About Project

<aside>

This project is bound by a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) with certain exceptions. The company name, software details, and other confidential information have been replaced with alternate names.

</aside>

This project aimed to design an anti-cheating mechanism for Intrick, a company specializing in psychometric-based assessments for employees and job candidates.

At the beginning of 2024, they received a request from their client to handle a proctored assesment with 20.000 concurrent participants, which is impossible to monitor individually. To address this, Intrick planned to automate the monitoring method.

In this project, I worked with a senior designer along with other roles in the team.

Current Condition: Manually-Proctored Self Interview

Before starting the test, participants needed to verify that their camera and microphone (optional) were functioning properly. The test would then begin recording the participant.

The screen would darken if no person was detected in the frame or if multiple people were detected. The assessor had to monitor this manually through their specialized testing system.

After completing the test, participants simply submitted their responses. The system did not provide any security options for requesting the deletion of face recordings.

Challenges

Designing B2B is more challenging than creating customer applications. There are several limitations, such as:

<aside>

• Confidential Content

  The design included confidential content that could only be accessed by participants and assessors. This meant that even the UX Designer had no direct access to the actual content.

• No Direct Meeting with User (Participant)

  Requirements were communicated solely through the Product Owner or Product Manager, with no direct channel to communicate with users.

• Limited Information about Users

  Information about users was often limited. For this project, we lacked basic demographic data like age ranges of the participants. We only knew that they were all candidates applying through mass recruitment.

• Tight Deadline

  This project had to be completed within a week before being handed off to the Developer Team.

</aside>

Preparation

We didn’t have access to know how the users were like, so we solely relied on the information provided by the product owner. The information were as follows:

• Company needed a reliable system that was able to monitor 20.000 participants simultaneously, currently it was able to handle only 15 participants manually.
• Company wanted to assessor role in monitoring participants so they could focus on grading them.
• System that could detect cheating or unusual activity during monitored test.
• Participants were candidates for client’s mass recruitment.