While browsing Y Combinator’s job board for hybrid roles, a developer spotted a “GTM” opening that listed product details and then requested applicants’ SAT scores. The odd requirement stood out amid a trend where startups drop degree filters in favor of side‑project portfolios. Asking for a decades‑old, self‑reported test raises questions about what hiring teams actually value.

Research on hiring assessments shows cognitive tests once ranked highest for predicting job performance, but recent meta‑analyses favor structured interviews and work‑sample exercises. Structured interviews—using consistent questions, scoring rubrics, and trained interviewers—now top the evidence base, though their reliability hinges on execution. Work samples let candidates demonstrate real‑world ability, providing a clearer signal than legacy metrics like the SAT.

The SAT request illustrates how some firms cling to outdated proxies while more reliable methods exist. Unstructured chats, personality quizzes, or novelty tests—like the infamous “manhole cover” brainteasers—have been debunked as poor predictors. Companies that replace arbitrary scores with structured interviews and realistic tasks gain clearer insight into candidate potential, making the hiring process both fairer and more effective.

Ultimately, demanding SAT scores adds noise without improving selection quality. Recruiters should discard such legacy criteria and focus on evidence‑backed tools that assess current ability. Firms that do so reduce bias and hire talent that truly moves the product forward and drive sustainable growth for the company.