Order an assessment and file the result on the record

The distinction matters legally and commercially. An assessment platform designs an instrument, validates it, defends its methodology and stands behind the score. Recruitment software sends a request, receives a result and stores it against the right person. Those are different responsibilities and they should not be blurred.

So the planned integration is deliberately thin: order, track, receive, file. Surhires will not re-score, re-weight, normalise or reinterpret a provider result, and it will not turn a provider score into a pass or fail on the provider's behalf. If your process sets a threshold, that threshold is yours and it is recorded as your decision.

Surhires does ship its own assessments module for the cases where a light structured evaluation is enough, and that is described on the assessments feature page. The two are not the same thing. A specialist platform exists because some roles need a validated instrument, and this integration exists because you should not have to choose between using one and keeping a clean record.

The current workflow at most desks is a copy of the candidate's email into a provider console, an invitation sent, then a wait, then a PDF that arrives in somebody's inbox and gets forwarded to the recruiter, who saves it to a shared drive and pastes the headline number into a note. The result is that the score is findable but the pipeline is not reportable.

Two things break. Nobody can answer how many candidates for this client are waiting on an assessment right now, so chasing is done from memory. And when a client asks why one candidate was progressed over another, the evidence is a file in a folder rather than a record on the submittal.

The push out of Surhires is minimal: the candidate identity and contact details needed to send an invitation, plus the assessment you selected. The return is the result and its report file, attached to the record.

What will not be pulled: your account configuration, your test library beyond the list needed to choose one, other customers' data, or any raw response data the provider treats as part of its instrument. Recruitment software does not need a candidate's individual item responses, and holding them would create an obligation to protect data whose only purpose sits in another system.

Where an assessment result contributes to a hiring decision, Surhires records which candidates were scored, when, and against which requisition. That is the data an independent bias audit needs where an automated employment decision tool is in scope. Commissioning the audit and issuing candidate notice remain yours.

For campus and volume hiring, assessments are not a step in a pipeline so much as the first filter across hundreds or thousands of applicants. That changes what the integration has to be good at: bulk invitation rather than individual ordering, and a status view that makes an incomplete cohort obvious before the client asks.

It also changes the failure mode. At single-hire volumes a lost result is an annoyance. At cohort volumes, a hundred invitations sent to stale email addresses is a day of work and a credibility problem with the client. Structured contact data and a status that is visible in a list view are what prevent that, and both are available in Surhires today without any integration.

Send invitations from the provider console, and record three things on the candidate record in Surhires: that an assessment was ordered, which one, and the date. Use a stage or a custom field so the pipeline view shows who is waiting. When the report arrives, attach the file to the candidate and note the headline outcome and the threshold you applied.

Before sharing a result with a client, capture the candidate consent to share it. That is good practice regardless of jurisdiction, and it is the step most likely to be skipped when the report arrives as an email attachment rather than as a record in a system.