I’m actually glad to see someone making thoughtful considerations in their hiring process. I’d only point out that it’s not just the candidate’s personal & professional security you’re looking out for with the time & resources consideration. It’s YOURS. So often it is the under-qualified candidates that may put forth the best test reel if given enough time and resources. Why? As you said, the best candidates are likely currently employed and without the time to dedicate. Many high-level sound designers don’t have home studios and libraries at home, not out of willful laziness but because they’ve always been working and never needed to acquire such tools. The ever-decreasing costs of tools and libraries means that greener sound designers without job experience can more readily purchase them. Combine that with the time available if unemployed… and you have a situation where the under-qualified produce a better result. By effectively limiting the time and resources of the test you’re leveling the playing field for all concerned helping yourself find a better candidate.

I’d personally be in favor of eliminating tests altogether, especially for senior level positions, but it would require studios to commit to hiring before the headcount is needed, knowing that some on-the-job training is necessary to support new-hires in learning tools such as Wwise or FMOD (if they only know one) or Nuendo if they’re a Pro Tools fiend, etc.

Of course, that would require studios to be willing to commit more to their sound departments and be accountable for the growth of their employees. And this IS the games industry. So…. yeah. There’s that.

-andy
(Nice props!)