Selection Transparency
Demonstrating fairness and objectivity in the selection process
Average Score Comparison by Selection Status
- Avg AIR Score
- Avg AI Competency ×10
Readiness Quartile by Selection Status
- Group 1 — Selected
- Group 2 — Nominated
- Group 3 — Nominated
Rank vs AIR Score — Selection Status Distribution
- Selected
- Nominated G2
- Nominated G3
- Not Assigned
Executive Insights — Selection Fairness Analysis
Group 2 (avg AIR: 58.7) and Group 3 (avg AIR: 56.7) show higher average scores than Group 1 (avg AIR: 54.2). This is expected — Group 1 was selected for Q1 2026 as the first cohort, while Groups 2 and 3 are nominated from a larger, later pool of higher-scoring candidates for Q2 2026.
The scatter plot confirms a strong inverse correlation between rank and AIR score — higher-ranked participants consistently achieve higher scores, validating the ranking methodology.
The quartile analysis reveals that Groups 2 and 3 (Nominated for Q2 2026) are concentrated in the Upper Mid and High readiness tiers, reflecting the merit-based nomination process. Group 1 (Q1 2026) spans a wider range, as it was selected from the initial assessment cohort.
AI Competency scores show a consistent gradient across selection tiers, reinforcing that both AIR Score and AI Competency dimensions were applied equitably in the selection process.