Employers share why they are choosing virtual over in-person assessment centres, how they get the most out of them, the implication of AI and the future.

 ISE WhatsApp groups provide a convenient way for members to ask questions and share best practice, but sometimes a theme takes a life of its own, prompting a more in-depth group discussion.

The virtues and challenges of virtual assessment centres, particularly given the rise of AI, has been hotly debated. ISE members including Juliet Huntington at Arden University, Dave Iles at Talenscio, Sarah Evans at Discovery, Penny Allum at AWE and Rachel Mutters at GTI, got together to share challenges and expertise.

Benefits of virtual assessment centres

The group highlighted several benefits of virtual assessment centres:

• Virtual centres can handle high volumes of candidates, reducing logistical challenges like travel and venue costs. Employers discussed the merits of running multiple sessions with relatively smaller groups (such as 12 people).
• They can reflect the virtual nature of many companies and roles, providing realistic insight to how a person is going to perform on the job including assessing virtual collaboration and communication skills.
• They can simplify international recruitment, accommodating candidates across time zones.
• Virtual centres can help accessibility, allowing assessors to join flexibly, even across international campaigns. Employers reported particularly high engagement from assessors and managers working virtually.
• They can be more equitable as they remove geographical bias.

Challenges and mitigations

Among the many benefits of running virtual assessment centres, there are clear challenges. The group explored these, providing some ideas for how they can be overcome:

• Giving candidates a preview of the company and culture can be done virtually to some extent, but it’s not quite as effective as going into the work environment. To help, some employers are adding a final stage after the virtual assessment centre, inviting candidates into the organisation.
• Candidates could use external support such as AI to answer questions, which can be deemed as cheating (use of AI explored in detail below).
• Delegates and assessors can be unfamiliar with platform technology, particularly when virtual assessment centres are rolled out internationally. Global use of Teams and Zoom has eased this somewhat, but educating people ahead can help put them at ease so they can concentrate on the assessment rather than navigating the tech.
• Digital poverty remains a concern. Some universities loan equipment, support financially or provide quiet spaces for students, but this isn’t universal and students don’t always know, or want to ask, about support.
• There is potential to disadvantage certain groups. For example, younger or less experienced candidates may struggle with virtual formats. Adjustments include offering paired exercises for candidates with specific needs, such as those who are deaf, note-takers for underage candidates and alternative tasks for people with disabilities.

Preparing candidates

Sending out information in advance can help reduce drop-outs, make the process less stressful for candidates and deliver a better result.

Dave Iles explained, “There’s no doubt that the employers that do it particularly well are those that provide the best communication up front. Detailing what candidates should expect, what they need and what they’ll be doing makes a big difference.”

The information should help candidates prepare and understand the process they will go through as well as the support available. It’s important that employers are transparent about AI and human-led decision-making in assessments to manage expectations.

Some employers choose to send questions and/or briefs for presentations and group exercises. As well as written information, employers suggest webinars can work well. Pre-session tech testing and clear instructions are also effective, particularly among international candidates who may have to adapt to more unfamiliar systems.

Use of AI during assessments

It’s widely acknowledged that candidates are deploying AI tools to help them through the recruitment process, yet employers continue to have mixed views on candidate use of AI in assessments.

While some employers label this as cheating, others embrace AI as it reflects modern work practices, but this requires defining acceptable use with clear guidelines to candidates.

Using AI to enhance problem-solving is generally viewed positively, provided candidates understand and apply the insights intelligently.

Sarah Evans explained, “I’ve definitely seen people put a question into ChatGPT. They’ve got an answer out, but they don’t understand it, so they just regurgitate it and it’s really obvious. However, I’ve also seen candidates use it in a really intelligent way and we are interested in people who use AI to solve business problems. But an assessment centre for us is often not about the right or wrong, it’s about the problem solving, the communication, and how they stand up under pressure when you push and pull them in different directions. AI is increasingly something that we use every day, so we’ve got to incorporate into our assessment centres.”

Employers shared ideas for mitigating cheating in virtual settings:

• Assessors can often detect inconsistencies in answers or delays, so probing questions can help uncover gaps in understanding.
• Tasks with multimedia components or complex briefs are less susceptible to AI misuse.
• Designing assessments with strengths-based questioning can help avoid cheating.

The future of virtual assessment centres

The group agreed that while tried and tested tools and activities are commonplace there is an appetite for innovation. For example, virtual escape rooms have been found effective for group exercises, assessing collaboration and communication in an engaging way.

It was felt that gamification and virtual reality that is used for training and inductions could evolve into assessment use.

And while online proctoring for group activities is under development, it could become a future solution to mitigate cheating.

A common theme was joining up the candidate experience from assessment to onboarding and beyond, enabling the assessment centre to become part of the overall learning journey. Integrating assessment data with learning and development processes would also help to streamline onboarding and development plans.

There is a lack of evidence around the differences in the quality of candidates that come through virtual or in-person assessment centres. Understanding whether particular candidates thrive better in a virtual setting and vice versa could be the key to designing the assessment centre of the future.

You may also be interested in…

Ensuring fairness in assessment and selection

How Flutter uses AI to reveal the potential in every candidate

5 quick wins to improve your assessment centre experience in 2024/25