You’ve been in the room: a charismatic “maybe” vs. a quieter “probably.” The business is leaning one way. Your gut tugs another. A good Hiring Recommendation doesn’t dodge this tension; it organizes it. The structure is simple—evidence for fit, evidence against fit, and the support package if we proceed.

Evidence for fit groups signals that cohere: high indicators on Planning, Decision Quality, and Collaboration; examples in interview that match the anchors; a work sample that shows judgment under time pressure. 

Evidence against names the real risk: “Role weighting demands Influence at 5; indicators and examples suggest a 3–4 ceiling right now.” 

Then you propose a support package: targeted mentoring, decision pre‑briefs for 60 days, and crisp exit criteria for a trial assignment.

For HRBPs, this structure pays off in three ways: it reduces panel noise, makes bias visible, and creates a clear path from decision to onboarding. You can defend the call with auditors and, frankly, with yourself. If we choose to “bet on slope,” we do it openly and with scaffolding. If we pass, we can articulate why without impugning the person.

Expect pushback. Managers may say, “I just have a good feeling.” Acknowledge it, then anchor it: “Which behavior did you see that maps to Influence at 5?” If the answer is thin, we’ve learned something. If it’s strong, great—score it accordingly.

This isn’t bureaucracy. It’s a humane way to make stakes‑heavy decisions in public.