Skip to main content

Why might the campaign report show inconsistent interview dates?

Learn what the preparation, interview, and validation dates in your campaign reports mean and why they may not always align chronologically.

Updated over a week ago

When reviewing your campaign reports, you may notice that the dates for the preparation, interview, and validation don't always follow a linear sequence. This is often expected behaviour. This article explains what each date represents, allowing you to interpret your reports with confidence.

Understanding the dates

To understand your report, it’s essential to know the origin of each date column:

  • Preparation Date: This is the date on which the final preparation step was completed by either the reviewer or the reviewee.

  • Interview Date: This corresponds to the date that was initially planned by the reviewer for the face-to-face exchange (the interview phase).

  • Validation Date: This is the date on which the last signature was obtained, officially closing the review.

Why dates can appear inconsistent

The primary reason dates may seem out of order is that the Interview Date is a static, planned date—not necessarily the date the meeting actually occurred.

📌 Note: If a reviewer needs to reschedule the meeting or if a review is returned to an earlier phase, the Interview Date in the report will not change. It always retains the date that was initially set.

Did this answer your question?