Interviews

Make hiring assessments accessible from the start

Accessible assessment begins by removing barriers that do not measure the job. Explain the task, format, timing, tools, and evaluation criteria early; offer a private, simple way to request adjustments; and prepare equivalent options. Train interviewers to assess the same capability across formats without treating an adjustment request as candidate evidence.

On this page
  1. Separate capability from format
  2. Provide details before the event
  3. Create a respectful adjustment route
  4. Prepare equivalent evidence paths
  5. Redesign a live exercise
  6. Audit barriers after each loop

Separate capability from format

For every interview or exercise, ask what ability is being assessed and which parts of the format are incidental. Rapid reading, live whiteboarding, camera use, dense slides, or extended sitting may create demands unrelated to the role. Remove unnecessary demands first. An adjustment process cannot rescue an assessment whose default design measures the wrong thing.

Provide details before the event

Tell candidates the length, participants, question style, materials, tools, breaks, and whether preparation is expected. Clear information lets everyone plan and reduces the need to disclose personal detail merely to understand the process. Share documents in formats that support common assistive technology and avoid images containing essential text without an alternative.

Create a respectful adjustment route

Name one contact and ask what change would support participation, rather than demanding a diagnosis. Handle information privately and share only what facilitators need to implement the arrangement. Confirm the plan with the candidate. If a request needs a different solution, discuss options instead of making the interviewer negotiate live.

Prepare equivalent evidence paths

An adjustment can change timing, input method, breaks, or presentation format while preserving the capability assessed. Define how reviewers will recognise equivalent evidence. Avoid describing the adjusted route as easier or adding extra scrutiny to compensate. Seek appropriate specialist guidance when the team cannot confidently design an accessible alternative.

  • Every demand has a role reason.
  • Process details arrive early.
  • Requests stay private and simple.
  • Alternative tests the same capability.

Redesign a live exercise

Illustrative example: a role requires careful written analysis, but the interview uses a surprise 20-minute screen-share exercise. The team sends the same case in advance, allows 60 minutes of independent work, and discusses reasoning live. Candidates can request breaks or compatible document formats. The scoring remains focused on prioritisation, accuracy, and explanation.

Audit barriers after each loop

Invite feedback about clarity, access, and unnecessary difficulty without asking candidates to justify personal needs. Review drop-offs, late changes, and facilitator mistakes. Include people with relevant lived or professional expertise when improving the process, while recognising that one perspective does not represent everyone. Document fixes so accessibility does not depend on the coordinator remembering each time. Test documents with common accessibility checks, practise the alternative route, and verify that scheduling messages preserve the adjustment. A good policy fails in practice when each hand-off requires the candidate to explain the same need again. Assign one coordinator to protect continuity. Record the agreed format without unnecessary personal details.

Next step

Review every assessment demand against the job, publish format details, and prepare one equivalent path plus a private adjustment contact before scheduling candidates.

A clearer starting point

Turn your next hire into a considered brief.

Start a hiring brief