In defense of design challenges
With specific conditions, of course.
This is a very controversial topic in the design community, so I’m a bit scared to even bring it up. I’ve always been conflicted about this topic, but I think this (as most things in the world) is not a black or white kind of issue, but there’s a grey area to look at.
What am I talking about? Design challenges, or design tests, or whatever you want to call them. The assignment you get when interviewing for a designer position.
Why someone might ask you that?
There are tons of jobs where you don’t get asked to do any work at home. You go to the interview(s), answer questions, make questions, maybe show things (analytics, sales reports, references, or whatever) and that’s pretty much it. There are other jobs where the required skill set can be more of a “show me, don’t tell me”. Designers and developers are some of these.
Now, while it’s 100% true that you can use a portfolio to show and explain your previous experiences, what you’re good at and how you work, we also know that design is teamwork, and while it’s paramount that for each project you clarify your role and what you did, it’s also true that it’s often complicated to discern what your contribution really was.
Asking a candidate to take a home assignment can become VERY easily an unfair request though. After all, they’re not working for your company yet, why should they bother? I think that if some conditions are met, the request is fair and it’s not just for the employer’s sake, but for the candidate’s too. Why? Well, if a company can assess your capabilities better, make a more conscious hire, it’s fair to assume you’re the right person for the job and your position is more secure. I’d honestly feel that way, but of course, this is a personal preference.
Furthermore, assigning the same problem to multiple candidates can be helpful to make a decision when they seem equally qualified on all other parameters (soft and hard skills, experience…).
What are these conditions?
Let’s go straight to the point(s):
- The assignment MUST ABSOLUTELY be a made-up job. You can’t ask a candidate to work for a real problem on a real product/client’s work for your company.
- It must be paid. You need to assign a budget to the hiring process to fairly compensate the candidate’s work. NO WORK FOR FREE.
- It must be limited in scope. You can’t ask a candidate something like “design an app to…”. Ask to solve a more specific problem or focus on part of a product, like “There’s an app to find dog sitters in your area. How do you imagine the onboarding for the dog sitters” or “design the search” or “design a rating system”. Also because…
- It needs to be completed in a few hours. Half-day of work or a day (4–8 hours) spread on a 1–2 weeks window. It’s absolutely probable that the candidates are working full time at another company at the moment and you can’t ask someone to work till late or during the weekends, especially if they have kids or other personal matters to take care of. A few hours spread across several days makes it a more manageable request.
- Clarify what’s the expectation in terms of deliverables. Explain clearly what you expect as the outcome. Just screens? A brief presentation? A prototype? But account for this in the time planned for the assignment. So if you ask for an interactive prototype, which is more time-consuming to do than exporting a few PNGs, limit the scope of the ask. It should be completed within the time assigned (and paid for).
- It has to be the same for all candidates. To evaluate one candidate over another you need to use the same parameter, it would be unfair to do otherwise. You can change it over time when another hiring window opens, but when interviewing for the same position it has to be exactly the same.
- Submissions must be anonymous. The work should be evaluated without being influenced by anything (identity, previous interviews…), so there must be a recruiter shielding the candidate's identity from the people who’ll review the work. The person evaluating needs to look at the assignment from a totally neutral point of view.
Is a home assignment better than on-site whiteboarding?
While a whiteboarding exercise could be valuable to have a glimpse of a candidate’s thinking process, brainstorming and verbal communication abilities, and teamwork, it’s also important to notice how that represents a very unrealistic setting.
When you do brainstorming with your teammates at work, you’re a totally different mindset and mood, compared to the tension that you feel during an interview when you know the team around you at the whiteboard is actually judging you.
I think it can still be done but has to be taken with a grain of salt. Some people are great at coming up with ideas and finding solutions, but might not do well during interviews.
The advantage of a home assignment is that the candidate can be relaxed and find the perfect situation for them to make the best work they can, without other people laser-focused on what they do or say. They are free to try things, make mistakes, and do their best.
Sure, you can cheat a home assignment. You can ask someone else to do it. But would it be a smart move? How long would someone last on the job if hired that way? 🤥
My new book “Designing Digital Products for Kids”! Learn the secrets to design successful digital products for children. You’ll find answers to all your questions regarding the industry, and its peculiarities in 📐 UX design, 🎨 UI design, 🔍 user testing, 📈 business strategies, and much more.
