The Archaic UX/UI Design Recruiting Process and How to Solve It
The hiring process for UX/UI designers hasn’t changed since I started my career 12 years ago. Think about that for a moment: while the design industry has evolved in ways we couldn’t have imagined, the way we hire designers feels frozen in time.
I wrote this article because I think we all feel the pain of this outdated system, but also because I believe we can start doing something about it. Let’s not just complain — we already know what’s broken. Instead, let’s talk about solutions.
What the Current Process Looks Like
If you’ve been through the UX/UI design job hunt, this will sound familiar:
- Submit your CV and portfolio
- Do an HR screening call
- Meet with the hiring manager
- Present your portfolio (sometimes combined with step 3)
- Complete a design challenge (whiteboard, take-home, or Crazy 8’s — either in person or online)
- Go through a series of behavioral interviews with team members
- Wait for an offer (if you’re lucky)
Why It Doesn’t Work
Here’s the thing: this process hasn’t evolved in over a decade. It’s the same whether you’re applying as a junior designer or a design lead.
Here’s what’s wrong:
- It’s a time sink. Candidates spend weeks preparing portfolios and take-home exercises, only to be ghosted.
- It rewards performance, not collaboration. Doing well in an interview doesn’t mean you’ll thrive in a team.
- It’s one-size-fits-all. The same process is applied to everyone, regardless of their level or experience.
- It’s a black box. AI is being used to filter applications, but candidates have no idea how to tailor their submissions to it.
If hiring practices are meant to find the right people for the job, why does the process feel so irrelevant to the way we actually work as designers?
Let’s Talk About Solutions
I know we can do better. If we could redesign the process from scratch, here’s what I’d want:
- Fewer steps. Let’s cut the unnecessary back-and-forth.
- More personalization. Tailor the process to reflect the candidate’s personality, not just their portfolio.
- Real-world relevance. Assess people based on how they’d actually work with the team, not how they answer questions in an interview.
- Less intrusiveness. Make it easier for candidates to participate without derailing their lives.
- Focus on fit. Stop looking for “perfect answers” and instead prioritize candidates who align with the company’s mission and values. The time and energy spent interviewing dozens of candidates could be better spent focusing on the right ones. This is where smarter filtering systems come into play.
- Embrace human connection. Build an authentic, welcoming atmosphere that fosters honest conversations instead of superficial, rehearsed exchanges.
- Tailored towards AI systems. Ensure the process works in our favor by making AI systems fair and unbiased, rather than a barrier to opportunity.
Where Do We Start?
Here’s my take on the big milestones that need fixing:
1. Rethink Candidate Filtering: Let’s Ditch CVs
The current reliance on CVs is fundamentally flawed. Even advancements like AI-driven CV scanning don’t address the root problem: the CV format itself.
The CV is outdated. It reduces rich, multi-dimensional experiences into a single, impersonal page. Why not leverage existing systems and data to revolutionize this step?
Think about it: we pour hours into tweaking one-pagers, swapping out keywords to pass through automated filters, and crafting “tailored” resumes for every job. And for what? So companies can skim through thousands of nearly identical documents.
What could work better?
- Leveraging existing data. Imagine a centralized system where employers can access meaningful information about you: performance reviews, feedback from colleagues, self-assessments, and even growth plans. All that rich data is already captured in performance reviews — why aren’t we using it to streamline hiring? This data, often captured during performance reviews, could be repurposed into machine-readable formats, interactive videos, presentations, or webpages accessible to recruiters.
- AI-powered profiles. Picture an AI assistant that creates a dynamic profile of your work: summarizing projects, gathering feedback from your teammates, and even pulling in data about your side projects and hobbies. It could create an interactive portfolio that tells your story more authentically than any static CV ever could.
This approach eliminates bias, ensuring the focus is on real-world achievements and potential rather than a curated version of oneself.
An interesting example I’d like to share is a company called Allup. The mission of the company is to bring a human touch to candidate reviews. What I truly appreciate about this product is:
- Balancing feedback: The product balances structured feedback with authentic human connections.
- Colleague recordings: Colleagues can record short snippets about their experience working with you.
- Guided process: The entire process is guided, removing the stress of figuring out what to say.
- Keyword analysis: The recordings are analyzed to identify keywords, which are then translated into profile tags.
- Dynamic profiles: Your profile isn’t just a static summary but includes a well-organized breakdown of feedback.
- Easy navigation: Feedback includes chapter names for easy navigation.
- Real references: Real names as references add authenticity, unlike traditional resumes.
- Technology meets human input: The approach demonstrates how technology and genuine human input can coexist to create a better representation of candidates.
2. Fix the Matching Process: Where’s LinkedIn 2.0?
Job searching shouldn’t feel like a part-time job in itself. Yet platforms like LinkedIn and Glassdoor make it way harder than it needs to be.
You scroll through endless postings, most of which don’t even align with what you’re looking for. And don’t get me started on LinkedIn’s algorithm — look at one Product Manager job, and suddenly your feed is flooded with PM roles you don’t want.
Welcome to the Jungle: A Platform That Gets It Right
Platforms like Welcome to the Jungle are paving the way for better job matching. Here’s what they get right:
- Job Filtering: You can set filters to see only the most relevant roles.
- Personalized Matches: Jobs are presented to you as tailored matches, saving time and effort.
- Resume-Free Applications: You can apply directly using your platform profile, removing the need to upload a CV.
- Holistic Profiles: Your profile captures more than just work experience and education, reflecting your personality and values.
- Exportable Resumes: The platform allows you to export resumes enriched with personal questions and answers.
- Company Insights: Detailed company profiles provide expert opinions and insights, helping candidates make informed decisions.
If larger platforms like LinkedIn adopted these principles, they could redefine industry standards and improve job-seeking experiences for everyone.
3. Make Candidate Evaluation Real
The truth is, you can’t really know someone from an interview. Real-world work experience will always tell you more than a portfolio presentation or a hypothetical whiteboard challenge.
So why don’t we focus more on that?
A Better Approach: Paid Work Simulation Programs
Currently, the market offers mainly apprenticeships, but they are typically geared towards individuals starting their careers or those returning to the workforce after a break (e.g., Amazon, Intuit). Paid work simulation programs, however, are practically non-existent.
For such programs to be truly effective and beneficial to both employers and employees, a better filtering and evaluation system is crucial. Unlike unpaid take-home assignments that candidates have traditionally gone through, these simulations require substantial resources, making it essential to ensure that the right candidates are selected for the opportunity.
There could be different variations of this initiative, depending on what works best for the company while delivering the most value to the hiring team.
The core idea behind work simulations is simple:
- Selected candidates join a team and contribute to a real project.
- This wouldn’t be full-time employment just yet, but it would offer a fully integrated experience.
- Employers get to see candidates in action, while candidates gain a genuine sense of the company culture and team dynamics.
- The structure could align with the familiar 30–60–90 day plan, which companies currently use for onboarding. Candidates would take on low-stakes projects to get familiar with the company and gradually showcase their skills.
Below are three different approaches to how paid work simulation programs could be structured. All engagements would include real-world interactions such as email exchanges, Slack communication, Jira contributions, and participation in meetings — offering a true-to-life assessment of a candidate’s fit within the company.
Part-Time Trial Engagement
Candidates are given a set timeframe (e.g., 1–2 weeks) to work alongside teams, potentially contributing to various projects. During this period, they are encouraged to identify areas where they can add value through collaboration and conversations. They could also shadow senior team members, such as the lead designer or product manager, to gain deeper insights.
How it mimics real work:
- Candidates solve real problems while working with the team.
- Encourages cross-functional collaboration.
- Helps both parties assess long-term fit organically.
- Provides insight into how candidates take ownership and navigate challenges.
- Tests adaptability, versatility, and learning agility in a realistic environment.
Freelance-Style Project with a Mentor
Candidates are assigned a project to complete within a set timeframe at their own pace. This could involve engagement with an internal or external client, offering a realistic project-based experience. A mentor, such as a senior designer or product manager, would be assigned — similar to how employees receive guidance and feedback in their daily roles. Candidates can ask questions, collaborate, and receive feedback just as they would in a real job.
How it mimics real work:
- Allows candidates to showcase their skills without time pressure.
- Provides insight into their ability to work with existing design systems and tools.
- Evaluates problem-solving within established guidelines.
- Tests communication skills, stakeholder management, and adaptability.
- Simulates real client-designer interactions with flexibility and quality expectations.
- Encourages independent work while maintaining a collaborative team environment.
Open-Ended Exploration Task
Candidates are invited to contribute to ongoing, low-stakes initiatives with broad scopes, such as “How would you improve the onboarding experience for new users?” without strict guidelines or constraints. This approach allows candidates to define their own solutions and demonstrate creativity.
How it mimics real work:
- Encourages exploration without the stress of rigid deadlines.
- Provides an opportunity to think creatively and problem-solve in an open environment.
- Allows candidates to present their ideas in their preferred format.
- Evaluates strategic thinking and prioritization skills.
- Assesses ownership, initiative, and collaboration within a flexible setting.
A Look at Global Practices: The Netherlands Example
Countries like the Netherlands offer a system where employers can sign candidates on fixed-term contracts for up to three years. This allows companies to assess candidates’ fit before offering a permanent role, providing a fair and balanced approach for both parties.
And yes — these work simulations should absolutely be paid. Candidates shouldn’t have to work for free to prove their worth.
Final Thoughts
The UX/UI design hiring process is long overdue for a redesign. It’s time to stop optimizing for the wrong things — polished resumes, perfect answers, and rehearsed presentations — and start focusing on what really matters: how we work, how we collaborate, and how we grow as designers.
We have the tools to make this happen. Let’s start using them.
Do you have any interesting examples of how the hiring process is improving? Let me know down below in the comments 👇
Don’t hesitate to get in touch via email, or👇
