In corporate hiring, spending time on a reference check is considered to be old school these days. At least that is the excuse usually used to skip this step in the hiring process. The process is often cumbersome, time consuming, and the results usually jaded. Larger companies hire third party investigators to do the dirty work because it is faster and less costly. Small companies find themselves mired in complex bureaucratic hiring processes and muddle through or just skip it altogether. Buried in the archives of most companies is a form that is supposed to be a template to check out a candidate before committing to make an offer of employment. If there isn’t one created by some nameless predecessor in “personnel†from the dark ages, just do a Google search and there will be hundreds of them. It is probably wasted energy trying to find some shining online jewel as a best example because it does not exist. Most of them are crap. There are too many good reasons that reference checking slipped into ancient history, but with a little attention in the right areas this can still be a meaningful exercise. The criticality of hiring the right person and the cost of a bad hire makes it worth the effort.
To be worthwhile, a reference check must follow certain key guidelines.
- Usually conducted by phone, the reference check should be scheduled in advance if possible and kept short and to the point. The best answers come from referrals that are not rushed but allowed time to formulate an answer.
- Don’t waste time on administrative data that can be obtained elsewhere. Usually someone designated as a reference will not know details of salary, employment dates and reason for termination.
- The best references are people who interfaced with the candidate during one of the bulleted points on their resume. Focusing on accomplishments can verify the information on the resume and dovetail with the answers given by the candidate during interviews.
Remember that in most cases the reference was picked and briefed by the candidate. Several areas are not useful to address.
- Do not ask open ended questions that open the way to flowery praise having no substance. Asking someone to “…describe the character…†of another individual will not yield useful information.
- Do not ask yes or no questions. Usually such questions are begging for a “yes†answer, such as “…did she get along with her coworkers…†that allows only for reinforcement of a good characteristic.
- Do not ask directly “…what were her weaknesses…†because they really don’t want to tell you a negative and will probably not be honest. Find out what you need by rephrasing the question to ask about outcomes.
Treat the reference with respect, but treat the conversation as if it were an interview and look for specific details.
- Always verify the relationship to the candidate and the time served together. Supervisors or academic advisors are best because coworkers or classmates are less likely to be in a position to report on results.
- Always ask about accomplishments listed on the resume that were observed by them and drill down to the key dimensions of the job that defined success.
- Always ask the reference to give an example of corrective action given and how it was received and acted upon. Oblique questions to arrive at answers about attitude and coachability are preferable to direct confrontations that appear to beg for a negative.
The most important lessons learned in a reference check are determined by a helicopter view of the entire process that encompasses the people selected as references as well as the answers given.
- The absence of a supervisory reference at a particular job could be a sign of something being intentionally hidden. Ask the candidate for more information.
- Volunteering the names of friends, relatives or former coworkers is also a telling sign. Only accept references that worked directly with the candidate and refuse to accept character witnesses.
- Contacting people who are surprised at being used as a reference violates one of the cardinal rules preached to candidates. Refusal to cooperate or evading questions as “…it’s against HR policy…†means they are either unprepared or have nothing good to say.
The improvement of background checking by use of technology may give a complete verification of a candidate, but nothing replaces the “old fashioned†personal contact to verify the process. Yes, it is time consuming and tedious work. It will pay off with key hires that are exactly who they claim to be.
Â
Image credit: icetray / 123RF Stock Photo