Stage One: Identifying Applicants meeting the Minimum Qualifications

By incorporating the qualifications from the position description into a standard evaluation matrix, selection criteria can be applied consistently to all candidates.

  • Determine, prioritize, and document search criteria based on position duties. Discuss the range of evidence that will be considered as relevant to each criterion.
  • Notice that different selection criteria may produce different top candidates. Be sure to consider all selection criteria that are pertinent to the department’s goals.  In addition, discuss the relative weight of the different selection criteria and the likelihood that no or few candidates will rate high on all of them.
  • Identify required qualifications without which a candidate will not be selected, no matter how impressive they may demonstrate themselves to be in other areas. Rank other skills or competencies in order of importance.
  • Ensure the selection criteria for evaluation of candidates do not preclude people with non-traditional career patterns (e.g., individuals who have taken family leave, a first- generation individual who began their career at an institution that was not teaching-intensive, or individuals with disabilities whose careers have been interrupted).
  • Consider highly successful people with transferable skill sets.
  • Develop a mechanism for screening applications that includes recording why or why not the applicant was selected. You will need to justify your final recommendations based upon the selection criteria.
  • Using a standard form will keep committee members focused on the agreed-upon selection criteria and provide documentation for the process.

One of the hallmarks of an equitable search is that all candidates are treated in the same manner.  This may include asking the same questions under the same conditions, and being evaluated using consistent criteria.  It is difficult to maintain a level playing field if the search committee uses internet searches to gather additional information about the candidates.

  • Some candidates might gain an unfair advantage because of their positive presence online; others might be disadvantaged by incorrect information.
  • Internet searches might also reveal personal details, such as race/color/ethnicity, marital status, sexual orientation, and/or age, which should not be considered by the search committee. Since it is difficult to disregard this kind of information once it enters the process, it is best to avoid it all together. 

Meeting after the Full Consideration Date:

With consensus of the search committee, identify status of all applicants to either “Candidate” or “Determined Did Not Meet Minimum Qualifications”.

 With the search committee, decide if the pool of candidates is adequate.  If the pool is not adequate, notify Human Resources and request one of the following:

  1. Re-advertise the position with a new extended Full Consideration Date.
  2. The posting should remain “live” on the applicant portal so people can continue to apply.

If the pool is adequate notify Human Resources and request that the posting be removed from the applicant portal so no new people can apply. At this time, with the search committee, decide if telephone inquiries are necessary to further screen the pool of candidates.





Back to top of page.