> ## Documentation Index
> Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://support.metaview.ai/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.
# Interviewer Coaching
> Review interview technique against a defined framework, with the actual transcript moments as evidence — private coaching, team patterns, and training guides.
Interviewing is a skill almost nobody gets feedback on — the only people watching are candidates. This skill reviews real transcripts against a concrete framework, points to the specific moments that worked and the follow-ups that were missed, and turns patterns across calls into two or three things worth changing.
**Requires:** the AI Notetaker. Team-level analysis requires access to colleagues' conversations.
This skill reviews **interview technique, not the candidate** — you interpret what the evidence means.
## Governance — read this first
Interviewer analysis touches people's performance. The skill enforces four rules, and you should confirm your own organization's position before running team-level analysis.
* **Individual coaching is private.** Output goes to the person being coached, framed constructively, and leads with strengths.
* **Team views aggregate.** Patterns and distributions with anonymized examples. The skill will not rank named interviewers or build a league table.
* **Assess the interviewer, not the candidate.** A weak candidate doesn't make a thorough interviewer bad. Only the interviewer's questions, framing, listening, and selling count.
* **Check local requirements.** Some organizations restrict interviewer-performance analysis — works councils, employment law, or internal policy. Confirm internally before team-level analysis.
## The framework
Coaching needs a benchmark, so the skill establishes one before reviewing anything:
Paste or attach the interview guide, rubric, or scorecard the round is supposed to follow. This becomes the primary frame.
Otherwise it coaches against a screening-call framework covering **Rapport, Probing, Talk Time, Candidate Motivations, and Selling the Opportunity** — with Housekeeping as a completeness check only.
The skill tells you which frame it used. For non-screening rounds it keeps Probing, Talk Time, and Rapport, swaps Motivations and Selling for that round's assessment goals, and says it has adapted the frame.
## Three ways to use it
Usually yourself. 5–15 calls is the sweet spot.
* “Coach me on my last five screens — use our interview guide, attached.”
* “Review yesterday's call with Maria against the screening framework.”
* “Every Friday, send me a private coaching note on that week's screens.”
**You get:** a private pack with what's working (quoted), your numbers versus the team median, at most three development areas each with the phrasing to use instead, missed opportunities, and one sentence to pin above your desk.
For a lead looking at consistency across a team or stage.
* “How consistent are our HM interviews for the AE role this quarter?”
* “Talk-time by interviewer across last month's screens.”
**You get:** distributions rather than rankings (“talk-time ranges 35–75%, median 48%; three of nine screens run above 40%”), consistency findings, anonymized strong and weak moments, and recommended interventions.
From an interviewer your team already learns from — with their knowledge.
* “Build a training guide from Priya's last ten finals — she's our best closer.”
**You get:** their call structure as a repeatable template, 10–15 of their actual questions with what each tests, annotated “listen to how this was handled” moments, and a do/don't list grounded in the calls.
## What the objective layer measures
| Metric | What it flags |
| ---------------------------- | ----------------------------------------- |
| Talk-time (internal) | Interviewer share above \~40% |
| Questions per call | Compared against the team median |
| Duration vs expected | Rounds running consistently short or long |
| Scorecard submitted, and lag | Completion and timeliness |
Every number is shown against the team median — never against a named colleague.
## Safeguards built into this skill
* Every piece of feedback cites a specific moment from a specific call. Feedback without evidence is not reported.
* Team-level AI fields carry the “assess the interviewer, not the candidate” instruction explicitly, and are calibrated on 8–12 transcripts before the numbers are trusted.
* Asked “who's our worst interviewer?”, the skill declines the ranking and offers the distribution plus private coaching for anyone who wants it.
* If you dispute a finding, it shows you the transcript moment — and drops the finding if the context genuinely justifies it.
Non-admins may only see their own calls. That's enough for individual coaching; team-level analysis needs broader access, and the skill will say so.
## Install this skill
Copy the following into a `SKILL.md` file and add it to your AI client. See [installation steps](/ai-skills/overview#install-a-skill).
This skill references a bundled `references/screening-call-guide.md`. If you install it without that file, supply your own interview guide when prompted, or ask the assistant to coach against a framework you describe.
````markdown SKILL.md expandable theme={null}
---
name: metaview-interviewer-coaching
description: >
Turn interview recordings into interviewer coaching — for yourself, or aggregate quality
signal for a team. Trigger on "how am I doing as an interviewer", "coach me on my screens",
"give me feedback on yesterday's interview", "review my call against the screening guide",
"how consistent are our interviewers", "talk-time by interviewer", "build interviewer
training from our best interviewer's calls", or any ask about interview quality, coverage,
question technique, or candidate experience. Reviews transcripts against a coaching
framework (the user's own guide, or the bundled Screening Call Guide), quotes the actual
moments, and delivers private coaching packs, team-level patterns, and training guides.
---
# Metaview Interviewer Coaching
Interviewing is a skill almost nobody gets feedback on — the only people watching are candidates. This skill puts the tape to work: it reviews real transcripts against a concrete benchmark, quotes the exact moments that worked and the follow-ups that got missed, and turns patterns across calls into two or three things actually worth changing.
## Why this is powerful
Every interview is already recorded and transcribed — the coaching evidence exists, it's just unread. A human coach would need to shadow ten calls to see a pattern in your follow-ups; this surfaces the ten transcript moments in minutes, privately. It's the difference between "be a better interviewer" and "here are the three follow-ups you didn't ask last week, and what to say next time."
## Ethics and governance — read first
- **Individual coaching is private.** Output goes to the person being coached, framed constructively, marked "for your eyes only". Lead with strengths.
- **Team views aggregate.** Patterns and distributions, anonymised examples. Never rank named interviewers, never build a league table; describe outliers abstractly and let the leader follow up humanely.
- **Assess the interviewer, not the candidate.** A weak candidate doesn't make a thorough interviewer bad; a strong candidate doesn't make an unstructured one good. Only the interviewer's questions, framing, listening, and selling count.
- Some organisations restrict interviewer-performance analysis (works councils, legal). If the user hints at this, suggest confirming internally before team-level analysis.
## The framework
Coaching needs a benchmark, so establish it first — ask the user, in order:
1. **Their own guide** — "Do you have an interview guide, rubric, or scorecard this round is supposed to follow? Paste or attach it." Use it as the primary frame if given.
2. **The bundled default** — otherwise coach against `references/screening-call-guide.md` (read it before reviewing any transcript). Six areas: **Rapport, Probing, Talk Time, Candidate Motivations, Selling the Opportunity** — plus **Housekeeping as a completeness check only** (one covered/missed line; never a headline development area unless wholesale skipped). Tell the user which frame you're using.
The evaluation rules travel with the framework regardless of source: be specific (quote the moment), be constructive (strengths first), benchmark against good/poor examples, adjust for context (a junior-role quick screen won't hit everything), patterns > one-offs, flag interviewer talk share above ~40%, and check motivations were *used* in the sell, not just collected.
For non-screening rounds (technical, HM, panel), keep Probing/Talk Time/Rapport, swap Motivations+Selling for the round's assessment goals (from the user's guide or the round's scorecard), and say you've adapted the frame.
## Operating rules
- Tool names may carry a connector prefix; match on the trailing name. No internal UUIDs in output; link conversations by URL.
- Every piece of feedback cites a specific moment from a specific call. Feedback without evidence is vibes.
- Scale: 1-5 calls → read transcripts in full; 6-20 → summaries + targeted transcripts; 20+ → AI fields (borrow the calibration discipline from metaview-interview-intelligence).
## Workflow A — Coach one interviewer (usually the requester)
1. **Setup** (ask, don't assume): whose calls (resolve via `list_field_values` on `default:interviewer` — internal people, one record each); which calls (default: their screens from the last 30 days — filter `default:interviewer` `includes_one_of`, `default:call_duration` greater_than ~10 min); and the framework (above). 5-15 calls is the sweet spot; with 1-2, coach per-call and say the sample is thin for patterns.
2. **Objective layer** — `group_conversations`/`get_chart_data` metrics: talk-time (`aggregation:talk_time`, `metric_arguments {"scope":"internal"}`; flag >40%), questions per call (`aggregation:question_count`, scope internal), duration vs expected, scorecard submitted + submission lag. Pull the team-wide median in one extra query so every number has context ("you vs team median" — never vs named colleagues).
3. **Craft layer** — read the calls against the framework. For each area, describe what happened with 1-2 verbatim moments as evidence, and note where the framework's guidance wasn't followed. Hunt specifically for: the 2-3 moments a great follow-up was missed (write the follow-up they should have asked), whether motivations were referenced later in the sell, and one thing they do well that colleagues could copy.
4. **Deliver the pack:**
```
# Interview coaching — · calls, · for your eyes only
## What's working (specific, quoted)
2-3 strengths with the transcript moment and why it works.
## The numbers
Talk-time, questions/call, scorecard completion — vs team median, one line each.
## Areas to develop (max 3 — highest leverage only)
Each: the pattern → 1-2 quoted examples → the follow-up/phrasing to use instead →
one concrete thing to try in the next call.
## Missed opportunities
Moments to dig deeper or sell harder, with the line that was left on the table.
## Area check
Rapport · Probing · Talk time · Motivations · Selling — one line each.
Housekeeping: covered ✅/missed ❌ item list, single line, no lecture.
## Keep this
One sentence to pin above the desk.
```
5. **Offer the recurring version**: after each interview (or weekly), review new calls against the same framework and DM the pack **to the person being coached, and only them** — confirm the recipient before scheduling. Track "since last time": which development area improved, what's new. Keep each recurring note under ~300 words.
## Workflow B — Team interview quality (for a lead)
1. Scope the population (team/stage/window) and the framework with the user, plus the aggregation ethics reminder.
2. Objective spread via `group_conversations` grouped by interviewer: report distributions, not rankings ("talk-time ranges 35-75%, median 48%; three of nine screens run >40%").
3. At 20+ calls, build interviewer-behaviour AI fields (confirm first; calibrate on 8-12 transcripts before trusting — the field's prompt must carry the "assess the interviewer, not the candidate" inversion explicitly). Proven shapes: framework areas covered / not covered (a list, not a score) · behavioural-question count (framing and follow-up probes don't count) · missed-probing flag · motivations-used-in-sell boolean · next-steps-set boolean.
4. Report: patterns, consistency findings ("the same role is screened three different ways"), 2-3 anonymised strong/weak moments, and recommended interventions (guide update, calibration session, one shared template). Dashboards render as artifacts/inline — never code files. Offer `create_report` (confirm first) if they want it live in Metaview.
## Workflow C — Training guide from an interviewer your team learns from
1. The user names the exemplar. Confirm the exemplar knows and agrees before pulling their calls — celebration, not surveillance. Then pull their last 8-12 relevant calls.
2. Extract the playbook: how they open, question archetypes (verbatim), how they probe and push back, how they use silence, how they weave motivations into the sell, how they close.
3. Deliver a training guide: their call structure as a repeatable template, 10-15 actual questions with what each tests, 3-5 annotated "listen to how this was handled" moments with conversation links, and a do/don't list grounded in the calls — mapped to the same framework areas so it doubles as the team's benchmark.
## Edge cases
- **Panel interviews:** attribute behaviour per speaker only when labels are unambiguous; otherwise coach the panel collectively.
- **"Who's our worst interviewer?"** — decline the ranking; offer the distribution plus private coaching for anyone who wants it.
- **Non-admins** may only see their own calls — perfect for Workflow A; Workflow B needs broader access (check `data_access` from `get_user_context` and say so).
- **The user disputes a finding:** show the transcript moment and let the tape settle it; if the context genuinely justifies it, drop the finding.
## Example invocations
- "Coach me on my last five screens — use our interview guide, attached."
- "Review yesterday's call with Maria against the screening framework."
- "How consistent are our HM interviews for the AE role this quarter?"
- "Build a training guide from Priya's last ten finals — she's our best closer."
- "Every Friday, send me a private coaching note on that week's screens."
````
## Related
The calibration discipline this skill borrows for team-scale analysis.
Where team-level views can live inside Metaview.