The new post-AI standard for hiring
Stori turns interviews from unstructured conversations into evidence-linked candidate intelligence. Built on a century of behavioral science and eight years of independent research, our patent-pending methodology replaces outdated competency-based interviews with a new framework of questions and traits.
Four meta-traits. Twelve facets. One unified language.
Every candidate is interpreted through a common language of four meta-traits and twelve facets — but Stori keeps the evidence sources separate: the 120-adjective trait assessment captures self-perception, while the interview captures observed narrative evidence. The same facets appear in both, so the two can be compared without being collapsed.
Thinking
How a person explores ideas, processes information, and generates insight.
Discipline
How a person sets standards, maintains reliability, and sustains effort.
Execution
How a person acts under pressure, manages risk, and delivers outcomes.
Communication
How effectively a person conveys ideas, moves others to action, and navigates interpersonal dynamics.
Evidence over assertion
After the interview, every concrete moment becomes a structured, tagged record — what was said, in what context, how specific it is, and whether it's a demonstrated outcome or just a claim. The report is then written only from that evidence, leading with what was actually done.
[ OUTCOME · specificity 92 · facets: accountable / adaptable · confidence: medium ]
context: Candidate describing taking over a struggling launch after the original owner left.
claim: Took ownership of launch execution, coordinated design, engineering and customer comms, and shipped within six weeks.
specificity markers: named project, named stakeholders, timeline, constraint, decision, outcome.
assessment note: Specificity does not prove the claim is true. It makes the claim inspectable. The interviewer can probe who was involved, what changed, what was delivered, and what evidence exists outside the interview.
Stori does not treat specificity as truth. Specificity is a confidence input because it determines whether a claim can be interrogated. A vague claim cannot be tested. A specific claim can be probed, compared against the rest of the narrative, and corroborated where needed.
Outcome over claim
A thing built, shipped, or decided outweighs “I’m results-driven” every time. You can’t fake a body of specific, lived outcomes.
Specificity, scored
Names, numbers, dates and real outcomes score high; vague assertions score low. The dial that separates the checkable from the vague.
A receipt for every claim
Each line in a report traces to a real quote and its context — auditable, the opposite of “trust the model.”
Of course a candidate can make something up — no method ever fully solves that. What changes is what ends up on the record: instead of inferring traits from vague, unfalsifiable self-description, every answer is pushed toward specific detail — names, numbers, and outcomes we could verify if we ever had to. Specificity isn't proof. It's the precondition for it.
The Stori Assessment Scoring Framework
4,000-word transcripts carry far more context than 400-word AI resumes. Because interview evidence contains more context than resume keywords, Stori gives greater weight to demonstrated narrative evidence once it is available. This doesn't make the system perfect — it makes the reasoning more inspectable, because every assessment claim is tied back to specific transcript evidence.
Layer 0: Eligibility filters
Location, work authorization, required qualifications. Rule-based fit, not assessment.
Layer 1: Resume intelligence
Experience, skills, education, company history. A useful proxy, not direct evidence.
Layer 2: Interview intelligence
Narrative evidence from what the candidate says they did, decided, built, learned and changed. Richer context than resume data.
Layer 3: Cross-validation
Comparison between self-reported traits and interview-observed patterns. Agreement increases confidence; disagreement becomes a self-awareness signal where the evidence supports it.
What Stori does not claim
Stori does not claim to read minds, predict performance with certainty, or replace human judgment. It does not treat personality scores as ability scores. It does not automatically reject candidates. It surfaces structured, evidence-linked signals so hiring teams can make better-informed decisions.
Research-grounded trait assessment
Stori builds on established personality research and the IPIP lexical framework to develop an assessment based on behavioral traits, not just experience.
