How we adapted the Design Sprint for design interviews

Why Shorten the Design Sprint Process?

At Phaidra, working effectively together in an all-remote environment is extremely important. Collaboration and open communication are important attributes that define our culture. Creating a shortened version of the Design Sprint process seemed like a better solution than the traditional whiteboard / take-home assignments because every candidate is given the same amount of time, everyone begins with the same amount of information, and everyone learns together. We felt this gave everyone the most accurate representation of collaboration and open communication.

Snag the Figma template here 👈🏻👈🏻

Cutting It Down

How?

We evaluated the main sprint topics and narrowed down the concepts that we felt were most important to keep and what we felt we could skip.

A lot of the information is the same, we just narrowed the overall focus to fit within our timeframe.

Details
TLDR (Too long didn’t read): Use a prompt generator so no one has the advantage, keep track of time closely, and only have the candidate vote on what to move forward with and why.

• Time each section to determine how long the entire mini sprint should take. 2 hours was the shortest we could get it without rushing/losing quality.
• The hiring manager should facilitate and make sure to have someone on the call monitoring time and enforcing it. If you don’t enforce the time, it only hurts the candidate in the end.
• Use an online generator for the design prompt. This gives everyone on the call an equal playing field where you can truly collaborate together, because no one knows the answers beforehand. This was super important to us, because we wanted to get away from the whiteboard-type experience where the candidate feels like they’re being judged.

Designercize allows you to adjust the length of time and the difficulty level of the prompt — which allows us to customize according to the candidate’s experience and skill level.

• Have 3 people in the interview. More than 3 is overwhelming and makes it harder to stay within the timeframe. Less than 3 isn’t an accurate representation of our cross-collaboration scenarios.
• During regular sprints, everyone votes on goals, risks, etc. For mini sprints, only the candidate votes. This is primarily a time issue, but their perspective, thoughts, opinions, and design thinking are what we’re looking to learn about most. The candidate should explain what prompt they want to move forward with and why.

Learnings and Optimizations

TLDR: Give the candidate options in the prompt generator, write on paper first, create a simple user flow list, write down the return time when it’s time for the candidate to build their wireframes, provide a low-fi UI kit.

• When using the online prompt generator, give the candidate 3 options to choose from. Some prompts are vague and can set the candidate up for failure.

• To prevent cheating, write responses on paper before transferring them to the shared doc. When discussing, have the candidate go first so they’re not influenced by the rest of the team’s answers.

• We found that the journey map was confusing for candidates and took too much time to explain. Instead, we created a separate customer section and transformed the journey map into a simple user flow list.

Have the candidate choose which part of this flow to sketch (shown in bold), so everyone draws the same thing (max of 2). This will provide the candidate with more components that they can choose from when they start building.

• During the build/wireframe section, everyone but the facilitator/hiring manager can choose to leave the call as this is the candidates time to design. By having someone stay on the call, it allows them to ask questions immediately, if needed, since their time is limited. Just make sure to write down the return time in the Figma file.

Write down the timezone if you’re a fully remote, global company like us.

• Have an example drawing so the candidate can reference it before completing their sketch.

Have an example drawing so the candidate can reference it before completing their sketch.

• We provided a low-fi UI kit for candidates to grab and go. They weren’t obligated to use it, but it allowed them to focus on the main tasks. It also gave them an expectation of visual and UI quality.

We used Fisamiq, a free Balsamiq-like low-fi tool in Figma created by Chang Jiang.

• For cross-functional teammates joining the interview process, we had a group of 3 people that we cycled through to give each person a break. No breaks for Design.
• Have a reflection at the end to get feedback on the mini sprint, the candidate’s experience, and general wrap-up items.

So, how did it go?

From the Candidate’s POV

Our newest product designer, Gabby, was put through the mini sprint process and says she enjoyed multiple aspects of it. Her thoughts:

• Options. “Selecting a design prompt from a list of 3 allowed me to pick a prompt I felt the most comfortable designing, and it also allowed me to demonstrate skills that I felt most comfortable designing for.”
• Immediate feedback. “Typical take-home assignments could take hours or even days to get a question answered by the team. In the mini sprint, I could get feedback and clarification on any questions that came to light immediately.”
• Super collaborative. “I was less nervous knowing the team was going to sketch alongside me. It really felt like a true working experience and gave me a great idea of what I could expect if I joined. Also, just knowing that the team was putting in the same time and effort as I was in this portion of the interview made it feel less like I was being judged and reviewed. Overall, they were able to see my skills, design thinking, and problem-solving in a more comfortable setting.”

Sketches during Gabby’s interview.

• Good preparation. “I was given the mini sprint Figma file ahead of my interview. This allowed me to review and get a good baseline on expectations. It helped ease my stress levels, and I went into the interview more comfortable than I had ever felt.”

“Overall, the mini sprint helped demonstrate the designer I am and the designer I could be within the company. It was the most comfortable design challenge, and the entire interview process was transparent and straightforward. I never felt unsettled about what to expect, and I knew what and how to prepare.”

From the Design Team’s POV

It was a much better process than the whiteboard challenges. The best candidates didn’t even feel like interviews at all. They felt like regular working sessions with a colleague.

We even cut the portfolio review section. We’re getting much more valuable information in the mini sprint than we ever could in a traditional portfolio review, why subject the candidate to an even longer interview process than necessary?

In the end, the mini sprint process was exhausting, but we felt 100% more confident in the overall process and knew Gabby was the best candidate for the role.

Snag the Figma template here 👈🏻👈🏻

If you or your team uses this strategy, please let us know how it went!