ThriveMap Accessibility Statement

Our position on accessibility in pre-hire assessment

ThriveMap provides realistic, role-based pre-hire assessments for high-volume frontline hiring. We believe a fair assessment and an accessible one are the same thing: every candidate should have a genuine opportunity to show they can do the job. This statement explains how we balance accessibility with the fairness and comparability that make an assessment worth running at all.

Why comparability matters

For high-volume, frontline roles, an assessment must be objective, consistent, and comparable. Recruiters use ThriveMap to understand how candidates perform relative to one another within a cohort, so hiring decisions rest on evidence rather than impression.

Comparability depends on all candidates facing the same questions and challenges. When candidates are assessed on a common basis, their scores carry real meaning: a recruiter can see who performed more strongly and who performed less strongly, and why. Anything that changes the substance of what is being measured, rather than how a candidate accesses it, undermines that comparability and makes scores impossible to read fairly.

Assessments reflect the real role

Our questions relate directly to the role being hired for and, wherever possible, mimic the actual tasks the role involves. A realistic assessment is fairer because it measures genuine job readiness, and it gives candidates a true preview of the work.

This principle shapes our approach to accessibility. The right question is not “can the candidate complete an abstract test?” but “can the candidate do the job, using the tools they would use on the job?”

Assistive technology candidates would use in the role

Candidates with additional needs, including dyslexia and visual impairment, are entitled to use the same assistive tools they would use while performing the role itself. This includes screen readers, keyboard navigation, and similar technologies.

Allowing these tools does not compromise comparability. It reflects reality. If a candidate would use a screen reader to do the job, then using a screen reader to complete a role-realistic assessment is a fair and accurate measure of how they would perform. Our assessments are designed and tested to work with these technologies, so that candidates who rely on them are assessed accurately rather than penalised by a tool that fails.

When the standard assessment is not the right path

For some candidates, an additional need cannot be accommodated by assistive technology within the assessment itself. In these cases, it would not be fair to the candidate or the cohort to ask them to complete the standard assessment, as their results could not be meaningfully compared with others’.

These candidates should not be turned away. Instead, the candidate should be able to raise this with the recruiter, who can arrange an alternative assessment path that gives them a proper opportunity to demonstrate their suitability for the role. The decision about an alternative path rests with the recruiter, not with ThriveMap; we provide the mechanism for candidates to identify their needs and for recruiters to act on them.

Telling the recruiter what you need

Some candidates use assistive technology or have a disability that warrants additional consideration, without being prevented from taking the assessment. These candidates must have a clear way to communicate their needs to the recruiter.

ThriveMap provides a method for candidates to declare any additional needs and provide relevant details before the assessment begins. This ensures the recruiter has the context to interpret results fairly and to make any reasonable adjustments the situation requires.

Standards and compliance

WCAG 2.2. We design and test ThriveMap assessments against the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2 at Level AA, the recognised international standard for digital accessibility. Because our assessments deliberately replicate real job tasks, some content is inherently visual, manual, or time-sensitive by design. Where a particular accommodation would fundamentally change what the assessment measures, WCAG itself recognises this through its “essential” exceptions. In these cases, rather than altering the assessment in a way that would make results incomparable, we direct candidates to the alternative assessment path described above.

Equality Act 2010. ThriveMap is designed to support employers in meeting their obligations under the Equality Act 2010, including the duty to make reasonable adjustments and the prohibition on indirect discrimination. As the assessment provider, we supply the tools and pathways, assistive technology compatibility, a pre-assessment route to declare needs, and an alternative assessment path, all of which enable recruiters to discharge that duty. Responsibility for making reasonable adjustments in any individual hiring process rests with the employer; our role is to make those adjustments practical to deliver.

Summary

Our commitment rests on a simple distinction: we keep what is measured constant for every candidate while supporting different ways to access the assessment. Candidates use the assistive tools they would use in the role; those who cannot be fairly assessed by the standard route are offered an alternative; and every candidate has a route to tell the recruiter what they need. That is how we keep ThriveMap assessments both fair to compare and fair to take.