Why Hiring Managers Should Rethink Take-Home Assignments
Written on
Chapter 1: The Flaws of Take-Home Assignments
Recently, I had an experience that opened my eyes to the shortcomings of take-home assignments in the hiring process. After submitting my CV for a position I was keen on, the recruiter contacted me just three days later for a brief 7-minute phone interview. At the end of that call, they informed me: “I will send you a take-home assignment, and you’ll have three days to complete it. If the design manager is satisfied, we’ll invite you for another interview.”
I was taken aback to be asked to tackle a three-day assignment before even meeting the design manager. While I had questions regarding the assignment, HR insisted that I complete it independently, without consulting anyone from the design team. Feeling undervalued, I promptly withdrew my application.
It's not uncommon to hear about designers facing similar take-home assignments during the hiring process. This article aims to outline my perspective on why this approach is ineffective and should be abandoned by design managers.
A take-home assignment typically refers to a design task requested by companies, expecting candidates to complete it on their own time. This method is intended to assess a designer's skills during recruitment. It's crucial to differentiate this from traditional whiteboard interviews.
Section 1.1: Time Considerations for Candidates
When organizations impose take-home assignments on candidates, they dictate the time required and the submission deadlines, which often range from three days to a week. The issue arises when companies expect around eight hours of work but give candidates only three to seven days. Many candidates end up investing significantly more time than anticipated, leading to feelings of frustration.
Some companies do compensate candidates for their efforts, but this practice is not widespread. I believe it can create a problematic dynamic, as candidates might accept assignments primarily for the payment, which could distort the evaluation process.
Section 1.2: The Impact of Personal Commitments
Consider the varying circumstances of candidates: those with family obligations often have less time to dedicate outside their regular jobs compared to those with fewer commitments. As a result, you risk losing talented designers who cannot allocate sufficient time to the assignment.
Moreover, candidates with ample free time may produce work that overshadows those with limited availability, leading to an unfair comparison.
Subsection 1.2.1: Importance of Presentation
Reviewing a candidate's submission is crucial, as it allows them to articulate their thought process and decision-making. Many organizations request candidates to present their solutions, which can take an additional four hours on top of the original task time. This again raises concerns about respecting candidates' personal time.
Chapter 2: The Collaborative Nature of Design
Design is inherently collaborative. In a product team, designers collaborate with developers, product managers, and QA testers. Requiring candidates to complete assignments in isolation does not mimic real-world scenarios where teamwork is essential.
Section 2.1: The Burden on Design Managers
Hiring managers often face heavy workloads, making it challenging to create thoughtful take-home assignments. Many resort to using generic tasks found online, which fail to align with their specific hiring goals or evaluation criteria. If you lack the time to develop an appropriate assignment, it’s better not to impose one at all.
Section 2.2: The Isolation of Candidates
Often, candidates are not permitted to seek clarification while working on their assignments. This isolation can lead to feelings of disconnection from the company and its culture, making candidates question how they might be treated as part of the team.
Section 2.3: Understanding Domain Complexity
Designers need a deep understanding of the domain to deliver effective solutions. Companies sometimes assign generic tasks that do not reflect the complexities of their products, leading to uncertainty about a candidate's capability to handle real challenges.
The first video titled The Design Interview Process and What Hiring Managers Are Looking For discusses the essential elements that hiring managers should consider during the recruitment process, emphasizing the need for a thorough understanding of candidates' capabilities beyond just technical skills.
The second video titled Why Companies Require Take Home Assignments During the Interview Process explains the rationale behind these tasks, yet also highlights the potential pitfalls and drawbacks associated with them.
Chapter 3: Essential Skills Beyond Technical Expertise
Designers must engage with users to create meaningful solutions, and empathy is a vital component of this process. Unfortunately, take-home assignments often lack user context, making it challenging for candidates to produce relevant work.
Additionally, candidates increasingly seek mentorship, which may skew the results of their assignments. It’s essential to recognize that strong soft skills often outweigh technical skills in collaboration and culture fit.
Section 3.1: Rethinking the Evaluation Process
A well-rounded interview process should evaluate both soft and hard skills. I advocate for a structured approach with multiple interviews, each focusing on different aspects of a candidate's abilities.
In conclusion, I argue that take-home assignments do not effectively serve their purpose in evaluating candidates. The need for collaboration, soft skills, domain knowledge, and user understanding should take precedence in the hiring process. As leaders in design, it is our responsibility to refine these processes to ensure we attract the right talent while respecting their time and efforts.
Thank you for engaging with this article. I hope it sheds light on the limitations of take-home assignments in hiring. Feel free to share your thoughts or questions, and consider following me for further insights.