---
name: work-sample-task
description: Designs a fair work sample or take-home assignment for a role, with a time box, a task that mirrors the real job, a candidate brief, a scoring rubric, and an accommodations line. Keeps it from becoming free consulting. Use when you want a take-home test, a skills assessment, a work sample, a case study exercise, or a paid trial task for a candidate, or want to check whether an existing take-home is fair.
---

# Work sample task

> Not legal advice. Pay for candidate time and accommodation duties vary by place; mark local points "[check: local law / HR]".

A work sample asks candidates to do a slice of the actual job. The US Office of Personnel Management describes work samples as tasks that "mirror the tasks employees perform on the job" and notes applicants often see them as very fair. Fair means short, scored the same way for everyone, and useless to you as real work.

## When to use

- You're hiring for a skill that's easier to see than to describe: writing, analysis, design, support replies, sales emails.
- You have a take-home already and want to check its length, brief, and rubric.
- Not for roles where people learn the core skill after they join. OPM advises using work samples when applicants should have the skill on entry.

## What you need

- The role and the 2 to 4 skills the task must show (from the job post or scorecard). If missing, ask; a task testing everything tests nothing.
- A real piece of the job you can turn into a task, with confidential details removed or invented.
- Who scores it, and when in the process it comes. If unknown, our default is after the first interview, before the final round.

## Steps

1. **Pick one real task.** Choose something the person will do in their first 3 months, at the size of one sitting. Rewrite it with invented data or a past, finished problem. Our rule: never use a live client problem or unshipped work; that is free consulting.
2. **Set the time box.** Our default is 2 hours or less for unpaid work, stated in the brief as a recommended limit. We found no controlled research on the right length; the 2-hour figure is practitioner guidance (Kofman-Burns, RecruitingDaily, 2023), which recommends a 2-hour limit for nearly all roles, says assignments over 1 to 2 hours present an equity issue because not everyone can fit unpaid work into evenings and weekends, and recommends paying candidates if you need more. Over 2 hours: pay for it or cut it "[check: local law / HR]".
3. **Test it on a colleague.** Someone in a similar role does the task cold within the box. If they can't, cut scope until they can.
4. **Write the brief.** What to make, who it's for, the time box, what format to send, what you will and won't judge (for example "spelling doesn't count; reasoning does"), the deadline, and who to ask. Kofman-Burns suggests a window of at least 10 days that includes 2 weekends; that is our default.
5. **Write the rubric before anyone submits.** One row per skill, each with 4 levels described in words (Google's re:Work guide describes poor, borderline, solid and outstanding answers). Score each submission against the rubric alone. Our default: hide the name and use 2 scorers where you can.
6. **Offer accommodations.** The EEOC says an employer may tell all applicants what the process involves, such as a timed test, and ask whether they need a reasonable accommodation, for example more time or another format. Put that offer in every brief, with a contact.
7. **State what happens to the work.** The candidate keeps their work, you won't use it in the business, and you'll give a short result either way.

## Output format

```markdown
# Work sample — [role]

## Design notes (internal)
- **Skills tested:** [2 to 4]
- **Based on:** [real task, how it was made safe]
- **Time box:** [n] hours, recommended [paid: yes/no; rate if yes]
- **Tested by:** [colleague], took [time]
- **Scorers:** [names]; blind: [yes/no]

## Brief (sent to the candidate)
**The task:** [2 to 4 sentences: what to make and for whom]
**Materials:** [attached files or links]
**Time:** Please spend no more than [n] hours. We won't judge you on extra polish.
**Send:** [format] to [email] by [date].
**We look at:** [skills, in plain words]. **We don't look at:** [list].
**Your work:** stays yours. We won't use it in our business.
**Need an adjustment?** If you need more time, another format, or any other accommodation, tell [name] at [email].
**Questions:** [name], [email]

## Rubric (internal)
| Skill | Outstanding | Solid | Borderline | Poor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [skill] | [observable description] | | | |
```

## Example

**Input:** Lantern Health is hiring a support specialist. Skills: clear written replies, judging urgency, knowing when to escalate. Real work: answering tickets from patients using the booking portal; clinical questions go to a nurse. Material: 5 closed tickets from 2025, rewritten with invented names and details; one asks about medication, one describes a symptom. Ines (support) did it cold in 70 minutes; time box 90 minutes, unpaid. Scorers: Ines and Tom, names hidden. Brief goes out Wednesday 4 November; send to hiring@lanternhealth.example; questions and adjustments to Ines, ines@lanternhealth.example. Product knowledge and formatting don't count.

**Output:**

```markdown
# Work sample — Support specialist

## Design notes (internal)
- **Skills tested:** clear replies, urgency judgment, escalation
- **Based on:** 5 closed tickets from 2025, rewritten with invented names and details
- **Time box:** 90 minutes, recommended; unpaid
- **Tested by:** Ines (support), took 70 minutes
- **Scorers:** Ines and Tom; blind: yes

## Brief (sent to the candidate)
**The task:** Here are 5 messages from patients using our booking portal. Put them in the order you'd answer them, write a reply to 3 of them, and say which (if any) you'd pass to a nurse and why.
**Materials:** tickets.pdf (attached)
**Time:** Please spend no more than 90 minutes. We won't judge you on extra polish.
**Send:** one document to hiring@lanternhealth.example by Monday 16 November.
**We look at:** how clear and kind your replies are, the order you choose, and your reasons. **We don't look at:** product knowledge or formatting.
**Your work:** stays yours. We won't use it in our business.
**Need an adjustment?** If you need more time, another format, or any other accommodation, tell Ines at ines@lanternhealth.example.
**Questions:** Ines, ines@lanternhealth.example

## Rubric (internal)
| Skill | Outstanding | Solid | Borderline | Poor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clear replies | Answers the question in the first line, plain words, next step named | Answers it; one unclear step | Answer buried or jargon | Doesn't answer |
| Urgency order | Medication question first, with a reason | Right first item, thin reason | One urgent item ranked low | No visible logic |
| Escalation | Escalates both the medication and symptom tickets to the nurse and says what to hand over | Escalates the right tickets | Escalates everything | Escalates nothing |
```

## Checks before you send

- [ ] The task uses invented or finished work; nothing you could ship or bill.
- [ ] The time box is stated, and a colleague finished inside it.
- [ ] The rubric exists before the first submission and describes each level in observable terms.
- [ ] The brief has the accommodation sentence and a named contact.
- [ ] Every candidate at this stage gets the same brief, time, and rubric.
- [ ] Anything over 2 hours is paid or cut, with pay marked "[check: local law / HR]".

## Common mistakes

- "Redesign our onboarding flow." That's a consulting project. Use a past or invented one.
- Leaving time open. People with more free time send more polish, and you end up scoring time, not skill.
- Scoring by gut, then writing the rubric to match.