What should you receive with a participant shortlist?

Back

A shortlist should help your team make selection decisions.

Names and screener answers may form part of it, but the information needs to make each person’s suitability easy to assess. Reviewers should be able to see why someone is being proposed and what, if anything, remains unclear.

The right level of detail depends on the study. These are useful points to agree on before recruitment begins.

A clear connection to the brief

• Show how each proposed participant fits the relevant criteria and quotas.
• If the study distinguishes current, lapsed and unfamiliar players, that classification should be clear. Where several requirements overlap, the agreed allocation should be visible.
• This avoids asking reviewers to reconstruct quota fit from separate answers or make assumptions about how someone has been classified.

Relevant experience in context

• A short account of someone’s gaming experience can make the application easier to interpret.
• For a fictional cooperative-games study, a useful summary might explain that an applicant usually joins public groups, plays several evenings a week and particularly enjoys coordinating difficult encounters.
• That tells a reviewer more than “experienced cooperative player”, provided the details are relevant and supported by the applicant’s responses.

What validation established

• Agree what information the client needs from the validation stage.
• This might include a concise summary, relevant recorded responses or supporting evidence where required. The purpose is to help assess the agreed criteria without making the reviewer repeat every recruitment step.
• Be clear about what has been checked and avoid presenting an applicant’s claim as independently verified when it has not been.

Availability and outstanding questions

• Suitability includes being able to meet the commitment.
• Show the relevant availability and preparation requirements, with any unresolved point clearly identified. Someone proposed for review should not appear fully confirmed if a necessary arrangement is still outstanding.
• Where client approval is needed before booking, make that status explicit.

An agreed review process

• Useful information also needs a workable route to a decision.
• Agree who will review the shortlist, how feedback should be returned and when decisions are needed. Consistent feedback helps the recruiter understand whether to continue sourcing, clarify an answer or prepare an approved participant.
• Participant information should remain relevant to selection and be shared through the agreed secure process.
• At Gromotion, we agree on the information clients need to review proposed participants, so the shortlist supports their decisions without creating unnecessary work.

Have particular review requirements? Include them in your brief, and we’ll discuss how to support your selection process.