I’ve done (or asked to do and then subsequently refused) several extensive work tests in job applications prior to working with the EA ecosystem. None of these were paid.
I’ve almost always had candidates do paid work tests for the final round (before interview and reference checks) of roles I’ve hired for within my role as ED of GWWC and on the board at EA Australia.
I’ve not used the work generated from work tests as free labour (on a couple of instances I asked candidates who did exceptionally in the work test but didn’t get the role if they wanted their work to be used and paid them to complete it as a contractor and in both those cases I was a reference for them for other roles they ended up getting).
I’ve found work tests to be very worthwhile in hiring (often the single most predictive) . In return (as well as paying) I’ve offered feedback to all candidates who’ve done the work test.
I’m glad you raised this and while I’m not sure of the prevalence of the problem within the EA ecosystem I think it’s important we have norms around paying people for their work (unless it is explicitly charitable volunteering which is something that I think is good to provide opportunities for people to do and has been valuable in my own impact journey).
I’m happy to know that your org has better practices. It’s also the feedback part that sucks: despite succeeding at many rounds, I never gotten any feedback!
Some anecdata:
I’ve done (or asked to do and then subsequently refused) several extensive work tests in job applications prior to working with the EA ecosystem. None of these were paid.
I’ve almost always had candidates do paid work tests for the final round (before interview and reference checks) of roles I’ve hired for within my role as ED of GWWC and on the board at EA Australia.
I’ve not used the work generated from work tests as free labour (on a couple of instances I asked candidates who did exceptionally in the work test but didn’t get the role if they wanted their work to be used and paid them to complete it as a contractor and in both those cases I was a reference for them for other roles they ended up getting).
I’ve found work tests to be very worthwhile in hiring (often the single most predictive) . In return (as well as paying) I’ve offered feedback to all candidates who’ve done the work test.
I’m glad you raised this and while I’m not sure of the prevalence of the problem within the EA ecosystem I think it’s important we have norms around paying people for their work (unless it is explicitly charitable volunteering which is something that I think is good to provide opportunities for people to do and has been valuable in my own impact journey).
Hi Luke,
I’m happy to know that your org has better practices. It’s also the feedback part that sucks: despite succeeding at many rounds, I never gotten any feedback!