Contacting HR over possible errors in test

[Nicktim]

Appreciate the intent behind this post but my advice would be that you've passed the test so I'd just move on and focus on the next step. Grad recruitment and interviewing partners/associates are ultimately looking for potential trainees they wouldn't mind spending long hours stuck in an office with and I'm not sure telling them their assessment is poorly worded is going to endear you to them, regardless how politely you tell them.

 

[M&ALawyer]

Appreciate the intent behind this post but my advice would be that you've passed the test so I'd just move on and focus on the next step. Grad recruitment and interviewing partners/associates are ultimately looking for potential trainees they wouldn't mind spending long hours stuck in an office with and I'm not sure telling them their assessment is poorly worded is going to endear you to them, regardless how politely you tell them.

Thanks for the advice.

My thoughts exactly at the moment - prefer not to be recognised as a potential problem-maker prior to a potential interview.

If I am right the benefit is to others rather than myself. If I am wrong then it’s going to work against me. So the net outcome of this for me is neutral at best, and negative at worst.

Best to leave it, and focus on my own efforts in the process - especially given the test does not concern me anymore.

 

[JHGNB]

One thing to consider is that while you may point out something worth changing, it may not actually lead to a change. I had once identified an issue on a test which contradicted the firm's diversity claims. I was assured that the issue would be taken up but nothing happened nor was I kept up to date. I also lost interest so didn't ask for an update. This year, when I took the test (and progressed to the next stage) I noticed that the issue still hadn't been resolved. My assumption is that either the issue was forgotten about or it was too expensive to correct or an alternative solution is still being researched. Despite the claims, most City law firms tend to be very hierarchical in my experience, and suggestions/requests of change/funding from the Business Services side of the firm (or "non-lawyers" as they're commonly referred to) are not necessarily prioritised. So even if the GR team would want to change, the issue might not be under their control.

If you feel strongly about the issue and have the time then I don't see the harm in sending off an email but if you're short on time and don't necessarily want to engage in chasing for replies etc then I would just focus on other things that might be more useful.

 

[Jessica Booker]

One thing to consider is that while you may point out something worth changing, it may not actually lead to a change. I had once identified an issue on a test which contradicted the firm's diversity claims. I was assured that the issue would be taken up but nothing happened nor was I kept up to date. I also lost interest so didn't ask for an update. This year, when I took the test (and progressed to the next stage) I noticed that the issue still hadn't been resolved. My assumption is that either the issue was forgotten about or it was too expensive to correct or an alternative solution is still being researched. Despite the claims, most City law firms tend to be very hierarchical in my experience, and suggestions/requests of change/funding from the Business Services side of the firm (or "non-lawyers" as they're commonly referred to) are not necessarily prioritised. So even if the GR team would want to change, the issue might not be under their control.

If you feel strongly about the issue and have the time then I don't see the harm in sending off an email but if you're short on time and don't necessarily want to engage in chasing for replies etc then I would just focus on other things that might be more useful.

What was the issue that contradicted their diversity claims? Genuinely interested.

 

[JHGNB]

The test asked for one's gender and only gave male and female options. I felt that was exclusionary of transgender, intersex, and others who do not necessarily fall into Male and Female. To me this contradicted their claims of being inclusive.

 

[Jessica Booker]

The test asked for one's gender and only gave male and female options. I felt that was exclusionary of transgender, intersex, and others who do not necessarily fall into Male and Female. To me this contradicted their claims of being inclusive.

Ah ok - that’s not the test itself (you’re not being assessed on that) but is there for monitoring purposes, to check the test doesn’t create adverse impact. Do agree though there should be at least one other option that basically encompasses “other”. I am not a fan of “choose not to disclose” options, although technically that should be included too.

It wouldn’t have cost that much to change it, not much effort to change it too. In fact, their supplier should have offered to change it at no additional cost.