Resume-based candidate review
Compare documented experience with job requirements.
- Applications are reviewed inconsistently and conclusions are difficult to verify.
Example paths: the agreed action or human review. This diagram does not run on your live data.
- 01Input: Resume · criteria.
- 02Resumes are compared with agreed job requirements; each criterion lists facts, sources and gaps, and a recruiter chooses next steps.
- 03Output to verify: Review for recruiter.
- 04Sensitive attributes and invented experience are excluded. Missing facts are marked unknown; automatic rejection or acceptance is not performed.
- ✓The review explains evidence against job requirements and unknowns; decisions remain with the recruiter.
- ✓We check repeated processing and connection failures using agreed examples.
An illustration of the logic, not a customer case. Connections and results are agreed before implementation.
What inputs do we need?
We need an example of “Resume · criteria”, processing rules and an owner for “Review for recruiter”. Access is requested after connections are agreed.
What happens if data is missing or an error occurs?
We check “Evidence available?”. Sensitive attributes and invented experience are excluded. Missing facts are marked unknown; automatic rejection or acceptance is not performed.
How is the result accepted?
The review explains evidence against job requirements and unknowns; decisions remain with the recruiter.
How long does implementation take?
Scope, price and timing are defined after checking systems, access and exceptions. This page describes a possible workflow, not a ready connection to your data.