We love to hear your feedback. Your suggestions and ideas are important to us. Our feedback forum is a great place to post your ideas and vote on others. Please share your detailed use case and how the proposed enhancements can increase value to your business. We do read all of your posts, but may not be able to respond to all comments.
More information on the status of submitted ideas can be found here
Reorganize or redesign the search committee feedback/responses page. Enable users to easily view all feedback for a specific applicant and determine which committee members have reviewed the applicant.
Below are some ideas to improve the existing page:
Provide the ability to sort applicants (e.g., alphabetically by first or last name).
Highlight the selected applicant (whose feedback the user is viewing). For example, display the selected applicant’s name at the top of the page or highlight the selected applicant in a contrasting color.
Rename the “feedback from search committee members” dropdown or clarify its purpose. Maybe move the dropdown to the right side of the screen, closer to the feedback provided for the selected applicant. This would serve as a visual cue that the dropdown filters the feedback, not the list of applicants.
If comments or summary are not enabled for a given application status, remove the corresponding text boxes instead of displaying “No response.” This will make it easier to determine which committee members might be in the process of reviewing the applicant and which have completed their review.
Alternatively, instead of enhancing the existing page, display feedback in a table format with drilldown options. For example, each row could represent the feedback provided for an applicant at a given status. The columns would contain the selection criteria outcomes/comments provided by a given committee member.
What business value are you trying to achieve?
We want to provide users with a way to quickly review the feedback provided for all applicants. Ideally users would be able to use the search committee responses page to:
|