Three Functions, Three Screening Standards
LivSyt needed early assessment that reflected the different requirements of product, engineering and construction management roles.
Different Evaluation Criteria
Product, software engineering and construction management required distinct technical, analytical and role-specific assessments.
Leaders Screening Early
Internal product, engineering and construction management leaders were involved in preliminary candidate evaluation.
Inconsistent Shortlist Quality
Initial screening did not consistently identify which candidates could demonstrate sufficient depth in live interviews.
Limited Early-Stage Evidence
CVs and basic screening did not provide enough role-specific evidence before candidates reached live evaluation.
Role-Aligned AI Assessments Before Live Interviews
LivSyt placed VProPle AI Interviews before its live depth interviews.
Role-Specific Logic
Assessment frameworks reflected product thinking, software development and construction-management requirements.
Asynchronous AI Assessment
Candidates completed role-aligned assessments without waiting for a live first-round interview slot.
Competency-Based Outputs
Structured results supported LivSyt's internal review and shortlist decisions.
Function-Specific Assessment
Each function was assessed against its own technical, analytical or operational criteria.
Live Depth Interviews
Candidates who progressed met the relevant LivSyt team for deeper evaluation. LivSyt retained responsibility for live interviews and later decisions.
One Assessment Model Across Three Functions
The engagement supported different early-stage requirements while maintaining a consistent assessment workflow.
Product
Product thinking, problem-solving, prioritisation, communication and role-relevant judgment.
Software Engineering
Technical knowledge, implementation understanding, problem-solving and engineering fundamentals.
Construction Management
Construction-project understanding, planning, coordination, operational judgment and role-relevant scenario handling.
Structured Cross-Function Outputs
Each function retained its own evaluation criteria while producing structured information for internal review.
Early Evidence Improved Progression Into Live Interviews
The engagement showed that one generic first-stage screen would not have reflected LivSyt's different hiring requirements.
Function-Specific Signals
Candidates were assessed against the competencies relevant to the function rather than a shared generic screen.
Better Shortlist-to-Live Alignment
Earlier role-specific evidence helped LivSyt make shortlist decisions before investing in live depth interviews.
Asynchronous Access
Candidates could complete the first assessment without depending on a live interviewer's schedule.
Structured Review
Internal teams received consistent outputs to support decisions about live-interview progression.
More Focused Progression Into Live Interviews
LivSyt used AI Interviews to create a role-aligned first stage across product, engineering and construction management.
120+ AI Assessments Completed
120+ candidates completed AI Interviews across the programme.
Three Functions Covered
The assessment model supported product, software engineering and construction management roles.
33% Relative Conversion Improvement
The proportion of shortlisted candidates progressing to live interviews improved by 33% compared with LivSyt's previous process.
Better Use of Live Interview Time
Live interview time was directed toward candidates who had already produced role-specific evidence in the first stage.
Internal Decisions Remained With LivSyt
LivSyt conducted its own live interviews and retained responsibility for later evaluation and hiring decisions.
Case Study Evidence
| Measure | Result | Context |
|---|---|---|
| AI assessments completed | 120+ | Across the programme |
| Functions covered | 3 | Product, engineering and construction management |
| Shortlist-to-live-interview conversion | 33% relative improvement | Client-reported comparison with LivSyt's previous process |
| Conversion definition | Percentage of shortlisted candidates who progressed to live interviews | The 33% figure is a relative improvement, not a percentage-point increase |
Evidence note: LivSyt's 33% figure is a client-reported relative improvement in the proportion of shortlisted candidates progressing to live interviews, compared with its previous process. LivSyt conducted its own live interviews and retained responsibility for later evaluation and hiring decisions.
KEY TAKEAWAY
LivSyt needed early assessment that reflected three different functions and improved progression into live interviews. Role-aligned AI Interviews assessed 120+ candidates and delivered a client-reported 33% relative improvement in shortlist-to-live-interview conversion.
Related Case Studies
More examples of role-aligned AI Interviews for startups, scale-ups and enterprise teams.
47% Lower First-Round Interviewer Load Across 100+ AI Interviews in 5 Practice Areas
Role-specific AI Interviews across practices.
80+ Asynchronous AI Interviews Across 3 Platform-Engineering Profiles, With 40% Less Coordination Effort
AI Interviews with role-aligned rubrics.
From 78 CVs to 20 Final-Round Candidates in One Weekend, Using Asynchronous Screening and Coding Assessments
Scale-up assessment before an internal final round.
Hiring across different functions with one first-stage screen?
See how VProPle AI Interviews assess each function against its own criteria before your live depth interviews.