Decision inputs
Facts that change the policy answer
For this request, interviewer notes and candidate responses is the input boundary and a structured candidate summary is the output boundary. A useful check makes both explicit.
- 1Task and owner
- Recruiter wants to summarise interview notes. Name who owns the finished a structured candidate summary; ownership should not disappear because AI helped produce it.
- 2Information involved
- Interviewer notes and candidate responses. Look beyond pasted text: files, integrations and retrieval connections can expose the same material.
- 3Tool and account
- An approved company account. Treat a new plug-in or connector as a change to the approved setup.
- 4Intended result
- The expected result is a structured candidate summary. Follow the result to its real endpoint so the request captures its practical effect.
- 5Consequence if it is wrong
- The summary may turn tentative impressions into facts or omit contradictory evidence. That risk sets the level of review and the person who should receive an exception.
- 6Human review
- responsible interviewer should inspect, change, reject or stop the result. Make the review happen before reliance and give the reviewer a real way to stop the work.
Possible policy routes
The task name alone cannot decide it.
A published workplace policy can return different answers for the same task. These are the practical branches worth encoding.
A routine policy route may be possible
The least restrictive path starts only after the exact account is approved, only the minimum candidate personal information is used, a structured candidate summary remains within the stated purpose, and responsible interviewer reviews it before use.
Approval may be required
Pause the ordinary route whenever the account or data handling is uncertain, the summary may turn tentative impressions into facts or omit contradictory evidence, or a structured candidate summary reaches people or systems beyond the requester’s authority.
The request may need to stop or change
A stop or redesign route becomes relevant if restricted information would enter an unapproved service, the output would act before responsible interviewer can intervene, or retain source notes and correct inferences before the summary is shared cannot be maintained. Consider less information, a controlled account or a non-AI process.
Request checklist
Questions to ask before using the tool
- 01
Will summarise interview notes run inside the approved company environment from start to finish?
- 02
Can any personal, sensitive, confidential or secret part of interviewer notes and candidate responses be removed?
- 03
At what point does a structured candidate summary move beyond the requester’s private draft?
- 04
Can responsible interviewer inspect the complete result and its source before reliance?
- 05
Which change in tool, data, purpose or impact would require a fresh request?
Worked request
What the employee should submit
This example supplies decision facts without pasting the underlying material into the approval record.
- requester
- recruiter
- task
- Use AI to summarise interview notes.
- information
- interviewer notes and candidate responses
- tool
- An approved company account
- frequency
- Recurring work
- region
- Where the work and affected people are located
- purpose
- Draft or analyse
- impact
- Employment decision support
- review
- Complete human review
- owner
- responsible interviewer
Useful safeguards
Controls that fit this request
- ✓
Retain source notes and correct inferences before the summary is shared
- ✓
Document why each part of interviewer notes and candidate responses is necessary before making it available to the tool.
- ✓
Set an expiry or review point when recurring work turns into a permanent process.
- ✓
Make the final route reproducible from the recorded facts, safeguards and policy version.
Questions people ask
About this AI use
Is using AI to summarise interview notes automatically allowed?
Treat this as a request pattern. The authoritative answer comes from the current company policy and the employee’s completed submission.
What does the policy need to know about this use?
Describe a structured candidate summary, identify interviewer notes and candidate responses, name the exact tool and account, explain who will receive or rely on the output, and state how responsible interviewer will review it.
How should a later reviewer understand this decision?
Make the final route reproducible from the recorded facts, safeguards and policy version. A classification and controlled reference may be enough when copying interviewer notes and candidate responses would create unnecessary risk.