docket.
After interviews, feedback often comes in late and nobody can see who is holding it up. Docket shows hiring managers which candidates are waiting on them and for how long.
- Research
- Clickable prototype
- 6 testers, 7 sessions
- Figma file
and for how long
Two roles, one hire.
If you have applied for a job, you have met both. The recruiter usually contacts you first. The hiring manager is the person you would end up working for. These are composites, not real people: every line comes from the research or is a reasonable guess, and the photos are AI-generated.
Illustrative · not a real person
Daniel, hiring manager
Hiring is about two hours of Daniel's week, squeezed between his other meetings.
- Make a confident decision without re-reading everything from scratch
- Give feedback the same day he interviews, not days later
- See a candidate's whole picture instead of a scattered chain of emails and Slack messages
- Gets pulled into a last-minute meeting right when he meant to review a candidate
- Feedback feels like homework on top of his real job, so it slips
- By the time he responds, the recruiter has already followed up twice
"Sometimes the hiring manager gets pulled into a last-minute meeting."
Illustrative · not a real person
Sam, recruiter
She is running hiring for several roles at once. Docket only has to solve the hiring-manager side of her job, but it cannot get in her way.
- Keep every candidate moving without chasing hiring managers for an update
- Get feedback back fast enough that good candidates do not take another offer
- Use one system that already works, since most reviews say today's tools are fine for her side
- Good candidates fall into a black hole waiting on the hiring manager
- Falls back to email because there is no faster way to get a hiring manager's attention
- Has to follow up more than once for the same candidate
"We've all experienced when a great candidate is sourced and sent to the hiring manager only to fall into a black hole where they never hear feedback."
Fixing where people got stuck.
Every change here came from something a tester did or said. The biggest one: Mazzy could not tell whose side the hold-up was on, which is the exact problem the research pointed to.
"Waiting on Rae Lindqvist" and a Send reminder button. Mazzy could not tell if the problem was the team's or Hannah's, or what the button would do.
1 It says in plain words that the hold-up is on the team, not Hannah. 2 The button says who the reminder goes to and how. 3 A "Your decision" box says whether you need to do anything. Leo and every new tester after him got it right away, 5/5 sure. Try it →
| What testers hit | What I changed | Result |
|---|---|---|
| "Awaiting you" and "Waiting on: You" read as the same thing (Ash) | Renamed the status Ready for review, and added one Waiting on you filter. | Everyone after found it |
| Did not know how to move Maya forward (Ash, Mazzy) | A "Your decision" box with a button that names the next step. Afterward it says what moved, with Undo. | 5/5 from round 3 on |
| Could not tell whose side Hannah's hold-up was on (Mazzy) | It says in plain words that the hold-up is on the team, and the button reads "Remind Rae." | 5/5 from round 3 on |
| Found the concerns only at the bottom (Mazzy) | Every interviewer's pros and concerns come first, concerns in bold. | Built |
| Wanted one number and a way to sort (Ash, Mazzy, Leo) | An overall score out of 20 in the list. Every column title sorts, and the list opens with what is late or due. | Built |
| Checkboxes read as move or delete, and there were two Compare buttons (5 of 7 sessions) | One checkbox selects a row, and a bar at the bottom lets you Compare or Archive. One Compare button, highest score first. | Rebuilt. Testing next |