Hiring well starts before the interview.
Personality, ability and fit – assessed for every candidate, not just the final three. FindingPotential defines what good looks like in the role first, then gives every applicant a ranked FIT Score built on occupational science.
Try it properly: run a full Match campaign on a job you’re hiring for now, or trial assessments on a handful of candidates for a specific application
Every applicant scored across the role’s five priority competencies, ranked by FIT – before you open the shortlist.
| Candidate | FIT | Drive | Infl. | Cust. | Collab | Resil |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sarah C. | 8.74 | 8.9 | 8.6 | 9.1 | 8.5 | 8.6 |
| James W. | 8.20 | 8.4 | 7.9 | 8.5 | 8.0 | 8.2 |
| Priya S. | 6.52 | 7.1 | 6.2 | 6.8 | 5.9 | 6.6 |
| Louise P. | 5.40 | 6.0 | 4.8 | 5.6 | 5.2 | 5.4 |
| Tom B. | 3.20 | 3.8 | 2.9 | 3.5 | 2.8 | 3.0 |
CVs are polished. Interviews are impressions.
Applications now arrive in the hundreds, many of them AI-assisted – the person who turns up at interview is not always the person on the page. Sifting on CVs at volume is neither fair nor reliable, and structured assessment has historically been too expensive to use early, so it lands at the wrong end of the funnel.
FindingPotential moves the evidence to the front. Define the behaviours the role actually needs, assess every candidate against them, and interview the people the data says are worth your time.
Evidence on every candidate.
Ranked FIT Scores
A behavioural profile of the role, matched against each candidate’s assessment data, returns a ranked 0–10 FIT Score – for every applicant, every time.
Harder to game
Forced-choice, ipsative questionnaire formats are meaningfully harder to game than standard rating scales – a measurement choice that matters in the AI era.
The whole toolkit
Personality, ability tests, situational judgement, motivation and competency models – with structured referencing alongside through ReferenceExpert.
Decision-ready and data rich.
- A ranked shortlist with FIT Scores and the evidence behind each score
- Individual candidate reports, including interview guides built from the gaps
- Feedback for every candidate, whatever the outcome – a better employer brand by default
- Role profiles you keep, refine and reuse across future hiring
FIT
| Candidate | FIT | Drive | Infl. | Cust. | Collab | Resil |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sarah C. | 8.74 | 8.9 | 8.6 | 9.1 | 8.5 | 8.6 |
| James W. | 8.20 | 8.4 | 7.9 | 8.5 | 8.0 | 8.2 |
| Priya S. | 6.52 | 7.1 | 6.2 | 6.8 | 5.9 | 6.6 |
| Louise P. | 5.40 | 6.0 | 4.8 | 5.6 | 5.2 | 5.4 |
| Tom B. | 3.20 | 3.8 | 2.9 | 3.5 | 2.8 | 3.0 |
FindingPotential has its own site.
FindingPotential defines what good looks like in a role, then scores and ranks every candidate against it with assessment built on occupational science. The dedicated site has more than 40 ready-made role profiles, the Job Success Profiler for anything bespoke, a guide to running your first Match — plus FeedForward, our forward-looking 360.
Part of the system.
What you assess for at hire doesn’t stop mattering on day one. The behavioural priorities set in FindingPotential shape the OnBoarder new-joiner conversation, inform development through FeedForward – and when LastOpinion shows why people leave, that evidence sharpens what you assess for next time.
Hover any stage to explore the platform
The clearest thirty minutes in your week.
Book a walk-through with a real person, or start with a pilot or a 30-minute conversation.