What it means
Candidate score normalization is the process of making candidate scores, ratings, assessments, or interview evaluations comparable across reviewers, stages, jobs, or assessment versions. It may involve calibration rules, score scaling, structured scorecards, reviewer guidance, benchmark comparisons, and reporting adjustments that explain how raw scores become comparable measures.
Why buyers should care
Scores can appear objective while hiding inconsistent reviewer behavior, unclear criteria, or differences between assessment versions. Normalization can support consistency, but it can also obscure important context if users cannot inspect the underlying inputs. Buyers should evaluate whether scoring systems preserve job-relevant criteria, reviewer notes, confidence limits, and override explanations.
Evaluation checks
Review scorecard design, weighting, calibration workflows, assessment versioning, audit history, reviewer training prompts, reporting labels, and explainability. Ask whether hiring teams can see raw scores and normalized scores side by side. Strong normalization should improve comparability without replacing structured human review or hiding the evidence behind a decision.
This glossary entry is buyer-oriented guidance, not legal, compliance, or financial advice.