When to Override an Automated Recommendation

An automated recommendation is a review input, not a final decision. An internal-mobility lead should override it when it does not answer the approved question, relies on incomplete or misread evidence, or conflicts with a documented role boundary. The override should correct a traceable problem, not provide a private preference with a technical-sounding label.

Use this guide when a ranking is already available and someone must follow it, pause it or record a different next step. Preserve the original output, test the disagreement and leave an evidence-based handoff.

Define the recommendation's job

Before changing the disposition, record what the recommendation was meant to do: the role brief version, internal-mobility question, candidate set, recommendation date and decision owner. A first-conversation recommendation is different from a decision about eligibility, promotion or appointment.

Separate the target role's must-haves, nice-to-haves and operating boundaries. For each material criterion, define the evidence that would support it, an acceptable equivalent route and the status for information that is missing. Keep the internal employee's current title, reputation and performance context in a separate field from evidence against the target role. Familiarity can help locate records, but it should not silently alter the standard.

Do not edit or replace the first recommendation while investigating. Save the original report or review record, explanations and input version. This prevents a corrected interpretation from being mistaken for the system's original output.

Diagnose the trigger before overriding

Most disagreements belong to one of four categories. Diagnose the category first because each has a different owner and response.

These are reasons to investigate, not automatic instructions to progress. If the trigger cannot be tied to the role brief or a permitted source, keep the recommendation as verify and name the remaining question.

Test the proposed override

Use this sequence before choosing a different next step:

1. State the conflict. Quote the relevant criterion or explanation and write the narrower claim the source supports.
2. Check the source. Read the internal record, CV, work sample or approved note. Distinguish participation from ownership and context from evidence.
3. Apply the same standard. Recheck candidates affected by the same correction. An internal employee should not receive a relaxed requirement because the reviewer knows more about them.
4. Check the boundary. Decide whether the issue is a must-have, learnable gap, operating boundary or unknown. Missing information is not a negative finding by itself.
5. Choose a disposition. Use progress, verify, hold, revise or close, with a job-related reason and named owner.

An override is usually defensible when it points to a source, frozen criterion or genuine input correction. It is weak when it says the employee is "known to be good", has a "better cultural fit", deserves an exception because of tenure or should move up because the ranking "feels wrong". Those statements may signal a panel question, but they are not an evidence trail.

Record the human decision

Write the override as a change to the review state, not a claim that the method is always wrong. Keep the recommendation, proposed override and uncertainty visible together. This record can sit beside the original report:

Role / brief version:
Recommendation date and source:
Candidate identifier:
Original recommendation and criterion:
Override trigger:
Source checked and narrow finding:
Comparable candidates rechecked:
New disposition and job-related reason:
Owner, next action and stop condition:
Review date:

For an internal move, limit the record to information needed for the target-role decision and follow the organisation's access and retention process. Do not copy unrelated personal details into a ranking note. If a manager has a conflict or strong influence, add an independent reviewer rather than disguising that concern as a score adjustment. Local requirements vary; this is general process guidance, not legal advice.

Review the override at the next gate

An override is not complete until its next action happens. The owner might verify project scope, ask a comparable work-sample question, confirm a boundary or revise the brief. Set a stop condition, such as "do not progress until the required licence is confirmed" or "rerun all candidates after the must-have wording is versioned". Close the note with the evidence reviewed and resulting state.

If new authorised internal evidence changes the recommendation, preserve both versions and explain the scope. If the brief changes, create a new version and decide whether every candidate needs a fresh review. Do not quietly apply a new rule to one employee. The record distinguishes a corrected input from a disagreement about judgement.

Where Talent Summoner fits

Talent Summoner is our product. Its current Candidate Ranking tool, checked on 3 September 2026, accepts a pasted or uploaded job description and up to 50 CVs in PDF, DOCX, MD or TXT format, requires no account and returns a ranked shortlist with plain-English reasoning and shareable reports. Use that report as the preserved starting recommendation, then add authorised internal context and the human override record. Our product does not decide whether an employee should transfer or verify private performance evidence.

When the approved internal pool needs an external comparison, candidate sourcing, checked on 3 September 2026, starts from a role brief and searches LinkedIn, GitHub and other public professional sources across 200M+ profiles. Treat public-source results as discovery material to verify, not proof of current availability, interest or ownership. Keep the source route visible when comparing internal and external candidates.

For the next internal-mobility review, save the original recommendation, classify the trigger, recheck comparable candidates and record one named next action. Use candidate ranking for supplied CV material or candidate sourcing for an approved external discovery pass.