{
  "registry_version": "2026.08.2",
  "data": {
    "title": "Conflicting feedback across different interviewers",
    "status": "active",
    "evidence_ids": [
      "EVD-006"
    ],
    "content": "# Conflicting feedback across different interviewers\n\nFeedback from one round praises architectural depth while another round claims insufficient technical background.\n\n### Diagnostic Non-Inferences\n- Does not prove bad faith; highlights lack of rubric calibration across the hiring committee.",
    "id": "A-014",
    "type": "artifact",
    "summary": "Feedback from one round praises architectural depth while another round claims insufficient technical background.",
    "stages": [
      "technical",
      "team"
    ],
    "evidence_level": "supported",
    "probes": [
      {
        "id": "PROBE-A-014-1",
        "action": "Request aggregated hiring rubric summary from talent partner.",
        "expected_signal": "Reveals whether team had misaligned internal evaluation criteria.",
        "cost": "low"
      }
    ],
    "specimens": [
      {
        "kind": "email",
        "label": "Two rounds, two verdicts",
        "subject": "Consolidated feedback",
        "context": "same candidate, four days apart",
        "lines": [
          {
            "text": "Round 2 (systems): Strong architectural depth. Reasoned clearly about consistency trade-offs and failure modes. Recommend proceed.",
            "tell": false
          },
          {
            "text": "Round 4 (technical): Insufficient depth for the level. Struggled to move past a first-pass solution. Recommend do not proceed.",
            "tell": true
          },
          {
            "text": "Final decision: do not proceed.",
            "tell": false
          }
        ],
        "reading": "Both notes are about the same person in the same week. At least one of them is measuring something other than the candidate."
      },
      {
        "kind": "transcript",
        "label": "What the two rounds actually asked",
        "lines": [
          {
            "speaker": "Interviewer B",
            "at": "08:30",
            "text": "Round 2 — Walk me through how you would keep two regions in sync when the link between them drops.",
            "tell": false
          },
          {
            "speaker": "Interviewer D",
            "at": "03:10",
            "text": "Round 4 — Here is a string parsing problem. You have twenty-five minutes.",
            "tell": true
          }
        ],
        "reading": "The rounds did not disagree about the candidate; they measured different things and reported both as depth."
      }
    ],
    "non_inferences": [
      "Does not prove bad faith; highlights lack of rubric calibration across the hiring committee."
    ]
  }
}