## TL;DR
Flag the specific leading questions in the QA section with timestamps and note the affected answers as lower confidence, because the interviewer steered the customer toward a favourable explanation and an unflagged summary presents those prompted answers as spontaneous feedback. Start with the interviewer questions in the win loss call for leading or loaded phrasing, work on one affected call, record, or run first, and prove the fix there before running the full set. Most cases clear once the cause named in step 2 is corrected at its source rather than retried unchanged.

```text
win loss call summary error interview bias not flagged in summary failure
```

## Use this when
- You see this exact message or symptom: win loss call summary error interview bias not flagged in summary failure
- One run, record, call, or object is affected and you can name it
- A retry without changing anything reproduces the same result

## Not for this skill when
- The system fails with a different message and none of the signals here appear
- Nothing has failed yet and you are doing first time setup or general planning
- Every service from this vendor is down for all users, which is a vendor outage to wait out first

## Steps
1. Reproduce the failure once using the interviewer questions in the win loss call for leading or loaded phrasing, and record the time, the workspace or account, and the one item it names. Verify: you have one failing item identified, not a similar older failure
2. Inspect interviewer questions that suggest an answer, the answers that followed them, and the bias checks in the QA template. Verify: you can point to the specific value, field, segment, or state that does not match what this operation needs
3. Apply the fix at that source: Flag the specific leading questions in the QA section with timestamps and note the affected answers as lower confidence, because the interviewer steered the customer toward a favourable explanation and an unflagged summary presents those prompted answers as spontaneous feedback. Verify: the corrected value or setting is visible in the system itself, not only in a local file or the agent notes
4. Re-run the original operation on the single affected item first. Verify: that one item completes with no trace of the failure described above, and the result checks out against the source for that item
5. Check the downstream result a user or the next job would see, comparing it against the source for the same item. Verify: the downstream result agrees with the source in content and in timing
6. Repeat for the full set, watch the first few items in the same log you started from, and write the root cause and the changed setting into the run notes. Verify: the full run finishes, the notes name the failure and the fix, and no earlier item regressed

## Variant phrasings
### win loss call summary error interview bias not flagged in summary failure
The subject-first phrasing of the same failure. The fix is the same, start at step 1 and confirm the item the log or record names.
### Tool-first phrasing of this failure
The phrasing searchers use once they know which system raised it. It is the same underlying problem, not a separate bug.
### Why does this keep happening after a retry
The repeat-occurrence phrasing. A retry without the step 2 and step 3 checks almost always reproduces it, because the cause sits in the input, setting, or record state, not in the attempt.

Compatibility: Win loss interview programs, Gong and Chorus QA templates.

## Why it happens
Win loss value depends on the customer volunteering reasons. A leading interview manufactures the reasons it asks about, and a summary that does not mark them turns a biased interview into clean looking data.

## Provenance

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_nKp2LzTo8pRRzOa7attJbQ