Stop Guessing Soft Skills: 5 Data-Driven Platforms That Complement HackerRank for Behavioural Hiring

Your technical screening works. Candidates pass the coding test, demonstrate solid algorithmic thinking, and join your team. Six months later, they leave because they struggle with feedback, cannot collaborate, or clash with team culture. You recruit, onboard, and replace someone who passed every technical hurdle but failed at the human side of the job.

This pattern costs UK enterprises an estimated £30,000 per departure when accounting for recruitment, lost productivity, and team disruption. The problem is not your technical assessment. The problem is the 50% of the candidate profile you never measured.

The technical trap: Why coding tests miss 50% of the candidate profile

HackerRank, Codility, and similar platforms set the standard for technical screening. They measure what candidates can do with code. They cannot measure what candidates will do when facing ambiguity, conflict, or a demanding stakeholder.

Leadership IQ tracked 20,000 new hires and found that 46% failed within 18 months. Of those failures, 89% resulted from attitudinal reasons. Only 11% stemmed from technical skill gaps.

The primary causes included:

• Lack of coachability (26%): Unable to accept and implement feedback
• Low emotional intelligence (23%): Struggled with interpersonal dynamics
• Lack of motivation (17%): Did not engage with the role or team
• Wrong temperament (15%): Poor fit for the job and company culture

In 82% of cases, hiring managers admitted they had overlooked subtle clues of these attitudinal issues during interviews. Technical tests cannot surface these red flags because they measure ability, not behaviour.

For TA leaders running graduate programmes or volume hiring, these statistics translate directly to budget scrutiny. When 40% of your hires leave within the first year, your CFO questions your recruitment technology spend because you cannot demonstrate whether the issue is assessment, onboarding, or management.

Schmidt and Hunter's meta-analysis confirms the predictive validity of different selection methods:

The implication is clear: you predict job success better with scientifically validated behavioural assessments than with gut-feel conversations about a candidate's CV.

Evaluation criteria: What to look for in behavioural assessment platforms

Before comparing vendors, establish your evaluation framework. The right platform depends on your hiring volume, compliance requirements, and operational constraints.

1\. Scientific validity

Look for assessments with documented predictive validity, typically expressed as a correlation coefficient (r-value) between assessment scores and job performance. Well-validated assessments typically show correlations of r=0.30 to r=0.50 with job performance. While no assessment predicts perfectly, validated tools significantly outperform unstructured methods.

2\. Legal defensibility

UK employers must ensure selection processes comply with the Equality Act 2010. EU employers must adhere to the Employment Equality Directive (2000/78/EC). Both regions require GDPR compliance. Defensibility requires:

• Validation studies linking assessments to job performance
• Adverse impact monitoring to identify potential disparate impact
• ISO 27001 certification (recommended best practice for data security)
• Clear data processing agreements

3\. Unified experience

Fragmented tools create administrative chaos. If your team manages separate platforms for psychometric tests, video interviews, and assessment centre scheduling, you lose strategic capacity to manual coordination. A unified platform consolidates this into one workflow.

4\. ATS integration depth

Native connectors for Workday, Greenhouse, and SAP SuccessFactors eliminate manual data entry. When a candidate completes an assessment, you want scores to auto-push to your ATS and trigger the next workflow step. Ask vendors for specific integration documentation, not vague claims of "seamless connectivity."

5\. Candidate experience

You damage your employer brand when candidates face poor assessment experiences. Look for mobile-responsive design, preparation resources, and transparent feedback. Platforms with WCAG 2.2 accessibility compliance ensure fair evaluation for all candidates.

Apply these five criteria as you evaluate the following platforms, each designed to address different organisational contexts and hiring volumes.

5 HackerRank alternatives for behavioural assessment

The following five platforms address the soft skills gap that HackerRank leaves open. We selected these based on enterprise adoption in UK/EU markets, scientific validation documentation, and ATS integration capabilities. Each has distinct strengths depending on your hiring volume, technical requirements, and implementation timeline.

1. Sova Assessment: The unified platform for enterprise volume

Best for: UK/EU enterprises hiring 200-5,000+ annually who need assessments, video interviews, and virtual assessment centres in one system.

Fragmented tools force your TA team to juggle separate logins for psychometric tests, video interviews, and assessment centre scheduling. This creates three problems: manual data entry consumes team time, candidates drop off when asked to complete assessments on multiple platforms, and you lose visibility into which stage causes quality issues.

Sova solves this by combining personality questionnaires, situational judgement tests, cognitive ability assessments, video interviews, and virtual assessment centres on a single platform.

Key capabilities:

• 38 Soft Skills Library: Pre-built assessments measuring collaboration, resilience, learning agility, and other competencies critical for technical roles
• Validated assessments: Sova reports moderate to very strong criterion validity correlations, with Personality Questionnaire showing r=0.41 correlation with task performance
• Integrity Guard: AI-powered monitoring that flags unusual candidate behaviour (browser switching, device changes, response pattern anomalies) without invasive proctoring
• Candidate Preparation Hub: Practice tests and guidance that reduce anxiety and improve completion rates
• 90% admin reduction: Automated workflows reduce assessment administration from manual tracking to streamlined ATS integration

Evidence of impact:

Sky achieved a 69% boost in assessment completion rates after consolidating from fragmented tools. Their senior assessment manager reported "higher-quality hires, improved retention, stronger engagement scores, and increased confidence from our hiring managers." The partnership earned a Brandon Hall Gold Award for Best Talent Acquisition Process.

Vodafone consolidated from 60 assessments across four platforms to Sova's unified system, reducing both technology cost and administrative burden.

"The system is very agile and one can use it for multiple assessment approaches. Platform easy to navigate and customer support are very responsive and knowledgeable." - Verified user review of Sova

Consider: Pre-built assessments deploy in hours to two weeks, with more complex tailored solutions taking 6-12 weeks. This is not instant self-service, but the investment pays off in reduced administrative burden.

2. Talogy: The psychology-first publisher approach

Best for: Organisations requiring deep psychometric expertise and complex competency framework customisation.

Talogy (formerly PSI and Cubiks) offers one of the industry's most comprehensive assessment catalogues, built on decades of psychological research. Their tools measure personality, cognitive abilities, and specific competencies with rigorous scientific backing.

Key capabilities:

• Extensive psychometric library: Validated instruments including the PAPI personality assessment, Caliper Profile, and cognitive ability tests
• Deep customisation: Complex competency framework mapping with psychology PhDs available for consultation
• Virtual assessment centres: Comprehensive VirtualAC platform with interactive simulations, video messages, and real-time exercises
• ATS integrations: Connections to Workday, Oracle Taleo, iCIMS, and other major platforms
• Video interviewing: Asynchronous capabilities through integrated solutions

Evidence of impact:

A Talogy case study documented a client reducing turnover from 50% to 16% after implementing their assessment solutions. This dramatic improvement demonstrates the potential of rigorous behavioural screening.

The limitation: Talogy's delivery model involves multiple specialised products rather than a single unified platform. Contact them directly for pricing, as models vary based on organisational requirements.

3. HiPeople: Combining reference insights with direct assessments

Best for: Organisations wanting both automated reference checking and direct candidate assessments in one platform.

HiPeople provides automated reference checking alongside a library of direct assessments including personality tests, situational judgement tests, and cognitive evaluations. This dual approach surfaces both historical performance data and predictive behavioural insights.

Key capabilities:

• Automated reference collection: Structured questionnaires gathering 360-degree feedback from multiple sources
• Assessment library: Over 400 tests including DISC personality, cognitive ability, and soft skills assessments
• Situational judgement tests: Scenario-based evaluations measuring practical decision-making
• Video interviews: Asynchronous video capabilities for screening and initial evaluation
• ATS integrations: Native Greenhouse integration plus connections to other major platforms

Evidence of impact:

HiPeople claims their platform can improve first-year retention by 45% by surfacing candidates with the right behavioural fit through comprehensive reference and assessment data.

What to know: HiPeople's primary strength is combining reference validation with direct assessments. The platform focuses on asynchronous video interviews rather than live interview capabilities.

4. Test Partnership: The accessible mid-market option

Best for: Organisations seeking user-friendly testing with straightforward implementation.

Test Partnership offers cognitive ability, personality, and situational judgement tests with a focus on usability and candidate experience. Their platform targets organisations that need solid assessment capabilities without complex implementation requirements.

Key capabilities:

• Assessment range: Cognitive, personality, and situational judgement tests with gamified options
• User-friendly design: Mobile-responsive assessments with 93% candidate satisfaction
• ATS integrations: Pre-built connectors for Workday, Greenhouse, and other platforms
• RESTful API: Custom integration capabilities for bespoke workflows
• Video interviewing: One-way and live video interview functionality

The constraint: Test Partnership may lack the enterprise-grade configurability, extensive validation documentation, and global compliance infrastructure that organisations with complex, multinational hiring programmes require.

5. SHL: The traditional enterprise incumbent

Best for: Large enterprises requiring a globally recognised assessment brand with extensive validation history.

SHL is the established leader in talent assessment, with a comprehensive portfolio built over decades. They serve multinational corporations with complex, global hiring programmes and bring significant scientific credibility.

Key capabilities:

• Massive assessment library: Validated assessments across cognitive, personality, and skills domains, used in 150 countries and 40+ languages
• Global infrastructure: Localised assessments with extensive normative data
• Virtual assessment centres: Comprehensive virtual AC capabilities including group exercises and simulations
• ATS integrations: Connections to 80+ platforms including Workday and Greenhouse
• Extensive validation: Decades of validation studies and published research

The consideration: Implementation can be complex and the platform may feel less agile than modern alternatives. Enterprise-scale typically means enterprise-complexity in terms of setup and configuration time.

Comparison framework: Matching the tool to your hiring volume

For Early Careers programmes: If you run graduate or apprenticeship schemes assessing 200-1,000+ candidates for limited positions, prioritise platforms with virtual assessment centre capabilities. These replace expensive in-person assessment days with validated online exercises.

"We love how all the functionality we need is gathered into one admin platform. We can do everything from creating competency profiles, build user friendly candidate areas as well as see results and download reports." - Verified user review of Sova

For Volume Hiring: Contact centre, retail, and logistics roles require rapid candidate processing without sacrificing quality. The Aberdeen Group found that companies using pre-employment assessments experience 39% lower turnover. Platforms with automated scoring and ATS integration free your team from manual administration.

"Quick easy access to candidate scoring, video assessments and past participation data. Customer support when used has generally been very quick and effective in their response." - Verified user review of Sova

Building a defensible process: Beyond the software

Selecting the right platform is necessary but not sufficient. Legal defensibility requires ongoing process discipline.

Adverse impact monitoring

You should monitor whether your selection process disproportionately screens out candidates from protected groups. For high-volume hiring programmes, this analysis provides evidence if Legal or a tribunal asks, "Can you prove this process is fair?"

Sova provides adverse impact analysis capabilities for high-volume clients. Ensure your chosen vendor offers equivalent functionality or budget for third-party analysis.

Validation evidence

When challenged, you need documentation linking assessment scores to job performance. This means validation studies with specific correlation coefficients (r-values), sample sizes, and job-relevance evidence. Generic claims of "proven validity" will not satisfy Legal or demonstrate ROI to your CFO.

Structured implementation

Even validated assessments fail if poorly implemented. Work with your vendor's customer success team to:

1. Map assessments to your competency framework: Align measured attributes with role requirements
2. Configure ATS integration with proper field mapping: Ensure data flows correctly between systems
3. Train hiring managers on interpreting results: Translate psychometric data into actionable insights
4. Establish feedback loops to track quality of hire: Monitor 12-month performance correlation

"The relationship Sova build with their clients is fantastic. The level of support and interaction is perfect. Sova are always available when needed and keep on top of projects and timelines." - Verified user review of Sova

Making the business case to your CFO

The case for behavioural assessment is not about replacing technical screening. It is about completing the picture. HackerRank tells you a candidate can write clean code. Behavioural assessments tell you whether they will collaborate effectively, accept feedback gracefully, and stay engaged beyond the first six months. That is the complete picture.

HiBob surveyed 2,000 European tech workers and found that 54% of those aged 20-30 are considering leaving the sector entirely. The primary reasons cited were poor relationships with managers and lack of clear career development. Technical skills did not cause these departures. Behavioural mismatches did.

For TA leaders managing significant hiring volumes, the maths is straightforward. If validated behavioural assessments reduce first-year attrition by 20-30%, the savings in replacement costs (£30,000+ per departure) far exceed the platform investment.

Research on psychometric testing indicates that companies using such assessments see measurable improvements in retention rates, with some studies showing decreases in turnover of 20-57% depending on implementation quality and role type.

The question is not whether to assess soft skills. The question is which platform delivers validated insights, integrates with your ATS, scales with your hiring volume, and provides evidence your Legal team can defend.

Ready to see how behavioural science predicts performance? Book a demo to see Sova's unified platform in action.

Explore the Sova Skills Library to understand which competencies predict success in your roles.

Frequently asked questions

What is the difference between behavioural and situational interview questions?

Behavioural questions ask candidates to describe past experiences ("Tell me about a time you resolved a conflict"), while situational questions present hypothetical scenarios ("What would you do if a colleague missed a deadline?"). Situational Judgement Tests scale this approach by presenting multiple scenarios with standardised response options for consistent scoring.

Can behavioural assessments be faked?

Validated assessments include consistency checks and response pattern analysis that detect favourable self-presentation. Sova's Integrity Guard monitors browser switching, device changes, and unusual answer patterns to flag suspicious activity.

How do I integrate soft skills assessment with HackerRank?

Most organisations run technical and behavioural assessments as separate stages, with candidates who pass HackerRank proceeding to behavioural assessment. Sova partners with Codility for technical assessment, enabling a unified candidate journey.

What predictive validity should I expect from behavioural assessments?

Well-validated assessments typically show correlations of r=0.30 to r=0.50 with job performance. This significantly outperforms unstructured interviews (r=0.38) and years of experience (r=0.18) based on Schmidt and Hunter's meta-analysis.

How long does implementation take?

Sova's pre-built assessments deploy in hours to two weeks, with tailored solutions taking 6-12 weeks. Enterprise implementations with SHL or Talogy vary based on global rollout requirements.

Key terminology

STAR Method: A structured interview framework prompting candidates to describe a Situation, Task, Action, and Result. This approach gathers evidence-based responses rather than hypothetical answers in behavioural interviews.

Situational Judgement Test (SJT): An assessment presenting realistic work scenarios with multiple response options. Candidates select the most and least effective actions, revealing their practical judgement and decision-making tendencies.

Predictive Validity: The statistical correlation between assessment scores and future job performance, expressed as a correlation coefficient (r-value) where r=1.0 would be perfect prediction.

Adverse Impact: When a selection process disproportionately screens out candidates from protected groups. UK employers must monitor and address adverse impact to comply with the Equality Act 2010.

Psychometrics: The science of measuring psychological attributes including cognitive ability, personality traits, and behavioural tendencies using standardised instruments with documented reliability and validity.

‍