context
- compliance certainty vs. workflow continuity
- one-way migration vs. incomplete verification
- interviewer simplicity vs. audit reconstruction
Why Ashby
At Ashby, this can matter when hiring teams need structured evaluation workflows that remain usable under stricter access expectations.
Written with these in mind
Not your kind of problem? 4 more at Ashby, or browse every organization.
This is the setup. The work is inside.
Running it puts you in the room: the full situation and its constraints, stakeholders who push back in their own words, and the decisions that are yours to make. What you produce becomes a Day One Plan — work you can show someone instead of describing.