Essential Work Samples for Evaluating AI Quality Assurance Skills

As artificial intelligence becomes increasingly integrated into business operations, ensuring the quality and reliability of AI outputs has emerged as a critical function. AI Quality Assurance specialists serve as the guardians of AI system integrity, responsible for systematically evaluating outputs, identifying errors, detecting biases, and establishing robust testing frameworks. Unlike traditional QA roles, AI QA requires specialized knowledge of machine learning concepts, an understanding of AI failure modes, and the ability to design testing protocols for systems that may exhibit unpredictable behaviors.

The complexity of AI QA demands a multifaceted skill set that combines technical expertise with critical thinking and methodical problem-solving. Candidates must demonstrate proficiency in evaluating AI outputs against established benchmarks, documenting findings with precision, and communicating technical issues clearly to diverse stakeholders. They must also understand the ethical implications of AI systems and be vigilant about identifying potential biases or safety concerns.

Traditional interviews often fail to reveal a candidate's true capabilities in these specialized areas. While candidates may articulate theoretical knowledge of AI QA principles, their practical ability to apply these concepts in real-world scenarios remains untested in conventional interview formats. This gap between theoretical understanding and practical application can lead to hiring decisions that don't accurately reflect a candidate's potential performance.

Work samples and role-playing exercises provide a window into how candidates actually approach AI QA challenges. By simulating realistic scenarios, these activities reveal not just what candidates know, but how they apply that knowledge—their methodical thinking, attention to detail, problem-solving approaches, and communication skills. The following exercises are designed to evaluate these critical competencies, helping you identify candidates who can effectively safeguard the quality and reliability of your AI systems.

Activity #1: AI Output Evaluation and Error Classification

This activity assesses a candidate's ability to systematically evaluate AI outputs, identify errors or inconsistencies, and classify them according to severity and type. Quality assurance for AI systems requires meticulous attention to detail and the ability to recognize patterns in outputs that may indicate underlying issues. This exercise tests the candidate's technical understanding of AI outputs and their methodical approach to error detection and documentation.

Directions for the Company:

• Prepare a dataset of 10-15 AI outputs (such as chatbot responses, content generations, or image descriptions) that contain various types of errors, including factual inaccuracies, logical inconsistencies, biases, hallucinations, and formatting issues.
• Create a simple classification framework with categories for error types (e.g., factual error, logical inconsistency, bias, hallucination, formatting issue) and severity levels (critical, major, minor).
• Provide the candidate with context about the AI system that supposedly generated these outputs, including its intended purpose and any relevant guidelines or constraints.
• Allow 30-45 minutes for this exercise.
• Have a subject matter expert available to evaluate the accuracy and thoroughness of the candidate's analysis.

Directions for the Candidate:

• Review the provided AI outputs and identify any errors, inconsistencies, or quality issues.
• For each issue identified, classify it according to the provided framework, noting both the type of error and its severity.
• Document your findings in a structured format, explaining your reasoning for each classification.
• Prioritize which issues should be addressed first, based on their potential impact.
• Suggest potential root causes for the patterns of errors you observe.

Feedback Mechanism:

• After the candidate completes their analysis, the interviewer should provide feedback on one aspect they handled well (e.g., thoroughness of analysis, accuracy of classifications) and one area for improvement (e.g., missed errors, misclassifications).
• Give the candidate 5-10 minutes to revisit their analysis based on this feedback, focusing specifically on the improvement area identified.
• Observe how receptive the candidate is to feedback and how effectively they incorporate it into their revised analysis.

Activity #2: QA Test Plan Development for a New AI Feature

This activity evaluates a candidate's ability to design comprehensive testing strategies for AI systems. Developing effective test plans requires understanding both the technical aspects of AI and the business context in which it operates. This exercise assesses the candidate's strategic thinking, foresight in anticipating potential issues, and ability to create structured approaches to quality assurance.

Directions for the Company:

• Create a brief description of a new AI feature your company is planning to implement (e.g., a sentiment analysis tool for customer reviews, a content moderation system, or a recommendation engine).
• Include information about the feature's purpose, target users, key functionalities, and any specific requirements or constraints.
• Provide any relevant technical details about the AI models or approaches being used.
• Allow 45-60 minutes for this exercise.
• Prepare evaluation criteria focusing on comprehensiveness, practicality, and alignment with business objectives.

Directions for the Candidate:

• Review the information about the new AI feature.
• Develop a comprehensive QA test plan that includes:
• Test objectives and scope
• Testing approaches (e.g., unit testing, integration testing, user acceptance testing)
• Specific test cases covering various scenarios and edge cases
• Data requirements for testing
• Evaluation metrics and success criteria
• Potential risks and mitigation strategies
• Timeline and resource estimates
• Consider both technical quality aspects (accuracy, reliability, performance) and user-centered aspects (usability, accessibility, ethical considerations).
• Present your test plan in a structured document format.

Feedback Mechanism:

• The interviewer should provide feedback on one strength of the test plan (e.g., thoroughness of test cases, practical implementation approach) and one area that could be enhanced (e.g., missing test scenarios, inadequate consideration of edge cases).
• Give the candidate 10-15 minutes to revise or expand their test plan based on this feedback.
• Assess the candidate's ability to quickly incorporate feedback and improve their work product, as well as their receptiveness to constructive criticism.

Activity #3: Bias Detection Role Play

This role play assesses a candidate's ability to identify and address bias in AI systems—a critical skill for ensuring fair and ethical AI implementations. The exercise tests not only technical understanding of bias manifestations but also communication skills in explaining complex issues to stakeholders with varying levels of technical expertise.

Directions for the Company:

• Prepare a scenario involving an AI system that exhibits bias in its outputs (e.g., a resume screening tool that shows gender bias, a loan approval system with racial disparities, or a content recommendation engine that reinforces stereotypes).
• Create sample outputs or metrics that demonstrate the bias, along with relevant background information about the system.
• Assign a team member to play the role of a product manager who is initially skeptical about the bias claims.
• Allow 15 minutes for preparation and 20 minutes for the role play.
• The role player should challenge the candidate's assertions but be open to well-reasoned arguments.

Directions for the Candidate:

• Review the provided information about the AI system and its outputs.
• Identify potential biases in the system based on the data provided.
• Prepare to explain your findings to a product manager (played by an interviewer).
• During the role play:
• Clearly articulate the biases you've identified and the evidence supporting your conclusions
• Explain the potential impact of these biases on users and the business
• Propose methods for further investigating and quantifying the bias
• Recommend approaches for mitigating the identified biases
• Be prepared to answer questions and address potential pushback

Feedback Mechanism:

• After the role play, the interviewer should provide feedback on one aspect the candidate handled well (e.g., clarity of explanation, strength of evidence) and one area for improvement (e.g., technical accuracy, persuasiveness).
• Give the candidate 5-10 minutes to reflect on the feedback and re-address a specific part of their explanation or recommendation that could be improved.
• Evaluate how effectively the candidate incorporates the feedback and whether they demonstrate improved communication or reasoning in their second attempt.

Activity #4: AI Safety Incident Response Simulation

This simulation tests a candidate's ability to respond effectively to AI safety incidents—situations where an AI system produces harmful, inappropriate, or dangerous outputs. This exercise evaluates critical thinking under pressure, process-oriented problem solving, and the ability to balance immediate mitigation with long-term solutions.

Directions for the Company:

• Develop a scenario describing an AI safety incident that has just occurred (e.g., an AI chatbot providing dangerous advice, a content generation system producing offensive material, or an automated decision system making a high-impact error).
• Create supporting materials such as sample outputs, user complaints, and initial internal reports about the incident.
• Prepare a list of stakeholders the candidate might need to consider (e.g., users, engineering team, legal department, executive leadership).
• Allow 45-60 minutes for this exercise.
• Designate an interviewer to play the role of a concerned executive requesting updates during the simulation.

Directions for the Candidate:

• Review the incident scenario and supporting materials.
• Develop and document an incident response plan that includes:
• Immediate actions to mitigate harm
• Investigation steps to understand the cause and scope of the issue
• Communication strategies for different stakeholders
• Longer-term remediation approaches
• Preventive measures to avoid similar incidents in the future
• Prioritize actions based on urgency and impact.
• Be prepared to explain your reasoning and respond to questions from a concerned executive (played by an interviewer).
• Consider both technical and ethical dimensions of the incident.

Feedback Mechanism:

• The interviewer should provide feedback on one strength of the candidate's response plan (e.g., thoroughness, prioritization logic) and one area that could be improved (e.g., overlooked stakeholders, technical feasibility of solutions).
• Give the candidate 10-15 minutes to revise their response plan based on this feedback.
• Evaluate the candidate's ability to quickly adapt their approach while maintaining a structured and comprehensive response to the incident.

Frequently Asked Questions

How much technical AI knowledge should candidates have for these exercises?

While candidates should have a basic understanding of AI concepts, these exercises focus more on quality assurance processes and critical thinking than deep technical expertise. The ideal candidate will understand AI systems well enough to identify potential issues but doesn't necessarily need to be able to build the models themselves. Adjust the technical depth based on the specific requirements of your role.

Should we use real data from our AI systems for these exercises?

It's best to create synthetic examples that mimic real issues you've encountered but don't contain sensitive or proprietary information. This approach protects your company's data while still providing realistic scenarios. If you do use modified versions of real data, ensure all personally identifiable information has been removed.

How should we evaluate candidates who approach problems differently than we expected?

Different approaches can often lead to valuable insights. Evaluate candidates on the soundness of their reasoning, the thoroughness of their analysis, and the practicality of their solutions—not on whether they followed a predetermined path. The most valuable QA professionals often bring fresh perspectives to problem-solving.

Can these exercises be adapted for remote interviews?

Yes, all of these exercises can be conducted remotely. For the role play and simulation activities, use video conferencing tools. For the evaluation and test plan exercises, provide materials digitally and use screen sharing for discussions. Consider extending time limits slightly to account for potential technical challenges.

How much weight should we give to these exercises compared to traditional interview questions?

These work samples should carry significant weight in your evaluation process as they demonstrate practical skills rather than theoretical knowledge. However, they should be balanced with behavioral interviews to assess cultural fit and traditional technical questions to verify foundational knowledge. A balanced approach might weight work samples at 40-50% of the overall evaluation.

Should we expect candidates to have experience with all the specific AI issues in these exercises?

No, candidates may not have encountered the exact scenarios you present. What's important is their approach to analyzing new problems, their application of QA principles, and their ability to learn and adapt. Look for transferable skills and sound methodology rather than specific experience with identical issues.

The quality of your AI systems directly impacts user trust, business outcomes, and potential risks. By incorporating these work samples into your hiring process, you'll be better equipped to identify candidates who can effectively safeguard your AI implementations through rigorous quality assurance processes. These exercises reveal not just technical competence but also critical thinking, communication skills, and ethical awareness—all essential qualities for excellence in AI quality assurance.

For more resources to enhance your hiring process, explore Yardstick's suite of AI-powered tools, including our AI Job Descriptions generator, AI Interview Question Generator, and AI Interview Guide Generator.

Ready to build a complete interview guide for AI Quality Assurance roles? Sign up for a free Yardstick account today!