Are reference checks more important than ever in an online world, or a waste of time?
I considered this issue after acting as a referee for a former media colleague. Having been a referee dozens of times over the years, I'm dismayed at the deterioration in reference checking.
Often, a twentysomething recruiter calls, with no notice, for a reference check. The interview is rushed, full of leading questions and poorly planned.
My referee interview this week was particularly bad. The young recruiter implied upfront that the candidate already had the job, asked mostly generic positive questions and seemed more like the applicant's cheerleader than an agent for the employer.
Thankfully, the candidate is a great fit for the job and there was no hesitation in recommending her. But I could have given the recruiter insights on the candidate's skill gaps and areas for career development, to help her and the employer, if asked.
I pity companies that spend so much time and money trying to find the best candidate, only to be let down by sloppy recruiting processes at the end. They risk hiring a weaker candidate or, worse, someone who blatantly lies on their CV and gets away with it.
Too many referee interviews seem like box-ticking that reinforce recruitment decisions already made. Or they focus only on the employer's needs today and overlook deeper insights that might help the employer with the new hire's career development.
Granted, online information and specialist recruitment tools makes it easier to vet references. And social media, such as LinkedIn, give a sense of the candidate's job history, professional networks and peer endorsements.
Yet nothing beats a good conversation with someone who has worked with the candidate, seen them in action and provides an honest assessment of their strengths and weaknesses – albeit with an obvious positive bias, given they agreed to be a referee.
What's your view?
· Are referee checks a waste of time?
· Has the standard of referee checks deteriorated in the past three years?
· Do you choose the same referee for job applications and school them in what to say?
Here are eight issues for companies to consider with referee checks:
1. Ask the recruiter about their referee interview process
Who conducts the referee interview, how many referees are called and what is the interview length? Put recruiters on notice that you want detailed notes and considered commentary from the referee interview.
2. Ideally, ask for three referee interviews
Much depends on the position's seniority and many recruiters ask for two referees. More interviews means greater scope to identify recurring themes about a candidate and test information with other referees.
3. Avoid the candidate's 'go to' referee
For example, ask the candidate to provide a referee from different employers. Or ask for a referee from someone who they have reported to, a peer at the same level, and someone who has reported to them. Make the candidate work harder finding referees rather than use the same person for each job application.
4. Vet the referees
Do not assume the given referee is the best person to comment. The "senior business development manager" named as a referee on the CV might be a junior ad rep who is best mates with the candidate. Assess the quality of the referee and ensure they are not a fake.
5. Set an interview time
Recruiters have a habit of calling without notice and asking if you can "talk now" about the candidate. The result: a rushed interview with less thought than usual because you are racing to another appointment. You risk being overly positive to get the recruiter off the phone because you are busy.
6. Be open-mined about referee comments
Do not mentally "hire" the candidate in the job interview and treat the referee interviews as an afterthought. Incorporate referee comments into the decision-making process across the candidate short-list.
7. The interview
The usual rules apply: being well-researched and planning interview questions that are linked to the position description and candidate.
Avoid generic questions and focus on specific examples – "Can you give me an example of a project or task that did not go as expected and how the candidate responded?" That provides better information and distinguishes referees who are familiar with the candidate's work from those who are not.
8. Focus on long-term career development
Organisations miss an opportunity when they focus only on the candidate's suitability for the job and not their career development. Consider some carefully worded questions: "What would you consider are the candidate's main skill gaps?" or "What advice would you provide to help the candidate develop their career?" They can make the interview more forward-looking and constructive.
That must be better than recruiters racing through referee checks as they move from one job application to the next – and leaving employers to clean up the mess.
2 comments
New User? Sign up