Effective hiring for product and design roles increasingly involves practical evaluation steps—often called “trial projects,” “case studies,” or “take-home assignments.” When designed and managed well, these trials can help employers assess real-world skills, while providing candidates with a meaningful preview of the work and team culture. However, they also present ethical, legal, and practical challenges. This article explores how to structure compensated, fair, and transparent trial projects for product and design hiring, balancing business objectives with candidate experience, and ensuring compliance with relevant standards.
Why Use Trial Projects in Product and Design Hiring?
Traditional interviews and portfolios have limitations. For product managers, UX/UI designers, and related roles, the ability to solve complex, ambiguous problems is critical—and not always reflected in prior work samples or behavioral interviews. Well-scoped trial projects provide additional data to predict quality of hire and role fit.
- For employers: Trial projects offer insight into candidates’ thinking, communication, and approach to real challenges.
- For candidates: They clarify expectations, showcase strengths, and help assess mutual fit.
However, concerns about unpaid labor, intellectual property (IP), bias, and fairness are frequently voiced by candidates (see UX Design CC, 2023). Ethical and practical frameworks are essential for both sides.
Scoping: Defining the Project
Scoping a trial project requires careful balance between depth of assessment and respect for candidate time.
Key Principles for Scoping
- Relevance: The trial should reflect actual tasks or challenges typical for the position.
- Time-boxing: Limit the expected effort (e.g., 2–4 hours for mid-level roles, rarely over 6 hours for senior positions).
- Clarity: Provide clear instructions, objectives, and context. Use an intake brief format: background, goals, success criteria, deliverables, and timeline.
- Realism without exploitation: Avoid assigning work that directly benefits the company in a commercial sense or could be implemented without further input from the candidate (see Fast Company, 2022).
“A trial project should simulate, not substitute, the real work. If you wouldn’t give this task to a trusted contractor, don’t assign it to a candidate.”
Example: Product Manager Trial Project (Mid-Level)
- Background: SaaS platform expanding into a new SME segment.
- Objective: Evaluate a candidate’s ability to analyze user needs and propose a basic product improvement roadmap.
- Scope: Review a user persona, suggest two new features, and outline a high-level go-to-market plan.
- Deliverables: 1–2 slides or a short document (max 4 hours recommended effort).
Compensation and Candidate Communication
Compensating candidates for trial projects is now best practice in mature hiring markets (especially in the US/EU) and can reduce drop-off and negative sentiment (see HBR, 2021). Payment should be fair, prompt, and clearly communicated in advance.
Typical Compensation Models
| Region | Suggested Rate | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| US/EU | $100–$300 per project | Adjust for seniority; clarify if taxed as contractor income |
| LATAM | $40–$120 per project | Benchmark against local freelance rates |
| MENA | $60–$150 per project | Consider currency volatility, transfer costs |
Companies should document payment processes and timelines. Communicate these details in the invitation email, along with a summary of the project scope, expected format, and review criteria.
Candidate Communication Checklist
- Clear description of the project, context, and deliverables
- Estimated time commitment and deadline
- Compensation details (amount, payment method, timeline)
- Information on data/IP ownership and confidentiality
- Contact for questions or accommodations (e.g., for disabilities)
- Optional: examples of successful past submissions (with permission)
Transparent, respectful communication reduces anxiety and improves response rates. In our experience, response rates for trial assignments increase by up to 40% when compensation and process transparency are included (internal data; see also Google Re:Work).
Intellectual Property and Legal Boundaries
Trial projects touch on sensitive IP and data protection issues. Candidates should retain rights to their work unless a separate agreement is signed. Most companies only request a non-exclusive, non-commercial license to review the submission. This is especially relevant under GDPR (EU), EEOC (US), and similar frameworks.
- Avoid asking for confidential company data or real customer information.
- State explicitly that the assignment is for evaluation only and will not be used for commercial purposes without further agreement.
- Provide a simple release or disclaimer, reviewed by legal if needed.
For global hiring, adapt legal language to local requirements and be sensitive to cross-border data transfer issues. In the EU, for example, candidates have the right to request deletion of their submissions after the process concludes.
Assessment: Scoring Guides and Fairness
Structured and objective evaluation is essential to minimize bias and ensure fairness. Scorecards and structured debriefs help standardize candidate assessment and improve predictive validity (see Spotify Careers and HBR, 2019).
Sample Scoring Guide for a Design Trial
| Criteria | Description | Score (1–5) |
|---|---|---|
| Problem Understanding | Clarity in framing the problem and user needs | |
| Creativity & Originality | Innovative solutions, fresh perspectives | |
| Practicality | Feasibility and alignment with constraints | |
| Communication | Clarity and persuasiveness of presentation | |
| Relevance | Alignment with company values and product strategy |
Each reviewer completes the scorecard independently. Use a structured debrief (ideally with at least two reviewers) to discuss, calibrate, and document final recommendations. This process supports bias mitigation and aligns with anti-discrimination best practices.
Structured Interviewing and Debrief
- Combine trial projects with structured behavioral interviews (e.g., STAR or BEI frameworks) to evaluate both skills and cultural fit.
- After the assessment, provide all candidates—successful or not—with feedback. This supports employer brand and learning, and is increasingly expected in competitive markets.
Process Integration: Where Trials Fit in the Hiring Funnel
Position the trial project after initial screening (resume and/or phone interview) but before final interviews. This balances efficiency and candidate investment.
- Intake brief and alignment with hiring manager
- Initial screen (resume, phone, or video call)
- Invite to trial project (with compensation and clear expectations)
- Structured review using scorecards
- Final interview (often including a debrief or presentation of the trial)
- Reference checks and offer
In high-volume scenarios, consider using a shorter, more focused trial at the first stage, and a deeper project only for finalists. For senior roles, adapt the scope and compensation accordingly.
Metrics: Measuring Impact and Ensuring Fairness
Monitor the effectiveness of trial projects using quantitative and qualitative KPIs:
| Metric | Target/Benchmark | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Time-to-fill | 30–45 days (product/design roles, global average) | Longer if trials are too burdensome |
| Time-to-hire | 7–15 days from first interview to offer | Delays often due to trial complexity or slow feedback |
| Response rate | 70–85% (with compensation) | Falls below 50% if trials are unpaid or unclear |
| Offer-accept rate | 60–80% | Higher where trial process is transparent and fair |
| Quality-of-hire | Manager satisfaction 6 months post-hire (scale 1–5) | Correlates with structured assessment |
| 90-day retention | 90–95% | Drop-off may indicate misalignment in project or communication |
Example: Mini-Case—Risk and Adaptation
Scenario: A SaaS company in the EU rolled out a 6-hour, unpaid design trial, resulting in a 40% candidate drop-off and negative posts on Glassdoor. After shifting to a 3-hour, compensated project and sending clear guidelines, response rate increased to 82% and new hires reported higher satisfaction (internal survey).
Trade-offs: Compensated trials may increase up-front costs, but reduce time-to-fill and improve brand perception. Overly complex or ambiguous projects, even when paid, can still deter top talent—especially in competitive or diverse markets (see LinkedIn Talent Blog).
Checklist: Designing Ethical Trial Projects
- Define clear, realistic scope (2–4 hours standard; avoid commercial value)
- Offer fair compensation and communicate terms up front
- Use an intake brief for context and clarity
- Respect candidate IP; clarify data use and retention
- Apply structured scorecards and multi-reviewer debriefs
- Integrate into the hiring funnel at the right stage
- Monitor metrics (response rate, time-to-hire, offer-accept, retention)
- Provide feedback to all candidates
- Adapt approach for local legal, cultural, and business context
Adapting for Company Size and Region
Startups may not have resources for large-scale, bespoke trials, but can still create fair, concise projects and offer symbolic compensation. Enterprises should standardize processes across teams to ensure consistency and compliance. In global hiring, account for local expectations and regulations—especially regarding payment, privacy, and bias mitigation.
Key Considerations by Region
- US/EU: High expectation for compensated, transparent, and unbiased processes. GDPR compliance is mandatory for EU operations.
- LATAM/MENA: Compensation expectations may be lower, but clear communication and respectful process are equally important. Adjust for currency and legal frameworks.
Final Thoughts: Human-Centric, Data-Driven Practice
Ethical, well-designed trial projects enhance both the validity and humanity of product and design hiring. By scoping realistically, compensating fairly, protecting candidate rights, and using structured, bias-resistant assessment, employers can build stronger teams—and candidates gain a sense of respect and clarity throughout the process. This approach is not only a matter of compliance and efficiency, but ultimately of building long-term trust and value in global talent markets.