At ThriveMap, we believe hiring should be fair, transparent, and inclusive. That means ensuring that our assessments don’t disadvantage candidates who may require reasonable adjustments due to disability or neurodiversity.
How To Ensure Fairness Through Reasonable Adjustments in Pre-Hire Assessments
While no online assessment can be perfectly standardised for every individual need, we’ve built our approach around three core principles: relevance, accessibility, and flexibility.
1. Relevance: We Only Assess What’s Intrinsic to the Role
We start by ensuring that everything we assess is directly related to the job being performed. If a task isn’t essential to success in the role, we won’t include it in the assessment. For example, we only use time-based questions when speed is genuinely required on the job. This means we’re not using artificial constraints that could unfairly penalise certain candidates.
This principle also provides a legal and ethical basis for asking candidates whether they need adjustments. Under the UK Equality Act 2010 (Section 60), employers may ask questions about disability if it relates to the ability to perform a function intrinsic to the work.
Our assessments typically require candidates to read from a screen, type into a keyboard or touchscreen, and navigate using a mouse or similar device – core functions in most entry-level roles we assess for.
2. Accessibility: Designed with Inclusivity in Mind
Before any new assessment version goes live, we review it with accessibility in mind. Our assessments are compatible with most screen readers, and we can actively avoid question formats that disadvantage those with visual or auditory impairments.
Some of the reasonable adjustments we can support include:
- Removing time penalties for timed questions (e.g. for candidates with dyslexia or motor impairments)
- Screen reader support for candidates with visual impairments
- Text transcripts for any voice or audio content, to support candidates with hearing loss
- High contrast mode and dyslexia-friendly fonts for better legibility
We deliberately avoid full-assessment timing unless it reflects a real-time-sensitive aspect of the job. When time-based performance is essential, we can apply score adjustments for candidates with specific conditions, such as dyslexia.
3. Flexibility: Offering Alternative Assessment Paths
Fairness sometimes means treating candidates differently based on their needs. That’s why we offer alternative pathways for candidates who declare that they require adjustments.
Accessibility information is often captured on the candidate application form in the ATS. If a candidate requires reasonable adjustments then they can declare it here and take an alternative assessment path that does not have the potential to disadvantage them.
Alternatively, we can implement the following solution within ThriveMap.
- At the start of the assessment, candidates are asked if they require any reasonable adjustments.
- If they say yes, then candidates can then proceed with an accessibility-optimised version of the assessment:
- Simplified UI (keyboard accessible, no decorative visuals)
- High contrast mode
- Larger, legible fonts
- Their results are marked as “Assistance Required,” which means:
- They are not included in comparative leaderboards
- Recruiters can toggle score views (e.g., excluding time-based metrics)
- Adjustment requests can be flagged and shared with the recruitment team
This helps ensure that comparisons are not made unfairly between candidates who completed the assessment under different conditions.
Why Not Just Make All Assessments Accessible by Default?
While we work toward universal accessibility, some features like time-sensitive tasks or certain question types, are incompatible with tools like screen readers. Making all assessments accessible in the strictest sense would limit our ability to reflect real job requirements accurately.
Also, disabilities differ greatly in type and severity. For example, two people with dyslexia may require very different adjustments. Standardising adjustments for all would not create a level playing field, it would simply create a different kind of imbalance.
Final Thoughts
We’re committed to fair hiring, and that includes thoughtful, case-by-case approaches to accessibility. If you’re an employer using ThriveMap and want to discuss how to best support candidates with additional needs, we’re happy to advise.
We believe great assessments don’t just test skills, they remove unnecessary barriers. That’s what fairness looks like in practice.
Keep reading.
Choosing a pre-hire assessment provider: what the new RecTech standard asks of them
UK RecTech vendors process more than 200 million job applications between them a year (Better Hiring Institute). That is the scale of what is riding on these tools actually working: whether the right people get shortlisted, and whether good candidates get screened out by something nobody has ever checked. The pressure on that volume is […]
How to avoid contrast bias in recruitment
Imagine your team spends a day sifting CVs. The first few are underwhelming. Then they open one that’s reasonably strong and, by comparison, it looks excellent. Or you’re interviewing six candidates in a day. The 10am candidate gives polished, detailed answers and sets an unusually high bar. The person who follows is perfectly capable, but […]
If AI can pass your hiring process, what are you actually assessing? Join live Equitas, ThriveMap and Morgan Philips Webinar
AI is changing both sides of recruitment at the same time. Candidates can use it to write CVs, improve applications, prepare interview answers and increasingly automate the application process itself. Employers are using AI to screen candidates, match people to roles and automate parts of selection. Some of this technology is genuinely useful. Some of […]