Write a fair work sample brief candidates can complete

Choose one decision to test

Select a task that reveals an important capability better than conversation alone. It might involve prioritising requests, reviewing a short dataset, drafting a customer response, or outlining a technical approach. Do not recreate a week of work. The exercise should be small enough that candidates can demonstrate judgment without donating a solution the company plans to use.

Supply sufficient context

Explain the audience, goal, constraints, definitions, and assumptions candidates may make. Include only information needed for the task. Ambiguity can be part of the assessment when the role requires clarification, but say that candidates may ask questions and score how they frame uncertainty. Hidden context mostly rewards guessing what the author had in mind.

Bound the effort honestly

State the expected time and design the task to fit it. Test the exercise internally under ordinary conditions, then reduce scope if reviewers need far longer. Avoid judging visual polish unless it matters to the job. If candidates can stop at the time limit and explain what remains, the exercise can reveal prioritisation without requiring unpaid extra hours.

Publish the assessment criteria

Tell candidates which dimensions matter, such as reasoning, prioritisation, accuracy, or communication. Create evidence anchors before receiving submissions. Provide an accessible format, explain permitted tools, and offer a route to request adjustments. Do not infer misconduct from a candidate using the tools the brief allows.

• Task represents real role work.
• Expected time is tested.
• Criteria are shared in advance.
• Output will not become free work.

Reduce an oversized task

Illustrative example: a marketing exercise asks candidates for a full campaign strategy, calendar, creative concepts, and measurement plan. Internal testing takes most of a day. The team narrows it to prioritising three audience options and drafting one message rationale in 75 minutes. A follow-up discussion explores tradeoffs, leaving execution depth for other evidence.

Use the discussion as evidence

Review the submitted work independently before the interview, then ask candidates to explain assumptions, rejected options, and what they would improve with more time. Do not surprise them with a hostile defence. Separate the artifact from the conversation in notes. After the process, delete or retain materials according to the organisation’s stated practice and avoid reusing candidate ideas operationally. Before sending the task, ask whether candidates with full-time work, caregiving, or limited equipment can complete it within the stated window. Offer scheduling choice rather than equating immediate availability with commitment. Track actual completion time volunteered through feedback and shrink the task when the internal estimate proves unrealistic.