...evaluating you as you evaluating the coach.

Got example, you mentioned s&c: I bet he did meet with them, but it was less “tell us, coach, your philosophy on injuries / strength versus cardio / etc.” and more “look at our great weight room facilities; here’s our training table plan and procedure; here’s what you need to know about South Bend Orthopedics and similar care your players can get; etc.”

Making people feel included, etc., and perhaps more importantly, not slighted.

To me, there are two sides to this coin. In general, I'm in favor of hearing from as many people as possible as long as I'm not overwhelmed as the decision-maker; people are clear that I am the decision-maker (when that's the case, of course); and the candidate isn't unduly annoyed or overwhelmed.

(And to be clear, as others have alluded, I presume much of this does not involve anything that comes close to a formal interview.)

But sometimes, the sense of entitlement ("I should get to participate" "I deserve a say" etc.) brings out the caveman in me.

Don't even get me started on "shared governance."