Skip to main content
Beta
Use case · Leadership and specialist search

For talent, hiring and retained-search teams working with people, legal, privacy, data and ATS owners.

One brief · One fair review · One hand-off

Review leadership and specialist evidence without turning it into a rank

Set the same approved brief before Search. Keep each reason, source, date, excluded field, gap, reviewer and human state on one research record, then pass only the agreed fields to the buyer’s hiring process.

Use Graph One when the role brief, work evidence, team routes and review notes sit in separate tools. Applicant tracking, high-volume screening and automated selection are not shown. The proof below shows one leadership brief; a specialist search needs its own approved facts and evidence question.

Buyer-owned role review brief · HR–14

Use one approved standard before reviewing any person

Local sample · Leadership search

Business need
Review people for a head of product role in a regulated software unit before the hiring team decides whom its formal process may approach.
Approved exact facts
A current product leadership role and an available GB country record. These facts form the initial research set only.
One evidence question
Does the available work-history text show leadership of a regulated product launch across product, data and operations?
Excluded factors
Protected or sensitive traits, relationship reach and any field not approved for this review stay out of Search, comparison and sort order.
Source scope
Buyer-approved role brief plus available Graph One profile and work-history fields. Any other source must be named and approved in scope.
Human owners
Hiring lead owns the need; talent lead approves the brief; people and data owners set use, access, retention, correction and deletion rules.

The buyer must approve the brief and fair-review method. This local sample does not establish a fairness result, legal compliance, qualification, availability, interest, consent or a hiring outcome.

Review the Sample Record

01 · Exact Search

Turn the approved facts into visible Search rules

The editable query uses only the brief’s approved exact facts. It forms an initial research set; it does not decide who should enter a hiring process.

Loading HR–14 · Initial research set

02 · Evidence review

See the reason and its limit before any route

Supported, Partial and Open apply to the same question for every person. Reviewers do not total, sort or turn those states into a screening score.

Compact fair-review record

Phone proof

Role brief
HR–14 · Head of product · Leadership search
Business need
One reviewed research set for a regulated software unit
Approved exact facts
Current product leadership role · GB country record
Evidence question
Shown leadership of a regulated launch across product, data and operations?
Excluded factors
Protected or sensitive traits · relationship reach · unapproved fields
Person
Morgan Patel · P–104 · Local sample
Evidence state
Supported · no score or rank
Source and date
Available profile and role text · checked 14 August 2026
Open gap
Team size, authority and formal requirements are not shown
Reviewer
Talent lead · Local sample owner
Decision state
Evidence review complete · owner review next
Route
Hidden until evidence review · no contact readiness implied
Access
Hiring lead owns · talent lead may edit · people and data review may read
Fields passed on
Brief ID · person ID · reason · source note · gap · reviewer · decision to approach
Formal system
Contact, interest, consent, checks, interviews and the hiring decision stay in the buyer’s process and ATS

03 · Profile proof

Inspect what the profile shows and what it does not

Open the same person record after evidence review. Source, date, excluded fields, gap, reviewer and research state stay beside the reason.

M
Morgan Patel · P–104
Product leader · Local sample record

HR–14 · Evidence review complete · 14 August 2026

Person profile · Sample data

Evidence state
Supported · No score or rank
Shown reason
Role text names a regulated launch and work across product, data and operations
Open gap
Team size, authority and formal requirements are not shown
Reviewer and state
Talent lead · Evidence review complete · Owner review next
Fields kept out
Protected or sensitive traits, relationship reach, qualification and interest
Current Graph One profile identity and tabs · Local sample research record. Use the profile for evidence review; keep qualification, availability, interest, consent and the hiring outcome in the buyer’s process.Swipe the tab row or use its arrow keys to review each section.

04 · Table, Views and comments

Give the panel one record it can challenge

One Table keeps the approved brief fields, three evidence states, source date, gap, reviewer and human state in the same row. Views can isolate open gaps; comments keep review beside the record.

Protected or sensitive traits, relationship reach and unapproved fields never become Table columns or sort rules in this sample.

The compact phone record above contains the same Table fields without hiding later columns off-screen.

05 · Route after evidence

Keep network reach outside the fair review

Reveal available paths only after the human evidence state is complete. Path evidence cannot change the brief, evidence state or record order.

The shown route remains under review. No request or contact step has been approved.

06 · Owned research work

End Graph One work at an agreed hand-off

The Board can hold source gaps, comments, dates and owners. Named access controls the Graph One research set; the Board does not become the formal hiring record.

Access paths show who can read or edit this sample. The buyer still sets permitted use, retention, correction and deletion.

The compact phone record carries the same owner, route gate, access and formal-system hand-off without shrinking Board lanes.

07 · Data, contact and ATS boundary

Pass a small reviewed record, not a shadow ATS

Graph One holds the research record shown here. Formal contact, checks, interviews and hiring decisions stay in the buyer’s approved process and ATS.

Graph One research keeps

The brief, exact Search, shown evidence, source and date, profile, route, gaps, reviewer, comments, Views, access and research state.

Buyer and approved sources supply

The business need, approved rules, source rights, missing role facts, formal requirements and authorised reviewers.

Buyer process and ATS own

Contact, interest, consent, application state, qualification and formal checks, interviews, records, offers and the hiring decision.

Review record to pass

Keep only what the next owner needs

The hand-off target and method form part of scope. This page does not claim a live ATS connector, import, export, write-back or sync.

Brief ID
HR–14
Person ID
P–104 · Local sample
Reason
Shown work text answers the brief’s one evidence question
Source note
Available profile and role text · 14 August 2026
Open question
Team size, authority and formal requirements
Reviewer
Talent lead · Local sample owner
Human state
Decision to approach remains open
The buyer’s people, legal, privacy and data owners set permitted use, access, retention, correction and deletion in the agreed process. Read the current product facts in the Trust centre; this sample does not claim legal compliance.

Role brief · Scope, evidence, owner

Test whether one live role can produce a fair research set

The first meeting will test its exact facts, one evidence question, excluded fields, source scope, three evidence states, route gate, access and ATS boundary. It will return one reviewed role brief, one field-and-source plan, one fair-review record specification and one agreed hand-off record – not a slate, qualification check, contact approval, ATS integration or hiring outcome.

Review Trust