Reference Checking – Simple Steps For Making Yours Better (The complete guide to accurate reference checking)

If you can’t afford to hire a single candidate who has lied about their experience or credentials, you must first realize that the standard reference-checking process designed to catch those resume lies ranks painfully low (#11) in predicting whether a candidate will perform well on the job.

Unfortunately, your current reference-checking processes will likely be screening out good candidates. It also allows lying candidates to be hired who will likely fail on the job. These damaging results, coupled with an increasing number of job applicants confessing they had lied on their resumes (70% in 2023, up from 55% in 2022). In my view, this is an opportune time to tweak your reference-checking process to catch almost every fraudulent candidate now.

The Top Action Steps For Improving Your Reference-Checking Results 

After decades of research and practice in improving the accuracy of reference checking, I have found that a handful of changes in the process can make a significant difference in the accuracy of your process. The most impactful changes appear first in the following list.

Focus your reference checking on work experience – there are numerous areas in which an organization can check a candidate’s background. Those possibilities include work experience, professional credentials, education, credit, social media, and criminal background. An increasing number of organizations are now deemphasizing educational verification because it is becoming clear that educational credentials are often not a valid job requirement. Unless an individual job requires a special background check (i.e., professional credentials or criminal background), I recommend that you laser focus on verifying the work experience and accomplishments that the candidate has provided in their resume and during interviews. When checking work experience, worry less about precise dates of employment and job titles. Instead, focus on verifying the candidate’s major accomplishments, work experience areas, and the skills they boast about in their resume.

Educate those conducting your reference checks – a lack of process training for the reference checker is a major cause of inaccurate reference checks. Unfortunately, I estimate that less than 20% of those doing reference checks have had their training updated during the last two years. So, at the very least, educate those doing the reference checking on the many problems associated with the process. Also, offer internal or vendor-supplied online reference check training to everyone who executes your process.

Standardize your reference-checking process – relying on unstructured and ad hoc reference-checking processes almost guarantees you will skip a critical step. And that will lead to inconsistent reference checking results. So, work with HR to develop a consistent internal reference checking process or use the processes provided by experienced external vendors (e.g., Checkster).

Talk only to a manager when verifying employment experience, accomplishments, and skills – it’s a major mistake to assume that the reference names provided by the candidate are the most knowledgeable references. So, specifically, ask each candidate for the name of their last manager at each of their major jobs. For critical jobs, it’s often a good idea to find the contact information yourself to ensure that you are actually talking to the real manager. Of course, never use personal references for employment verification.

Ask them “forced-ranked” questions – one of the most common and damaging of all reference-checking elements is when you ask the reference “leading questions.” Like “Did you find Mary to be a strong leader?” Because those types of leading questions will almost always receive the answer, the reference thinks you want to hear. So instead, wherever possible, use “forced-ranked questions,” where you give the reference a list of 5-6 skills or traits (in this case, including leadership). Then, you ask the reference to rank the top ones. You will need to explore the topic further if the (leadership) trait you are looking for isn’t ranked in their top two. You can also ask “forced-ranked questions” in many other areas, including strengths/weaknesses, values, what motivates them, and identifying their areas of expertise.

Look for inconsistencies between the resume and the LinkedIn profile – one of the easiest and most accurate ways of verifying resume information. Directly compare a candidate’s resume to their LinkedIn profile. Realize upfront that there is data that shows that LinkedIn profiles are normally the more accurate of the two because so many people review them. However, social media background checks are not accurate predictors of job success. And finally, even though social media background checks are not accurate predictors of job success, a social media scan of their work-related sites may reveal some inconsistencies.

Require the use of a scoring sheet – it’s essential that you require the use of a reference check scoring sheet for each reference provider. The sheet should require that the reference checker assign a specific number (out of 100) to the reference provided by each reference provider. A scoring sheet adds great value because it forces the reference checker to stick to the items that must be checked. It also helps prevent the inclusion of any non-job-related inquiries. The scoresheet also provides documentation in case of a legal challenge to this reference check later. HR should check across many hires to see whether a high reference checking score accurately predicts a candidate’s future on-the-job success.

Prioritize what you check – hiring someone who has misrepresented themselves will have a much larger impact in some key jobs. It is essential to prioritize your jobs for reference-checking purposes. Then, you must assign your best reference checkers to your high-priority jobs. You should also prioritize the skills, experiences, and accomplishments that you will focus your checking on for this candidate. Finally, you should also be aware of the areas where most resume lies occur. Expect to find the most lies in IT, Finance, high earner, and resumes from males and college students. The most lies within a resume occurs in the areas of years of experience, education, and tenure. Knowing where to expect the most resume lies allows you to focus on those areas.

Assign reference checkers with technical knowledge of the job – I have found that individual reference givers quickly realize when they are contacted by someone who knows little about their field. They won’t take the reference check as seriously as if the person was another professional in their field. So, for key reference checks, you will get much better results if the manager or someone who has worked in the job makes the call.

Conduct background research on your key reference providers – I have found that one of the most effective ways to get a reference giver to be frank, transparent, and honest is by beginning the reference call by praising them. Show them you took the time to learn about their background before you called. This action often makes the reference giver feel like they are talking to a fellow professional and that they may be negatively impacted if an inaccurate reference is provided.

Additional Actions For Further Improving Your Reference Checks

If you’re serious about significantly improving your reference checks’ accuracy and recruiting results. Below, you will find a handful of slightly less impactful actions that you should also consider.

• Covering your butt against legal action should always be a sub-goal – always remember that when a new hire does something catastrophically wrong. Their hiring will be difficult for you to defend if you haven’t conducted a sound reference check. So always ensure that your reference-checking actions are completely defendable if they are legally challenged. One LinkedIn poll found that even though 92% of organizations conduct reference checks. 25% of reference checks are done only for compliance purposes, and an amazing 46% consider reference checks pointless and biased.
• Assume it’s all a lie – start by putting on hold your inherent “faith in people.” Instead, realize that the high frequency of resume lying fully justifies starting out with a completely critical screening approach, where you simply assume that any resume content you don’t have backup verification for is untrue. That means you must design your interview to allow you to verify any of this important suspect information using targeted questions.
• Don’t hire those who fail their reference check – it may be repeating the obvious. However, the purpose of reference checking is to reject those that fail the screening. But in reality, 59% of dishonest job seekers are hired anyway! So, if you have a valid reference checking process, you must have rules preventing this.
• Be on the lookout for extreme reference bias – one of the primary flaws of reference checking. For some reason, a percentage of all reference givers will have an extremely positive or negative bias toward the candidate. Unfortunately, that strong bias will mean the information you’ll get from them will be highly slanted. So be on the lookout for this possibility. And when you feel this extreme bias is occurring, add another reference to your list.
• Consider conducting reference checks before the final interview – today, most companies only complete reference checks on their chosen final candidate. However, there is a benefit to completing reference checks for each of your top two finalists before their final interview. First, completing reference checks for the top two finalists may provide information to help you make a more accurate final choice. Having that information before their final interview will also provide you with another opportunity to probe into any questionable areas discovered during their reference check. Yes, conducting one additional reference check will take more time, but I have found that, in most cases, it’s well worth it. 
• If you get questionable reference results, consider following up – most processes use the “one and done” reference-checking model. However, a superior approach is to have the hiring manager make a follow-up call whenever the questionable reference information may be a dealbreaker for a top candidate.
• Find out if your process adversely impacts diversity – be aware of the jobs frequently held by diverse candidates or their more frequent changing of jobs. This may make accurate reference checking for diverse candidates much more difficult. So, if you want more diversity hires, use data to determine if your process is fair.
• Find out if this candidate is exceptional – references may be the best way to identify when you have an exceptional candidate. Obviously, most reference checks are focused on simply verifying employment information. And with that focus, most reference checks won’t reveal whether a candidate is actually an exceptional one. So, when you suspect that you have an exceptional candidate, ask their references directly if they consider this candidate exceptional (and why?).
• Realize that for some jobs, continuous reference checking may be required – in some jobs, it’s not enough to ensure that the candidate has acted appropriately up until the time they are hired. So, in some sensitive jobs like education, childcare, and health-related jobs. Your employees’ references may need to be checked continuously or at least once a year.
• Encourage your repeat references to be more accurate in the future – when you have reference givers often listed as a job reference for one of your open jobs. You can increase their willingness to be frank and honest in the future. Thanking and praising them each time you hire a candidate for whom they provide a reference.

Final Thoughts

It’s easy to automatically assume that a hiring process that literally everyone uses must be effective. However, in the case of reference checks, it’s a mistake to assume they are effective. In fact, throughout my entire career, I’ve never found a single corporation that had positively connected (correlated) their reference-checking results with great hiring. So, because so many rely on reference checking. In my view, with the recent dramatic increase in resume lies. Now is the perfect time to examine your current process with a critical eye. And begin to use data (and the above recommendations) to improve the accuracy of your reference-checking process.