To assess a candidate's authentic writing ability, compare their response to a short, single-sentence prompt with a longer, paragraph-based one. A flawless paragraph but a weak sentence suggests heavy reliance on editing tools or AI for the longer response.

Related Insights

The purpose of quirky interview questions has evolved. Beyond just assessing personality, questions about non-work achievements or hypothetical scenarios are now used to jolt candidates out of scripted answers and expose those relying on mid-interview AI prompts for assistance.

Rather than creating assessments that prohibit AI use, hiring managers should embrace it. A candidate's ability to leverage tools like ChatGPT to complete a project is a more accurate predictor of their future impact than their ability to perform tasks without them.

To gauge an expert's (human or AI) true depth, go beyond recall-based questions. Pose a complex problem with multiple constraints, like a skeptical audience, high anxiety, and a tight deadline. A genuine expert will synthesize concepts and address all layers of the problem, whereas a novice will give generic advice.

To simulate interview coaching, feed your written answers to case study questions into an LLM. Prompt it to score you on a specific rubric (structured thinking, user focus, etc.), identify exact weak phrases, explain why, and suggest a better approach for structured, actionable feedback.

To assess a product manager's AI skills, integrate AI into your standard hiring process rather than just asking theoretical questions. Expect candidates to use AI tools in take-home case studies and analytical interviews to test for practical application and raise the quality bar.

Instead of accepting an AI's first output, request multiple variations of the content. Then, ask the AI to identify the best option. This forces the model to re-evaluate its own work against the project's goals and target audience, leading to a more refined final product.

As AI renders cover letters useless for signaling candidate quality, employers are shifting their screening processes. They now rely more on assessments that are harder to cheat on, such as take-home coding challenges and automated AI interviews. This moves the evaluation from subjective text analysis to more objective, skill-based demonstrations early in the hiring funnel.

Founders often mistakenly hire offshore candidates who are fluent conversationalists, only to find their work product is poor. A better indicator of success is strong reading comprehension and written ability, as many global education systems prioritize these skills over spoken fluency.

Since AI assistants make it easy for candidates to complete take-home coding exercises, simply evaluating the final product is no longer an effective screening method. The new best practice is to require candidates to build with AI and then explain their thought process, revealing their true engineering and problem-solving skills.

Traditional hiring assessments that ban modern tools are obsolete. A better approach is to give candidates access to AI tools and ask them to complete a complex task in an hour. This tests their ability to leverage technology for productivity, not their ability to memorize information.