Situational judgment test · product roles
Test how product people think, not how they present.
Tell us what the role can’t do without. They answer twelve situations in about fifteen minutes, and you get a report that tells you whether to interview them and what to ask.
Fifteen minutes for them. First candidate free, no card.
One instrument, six product roles
- Product Designer
- Product Manager
- UX Researcher
- Frontend Engineer
- Design Engineer
- UX Writer
How it works
Three steps, with no calls and no setup
You describe the role once, send a link, and read a recommendation the moment they finish.
What must they be good at?
- Spots when the brief is wrong
- Knows what the data supports
- Moves without being told
- Sweats states and edge cases
Try it
The same candidate, read for two different jobs
Marta R. answered once. Change who’s hiring and watch the recommendation change, even though the person and the answers stay the same.
Marta R. is a sample profile of an invented candidate. The report format is the one a paying customer receives.
Marta R.
Close to your job
Leads with all 3 of the things you named
What this role called essential
- Spots when the brief is wrongnear the front
- Knows what is cheap to buildfurther back
Ask them to name something they wanted to build and dropped because of what it would cost.
The same twelve situations exist for six roles, and what they measure changes with the job. If you want the reasoning before the product, the guides are where we write down how to read any of this, including what to look for without a test at all.
Why now
AI broke the portfolio
A portfolio always showed the outcome and never the judgment. It never separated your work from your team’s, and never said what happened when the plan broke halfway. Now a model writes one in four minutes.
Engineering solved this years ago with the technical interview: a standard exercise and a way to compare. For product roles, nothing existed. That’s what we built.
67%
of hiring leaders say AI-generated applications have slowed their process down.
65%
can no longer verify whether the skills they see on an application are real.
Source: Robert Half, March 2026
Pricing
Your first candidate is free
No card, no call. Credit packs never expire, so try it on the role you have open right now.
Free
your first candidate
One assessment, scored and reported, with no card and no call. It’s the same report a paying customer receives.
Start free$89
starter pack · 5 candidates
Enough to see it work on people you know. Credits never expire, and one is only spent when a candidate starts.
Buy credits$290
Save −19%one role · 20 candidates
A whole hire, start to finish. The report and the instrument stay the same; you’re buying more of it.
Buy credits$690
Save −35%several roles · 60 candidates
Three or four hires whenever they come up, or an agency running more than one process at a time.
Buy creditsThere’s no subscription and nothing expires. You pay for the hire you’re making. How teams use it differs: a first design hire, an agency running several clients and a recruiter shortlisting each buy a different amount of the same thing.
Candidates never pay for the case or for their profile.
What people ask us
Questions teams ask before they try it
Then you already know its three problems. The results can’t be compared: one candidate spends two hours and another spends the weekend, so you end up ranking availability. It loses your best people, because anyone with three live processes turns down a weekend of unpaid work. And it has no outside reference. You learn which one you preferred, and nothing about whether either is any good. This takes fifteen minutes of theirs and none of your design lead's.
It measures one thing: judgment. What someone does when the brief is wrong, the data is thin or the plan breaks halfway. Craft, tooling and presentation are left out, and judgment is the part a portfolio never shows you. If you want to see their craft, look at their work. That's what a portfolio is good for.
It buys them very little here. There's no essay to generate and no artefact to polish, so a model has nothing to improve on, and it can't know what this particular person would do. When a result can't be read with confidence, we withhold it and your credit comes back.
No. An assessment you can prepare for stops measuring anything. You choose the capabilities that matter for your role, and the report tells you exactly where the candidate stands on each of them. Nobody gets to rehearse the situations.
Every candidate for a role answers the same situations and is read against the same standard, so two people are finally comparable. What changes between two companies is the brief: you say what this role can't do without, and the same candidate can read differently for a different job. That subjectivity is out in the open, and it's yours. If a result ever looks wrong to you, a person reviews it on request.
Fifteen minutes is a long way from a take-home. They're told before they start that there's nothing to prepare, that the company in the situations is fictional so nobody is working for free, and that we look at how they decide rather than how they present. They also sit it once, not once per company: if another company asks for the same assessment in the next six months, they don't take it again.
Then that hire matters more to you than to anyone, and getting it wrong costs a full salary and half a year. Your first candidate is free, with no card. Use it on the process you have open right now.