You are in : Human Resources > Recruitment & Selection

Reference Checking

Common reference checking mistakes

Mon, 28 Mar 2011 13:50

According to our specialist, in some 90% of cases involving disciplinary and/or dishonesty investigations, especially those involving fraud and/or corruption, the culprits’ personnel files all quickly revealed that an inadequate reference check had been conducted.

Further, in an alarmingly high proportion of cases, subsequent reference checks showed that the individual had a prior history of similar offences, sometimes including a prior criminal conviction.

Investigations conducted also revealed that the greater majority of HR / personnel officials did not know how to obtain a proper reference, particularly if a high-risk position of trust was involved.

Overall findings showed reference checking procedures deficient in the following ways;

1. The reference-checker usually never asked for specific information, but only for a “yes/no” confirmation of the information provided by the candidate, so closing off the possibility of the referee ‘volunteering’ supplementary information that could critically affect an employment decision.

2. Past employment history especially that more than 7 years old, was often provided by year only, so potentially hiding a multitude of sins in the ‘missing’ months.

3. Reference-checkers and/or HR and personnel officers rarely checked to ensure that there was proper continuity in the candidate’s employment history. Where discrepancies were noted, the official seldom obtained suitable independent information to account for the apparent discrepancies and/or anomalies, but was usually satisfied by explanations given by the candidate. In the majority of cases, this deficiency placed the organisation at an avoidable risk, especially where the candidate had claimed that he/she had been self-employed for that period.

4. Telephonic enquiries are the standard procedure used to confirm the employment history of a candidate, irrespective of the hierarchy-level of the position in question and the level of risk and/or trust involved. No consideration is given to arranging a meeting with candidate’s previous superior.

5. Many organisations insist that references can only be given by a designated HR and personnel officer. Consequently, most reference-checkers and/or HR and personnel officers make no attempt to obtain any information from the candidate’s previous superior(s). We found that our enquiries of an employee’s previous superior(s), especially those relating to his/her capabilities, reliability and integrity, provided the more significant information than any other.

6. Reference-checkers and/or HR and personnel officers usually never asked any of the following questions of referees, questions found to be crucial to a reliable reference check:

“Given our assurance that we will maintain the confidentiality of all information you provide:” 6.1 Would you employ the named person in the position he/she previously occupied and/or in any other position of trust? 6.2 Would you recommend that we employ the named person in the position applied for / currently occupied, and/or any other position of trust? 6.3 Are you prepared to provide your reasons for the answers you have given? If not, why not?

Incidentally, officials of almost all referee organisations were far more readily prepared to provide surprisingly comprehensive answers to these questions, provided that the meeting was held at their offices.