Working
Can explain the concept and its trade-offs.
Standardised practical tests per role with a 1-5 rubric and explicit pass criteria. Outputs feed directly into the interview decision.
Open
Any editor can update. Vera routes questions to any team member with relevant expertise.
Owner: Mikkel Nygaard
You can read, edit and deprecate this skill.
Working
Can explain the concept and its trade-offs.
Led
Has done it independently and owned outcomes.
Every role at Media Tech has a standardised practical test. The test is not a hazing ritual or a substitute for interviewing — it is a focused, time-boxed assessment of the work the role actually does, scored against a rubric we agreed on before the candidate sat down.
The point of standardising the test is to compare candidates fairly across cycles, not just within a single hire. We hire from a small pool, and being able to look at last year's Backend test scores against this year's is more useful than retroactively comparing live interview impressions.
Every test has between 4 and 8 scoring categories specific to the role. Each category is scored on a 1–5 scale:
Each test additionally identifies key risk areas — the categories that, if scored low, would predict job failure even if the average is high. For Backend, that's data modelling and security. For Frontend, it's accessibility and platform-specific UX. For QA, it's defect-report clarity.
A candidate passes the test stage when all three conditions are met:
Passing the test is necessary but not sufficient. The decision to extend an offer happens after the main interview (hr/interview-templates).
Build a small Laravel endpoint that ingests a webhook from a fictitious vendor (provided OpenAPI spec), validates the payload, persists it to Postgres, enqueues a job to call an external API, and emits a Pusher event. Scoring categories: data modelling, request validation, error handling, queue design, security (key risk), observability (key risk), code clarity, test coverage.
Implement a Castline-style diary list screen in React Native from a provided Figma frame. The screen must support pull-to-refresh, infinite scroll, and one empty state. Scoring categories: visual fidelity, accessibility (key risk), platform UX (key risk — iOS and Android), component decomposition, state management, performance with 500 items, test coverage.
Same Backend test plus the Frontend list screen consuming the endpoint they built. Scoring categories: combined Backend + Frontend categories, plus systems thinking (key risk — does the architecture make sense end-to-end), plus deployment readiness.
A Castline feature spec is provided; the candidate writes a functional test plan following the Welcome Screen pattern (developer/test-cases-functional). They then test a deliberately buggy build and submit defect reports. Scoring categories: checklist completeness, edge-case coverage, language coverage, defect-report clarity (key risk), reproduction-step specificity, severity judgement.
Redesign one existing Castline screen end-to-end. Deliverables: research justification (one page), redesigned screen in Figma at three breakpoints, motion spec, accessibility annotations. Scoring categories: research grounding, visual systems thinking (key risk), motion design, accessibility (key risk), Figma file organisation.
Write a Requirement Specification for a Castline feature given a 90-second Loom video as the brief. Use the 10-section format. Scoring categories: section completeness, business-logic rigour, stakeholder identification (key risk), edge-case coverage, language and accessibility coverage (key risk), open-question quality.
People Operations, with the hiring manager for each role as co-owner of that role's test.