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.
