Independent advisors for
AI-enabled talent acquisition.
Expert advice on AI-enabled hiring, from people who have built, bought, and delivered assessments for the world’s leading employers.
experience of building, buying, and implementing assessments.
25+ years
Global expertise
delivering assessment solutions to enterprise clients worldwide.
Over 10 million
candidates assessed through systems we have built, bought, or implemented
The new challenges facing talent acquisition
AI-augmented candidates
If candidates use AI to write applications, prep for interviews, or complete take-home tests, what are we actually measuring?
The issue isn’t with candidates: they’re simply using the tools available to them. And prohibiting AI isn’t the answer.
Instead, we diagnose what your process is really measuring, redesign assessments to withstand AI-assisted candidacy, and build selection systems that remain valid in the world as it is now.
AI-powered
hiring tools
AI-based hiring tools do more than traditional assessments or tracking systems.
They infer skills from job titles, predict performance or turnover, and add outside information to candidate profiles.
We help organisations ask the right questions before buying and review tools already in use.
Hiring for
AI skills
Most organizations say they want to hire for AI skills. But can they define what that means for each role, assess it fairly, and stand by their criteria?
We translate ambiguous AI requirements into explicit criteria, structured interview questions, and role-specific assessments - that are all defensible if challenged.
If you have a specific question about an AI hiring tool, a live process, or how to define and assess AI skills for a role, a 30-minute scoping call is the right place to start.
Work with us
What we do
The Hiring Science Studio works with employers who are buying, running, or redesigning AI-assisted hiring processes.
We also support HR tech vendors who want an independent review of what their tools measure and whether those claims stand up to scrutiny.
Every project is delivered by Kate Young and Ben Hawkes. Engagements run for two to eight weeks, with clear goals and deliverables.
Vendor Due Diligence
Most HR and IT procurement processes focus on price, support, and contracts. But they rarely check if an AI hiring tool actually measures what it says it does, if it works for your people, or who is responsible once it goes live.
We help procurement teams run better evaluations of AI hiring tools. We work with you to set the right criteria, ask the right questions, and make sense of the answers. You stay in control of the process. Our role is to make sure your evaluation checks what matters.
Who this is for
CHROs and TA leaders at organisations with 5,000 or more employees, typically in regulated sectors or with a high volume of applications. Also relevant for HR tech procurement leads and in-house legal teams reviewing vendor contracts.
-
Review the tool categories and vendor shortlist you are considering, and identify the measurement and validation questions specific to your context
Build an evaluation framework covering what to assess, how to assess it, and how to weight the criteria
Draft the technical questions to put to vendors - on validation methodology, demographic testing, decision rules, and ongoing monitoring
Help your team interpret vendor responses, including compliance documentation that is accurate but incomplete
Advise on the contract terms and conditions of use that your legal team should review before sign-off
-
A structured evaluation framework your procurement team can use directly, covering the criteria, the questions, and the scoring approach. We also provide a written summary of the risks and open questions identified at each stage of the process.
Where you want us present for vendor presentations or technical Q&A sessions, we can attend in an advisory capacity.
Audits of live hiring systems
We conduct structured reviews of AI hiring tools and processes that are already in use. Many organisations bought tools two or three years ago, under different regulatory conditions, with validation data that has not been updated since. This audit establishes what the tool is doing now for your current roles and workforce.
Who this is for
CHROs, TA leaders, and in-house employment counsel at organisations with AI hiring tools currently in production. Particularly relevant where tools have been live for more than eighteen months without a formal review.
-
What the tool was originally validated to measure, and whether that validation is still current
How the tool is performing against its stated purpose across your current applicant population
Adverse impact data, by demographic group, at each stage of the process where the tool is used
The decision rules in place, who reviews them, and how exceptions are handled
The documentation available to support the process if it were challenged
Any difference between what the vendor has supplied and what your organisation has implemented
-
A written audit report covering each area above. The report sets out specific findings, not general observations. Where we identify problems, we describe them precisely and indicate their severity. Where we identify gaps in documentation or governance, we say what is missing and what would be needed to address it.
We also provide a verbal debrief with your senior HR and legal team.
Hiring process redesign
If you’re hiring at scale, you’re already seeing plenty of AI-assisted applications. It’s time to look at what your process is actually measuring, and rethink it for a world where AI is part of how candidates apply.
This is just as relevant for assessment vendors who need to check if their tools still work in today’s environment.
Who this is for
TA leaders and HR directors at organisations hiring at volume, particularly where roles attract a high proportion of AI-assisted applications. Also relevant for assessment vendors reviewing the validity of their products in current conditions.
-
Which stages of your process are now most affected by AI assistance, and how
What each stage is currently measuring, and whether that is still what you need it to measure
Where the process advantages candidates with better access to AI tools, regardless of their actual ability
Which assessment methods remain valid in their current form, which need adjustment, and which should be replaced
How to document the redesigned process and the rationale behind it
-
A written process specification covering the revised design, the rationale for each change, and the validity evidence supporting the new approach. Where we recommend new assessment methods, we specify them in enough detail to brief a vendor or build internally.
We also provide guidance on how to communicate changes to hiring managers and candidates.
Fairness and defensibility audits
A review of your full hiring process for adverse impact, decision rules, and the documentation you would need if your process were legally challenged.
This is necessary before making a major change to hiring, such as adding a new tool, introducing another assessment, or shifting to more automation. It is also needed after a complaint, a legal claim, or a regulatory review.
Who this is for
CHROs, heads of TA, and employment counsel at large employers, particularly those in regulated sectors or with a significant volume of hiring activity. Also relevant for US federal contractors and organisations operating across multiple jurisdictions.
-
Adverse impact data at each stage of the process, by protected characteristic
The decision rules in use, how they are set, and who reviews them
Whether the criteria applied at each stage are job-related and can be shown to be so
The documentation available to support each hiring decision
How your process compares to current legal and regulatory expectations in your jurisdiction
-
A written audit report with specific findings at each process stage. Where adverse impact is present, we describe its scale and likely source. Where documentation is insufficient, we specify what is missing. The report is structured for use by HR, legal, and compliance teams, and is written to be legible to a regulator or tribunal if that becomes necessary.
Governance for AI-powered hiring
Oversight of AI tools in hiring is often divided among IT, HR, and Legal. This leads to unclear accountability and increased risk.
Instead, we build effective governance models that specify ownership, roles, and responsibilities - with clear documentation and audit trails.
Who this is for
CHROs and HR directors at organisations with multiple AI tools across their hiring process, particularly where those tools inform decisions at volume. Also relevant for HR tech vendors building governance documentation for enterprise clients.
-
A clear inventory of the AI tools in use across your hiring process, and what decisions they inform
Defined review criteria for each tool, including performance thresholds and adverse impact monitoring
Roles and responsibilities for ongoing oversight — who is accountable, what they review, and how often
An escalation process for when a tool produces unexpected or concerning results
Documentation standards that meet current regulatory expectations in your jurisdiction
-
A governance framework document, written for use by HR, legal, and technology teams. It sets out the oversight structure, the review schedule, and the documentation requirements for each tool. We also provide a briefing session with the relevant teams to walk through how it works in practice.
Define and assess AI skills
"AI skills" is already appearing in job specifications, but often without a clear definition or explanation of how they will be measured for a given role.
We help you identify which AI skills are actually relevant for each role and level, and specify how they will be assessed. This means setting out clear, defensible criteria for use in job descriptions, interviews, or formal assessments.
Who this is for
TA leaders, L&D directors, and HR business partners at organisations hiring for roles where AI use is already expected or growing. Also relevant for workforce planning teams building future skills frameworks, and for HR tech vendors developing AI skills assessment products.
-
Review the roles in scope and identify what AI-related tasks and decisions they actually involve
Define AI skills at the level of specific, observable behaviours — not broad categories
Specify what each skill looks like at different levels of proficiency
Design or recommend assessment methods that can distinguish between those levels reliably
Test the criteria against your existing workforce data where that is available
-
A written AI skills specification for the roles in scope, covering definitions, proficiency levels, and assessment methods. We also provide guidance on how to integrate the criteria into your existing job architecture and assessment process.
Where the engagement includes assessment design, we provide structured interview guides, exercise briefs, or evaluation criteria ready for use.
Transform your talent acquisition.
Email us to book a scoping call: a short conversation to see if there is a problem worth solving, what it would take, and if The Hiring Science Studio is the right fit.
The Hiring Science Studio Team
-
Kate Young
Hiring science & assessment design
Kate has worked in assessment science since 2004. She has designed and evaluated hiring processes for FTSE 100 companies and UK government departments, and has spent recent years working with organisations building or implementing AI-enabled hiring systems.
Her focus is on validity evidence, bias reduction, and what proper oversight of AI hiring tools actually requires - both in the technical design and in how decisions get made and documented.
-
Ben Hawkes
Implementation & governance
Over the last twenty-five years, Ben has led the transformation of hiring and assessment across many complex and global organisations.
He is also the founder of TAPnet, a network of over 80 senior Fortune 500 talent and AI leaders.
He focuses on the design and implementation of hiring processes and the fairness and defensibility of AI hiring tools.
Independence & transparency.
Alongside buyer-side advisory, we work selectively with AI hiring vendors on product quality, validation methodology, and fairness documentation.
We understand how these products are built because we have done it ourselves.
We have a straightforward rule: we do not advise buyers on any vendor with whom we have a current paid relationship, or a paid relationship that ended within the previous 12 months.
We disclose vendor relationships at the start of every buyer engagement.
Transform your
talent acquisition.
Email us to book a scoping call: a short conversation to see if there is a problem worth solving, what it would take, and if The Hiring Science Studio is the right fit.