ceo-orchestration 1.0.0

package/.claude/skills/domains/hr/skills/recruitment-specialist/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,400 @@
+---
+name: recruitment-specialist
+description: |
+  End-to-end talent acquisition across the full hiring lifecycle.
+  Covers job description and scorecard authoring, multi-channel sourcing
+  strategy (inbound, outbound boolean, referral, community, agency), structured
+  interviewing (Toggl 4-stage / Bock-style rubric), debias-by-design bias
+  mitigation, reference and background check discipline, offer negotiation, and
+  candidate-experience NPS. Enforces minimum-necessary PII handling at each
+  stage with documented retention schedules and LGPD Art. 7 / GDPR Art. 6
+  lawful bases. Use when: authoring or auditing a job description or scorecard;
+  designing or reviewing an interview process; evaluating sourcing channel ROI;
+  preparing an offer strategy; conducting a post-hire pipeline retrospective; or
+  reviewing a recruitment workflow for bias or privacy compliance.
+owner: Recruitment Specialist (domain persona)
+tier: domain:hr
+scope_tags: [recruitment, talent-acquisition, structured-interviewing, sourcing, bias-mitigation, offer-negotiation]
+inherits: [core/compliance-lgpd, core/pii-data-flow, core/consent-lifecycle, core/dpo-reporting]
+pii_handling: required
+inspired_by:
+  - source: msitarzewski/agency-agents/specialized/recruitment-specialist.md@783f6a72bfd7f3135700ac273c619d92821b419a
+    license: MIT
+    relationship: structural_inspiration
+    authored_by: ceo-orchestration framework
+    authored_at: 2026-05-07
+# --- smart-loading fields (PLAN-083 Wave 0b sub-agent 0.7c) ---
+domain: hr
+priority: 8
+risk_class: low
+stack: []
+context_budget_tokens: 500
+inactive_but_retained: true
+repo_profile_binding:
+  frontend: {active: false, priority: 10}
+  engine: {active: false, priority: 10}
+  fintech: {active: false, priority: 10}
+  trading-readonly: {active: false, priority: 10}
+  generic: {active: false, priority: 10}
+activation_triggers: []
+# --- K1 paths: native file-touch activation (PLAN-135 W3 unit k1a) ---
+paths:
+  - "**/recruitment/**"
+  - "**/candidates/**"
+  - "**/interviews/**"
+  - "**/job-descriptions/**"
+  - "**/offers/**"
+---
+
+# Recruitment Specialist
+
+## Cardinal Rule
+
+Every hiring decision must rest on a documented scorecard with per-competency
+ratings recorded before the debrief discussion begins. Decisions made on
+impression without a scored rubric are rejected at the two-pass review gate
+(ADR-058). Post-hoc rationalisation of an impression is not a scorecard.
+
+## Fail-Fast Rule
+
+Stop and return a structured failure when any of the following is true:
+
+- A job description contains exclusionary language based on gender, age,
+  marital or parental status, ethnicity, religion, or physical appearance
+  not directly required by the role.
+- Applicant personal data is collected without documented lawful basis
+  (LGPD Art. 7 / GDPR Art. 6) and explicit purpose specification.
+- A background check is initiated without prior written authorization from
+  the candidate naming the specific categories of data to be verified.
+- A single interviewer is the sole decision-maker for a hire into a
+  full-time role — this arrangement cannot be mitigated; escalate to
+  process redesign.
+- A non-compete conflict screening has not been completed before an offer
+  is extended.
+
+Never proceed with an unstructured interview and score it retrospectively.
+Retrospective scoring anchors on the hiring manager's prior impression and
+produces discriminatory outcomes even when individual interviewers are acting
+in good faith.
+
+## When to Apply
+
+Apply this skill when: authoring or auditing a job description or scorecard;
+designing or diagnosing an interview process (high interviewer disagreement,
+short-tenure hires); evaluating sourcing channel ROI; preparing an offer
+strategy involving equity or non-standard benefits; conducting a post-cohort
+retrospective matching hire-quality back to channel and scorecard dimension;
+or reviewing a recruitment workflow for PII exposure or retention compliance.
+
+Do not substitute for legal counsel on non-compete enforceability or
+jurisdiction-specific employment law; route to
+`domains/business-support/skills/legal-compliance-checker`.
+
+## PII Handling
+
+Recruitment generates candidate personal data at every stage. Each stage
+has a minimum-necessary ceiling, a documented lawful basis, and a
+retention schedule. Processing outside these bounds is a compliance failure
+requiring immediate remediation.
+
+### Lawful Basis
+
+| Jurisdiction | Stage | Basis |
+|---|---|---|
+| Brazil (LGPD) | Application through offer | Art. 7 §V — execution of pre-contractual procedures at the request of the data subject |
+| Brazil (LGPD) | Rejected-candidate retention | Art. 7 §II — legitimate interest, provided retention period is documented and proportionate |
+| EU (GDPR) | Application through offer | Art. 6(1)(b) — steps prior to entering a contract at the request of the data subject |
+| EU (GDPR) | Rejected-candidate retention | Art. 6(1)(f) — legitimate interest; document interest, necessity, and balancing test |
+| US | Generally | No single federal framework; FCRA governs background checks; state CCPA/CPRA and equivalents govern data rights |
+
+Consent (LGPD Art. 7 §I / GDPR Art. 6(1)(a)) is a weak basis for processing
+materially required for the application process: candidates in a power-
+imbalanced position relative to the hiring organisation cannot freely refuse.
+
+### Minimum-Necessary at Each Stage
+
+| Stage | Permitted data | Prohibited at this stage |
+|---|---|---|
+| Initial application | Name, contact, CV/resume, role-relevant credentials | National ID, date of birth, marital status, photo (unless role requires), health data |
+| Screening call | Confirmed skills, availability, compensation expectations, right-to-work status | Detailed financial history, medical history, family situation |
+| Interview | Competency evidence per scorecard | Medical data, credit history, political or religious views |
+| Reference check | Employment dates, role, performance in role-relevant competencies | Reason for departure beyond verified facts, personal information volunteered beyond scope |
+| Background check | Only categories explicitly authorised in writing by candidate (employment history, education, criminal record where role-required and jurisdictionally permitted) | Financial history not role-required; medical; social media not disclosed by candidate |
+| Offer and onboarding handoff | Data required for contract formation and payroll | Excess retention of interview notes after onboarding completion |
+
+### Retention Schedule
+
+| Cohort | Retention period | Deletion trigger |
+|---|---|---|
+| Hired candidates | Duration of employment + legal minimum post-termination (varies: BR 5 years civil claims / EU varies by member state / US EEOC 1 year from hire) | Employee offboarding ceremony |
+| Rejected candidates — reached interview stage | 1 year from rejection notification, unless candidate requests shorter period | Automated purge or documented manual deletion |
+| Rejected candidates — application only | 6 months from rejection notification | Automated purge |
+| Background check reports (FCRA-governed, US) | 5 years from report date | Documented purge |
+
+Retention beyond these periods requires a specific documented business
+justification reviewed by the DPO or privacy counsel. "We might want to
+contact them later" is not a sufficient justification.
+
+See `core/compliance-lgpd` for LGPD data subject rights, breach notification,
+and processing registry requirements. All recruitment workflows must be
+registered in the data processing activity record before going live.
+
+## JD and Scorecard Authoring
+
+A JD communicates role expectations to candidates. A scorecard defines
+competency evidence required for a hire decision. The two must be aligned
+but are never the same document.
+
+### Job Description Principles
+
+- Lead with outcomes the role is accountable for, not tasks it executes.
+  Outcome: "owns 90-day onboarding completion rate for direct reports".
+  Mislabelling preferences as requirements shrinks the addressable candidate
+  pool without increasing hire quality.
+- Eliminate universally exclusionary language: "young and dynamic", "native
+  speaker" (unless documented linguistic requirement), "cultural fit" without
+  definition, gendered role titles. These trigger legal exposure under US ADEA /
+  EU Equal Treatment Directive 2006/54/EC / BR Constituição Federal Art. 7 XXX.
+- Disclose compensation band where required by law (Colorado EPEWA, NYC Local
+  Law 32, WA HB 1696, EU Pay Transparency Directive 2023/970) and as best
+  practice elsewhere. Concealment increases time-to-hire without negotiation
+  advantage.
+
+### Scorecard Construction
+
+- Define 5–7 outcome-based competencies, not trait labels. Competency:
+  "structures ambiguous problems into prioritised workstreams". Trait:
+  "strong analytical skills". Traits are unmeasurable in a behavioral interview.
+- Map each competency to at least one behavioral question with scoring anchors
+  at three levels (does not meet / meets / exceeds). Anchors must describe
+  observable evidence, not impressions.
+- Never copy-paste the JD into the scorecard; requirements-language cannot
+  be scored from interview evidence.
+- Calibrate the scorecard with the panel before the first interview.
+  Un-calibrated panels anchor on the most senior interviewer's impression.
+
+## Sourcing Strategy
+
+No single sourcing channel produces optimal results across all role types,
+seniority levels, and talent markets. Channel mix is a cost-per-qualified-hire
+optimisation problem, not a posting checklist.
+
+### Channel Mix Model
+
+| Channel | Optimal for | Cost profile | Lead time |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| Inbound (careers page, job boards) | High brand recognition; high-volume junior roles | Low cost per application; variable quality | 2–6 weeks typical |
+| Outbound boolean (LinkedIn Recruiter, GitHub search) | Senior / specialist roles with small addressable pool | High recruiter-time cost; higher passive-candidate quality | 4–10 weeks |
+| Referral programme | Cultural fit; roles requiring high trust | Low cost per qualified hire; must manage homophily risk | 2–4 weeks |
+| Community / open source / conference | Technical roles where craft is publicly observable | Near-zero direct cost; recruiter-time for community presence | 4–12 weeks |
+| Agency / retained search | Executive roles; time-critical senior fills; geographies without local recruiting capacity | 15–30% fee on first-year base; negotiate replacement guarantee (standard 3–6 months) | 6–14 weeks |
+
+### Active vs. Passive Candidate Framing
+
+Active candidates (currently searching) respond to well-structured JDs on
+high-traffic boards. Passive candidates require outreach leading with the
+opportunity's career-trajectory signal value. Opening with "we are hiring
+for X role" achieves response rates below 5%; leading with a specific
+observation about one artifact the candidate has produced (paper, project,
+talk, open-source contribution) achieves 20–40%.
+
+### Channel ROI Discipline
+
+Every channel requires documented cost-per-hire and offer-acceptance rate
+tracked quarterly. Composite efficiency: `(hire_quality × 0.4) +
+(1/cost_per_hire_normalised × 0.3) + (probation_retention × 0.3)`.
+Reallocate budget toward higher-scoring channels; fund on current data,
+not historical assumption.
+
+## Structured Interviewing
+
+Unstructured interview validity for job performance: r ≈ 0.20. Structured
+behavioral interviews: r ≈ 0.51 (Schmidt & Hunter, 1998). Standardise the
+process or accept the bias.
+
+### Four-Stage Process (Toggl-inspired)
+
+| Stage | Purpose | Competency focus | Format |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| 1. Screening | Confirm baseline fit: role understanding, availability, compensation expectations, right-to-work | Motivation, communication clarity | 30-min async or phone |
+| 2. Structured skills | Assess primary technical or functional competencies via behavioral evidence | Role-specific outcomes from scorecard | 60–90 min, 2–3 interviewers |
+| 3. Cross-functional fit | Assess collaboration, ambiguity tolerance, feedback receptivity | Teamwork, influence without authority, learning velocity | 45–60 min, cross-team panel |
+| 4. Hiring manager close | Validate mutual understanding of role scope, success definition, and career trajectory | Leadership philosophy, strategic context | 30–45 min |
+
+### Bock-Style Rubric Application
+
+The most predictive question type is work-sample simulation followed by
+structured behavioral (Bock, "Work Rules!" 2015). Prediction validity requires:
+
+- Specific past situations over hypotheticals: "Tell me about a time…" over
+  "What would you do if…".
+- Verbatim evidence recorded during the interview; memory contaminates toward
+  first impression within 30 minutes.
+- Scores locked before debrief; post-discussion revision requires documented
+  rationale or is treated as evidence contamination.
+
+### Calibration Session
+
+Run one calibration session per panel before the first live interview:
+present a case study, have each interviewer score independently, compare
+scores, and update anchor descriptions where divergence exceeded one level.
+A panel that has calibrated once achieves measurably higher inter-rater
+reliability than one that has not.
+
+## Bias Mitigation
+
+Bias in hiring does not require bad intent. It is produced by process design
+that allows heuristics — which encode historical base rates — to substitute
+for structured evidence. The mitigation is process design, not attitude
+adjustment.
+
+### Debias-by-Design Interventions
+
+| Intervention | Bias addressed | Implementation |
+|---|---|---|
+| Blind resume screening | Name-based and photo-based bias | Strip name, photo, address, university name (not degree level) before initial screen; restore for offer stage |
+| Structured rubric scoring before debrief | Anchoring, halo/horn effect, affinity bias | Lock scores individually before panel convenes; debrief surfaces disagreements, not impressions |
+| Two or more interviewers per stage | Single-interviewer bias amplification | No solo interviewer is the decision-gate for any stage beyond the 30-min screen |
+| Decision-before-discussion rule | Social conformity, authority anchoring | Each interviewer submits a hire/no-hire recommendation before the group debrief begins |
+| Never anchor on first impression | Primacy bias, confirmation bias | First-impression scores are advisory only; the scorecard dimension scores are the decision record |
+| Diverse panel composition | In-group homogeneity bias | At minimum one interviewer from outside the immediate team and one with different functional background |
+
+### Affirmative Action and Equal Treatment Compliance
+
+| Jurisdiction | Legal framework | Obligation |
+|---|---|---|
+| United States | Title VII / ADEA / ADA / OFCCP EO 11246 | Government contractors: affirmative action plans for women, minorities, veterans, disabled persons. All employers: no adverse impact on protected classes without documented business necessity |
+| European Union | Equal Treatment Directive 2006/54/EC; Employment Equality Directive 2000/78/EC | Prohibit direct and indirect discrimination on sex, racial/ethnic origin, religion, disability, age, sexual orientation. Positive action permitted but not mandatory |
+| Brazil | Lei das Cotas (Lei 8.213/91) | Employers with 100+ employees: mandatory quotas for persons with disabilities (2–5% of payroll depending on headcount). Constituição Federal Art. 7 XXX–XXXIV prohibits discriminatory hiring criteria |
+
+Document all adverse-impact analyses annually for roles with significant
+hire volume. Adverse impact at the 4/5 rule threshold (hire rate of a
+protected group below 80% of the highest hire rate group) requires immediate
+process review.
+
+## Reference and Background Check
+
+### Reference Check Discipline
+
+References provided by the candidate are advocates, not neutral validators.
+Treat reference data as one signal among several.
+
+- Obtain at minimum two candidate-sourced references, including at least one
+  direct manager.
+- Use structured questions tied to scorecard competencies; unstructured
+  reference conversations produce legally risky anecdote, not calibrated evidence.
+- Never contact references not provided by the candidate without written consent.
+  Backdoor references carry GDPR/LGPD compliance risk and tortious-interference
+  exposure.
+- Document verified facts (dates, title, scope) separately from assessed quality
+  evidence; conflating them creates false precision.
+
+### Background Check Compliance
+
+| Jurisdiction | Governing framework | Key obligations |
+|---|---|---|
+| United States | FCRA (15 U.S.C. § 1681) | Written disclosure and authorisation before check; copy of report to candidate before adverse action; pre-adverse action notice; adverse action notice with dispute rights |
+| European Union | GDPR Art. 6(1)(b) / member-state implementations | Purpose limitation to role requirements; data minimisation; proportionality; no processing of special-category data without explicit consent or legal basis |
+| Brazil | LGPD Art. 7 § 1; Lei 9.029/95 | Written authorisation; purpose limited to role requirements; criminal record checks require legal basis; prohibit checks that constitute indirect discrimination |
+
+**Ban-the-box (US):** 35+ states and 150+ cities restrict criminal-history
+inquiry timing; many require conditional offer before background check
+initiation. Verify per hiring jurisdiction. Criminal record findings require
+individualized assessment (nature of offense, elapsed time, role nexus,
+rehabilitation evidence) — automatic disqualification is not permitted.
+
+## Offer and Negotiation
+
+Offer conversations have the highest leverage-to-outcome ratio of any
+recruitment touchpoint. A mishandled offer converts a high-signal candidate
+into a declined offer and a sourcing restart.
+
+### Compensation Philosophy Disclosure
+
+Disclose the compensation philosophy before extending the offer, not as
+part of the negotiation. Candidates need to understand whether the offer
+is at the band midpoint, the band floor, or above-band before evaluating it.
+"This offer is at the 60th percentile of our band for this level" is more
+useful than a raw number with no frame.
+
+### Band Positioning Principles
+
+- Do not open below the band floor to create negotiation room. This produces
+  adverse impact against groups with lower negotiation propensity and reduces
+  offer acceptance rate.
+- Disclose the band range. Post-hire discovery of significant peer-pay gaps
+  creates flight risk within 12 months.
+- Present total compensation clearly: base, variable (plan mechanics, target
+  payout, historical achievement), equity (409A grant value, vesting schedule,
+  cliff, liquidity treatment), and benefits. Opaque equity grants default to
+  base-anchoring against market rates.
+
+### Non-Deception Obligation
+
+Never misrepresent equity valuation, liquidity probability, role scope,
+reporting structure, or company financial condition. Offer misrepresentation
+is grounds for rescission, regulatory complaint, and reputational damage.
+Candidates talk.
+
+## Candidate-Experience NPS
+
+### Post-Stage Survey Discipline
+
+Deploy a 2-question pulse survey after each stage: (1) likelihood to recommend
+the process (0–10); (2) one change that would most improve the experience.
+Score stage-level NPS separately — aggregate company NPS masks stage-specific
+failure modes.
+
+### Per-Stage Drop-Off Analysis
+
+Track conversion by sourcing channel, role family, and hiring team.
+Drop-offs indicate either calibration failure (interview standard
+misaligned with candidate pool) or process failure (scheduling friction,
+communication delay, interviewer conduct). Distinguish before prescribing.
+
+### Rejection Feedback Discipline
+
+Every candidate who reached the interview stage receives substantive rejection
+within 5 business days. Name one competency dimension where the candidate
+did not meet bar; this improves employer-brand NPS by 15–20 points. Never
+ghost a scheduled-interview attendee — ghosting produces active detractors
+at 3× the rate of a clear rejection.
+
+## Anti-patterns
+
+| Anti-pattern | Risk | Correct Approach |
+|---|---|---|
+| Unstructured interview as primary signal | Validity r ≈ 0.20; high bias amplification; legal exposure on adverse impact | Structured behavioral interview with per-competency anchors; lock scores before debrief |
+| Single-interviewer final decision | No inter-rater check; bias unmediated; legal risk | Minimum 2 interviewers per substantive stage; independent scores before panel discussion |
+| JD written as marketing copy | Attracts high applicant volume with poor signal; misrepresents role scope | Outcomes-first JD; hard requirements distinguished from preferences; compensation band disclosed |
+| Hidden compensation band | Increases time-to-hire; adverse impact on lower-propensity negotiators; pay equity exposure | Disclose band in JD or before first conversation; present total comp at offer |
+| Ghosting candidates | Active brand detractors; Glassdoor/Blind reputation damage; GDPR notification obligations in EU | Close all candidates within documented SLA; structured rejection with competency feedback for interviewees |
+| Copying JD into scorecard | Non-scorable competencies; interviewer frustration; no decision signal | Separate artifacts: JD communicates to market; scorecard operationalises evidence requirements |
+| Backdoor reference without consent | GDPR/LGPD compliance risk; tortious interference exposure; candidate trust destruction | References sourced by candidate only; structured questions tied to scorecard; document verification vs. assessment |
+| Post-offer equity misrepresentation | Grounds for rescission; regulatory complaint; retention damage when reality arrives | Disclose 409A, vesting schedule, cliff, liquidity probability in clear language at offer stage |
+
+## Cross-References
+
+- `core/compliance-lgpd` — LGPD data subject rights, lawful basis documentation,
+  data processing registry, breach notification, and DPO obligations for all
+  candidate personal data processed under Brazilian law.
+- `domains/hr/skills/hr-onboarding` — hand-off protocol from accepted-offer
+  to onboarding; data minimisation at the recruitment-to-HR-systems boundary;
+  probation period management.
+- `domains/business-support/skills/legal-compliance-checker` — jurisdiction-specific
+  employment law interpretation (non-compete enforceability, ban-the-box scope,
+  pay transparency statute details, OFCCP affirmative action plan requirements).
+
+## ADR Anchors
+
+- **ADR-058 (Brainstorm gate + two-pass adversarial review):** job descriptions,
+  scorecards, and sourcing strategies produced under this skill are primary
+  analytical artifacts requiring the two-pass review defined in ADR-058
+  §BORROW-2. The first pass reviews completeness: scorecard has 5–7 scorable
+  competencies, lawful basis is documented, retention schedule is specified.
+  The second pass reviews from an adversarial frame: specifically testing
+  whether any JD language creates exclusionary effect, whether scoring anchors
+  are genuinely behaviorally observable, and whether the offer package contains
+  any representation that cannot be verified at onboarding. The deliverable
+  must not be distributed to candidates or published externally until both
+  passes are complete and any blocker findings are resolved.

package/.claude/skills/domains/hr/task-chains.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,91 @@
+# Task chains — HR Squad
+# Domain-specific workflows that extend the universal .claude/task-chains.yaml.
+
+task_chains:
+  - id: hr-hire-to-onboard
+    title: "Hire-to-onboard execution (structured recruitment + day-one readiness)"
+    whenToUse: |
+      A new hire has been made and the transition from signed offer to
+      productive team member must be executed. This chain covers: offer
+      acceptance to day-one logistics, PII collection under minimum-necessary
+      discipline, access provisioning, compliance training enrollment,
+      benefits enrollment, and first-30-60-90 plan delivery. Triggered by
+      every new hire, including rehires and contractors converting to full-time.
+      Out of scope: the interview and selection process itself (see
+      hr-structured-recruitment chain).
+    steps:
+      - id: 1
+        owner: "Valentina Souza (HR Onboarding Specialist)"
+        action: "Pre-boarding sequence (days 1-5 before start): send welcome email with equipment logistics, system access timeline, and first-day schedule. Collect required PII only (CPF, bank coordinates, CTPS, emergency contact). Do NOT request medical history beyond legally required fitness check (HRR-004)."
+      - id: 2
+        owner: "Isabel Meireles (HR Operations Lead)"
+        action: "Employment record creation: create canonical record with legal basis (CLT / LGPD Art. 7 employment performance) for every PII field. Assign retention class. Confirm the new hire's record is accessible only to payroll, their HRBP, and direct manager (HRR-002 access-control check)."
+      - id: 3
+        owner: "Isabel Meireles"
+        action: "Double-approval hire entry: record who authorised the hire (hiring manager) and who executed the HRIS entry (HR Ops). Both IDs logged with timestamps (HRR-003). Employment status set to 'active' only after both approvals are recorded."
+      - id: 4
+        owner: "Valentina Souza"
+        action: "Access provisioning request: submit access request for core tools (email, Slack, code repository, HRIS self-service) on the FIRST day, not the first week. Confirm provisioning by end-of-day-one. Least-privilege: role-appropriate access only (HRR-013 principle applied to provisioning speed)."
+      - id: 5
+        owner: "Valentina Souza"
+        action: "Day-one orientation: mission + team + tools sequence (NOT paperwork-first). Pair with a buddy (tenured peer, same team, identified before start date). Schedule week-one check-in with direct manager."
+      - id: 6
+        owner: "Valentina Souza"
+        action: "Benefits enrollment: open enrollment window, confirm hard deadline communicated, confirm new hire knows consequences of missing the window (most benefits require qualifying event or wait for open enrollment). Document window close date in the employee record."
+      - id: 7
+        owner: "Isabel Meireles"
+        action: "Compliance training enrollment: assign required training (data privacy, code of conduct, anti-harassment, safety) on day one. Set completion deadline (typically 30 days). Delinquency flagged to HRBP at day 25."
+      - id: 8
+        owner: "Staff Code Reviewer"
+        action: "30-day check: first-30-plan checkpoint complete, compliance training completion rate confirmed, access provisioning verified as correct (no over-provisioning), compensation data access verified as minimum-necessary (HRR-002)."
+    verification: |
+      - PII collected: minimum-necessary only, legal basis declared per field (HRR-004)
+      - Employment record: access-controlled to payroll + HRBP + direct manager (HRR-002)
+      - Double-approval employment-status entry recorded (HRR-003)
+      - Day-one access provisioning: core tools live by end of day 1 (HRR-013 principle)
+      - Benefits enrollment window communicated with hard deadline
+      - Compliance training: enrolled on day 1, completion deadline set
+
+  - id: hr-structured-recruitment
+    title: "Run a structured recruitment cycle (scorecard-driven, bias-audited)"
+    whenToUse: |
+      A new role is being filled through external recruitment. This chain
+      covers: job description review, sourcing strategy, structured interview
+      design, debrief protocol, reference and background check sequencing,
+      and offer. Applies to all external hires. Internal transfers use a
+      shorter chain (not documented here — adapt by skipping sourcing steps).
+      Out of scope: compensation benchmarking and offer negotiation strategy
+      (handled within the offer step using finance-accounting squad input for
+      budget approval).
+    steps:
+      - id: 1
+        owner: "Larissa Andrade (Recruitment Compliance Specialist)"
+        action: "Job description review: scan for age references, gendered language, physical requirements without demonstrated necessity (HRR-006). Confirm salary history is NOT in the job posting or application form (HRR-007). Confirm minimum requirements are grounded in job function, not credential inflation."
+      - id: 2
+        owner: "Larissa Andrade"
+        action: "Scorecard design: define 4-6 competencies per role with behavioural anchors (what does 'exceeds expectations' look like for this competency in this role?). Confirm global impression rating is NOT on the scorecard — per-competency only (HRR-005)."
+      - id: 3
+        owner: "Valentina Souza (HR Onboarding Specialist acting as coordinator)"
+        action: "Sourcing strategy: define channels (inbound, outbound boolean search, referral, community, agency). Document demographic reach of each channel. Flag if all channels systematically draw from the same networks — diversity of sourcing pools is a fairness input (HRR-009 downstream)."
+      - id: 4
+        owner: "Larissa Andrade"
+        action: "Interview panel briefing: all panel members receive the scorecard and behavioural question bank before the first interview. Brief on prohibited questions (marital status, children, religion, political affiliation, health — HRR-004). Confirm debrief protocol: independent scores submitted before group discussion."
+      - id: 5
+        owner: "Larissa Andrade"
+        action: "Debrief facilitation: collect per-competency scores from all panel members independently. Hold group debrief only after scores are submitted. Challenge any global impression override of the per-competency aggregate without documented justification (HRR-005)."
+      - id: 6
+        owner: "Larissa Andrade"
+        action: "Background check: order only after conditional offer is extended (HRR-008). Confirm FCRA disclosure provided (US) or equivalent BR legal basis for the check. Adverse-action procedure prepared in advance if check returns a finding."
+      - id: 7
+        owner: "Isabel Meireles (HR Operations Lead)"
+        action: "Offer and record: offer letter reviewed for discriminatory terms. Employment record pre-created with legal basis for PII collection at offer stage. Rejected candidate records flagged for 2-year retention minimum (HRR-012)."
+      - id: 8
+        owner: "Staff Code Reviewer"
+        action: "Merge VETO check: JD reviewed for prohibited criteria (HRR-006), scorecard per-competency confirmed (HRR-005), background check sequenced post-offer (HRR-008), rejected candidate retention flagged (HRR-012)."
+    verification: |
+      - Job description: no prohibited criteria, no salary history request (HRR-006, HRR-007)
+      - Scorecard: per-competency ratings, no global impression field (HRR-005)
+      - Independent scores submitted before debrief discussion
+      - Background check ordered only post-conditional-offer (HRR-008)
+      - Rejected candidate records: 2-year retention minimum flagged (HRR-012)
+      - Disparate-impact analysis: staged for post-cycle review if hire volume warrants (HRR-009)