Where should you focus your recruiting efforts if you want to find out more about a job candidate?
Do interviews provide the greatest insight, or do reference checks paint a more accurate picture?
About Interviews
Interviews have many advantages. They allow a company to get answers from a candidate that provide insight into skills, ability, and experience. A resume provides an introduction; an interview fills in the details.
Or at least it should.
The trouble with interviews is that they involve two people, both of whom are sending and receiving information. (Group interviews create an entirely different dynamic, which increases the complexity.) One-to-one communication is fraught with opportunities for misunderstanding, especially when the two people are strangers.
An interview assumes both the interviewer and the interviewee are strong communicators, which may not be the case. If, for example, the interviewer is a weak communicator, meaning that he or she doesn’t ask appropriate questions, listen well, and process what the candidate says with attention to the conversation’s objective, the interview won’t provide necessary insight.
Likewise, if an interviewer is a weak communicator and a candidate is a strong communicator, the interviewer may be impressed by the person’s communication skills, as opposed to skills, ability, and experience relevant to the job, and miss the point of the interview process.
Conversely, if a candidate is a weak communicator, he or she may still have what it takes to do the job – depending on the job – but it’s up to the interviewer to ask probing questions that allow for that determination to be made.
Additionally, because the candidate is the one telling the story about his or her work experience, there is the possibility of embellishment or inaccuracy.
About Reference Checks
Reference checks, on the other hand, let others speak to the candidate’s skills, ability, and experience.
Automated tools, like those offered by Checkster, SkillSurvey, and other software providers, take the hiring company out of the process and allow for consistency in terms of questions asked and answered by candidate references.
Even so, hiring companies sometimes think that reference checking is “fixed”; that is, a candidate’s references have already been told what to say.
However, research conducted by Checkster finds that, when asked about realistic feedback, two-thirds of references say they would be “very truthful – I’d give an honest review, not just positive feedback,” while one-third say they would be “somewhat truthful – I’d give a pretty honest review, but I’d be slightly more positive in my feedback to support my colleague.” Only 1 percent says they would give only positive feedback.
Automated reference checking allows for confidentiality and, in theory, more candid responses to reference questions.
Still, a candidate generates a list of reference, and presumably chooses individuals who will say good things. While candidates are sometimes removed from the hiring process as a result of reference checks, a majority pass.
According to Checkster research, less than 1 percent of candidates are removed as a result of manual reference checking, while approximately 11 percent are removed as a result of a digital process.
Evaluating Your Process
This makes a strong case for automation, but it also suggests that reference checks are not necessarily better than interviews.
Instead, Checkster research suggests that to get the most out of reference checking, the process should be automated.
At the same time, companies should strive to make interviews as meaningful as possible. Don’t assume recruiters and hiring managers know how to interview. Many do not. Interview skills are learned. As with other skills, interviewing requires training and practice.
Interviews or reference checks? You should focus on both—but make sure you do them right.
 |
Paula Santonocito, Contributing Editor for Recruiting Daily Advisor, is a business journalist specializing in employment issues. She is the author of more than 1,000 articles on a wide range of human resource and career topics, with an emphasis on recruiting and hiring. Her articles have been featured in many global and domestic publications and information outlets, referenced in academic and legal publications as well as books, and translated into several languages. |
