A Work Simulation is a bespoke hiring assessment designed from a company’s real work context. Instead of generic personality tests or hypothetical case studies, candidates complete actual tasks they would face in the role. They use real tools, work with real data, and solve real problems. Candidates are paid for their time. The results reveal how someone approaches work, not how they describe approaching it. Work sample tests predict job performance three times better than unstructured interviews (Schmidt and Hunter, 1998, Psychological Bulletin).
Why traditional assessments fall short
Most hiring assessments test the wrong things. Personality questionnaires ask candidates to describe themselves. Timed cognitive tests measure general intelligence. Generic case studies measure how well someone structures a hypothetical answer under pressure. Whiteboard exercises test performance anxiety, not job performance.
None of these predict whether a specific person will thrive in a specific seat.
The problem is abstraction. A generic assessment strips away the context that determines real performance: the tools the person will actually use, the pace of the real environment, the types of problems that actually come up, and how the team actually collaborates.
Work Simulations solve this by eliminating abstraction entirely.
What a Work Simulation looks like
Every Work Simulation at SuperHired is built from the discovery findings for that specific engagement. There is no standardization. The simulation for a marketing operations manager at a 15-person agency looks nothing like the simulation for a finance director at a tech company, because the roles demand different behaviors.
Part 1: Async deliverable
The candidate receives a brief based on a real scenario from the company. They have 3 to 5 business days and approximately one hour of work to produce a deliverable: a written analysis, a Loom video walkthrough, a presentation, a strategic recommendation, or whatever the role demands.
The scenario includes enough context for a strong candidate to make real decisions but not so many instructions that the approach is prescribed. The candidate’s approach IS the assessment. Five strong candidates should produce five meaningfully different responses.
What Part 1 reveals:
- How they communicate value clearly
- How they prioritize when given an open-ended problem
- Whether they think structurally or reactively
- How much initiative they take without being told what to do
Part 2: Live simulation
Within a week of Part 1, the candidate joins a 20 to 30 minute live video call. This includes two components.
A roleplay scenario. Based on a realistic situation from the company’s actual context. A client pushback conversation, a multi-priority triage, a cross-functional negotiation. The scenario is specific enough to test real judgment and open enough to reveal the candidate’s natural approach.
A feedback moment. The interviewer gives constructive feedback on the candidate’s Part 1 submission. Not harsh criticism. Genuine, specific feedback. Then they observe the response. Does the candidate engage with the feedback? Get defensive? Immediately improve? In our experience, coachability is the strongest predictor of who works out in the role.
What Part 2 reveals:
- How they think on their feet under real conditions
- How they handle unexpected challenges
- How they receive and integrate feedback
- How they communicate in real time versus in a polished document
Scoring
Scoring is split between SuperHired and the hiring company. SuperHired evaluates behavioral dimensions: communication quality, self-direction, coachability, structured thinking, and adaptability. The hiring company evaluates domain dimensions: technical accuracy, strategic thinking, and industry-specific judgment.
Both parties score independently before comparing notes. This separation prevents either dimension from overwhelming the other.
The default weighting depends on the role. Standard business roles weight behavioral factors at 70% and domain at 30%. Technical roles flip to 40% behavioral and 60% domain. Leadership roles sit at 60% behavioral and 40% domain.
Each dimension is scored on five levels: Exceptional, Strong, Adequate, Concerning, or Disqualifying.
Why candidates are paid
Candidates receive compensation for completing Work Simulations, typically between $100 and $250 depending on the scope and role level. This isn’t a token gesture. It serves three purposes.
It produces better results. Paid candidates treat the simulation as real work because it is real work. They invest their best thinking because their time is being valued.
It ensures completion. Unpaid assessments have high dropout rates, especially among candidates who have multiple options. Payment signals that the company respects the candidate’s time and takes the process seriously.
It aligns with the methodology. Discovery-led hiring treats candidates as buyers, not products. Paying for assessment time is a concrete expression of that principle. The right candidates notice.
How this differs from standard hiring assessments
Three distinctions separate Work Simulations from the assessments most companies use.
Real context versus hypothetical scenarios. Standard assessments use generic prompts. Work Simulations use the company’s actual tools, data, and problems. Candidates get access to real accounts, sign NDAs, and navigate the genuine complexity of the role. The simulation isn’t a proxy for the work. It is the work.
Behavioral observation versus self-reporting. Personality tests ask candidates to describe themselves. Work Simulations observe what candidates actually do under real conditions. The gap between stated and revealed preferences is where most hiring mistakes happen.
Judgment versus knowledge. Traditional assessments test what someone knows. Work Simulations test how someone makes decisions when the instructions are ambiguous and the context is complex. A strong candidate should walk away thinking “that was actually interesting.”
What the data shows
SuperHired designs Work Simulations to produce a specific outcome: the hiring manager should have a hard time choosing between the final candidates because they’re all genuinely strong.
This is deliberate. When the methodology works, the discovery phase filters behavioral mismatches out before anyone reaches the simulation stage. The candidates who complete simulations have already been evaluated against 32 Work Drivers and matched to the environment. The simulation confirms the behavioral data and reveals domain capability.
The combined effect of behavioral matching and Work Simulations produces a 90% retention rate at 18 months. Not because the methodology finds perfect people. Because both sides have enough data to make informed decisions before anyone commits.
$7,500 flat fee. 120-day guarantee, twice the industry standard. Paid simulations included.
Learn how behavioral matching identifies the right candidates before simulations begin or book a Scoping Call to discuss your role.
