Skip to main content
Steady at the Top
← All articles

How to use a work sample when hiring a senior executive

Use an executive work sample to observe how a candidate handles a representative task under defined conditions. Give comparable candidates the same hypothetical case and evaluate their responses against criteria written beforehand. Keep the exercise bounded, explain the expected effort, and have qualified advisers review employment and candidate-information issues.

A work sample is an assessment in which a candidate performs tasks that represent work required by the job. This follows the established assessment method described in OPM’s guidance on work samples and simulations. The executive exercise proposed here is an advisory application, not a validated selection instrument with a claimed predictive score.

A work sample and a request for production work differ. The sample should provide evidence for a hiring decision through a defined hypothetical task. It should not extract a candidate’s unpaid solution to the company’s live commercial problem.

Choose the capability before designing the case

Begin with the role requirement you need to examine. A senior operating role might require identifying a resource trade-off from incomplete information. A different role might require communicating a consequential recommendation to a board.

Use job analysis to connect the proposed task to the actual role. OPM describes analysis of tasks, required competencies, and the connection between them. Do not select an exercise because it resembles a familiar business-school case.

The executive hiring decision playbook places the sample within the wider evidence process. Identify which requirement the sample answers and which requirements still need a different method.

OPM cautions that work samples fit competencies expected at entry. If the company intends to train a particular method after hiring, consider whether testing prior familiarity with that method would serve the selection purpose. Seek qualified assessment advice before deciding.

Build a hypothetical case with a clear boundary

Use invented company facts that are sufficient for the task. Label them as hypothetical. Do not include identifiable customer information, confidential employee accounts, or unresolved live decisions disguised through minor changes.

State the role the candidate is playing and the decision they are asked to address. Identify the authority and constraints within the case. Provide the same core information to comparable candidates.

Explain whether candidates may ask clarifying questions, use external materials, or use assistance. Set the rules before the exercise and apply them consistently. Avoid relying on a hidden expectation that candidates should infer the assessor’s preferred working style.

Keep the requested output proportionate to the hiring question. A concise decision brief may provide relevant evidence. An open-ended strategy project can introduce unnecessary effort and a wider set of uncontrolled conditions.

Use the bounded executive work-sample design

The bounded executive work-sample design is a proposed advisory method. It needs appropriate assessment and legal review before use. A realistic appearance does not establish validity or legal compliance.

  1. Name the assessed requirement. Link the task to a capability required on entry. State what evidence the exercise can reasonably provide.
  2. Write a hypothetical case. Supply the information needed for the decision and mark deliberate uncertainty. Remove live confidential material and commercially usable production requests.
  3. Set common instructions. Specify the output, expected effort, permitted resources, and clarification process. Establish an appropriate accommodation route with qualified support.
  4. Create evaluation criteria. Describe what assessors should observe in the response. Distinguish an acceptable alternative judgment from a failure to address the requirement.
  5. Test the exercise. Ask suitable reviewers to attempt it and inspect ambiguous instructions. Revise the task before using it with candidates.
  6. Record evidence independently. Have trained assessors note the candidate’s actual choices before discussion. Keep observations separate from global impressions.
  7. Use the result within its limits. Combine it with other relevant evidence and record unresolved gaps. Do not present an informal exercise score as a validated prediction of executive performance.

Give candidates enough information to understand the process and expected use of their material. Have appropriate advisers review retention, confidentiality, ownership, and any compensation arrangements.

Score the reasoning you intended to observe

For a resource-allocation case, criteria might address whether the candidate identifies the decision, separates facts from assumptions, and explains a feasible trade-off. These are proposed examples, not a universal executive scorecard.

Write a description of the evidence supporting each judgment. “Named the dependency and assigned a check before committing” is more informative than “strong operator.” Do not reward a preferred vocabulary unless the role genuinely requires that vocabulary.

Allow more than one defensible recommendation when the case permits it. A candidate can disagree with your preferred answer while handling the evidence carefully. Require assessors to explain why a recommendation is feasible or unsupported within the case.

The decision-quality review guide helps distinguish reasoning from outcome. In a hypothetical exercise, there is no later business result to validate an attractive story. Evaluate the task and evidence you actually observed.

A composite scene: the candidate solves your real problem

Consider a hypothetical composite. You are reviewing a senior candidate at home after another long day of interviews. The candidate has sent a detailed market-entry plan in response to an assignment. The plan looks useful enough that you start discussing how to implement it with a colleague.

The hiring question was supposed to concern operating judgment, but the exercise asked for a solution to the company’s actual market problem. Candidates had different access to context, and assessors never wrote a common standard.

The bounded design replaces the assignment with a clearly hypothetical decision brief. Each candidate receives the same case and rules. Assessors evaluate the handling of assumptions and resource trade-offs against criteria set before the responses arrive.

In this constructed example, the company loses access to a free live strategy proposal. It gains a clearer basis for comparing evidence about the role. Candidate effort serves the stated hiring purpose.

The revision does not prove the sample predicts later executive performance. It makes the task’s purpose and limits more explicit so qualified professionals can review the design and interpretation.

Use follow-up questions to clarify the response

Ask the candidate to explain a consequential choice in the sample. Which assumption mattered most? What new fact would change the recommendation? Which decision belongs to another role within the case?

Use the same core follow-up structure for comparable candidates. Record any case-specific clarification so assessors can distinguish a misunderstanding of the instructions from a different judgment about the problem.

The structured executive interview guide addresses the interview around the exercise. Avoid turning follow-up into an unbounded search for private information or evidence unrelated to the job.

Do not treat fluent explanation as automatic proof of execution capability. Ask what the response itself shows and what still needs verification through an appropriate account of past work or a reference.

Preserve a fair and appropriate process

The EEOC guidance on employment tests and selection procedures describes discrimination concerns associated with selection tools. A method’s usefulness for assessment does not automatically establish that every implementation is lawful.

Before candidates receive the case, have qualified employment counsel examine the exercise, accommodation process, data handling, and proposed use of the work. Ask counsel to assess the circumstances and jurisdictions involved. The case-design recommendations here cannot establish whether your selection process meets its legal obligations.

Do not ask candidates to disclose health information to a general interview panel. Establish the appropriate professional route for accommodations and other sensitive matters. Keep assessment records limited to information needed for the authorized hiring purpose.

If a vendor supplies the exercise, ask how its evidence supports your intended use. Determine who can interpret results and which limits must remain visible. A branded report should not replace a role-specific explanation.

Check the assessors as well as the task

Involve an industrial/organizational psychologist, a specialist in the psychology of work and organizations, when examining whether the case instructions and scoring reveal the executive capability the exercise was designed to assess. Use that expertise to review the task, criteria, and preparation of assessors. An exercise can be well-scoped while its evaluators still apply inconsistent standards.

Have assessors compare judgments on a practice response before interviewing candidates. Ask which observation supports each rating. Revise unclear criteria rather than teaching everyone to imitate one person’s impression.

Preserve meaningful disagreement during the actual process. If one assessor sees a major omission and another does not, inspect the response and criterion. Do not resolve the issue only by averaging the ratings.

Use the executive reference-check guide for another evidence source, with appropriate consent and legal review. Keep the distinction between an observed sample response and a verified account of past responsibility.

Explain what happens to the response

Tell candidates how their material will be used and handled through the authorized process. If a candidate withdraws, follow the agreed retention and privacy arrangement with appropriate advice. Do not repurpose a response as company work because it contains an attractive idea. Keep the assessment purpose visible to the people who receive the material. If the business wants a separate paid advisory engagement, handle that through a distinct, properly reviewed agreement. Participation in a selection exercise should not silently become a different commercial relationship.

Carry the result into the decision record

Record the task conditions and the evidence the response supplied. Identify material limitations, including a capability the sample did not examine. Keep those limits alongside the result when the hiring panel makes its recommendation.

If the role changes during the search, reconsider whether the sample remains relevant. Decide how comparable candidates will be assessed under the revised requirement with professional and legal support as appropriate.

After appointment, do not silently convert an exercise weakness into a new performance standard. Carry agreed development and support needs into onboarding, subject to the company’s normal process.

The useful sample is bounded and relevant: a hypothetical task, consistent instructions, observable criteria, and an honest account of what the response can establish. Design that evidence before asking the candidate to do the work.

Sources

Steady at the Top