We recently conducted a survey involving 1,000 recently hired individuals, seeking their insights on various recruitment practices.
What candidates really think of gamified job assessments
You can download a copy of the Candidate Expectations vs Reality Market Report here: thrivemap.io/candidate-expectations-gap-report/.
One of the key themes we explored was the use of Game-Based Job Assessments.
Gamified tests incorporate game elements. In recent years, they have been popular with hiring teams as there is a perception that gamification makes the assessment process more enjoyable and reflect the brand as being fun.
However, we wanted to learn – what do candidates from different backgrounds think of game-based assessments?
And do candidates think that they are fair?
Here are four of the key findings:
1. Bias and reduced diversity:
An overwhelming 95% of respondents believe that certain individuals are disadvantaged to some extent by gamified tests. This indicates a perception of bias and a negative impact on workforce diversity.
When candidates believe that they may be unfairly treated due to these assessments, it can discourage individuals from diverse backgrounds from applying or succeeding in the recruitment process. This, in turn, can lead to a less diverse workforce, which can have various negative consequences for an organisation, including limited perspectives and reduced innovation.
2. Accuracy concerns
Candidates expressed skepticism about the effectiveness of gamified tests in selecting the best candidates for the job. They ranked these assessments as the least accurate method for job selection, suggesting a lack of trust in their ability to make fair and accurate hiring decisions.
3. Gender differences:
The survey revealed gender disparities in perceptions of gamified tests. A higher percentage of male candidates (80%) found them appealing compared to female candidates (61%).
Additionally, a smaller proportion of men (7%) disliked them compared to women (21%).
Moreover, more men (27%) expressed a strong willingness to take such tests when asked, compared to women (18%).
4. Age-related differences:
Older candidates (55+) were less enthusiastic about game-based tests, with 28% expressing disinterest, higher than the overall average of 13%.
Furthermore, 24% of this age group would feel annoyed if asked to take such an assessment, compared to the 13% overall average.
Alternative approach:
It’s evident that gamified tests may not effectively promote gender fairness, diversity, and inclusion in the hiring process, and they may inadvertently introduce bias, negatively impact the candidate experience, and hinder long-term retention and engagement among all employees.
If you’re considering alternatives to gamified tests, we recommend exploring Realistic Job Assessments.
For more information on this alternative, please visit: https://review-mkt.thrivemap.com/realistic-job-assessment/

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 […]