# Executive Resume Evaluation Rubric

## Scoring

| Dimension | Weight | Full-credit standard |
|---|---:|---|
| Target mandate fit | 25 | Covers the role's core work, not only adjacent keywords; must-haves appear with evidence |
| Evidence credibility | 20 | Material claims are directly supported, precisely bounded, and internally consistent |
| Expert and executive tone | 15 | Senior, specific, decisive, and free of inflated or generic leadership theatre |
| Scope and leadership | 15 | Shows decisions, team or portfolio scope, stakeholder level, governance, and operating scale appropriate to the target |
| Outcomes and value | 10 | Quantifies business, risk, adoption, productivity, revenue, cost, or reliability outcomes with defensible causality |
| ATS and role vocabulary | 10 | Uses target terminology naturally while retaining accurate titles, dates, skills, and searchable nouns |
| Clarity and presentation | 5 | Strong first half-page, concise bullets, consistent grammar, complete contact block, balanced two-page rendering |

## Readiness Bands

| Score | Interpretation |
|---:|---|
| 90-100 | Exceptional and defensible; submit |
| 85-89 | Strong; submit after minor polish |
| 78-84 | Competitive but needs targeted revision |
| 70-77 | Plausible stretch; material gaps or credibility risks |
| 60-69 | Weak fit or inflated positioning |
| Below 60 | Do not submit in current form |

Hard gates in `SKILL.md` override the total score.

## Tone Anchors

### Professional expert VP/director

- Explains what was built, decided, or governed.
- Names scale: users, regions, models, assets, teams, budget, throughput, or risk tier.
- Shows technical or commercial judgment and trade-offs.
- Connects mechanisms to outcomes without claiming sole causality.
- Uses leadership verbs only where ownership is evidenced.

### Enterprise executive

- Owns a portfolio or program, not just projects.
- Establishes operating rhythm, governance, prioritisation, funding, adoption, and value measurement.
- Influences senior business, technology, risk, and regulatory stakeholders.
- Shows people leadership and organisational change.

### Inflation signals

- Title in headline is above the candidate's current level without equivalent-scope evidence.
- "12+ years leadership" when only total experience is known.
- "Led," "directed," "governed," or "commercialised" replaces a weaker source verb without evidence.
- New platforms, frameworks, databases, cloud providers, regional regulators, partnerships, or teams appear only in the tailored version.
- A business result is presented as direct revenue or savings when the source says "supported."
- MIT, university, publication, or award wording implies a credential or affiliation broader than the official record.

## Evidence Labels

| Label | Meaning | Treatment |
|---|---|---|
| E2 | Direct source support | Keep; improve specificity if useful |
| E1 | Defensible inference | Keep only with bounded wording |
| E0 | Unsupported or contradicted | Remove, verify, or rewrite before submission |

## Comparison Rules

- Score against the actual job mandate, not title prestige.
- A technically deep GIC-style VP may require more hands-on evidence than people leadership.
- A bank FVP/SVP program role requires portfolio, budget, adoption, and operating-governance evidence beyond technical delivery.
- A research/innovation SVP role requires research ecosystem, external partnership, commercialisation, and value-office evidence; publications alone are insufficient.
- Do not penalize a candidate for lacking a requirement hidden outside the supplied job description.