HRM.2:4.4 - Compare candidates under the justified rule

Apply the supported procedure to the eligible population. Separate missing evidence from unfavorable evidence and record material uncertainty. A person denied a relevant opportunity should not silently receive the same interpretation as one who demonstrated failure. Seek a proportionate clarification or another valid opportunity when it can change the choice and is permitted.

Distinguish minimum conditions from compensable preferences. A required professional permission cannot be compensated by a high interview score. Among candidates who meet binding conditions, use the explained comparison relevant to the work. Do not construct weights retrospectively to select a favored person. When candidates are not distinguishable on the evidence, use the applicable tie or further-evidence procedure and state the limit; artificial numerical precision supplies no missing information.

Construct the recommendation with the proposed work and terms, evidence and uncertainty, applicable conditions, and any learning or support on which it depends. The authorized decision maker may accept it, request a defined missing contribution or make another supported choice within the actual rules. Communicate the decision and available correction or challenge route through HRM.4. Use ADM and the relevant organizational process to make an appointment or assignment effective; selection itself does not provide access, remuneration or authority.