{
  "registry_version": "1.0.0",
  "data": {
    "title": "Take-Home / Work Sample Evaluation",
    "status": "active",
    "evidence_ids": [
      "evidence.employment_interview_reliability_new_meta_analytic_estimates_by_structure_and_format"
    ],
    "content": "# Take-Home / Work Sample Evaluation\n\nAsynchronous technical assignment or project artifact reviewed by engineering peers against quality benchmarks.\n\n### Pass Condition\nThe submitted code meets the architecture, functionality, test coverage and documentation requirements.",
    "aliases": [
      "B-006"
    ],
    "id": "bar.take_home_work_sample_evaluation",
    "type": "barrier",
    "stage": "technical",
    "order": 8,
    "precedes": [
      "bar.hiring_manager_in_depth_review"
    ],
    "description": "Asynchronous technical assignment or project artifact reviewed by engineering peers against quality benchmarks.",
    "pass_condition": "The submitted code meets the architecture, functionality, test coverage and documentation requirements.",
    "evidence_level": "proven",
    "specimens": [
      {
        "kind": "note",
        "label": "Review record",
        "lines": [
          {
            "text": "Submission received: 41 files, 78 tests, README with design rationale.",
            "tell": false
          },
          {
            "text": "Reviewer 1: 9 minutes. Reviewer 2: 4 minutes.",
            "tell": true
          },
          {
            "text": "Scored on: architecture, test coverage, documentation, commit hygiene.",
            "tell": false
          },
          {
            "text": "Outcome: advance.",
            "tell": false
          }
        ],
        "reading": "This gate compares hours of work against minutes of review. It can pass or fail on what a reader happened to open."
      }
    ],
    "perspectives": [
      {
        "actor": "actor.hiring_manager",
        "sees": "A repository and a scoring form, opened between the team's own delivery work. The hours the submission took are not a field on the form.",
        "reads": "A score against the rubric reads as the work this candidate would produce on the team.",
        "does": "Advances or declines on the returned scores. A second read is scheduled where the two reviewers disagree, and not otherwise."
      },
      {
        "actor": "actor.candidate",
        "sees": "A brief, a deadline, and a scope the candidate sets inside it. After submission, a verdict with no reference to any particular file.",
        "reads": "The hours spent read as the unit this gate measures, and a decline reads as a judgement on the code.",
        "does": "Builds to the upper bound of the brief, because the brief states a scope and not a review depth. What is left afterwards is the dates and the wording of the verdict."
      },
      {
        "actor": "actor.recruiter",
        "sees": "The date the assignment went out, the date it came back, and a line of recommendation. The submission itself is not in the fields the recruiter works from.",
        "reads": "The gate reads as an interval in the pipeline: days between dispatch and a decision that can be acted on.",
        "does": "Follows up with the reviewers as the interval grows, and writes the outcome from the recommendation, since the notes behind it do not reach the recruiter."
      }
    ]
  }
}