Reference checks, like interviews, are one of the mainstays in the process of candidate selection.  The reference check, if handled improperly, can be of little value in adding information to the candidate’s performance since the referees are selected by the candidate and are, of course, expected to be very positive in responding to the questions. 

On the other hand, if the questions posed to the referees are carefully developed and designed for internal validity checking, the reference check should provide you with effective additional information.  Ensure that the candidate identifies the type of referees being provided (i.e.:  employment, professional, academic and character).  You will want to confirm that relationship when speaking with the referee.

Let’s start with the generation of the questions.  Since the candidate interview should have been developed around the elements of the job description and the job advertisement, the questions posed to the referee should be developed on the same basis.  This is where the cross-checking occurs.  For example, if the candidate was asked during the interview about:

• handling a conflict situation, ask the referee about the candidate’s capacity to manage conflict and to give a specific example,
• time management or organizations skills, why not frame a question for the referee that does the same thing?

When the questions to the candidate do not match the questions to the referee, then no triangulation is possible.  Remember, you are looking to assess the candidate against the same criteria from two sources – the candidate and the referee.  This can only be done when the questions are essentially the same.

In addition to questions which call for a narrative or an anecdotal response, you are quite at liberty to ask the referee to rate the candidate on some of the key skills, understandings and professional or personal qualities that are identified in the job description.  These include such considerations as dependability, creativity, industriousness, knowledge in the field, etc.

Bendel always suggests the use of a four-point scale with a “4” being the highest and a “1” being the lowest (along with a D/K or Don’t Know).  The reason an even number is used is to avoid the tendency of “migration to the middle”.  This usually happens when one uses a 5- or 7-point scale (with 3 & 4 respectively being the “draw to the middle”).

Traditionally, the last reference question is: “If you had the opportunity to hire this person again, would you do so?  Use a four-point scale – “Absolutely,” “Very Likely,” “Somewhat Likely” or “Not at All.”  Bendel suggests you follow the referee’s response with: “Why? How would you justify your response?  There is one other consideration you might want to address – and more will be said of this in the next blog.

We began this standard interview series with a note on the invitational organization.  That extends to referees as well.  These people are taking time from their daily activities to serve your purpose, not theirs.  If a brief “thank you”is followed by a quick email, you will likely leave the referee with a very favorable impression of the organization you represent – and you never know if you are talking to a prospective client.  For the referee, you are the organization.  Don’t let the opportunity pass to represent it well.  You just never know when that courtesy will yield a dividend you never expected.

Join us next week for the last entry in this series.  That will be followed by several blogs on other ways to assess candidates along with, or without, the traditional interview.

Dr. Dan

To arrange a customized Interviewing webinar for your recruiters (with examples on how to create alignment between the job description, advertisement, selection process, reference checks, training and appraisal processes) contact Jen and Dan at info@bendelservices.com.