3 minute read
Posted by Emily Hill on 27 November 2025
Every week another Reddit post goes viral, exposing the strange, improvised “tests” candidates face.
And this week, one Reddit post summed up the whole problem in a single screenshot.
A hiring manager proudly described their “punctuality test”:
They join a Zoom call 15 minutes early.
They sit silently and wait.
If the candidate doesn’t also arrive at least 5 minnutes early, they disconnect before the scheduled time and ghost them.
They never explain why.
They believe turning up 15 minutes early to an interview and waiting 10 minutes is an efficient way to weed out candidates.
This isn’t just bad practice — it’s what happens when organisations lack proper hiring processes, policies, and validated selection tools whilst trying to keep up with huge volumes of applicants.
When structure is missing, managers invent their own rules.
And those rules create bias, unpredictability, legal risk, and higher early attrition.
This is why building a proper, job-relevant hiring framework matters more than ever.
When hiring teams don’t have structured, predictive processes, managers fill the gap with personal rules:
None of these tests map to job performance.
None are consistent.
None are fair.
These rules have no predictive validity, yet without processes, systems and tools, these improvised tests are what commonly shapes hiring decisions.
Decades of research show these tests perform at 0.00–0.10 validity — the statistical equivalent of winging it.
Improvised tests create:
Different managers, different rules, different results.
Candidates are judged on circumstances, not capability.
No documentation. No fairness checks. No audit trail.
None of these shortcuts correlate with performance, retention, safety, or readiness.
Because candidates weren’t shown the realities of the job.
And yet they’re everywhere — especially in high-volume hiring.
This is not a hiring strategy.
It’s a coin toss dressed up as a process.
This is the natural outcome of having no structured selection policy.
If you want to avoid improvised, biased mini-tests like the Reddit example, you need structure.
A modern, fair, and predictive entry-level hiring process should be:
Clear steps. Same process across managers and locations.
Assessment tasks that reflect real workplace conditions.
Tools that can withstand a fairness audit.
Scores that correlate with retention, performance, and onboarding success.
Candidates know what they’re signing up for.
Reduce discretion, increase consistency.
Your full framework for this is here:
➡️ Entry-Level Hiring Best Practice Playbook
Improvised tests don’t work.
Personality questionnaires barely work.
Unstructured interviews rarely work.
The assessments that consistently deliver the strongest predictive accuracy are Realistic Job Assessments.
These measure how people behave in real job conditions:
Because they reflect day-one reality, they deliver:
Learn more here:
➡️ https://thrivemap.io/realistic-job-assessments/
Subscribe for insights, debunks and what amounts to a free, up-to-date recruitment toolkit.
ThriveMap creates customised assessments for high volume roles, which take candidates through an online “day in the life” experience of work in your company. Our assessments have been proven to reduce staff turnover, reduce time to hire, and improve quality of hire.
Not sure what type of assessment is right for your business? Read our guide.
As the new UK National Hiring Strategy highlights, poor hiring decisions come at a significant cost. The strategy estimates that poor hiring decisions cost the UK economy £14.4 billion each year. Unemployment drains a further £61 billion, while inefficient recruitment processes and unfilled vacancies add nearly £150 million more. But the challenge facing employers isn’t […]
Continue reading
Most hiring teams optimise for speed. Time to hire.Application conversion.Assessment completion rates.Offer acceptance. These metrics are easy to measure and easy to improve. They also tell us very little about whether hiring actually worked. The real test of hiring success happens months later, when new employees decide whether to stay. Across early careers hiring, this […]
Continue reading
What 200,000+ candidate journeys reveal about how hiring performance changes across sectors Why do candidates complete nearly every assessment in some industries — but never even start them in others? At first glance, the explanation seems obvious. Different sectors have different candidates, different expectations, or different hiring challenges. But analysis of more than 200,000 pre-hire […]
Continue reading