Independent audit for AI assessment products.
The Hiring Science Studio reviews AI hiring tools against the same framework we give to enterprise employers. We advise CHROs and procurement teams on evaluating vendors — so our findings carry weight with the buyers you are trying to reach. Every engagement is delivered by Kate Young and Ben Hawkes, who together have over 25 years of experience building, buying, and implementing assessments for large employers.
Book a scoping callWhat we offer vendors
The Hiring Science Studio works with HR tech vendors who want an independent review of what their tools measure and whether those claims stand up to scrutiny.
We sit on both sides of the market. We advise enterprise employers on evaluating and auditing AI hiring tools. We use the same framework — the same questions, the same criteria — when we review vendor products. That means our findings carry weight with the buyers you are trying to reach.
We offer two levels of engagement, depending on where your product is in its development.
Pre-audit vs full audit — which is right for your product?
| Pre-Audit | Full Audit | |
|---|---|---|
| Product stage | In development or pre-revenue | Live, with active customers |
| What we evaluate | Design, methodology, validation plan | Full Vendor Evaluation Framework |
| Output | Written report with prioritised gaps and recommendations | Written report with specific findings and severity ratings |
| Typical timeline | 2 to 4 weeks | 4 to 6 weeks |
| Best for | Vendors preparing for first enterprise sale; established vendors adding AI to existing products | Vendors losing deals to procurement scrutiny; vendors wanting independent evidence for enterprise buyers |
| Progression | Most pre-audit clients go on to commission a full audit after addressing gaps | Can be repeated when the product changes significantly or enters new markets |
Pre-Audit — Course Correction
Early-stage review for vendors preparing a new AI assessment product for market, or adding AI capability to an existing product.
Most vendors underestimate what proper validation requires. The time to find out is before your first enterprise prospect asks a question you cannot answer. A pre-audit identifies the gaps while there is still time to address them.
Who this is for
Founders, CEOs, and Heads of Product at assessment vendors with a product in development or pre-revenue. Also relevant for established vendors adding AI scoring or inference to an existing assessment — the validation burden is different, and most teams do not realise how different until it is too late.
What we examine
- What your product claims to measure, and whether the design supports those claims
- Your validation methodology — what you have tested, what you have not, and what you would need to test before an enterprise buyer would be satisfied
- The questions your future customers will ask, mapped against what you are currently able to demonstrate
- Demographic testing: what data exists, what is missing, and what adverse impact monitoring would require
- The documentation you would need to produce if your product were subjected to independent scrutiny
- Where your product sits relative to current regulatory expectations (EU AI Act, NYC Local Law 144, evolving EEOC guidance)
What you receive
A written pre-audit report covering each area above. The report identifies gaps, prioritises them by severity, and sets out what would need to change before the product is ready for a full audit or for enterprise procurement scrutiny.
We also provide a verbal debrief with your product and leadership team.
Full Audit — Vendor Evaluation Framework
An independent review of your product against the full Vendor Evaluation Framework — the same framework we use when advising enterprise employers on which tools to buy.
This is not a certification. We do not issue badges or approvals. What we produce is a structured, evidence-based audit report that sets out what we found, what is missing, and how significant each finding is. Vendors use this report as a credibility asset with enterprise prospects — and as a roadmap for product improvement.
Who this is for
Assessment vendors with a live AI-powered product who want independent validation they can share with enterprise buyers. Particularly relevant for vendors who keep losing deals because procurement teams cannot evaluate their claims, or who want to differentiate in a market where every competitor says they are "validated" and "bias-free."
What we examine
- Training population: who built the model, how many, what demographics
- Validation evidence: what exists, what is independent, what is peer-reviewed, what is missing
- Construct validity: does the tool measure what it claims, for the populations and roles it is used for
- Adverse impact: what monitoring is in place, what thresholds trigger action, what happens when it fires
- Score defensibility: can you explain why candidate A was ranked above candidate B — not the algorithm, the reasoning
- Documentation: what would be available if the product or a hiring decision based on it were challenged
- Regulatory posture: how the product sits against current and emerging regulation in your target markets
What you receive
A written audit report with specific findings at each point of the framework. Findings are precise, not general. Where we identify problems, we describe them and indicate their severity. Where we identify gaps, we say what is missing.
The report is yours to use as you see fit. Many vendors include it in enterprise sales conversations, RFP responses, and procurement documentation.
We also provide a verbal debrief and are available for follow-up questions from your team.
Why work with us
We advise the buyers you are trying to reach.
We work with enterprise employers — CHROs, TA leaders, procurement teams, and in-house counsel — on evaluating and auditing AI hiring tools. We know what they ask, what they look for, and what makes them walk away. A review from us carries weight because it uses the same framework your customers are being trained to use.
Most enterprise procurement processes focus on price, support, and contracts. They rarely check whether an AI hiring tool measures what it says it does, whether it works for the organisation's specific population, or who is responsible once it goes live. We close that gap.
We have built and bought these products ourselves.
Between us, Kate Young and Ben Hawkes have over 25 years of experience building, buying, and implementing assessments for the world's largest employers. Over 10 million candidates have been assessed through systems we have been involved with. Kate has designed and evaluated hiring processes for FTSE 100 companies and UK government departments since 2004. Ben founded TAPnet, a network of over 80 senior Fortune 500 talent and AI leaders.
We understand how these products are built because we have done it — not as advisers watching from the outside, but as practitioners who have made the same decisions vendors face every day.
We are independent.
We do not sell assessment products. We do not take referral fees from vendors. We do not advise buyers on any vendor with whom we have a current paid relationship, or a paid relationship that ended within the previous 12 months. We disclose all vendor relationships at the start of every buyer engagement.
This independence is not a marketing position. It is the foundation of why our audits mean something — to buyers, and to the vendors who commission them.
Questions vendors ask
Every project is delivered by Kate Young and Ben Hawkes.
If you are building an AI assessment product and want an independent view of where it stands, email us to book a scoping call. It is a short conversation to see if there is a problem worth solving, what it would take, and if we are the right fit.
Book a scoping call