With or Without You: A Comparison of Single and Multi-Player Game-Related Assessments

This study compares two game-related assessments (GRAs) used in a real-world, EU co-financed international internship recruitment process in the food and agriculture sector. The first, ClusterMind, is an individual, automated browser-based video game; the second, The Collectors, is a collaborative group task delivered via Zoom, facilitated by a game master and observed by human assessors. The research examines candidate reactions to both tools and compares the operational efficiency of the gamified process against a traditional assessment centre used in earlier years. Data came from 434 candidates across the three years of gamified recruitment, with 126, 112, and 212 survey responses collected in 2022, 2023, and 2024, supplemented by open-ended feedback.

Candidates rated The Collectors significantly higher than ClusterMind (M = 8.91 versus 7.52 on a 1-10 scale; p < .001), although they also judged it slightly more difficult (M = 6.79 versus 6.45). Qualitative responses indicated that candidates valued teamwork, meeting peers, individual feedback, and the sense that the social setting made the evaluation feel less pressured and more enjoyable. Some respondents, however, questioned the validity of the games or worried that they favoured experienced gamers or extraverted candidates.

On operational measures, the shift to GRAs reduced the number of assessors from 90 in the prior traditional format to 32 in the first gamified year and 27 in each subsequent year, while the candidate pool grew to 319 in 2024 and candidate time commitment was shortened. The author concludes that blended formats combining automation with human interaction may best balance scalability with candidate experience. Limitations include the non-equivalence of the two games' competencies, a homogeneous young candidate sample, limited data on the prior traditional centre, and the absence of personality or predictive validity measures.