Take-homes are the fairer interview format. Running them well is the hard part.
Most AI hiring tools try to replace the reviewer. We don't. Graden runs the whole take-home loop (send, track, collect, review, calibrate) and uses AI where it actually helps: in the preparation a good reviewer wishes they had time for.
Take-home assessments beat live pressure tests. Candidates work in their own environment, on realistic briefs, at their own pace. No whiteboard panic. No gotcha questions. Just a chance to see how someone actually works, whether that's a campaign brief, a strategy deck, a design exercise, an analytical write-up, or shipped code (at their own pace).
The trouble isn't the brief. It's everything around it. Sending the challenge is a copy-paste job across inboxes. Tracking who's working and who's ghosted sits in someone's head. Collecting the deliverable gets messy (Drive links, attachments, repos). And the review, the part that actually matters, gets squeezed into the last ten minutes before the interview.
Graden runs the full assessment loop in one place. You send the brief with a tokenised link, the candidate submits their work (inline writing, a file, a link, a GitHub repo), and we lock the deliverable at submission so the reviewer is always looking at what was sent. Then Claude reads it against your grading guide, scores each criterion, and drafts talking points linked back to each grading criterion.
Scores are inputs to judgement, not verdicts. The human stays in the loop. The AI just stops the review from being the weakest link in the process.
Scores are inputs to judgement, not verdicts. The reviewer reads the work. Claude drafts talking points tied to each grading criterion. The human agrees, overrules, and makes the call. We never surface a verdict to the reviewer or the candidate.
Hiring isn't continuous. You shouldn't pay for reviewers who aren't reviewing. Bring your whole team in on every paid plan, and pay for the reviews you actually run.
One system for writing, strategy, design and code. Same submission flow, same grading guide structure, same calibrated review. Stop paying for a coding-test tool, a shared doc for the marketer, and a Figma link for the designer.
Any hiring team that's chosen the take-home format and wants the whole loop to run without friction (calibrated, fast, and consistent). Marketing. Content. Design. Ops. Analytics. Consulting. Engineering. Anywhere a candidate produces work that deserves a scored, criterion-by-criterion read and a prepared conversation.