Career Development Partners » References

Checking References – Part III

admin — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 05:54:24 +0000

In the last two issues of HIRING LINE we discussed nine practical aspects of checking references that will help a prospective employer. Even in this day of litigation these practical approaches will help us check references safely and still find what we need to know

Degrees
It is estimated that 20% of the people who say they have a degree don’t. So what is so important about that? Well nothing unless the candidate says or states in his resume that he does have one. Not that we believe a person has to have a degree. In fact, there is no good reason for most of the employers who require degrees to do so. Be that as it may. If an employer specifically asks if a person has a degree and the candidate states he does then it is revealed that he does not, this candidate just can’t he trusted. He should not he hired. Degrees should be verified as a matter of course. It’s simple to do. One just calls the college or university, speaks to the registrars office and asks them to confirm if a certain person has had a degree conferred on them. The college or university will either verify the record or say they have no record of it. They will probably tell no more than this. Schools sometimes make mistakes so checking it again especially if there is a discrepancy is of value.

The School
If the school cannot confirm the candidate has a degree when he says he does, it wouldn’t hurt to give him a chance to prove it. Colleges and universities though, are very sensitive to the position they are in. They seldom make mistakes regarding these inquiries, but there have been rare instances of crossed records of people with similar names, etc. If there is a discrepancy, let the candidate prove his position. If a discrepancy occurs notify the candidate and let him try to set the record correct. Nine out of ten times though, this will be very embarrassing for the candidate and he will eliminate himself from consideration.

A Lie
As much as we would like to have empathy, sympathy and want to give the benefit of the doubt to a candidate, no one can justify hiring someone who lies about the matter of having a degree. None of us can afford to hire anyone who fabricates such things. Our natural inclination is to wonder where else they may lie. There is no good excuse for this. We have seen instances where candidates have begged for mercy and convinced prospective employers it’s the only place they have lied. We do not recommend hiring such a person. They simply can’t be trusted. As a matter of course degrees should lie verified.

Unvolunteered References
No candidate is going to give as a referral, someone whom they did not like, get along with, etc. No one would volunteer references they believe will be poor or bad ones. Other than previous employers, most references we check are given to us by candidates and are obviously people who are going to say positive things.

With an amount of effort an employer can find people who know about the candidate. People that worked with him are familiar enough with him to be of value. These kind of objective references can be very valuable. Previous clients or customers of sales candidates, for instance, can give a perspective of the candidate one can’t get elsewhere. Simply asking initial references who else might have knowledge of the candidate will give one other references. These volunteered references may offer other facets of the candidate not found in traditional first line references.

Previous Bosses
These people are going to tell you the most about how an individual performs on the job. Try not to settle for checking previous employment references with anyone other than previous, immediate bosses. They will know the most. Sometimes candidates who fear a bad reference from a previous boss will claim that they can’t find their previous boss so they’ll get a previous peer or subordinate or someone they once worked with etc., to provide a reference. Don’t buy it! Make the candidate find previous bosses. Take no excuses. Don’t rely on the candidates previous employers personnel department. They are going to confirm salary, starting and ending dates, etc. Nice stuff maybe, but it’s not going to help you really hire right. Find previous direct supervisors and ask them questions that will help you not only decide to hire or not to hire the candidate but will give you direction of how to manage the person should he be hired.

Get specific answers to specific factual questions. Ask the same questions of all references. This way they can be compared and three days later one doesn’t have to rely on recollection. Patterned questions will provide an in-depth overall picture.

Tony Beshara is owner and president of Babich & Associates. Beshara has been in business since 1973, and he alone averages $2.5 – $4 million per year in billings. If you have any questions about this article, please call (214) 823-9999.

Checking References – Part II

admin — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 05:53:58 +0000

In previous articles, we discussed four practical aspects of checking references that will help a prospective employer. Even in this day of litigation, these practical approaches will tell us what we need to know about candidates.

Do It Yourself
In the last issue we discussed that checking references needed to be done carefully since people are so concerned with litigation. What is said and what isn’t said, how questions are answered and in between the lines documents can make all the difference in the world. It is always best for a hiring manager to check references himself. Any third party, i.e., personnel, administrative assistants (yes, we’ve even seen secretaries do it) just can’t do as thorough a job.

Part of reference checking goes beyond the question of hiring the individual. Often we want to know work habits, attitudes, etc., not only to find out how they are but to also evaluate them relative to the specific job function we want accomplished. A direct manager can evaluate all these things better from a reference check if he does it himself. He can ask more direct relative questions and the answers will mean more. How a particular individual is motivated or managed can best be interpreted by a direct manager. Doing reference checks personally gives an employer a better picture of what he might be hiring.

Present Employment
Never under any circumstances check references at the present place of employment unless the candidate gets his present employer to call you. Even if the candidate tells you it is fine to check with his present employer …don’t do it! If you jeopardize a person’s job, you are opening yourself up for litigation. Candidates may think they are going to be laid off and tell you that checking with where they work is fine. Don’t run the risk!

At the risk of being pedantic, don’t check references of present employers on your own even without permission. Believe it or not we have three of four instances a year where employers check references of candidates where they are presently working. It’s stupid.. ..but it’s done. Any attorney would love to get a hold of one of these cases. No prospective employer or anyone has the right to jeopardize a person’s present job. The rationale we hear is “….the candidate put himself at risk by applying for a job. ..so if he loses his job because I checked a reference it’s his fault….” This thinking is totally ridiculous.

Check References With Factual Questions
Facts can be denied or confirmed. Even though you are trying to make personal evaluations asking personal evaluative questions like “What did you think of the candidate?” …or… “How do you feel about his personal life?” …could get you into trouble. Asking more factual questions like “Did the candidate sell his quota? “….or “The candidate says he was 75% of quota last year, is that correct?” …are factual questions that require a more factual answer.

Reasons For Leaving Previous Employers
These are very important issues to consider about a candidate. They will tell you a number of things. First of all, whatever a candidate says about his last employers he will say about you. Secondly his reasons for leaving you won’t be much different than why he left the previous ones. If his reasons for leaving are vague like “…no opportunity for advancement, …philosophical differences with the boss. …redirection of the company, …personality conflicts….” they need to be clarified in detail and verified in reference checking. Nebulous reasons for leaving a company are a bad sign, watch for them carefully.

Spouses
Who we marry is the nicest compliment we have ….(for better or for worse). The spouse of candidates will give you a picture of the kind of person you are interviewing better than 10,000 questions. Many companies at mid level positions and above invite spouses to a dinner interview. There are many good reasons for doing this, but it is one of the best reference checks an employer can do. Just seeing how people interacts with others in the presence of their spouse will reveal a facet of their personality you won’t get any other way.

There is no reason that interviewing the spouse needs to be limited to mid or upper level positions. It can be done on any level. There are residual aspects of this practice. One is to get the support of the spouse. If the candidate is hired he or she is more likely to do a better job because the spouse is not only behind the person but they can identify with the people the employee works for and with. The second aspect of this practice reveals just how committed the spouse is to the prospective employee’s job or career. We’ve seen instances where a spouse’s career was so important to the family the prospective employee’s job was no-where near a priority. This may be fine for them, but would not be good for the company contemplating the candidate.

Checking References – Part I

admin — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 05:53:26 +0000

The Challenge
In the last two HIRING LINES we discussed giving references. In theses next two or three we will address getting references on potential employees. This issue is a sensitive one and prospective employers have to be increasingly careful in checking them. Most ex-employees are so afraid of litigation on the part of the ex-employee/candidate, for anything they might say that may be negative, they, may avoid giving any information at all. This in itself can be damaging. Most will agree that we are in a sad state of business conditions when employers cannot get or give truthful, honest information about prospective employees. But, nonetheless, our litigious society has forced us as employers to be more careful and do more intense due diligence to protect ourselves. Since negative opinions of an employee’s value must be avoided by ex-employers, potential employers must resort to careful evaluations of facts presented in personal interviews. Most of us approach references as information to round out the interviewing. Our approach in checking references should be to give us a better idea of the person we are hiring. References can sometimes totally eliminate a candidate but most of the time they should be used to give us a clearer picture of what we are trying to hire. Most of us acknowledge there are no perfect candidates. Reference checking should give us a better picture of a candidate …warts and all. Here are some practical concepts and actions that can be taken to insure quality reference checking.

RECOGNIZE that reference checking can be treacherous, dubious, questionable, etc. Mere recognition of the fact that checking references isn’t as effective as it used to be gives one an advantage. Just knowing that the fear of litigation by saying the wrong thing is in the mind and heart of whomever gives a reference, forces a prospective employer to understand better both what he hears and doesn’t hear. Being aware of the care that references must be given forces a prospective employer to only rely on them to a limited extent.

Interview Factually
Along with other things, an employer should interview candidates knowing that facts can be verified; feelings, “chemistry, ” etc., can’t. Here is another reason to give a patterned interview (as discussed in another HIRING LINE). “Chemistry,” compatibility, etc., make the real difference in hiring someone, but documental questions of fact are verifiable. Exact starting and ending dates of employment, starting and ending titles, exact number of people supervised, exact duties and responsibilities, exact figures of budgetary responsibilities, etc., can all possibly be verified by a previous employer. It’s hard for people to lie about facts. Either a person’s title was controller or it wasn’t. A sales person either hit 110% of quota or 50% of quota. These are factual questions that should be asked and verified. The more factual questions and information can be, the better off an interviewer is. Asking a previous employer if a candidate was a good employee can too easily get a non-answer response. Asking a previous employer a question like: “Our candidate states that he was 97% of quota when he left, is this correct?” Illicits a black and white clear cut yes or no. Getting factual information in the interviewing process gives an employer facts to verify.

Credit Reports
This is an excellent way to see if a person has their personal house in order. Most of us would agree that we handle our business affairs no differently than our personal affairs. As one expert put it: “the executive with a messy garage will have a hard time straightening up the corporation”. Serious credit problems will usually indicate serious personal problems. Serious personal problems will usually indicate serious professional problems. Direct personal references have to be careful in what they say. Credit reports, however, are factual. You must however, GET PERMISSION FROM A CANDIDATE to check his credit. There are forms available that a candidate must sign giving you permission for his credit to be checked. BE CAREFUL! There are some states that limit how a credit check can be used and who can perform one. Get legal advise before instigating such a practice! Membership in a credit bureau will facilitate such credit reports. Credit reports will usually tell you how a prospective employee will handle the company’s money, …no differently than his own. Having said all this, however, we encourage employers to use the results of a credit report with prudence. The level of job, function, etc., will dictate how much of an impact a credit report should have on the decision to hire someone. Extenuating circumstances like long term unemployment or long term illness of a family member will sometimes negatively impact a person’s credit when normally they would have no difficulties.

Driving Record & Arrest Record
There are service bureaus that provide during, arrest and credit records on any individual. With a candidates permission this information ought to be a must. What you do with the information you get is up to you. Remember that no one “runs” their business life any differently than they “run” their business life.