Collaborate on candidate cards

The card is the conversation

In Talinty, work doesn't happen in a separate project tool. It happens on the candidate page. Notes, scorecards, comparisons,

mentions, scheduling, approvals: all of it lives in the candidate's profile, and that's deliberate.

The principle is that the candidate is the unit of decision. Everything your team thinks about a candidate should be readable in

one place by the next person who opens that profile.

Two or more people on the same profile

Multiple teammates can have the same candidate profile open at the same time. When two people are looking at a profile

concurrently, you'll see avatars at the top of the page showing who else is here.

If your teammate is taking an action (writing a note, submitting a scorecard, moving the candidate to a new stage), you'll be

notified. The actions don't block each other; everyone can work in parallel. Conflicts are rare because most actions are additive

(adding a note, submitting a scorecard) rather than overwriting (changing a status).

Shared tabs

For working across a longer shortlist together, tabs are the right tool. A tab carries its filters, AI criteria, notes, and scoring with it;

sharing one with a teammate hands them everything you've built up.

The collaboration angle is simple: name the tab clearly (Senior eng shortlist for Monday review), share it with the people who

need to see it, and walk into the meeting knowing everyone is looking at the same thing.

Scorecards as structured collaboration

Notes are free-form. Scorecards are structured. They're the tool teams use to make sure every interviewer leaves the same set of

evidence in the same shape.

A scorecard is tied to a specific stage (usually an interview) and has:

A few criteria specific to the role (technical depth, communication, problem-solving, culture fit).

A score per criterion (number, rating, or thumbs).

A required comment field per criterion.

An overall recommendation: Advance, Hold, Reject.

When several teammates interview the same candidate, their scorecards stack on the profile. You see them side by side with

their individual recommendations. The AI's hiring recommendation weighs these alongside the other signals.

The reason this matters: scorecards force the conversation to have shape. Free-form notes from three interviewers can be hard

to compare. Scorecards from three interviewers, scored on the same criteria, are directly comparable.

Mentions, briefly

When you need a specific teammate's attention on a candidate, mention them in a note or scorecard with @theirname. They get

a notification with a direct link to the candidate and the specific note. Mentions are the lightweight way to hand off without

leaving the candidate.

Common collaboration patterns

A few patterns that come up over and over:

Recruiter to hiring manager handoff. Recruiter completes initial screening, adds a team-visible note summarizing the case,

mentions the hiring manager, and shares the candidate's tab. Hiring manager opens the profile, reads the note, reviews the AI

vetting, and either responds in the same thread or schedules an interview.

Panel debrief. After several interviews, the panel meets (or works async) on a side-by-side comparison view. Each interviewer's

scorecard is already on the profile. The debrief converges on an Advance, Hold, or Reject decision, captured as a team note that

summarizes the conversation.

Out-of-band check-in. Recruiter notices something the hiring manager should weigh in on (a salary expectation issue, a

competing offer rumor). Mentions the hiring manager in a note. Hiring manager responds in the thread. The decision and the

context are both in the profile.

The common thread: the candidate's profile is where the conversation lives, not a parallel Slack thread or an email exchange.