Reference checking is a given part of modern recruitment processes, but it is not obvious how to conduct it in order to render as much value as possible. Who can be a referee and what kind of information and feedback can be retrieved from a reference check? How many referees should I contact? How do I know that the referees are authentic? Do I need approval to conduct the reference check? Which questions should I ask? And which questions should I avoid?
Reference checking in a recruitment process means that the recruiter contacts previous employers or other people who know the candidate to get information about him/her. A reference check often serves several different purposes:
Studies have shown that many candidates embellish information on their CVs and lie in job interviews.1,2 Because of this, it is important to confirm the information provided by the candidates themselves. Through reference checks, you can verify information about the candidate’s experience, skills, etcetera.
As the referees tend to be people who have observed the candidate in a work context for a long period of time, obtaining information about the candidate's previous work performance is a common purpose of a reference check.
Counterproductive work behaviour is intentional employee behaviour that violates organisational norms, which could harm the well-being of the organisation, its employees and customers.3 Examples of such behaviours are theft, bullying, late arrivals and sexual harassment.4,5 Such behaviours can have devastating consequences for organisations, such as increased sickness absence, reduced productivity, legal processes, and damaged employer brand.6,7 Since it is unlikely that the candidates themselves will disclose that they are willing to engage in counterproductive work behaviour, reference checks can be an important safeguard against bad hires.
A referee is a person who can confirm or supplement the information you already have about the candidate. Often, you want the referees to be previous managers of the candidate, but it can also be worth collecting data from people who have had roles other than manager. A good starting point is to think about what information you want to collect in the reference check and then ask for referees who can provide that information.
Below is a list of different types of referees and what kind of information they may provide:
Previous managers or team leaders are often suitable as referees because they usually have information about how well the candidate has performed the duties and whether the candidate has exhibited counterproductive behaviours (for example, invalid absence). If the candidate himself/herself has held a managerial position, it may be relevant to collect information from middle managers and colleagues who have reported to the candidate.
Colleagues who have worked closely with the candidate may possess valuable information about the candidate’s personal characteristics. For example, former team members of the candidate probably have good insights into the candidate’s cooperation skills.
An external person, for example, a former customer of the candidate, can contribute with an outside perspective and insights regarding, for example, customer service.
For a candidate who is new to the job market with little or no work experience, a previous teacher or mentor can act as a referee to confirm the candidate’s qualities and work performance.
In addition to teachers, mentors and advisors, candidates with little or no work experience might nominate a friend or family member as a reference. They probably possess valuable information about the candidate’s personal characteristics but lack information about how the candidate behaves and performs in a professional context. Because it is often in the interest of friends and family members that the candidate gets a job, there is a great risk that they will withhold information that could be to the candidate’s disadvantage.
Recruiters contacting people who have previously worked with the candidate, without the candidate having nominated these people as referees, is a relatively common phenomenon known as "backdoor references".8 Although it may be appealing to gather information about the candidate from additional sources than those that the candidate has nominated, there are risks involved in doing so. For example, the candidate may not want others to know that he/she is looking for a new job.
Contacting someone who doesn’t know that the candidate is looking for a new job can put the candidate in precarious situations. In addition, if the candidate finds out that the recruiter has contacted people without his/her knowledge, this may ruin the candidate experience and make the candidate leave the recruitment process.
If you want to contact people that haven’t been nominated by the candidate, our recommendation is that you first ask the candidate if it is okay that you contact these people. If the candidate says no, you can ask the candidate to explain why.
As many as possible. The more referees that answer questions about the candidate, the more reliable the reference check will be. Scientific studies as well as analyses of data collected via Refapp show that at least three referees should be used.9
The advantage of digital reference checking via Refapp is that you can collect data from many referees without adding to your workload. In traditional reference checking, the number of referees is limited by the time you as a recruiter can spend on phone calls.
Reference checking in recruitment processes can be conducted in several different ways, and there are both advantages and disadvantages to the various methods.
Traditionally, reference checking has taken place over phone. An advantage of calling the referees is that you can ask follow-up questions straight away during the phone call. Many recruiters also like to "read between the lines" when talking to referees on the phone.
The problem though is that "reading between the lines" is an arbitrary activity where our "gut feeling” intuitively adds information that is not there. Intuitively interpreting information can lead to poor hiring decisions. Another disadvantage is that the phone calls are time-consuming, both for you as a recruiter and for the referees. Another disadvantage of using phone calls is that it is hard to verify the identity of the referee. There are many cases where the candidate has cheated in the reference check by stating that the provided phone number goes to a former manager when in reality, a friend of the candidate is answering the call.
A letter of recommendation is a text written by, for example, a former manager or teacher to the candidate. The letter can contain information about the candidate’s duties, work performance, characteristics, etcetera. Letters of recommendation are often something that the candidate has collected when leaving previous employment or studies. A disadvantage of the method is that the information in letters of recommendation is often of a general nature and not related to the requirements for the position you are trying to fill. The risk of cheating is also important to keep in mind. Since you, as a recruiter, do not contact the referee yourself, but instead receive the letter directly from the candidate, it can be difficult to determine who actually wrote the letter.
Nowadays, there are services for carrying out reference checks digitally. Questionnaires are sent to the referees, who answer them via their computer or mobile phone. When the referees answer the questions about the candidate, they are also asked to verify their identity.
One of the advantages of doing reference checks digitally is that it saves you a lot of time. In 2022, Refapp carried out a study together with a Swedish organisation. The organisation were recruiting temporary workers for the summer and conducted reference checks on 550 candidates. The results of the study showed that the organisation saved 354 working hours (almost 9 weeks of full-time work) by switching from traditional (phone) reference checks to digital reference checks.
Another advantage of digital reference checking is that it facilitates a more structured and standardised data collection. The latest scientific studies show that structure is a prerequisite for achieving good validity in reference checks.9,10,11 Structure means, among other things, that the same questions are asked to all referees, that the questions are scored on standardised response scales, and that the scores from the various referees are aggregated. In order to achieve the highest possible structure in reference checking, and thus provide you with the most valuable information about the candidates, we have developed Refapp Insights, which you can read more about here.
The methods mentioned above do not necessarily have to be mutually exclusive. Sometimes the answers you get via digital reference checking can be ambiguous and sometimes the referees would prefer to talk to you over phone rather than answer questions digitally. With Refapp, you get a flexible calendar booking function that makes booking time for phone calls with referees easy. The notes can then be made directly in the system so that the answers are presented next to the responses of other referees.
There is no universal answer to when it is best to carry out a reference check. References are usually taken at the end of the recruitment process. By doing the reference check at the end of the recruitment process, you can validate the information that the candidate has provided earlier in the recruitment process and possibly prevent a bad hire.
It should be noted that reference checks are not intended to be used to distinguish between two or more top candidates. Reference checks should instead be seen as a method to prevent hiring underperformers or people who are willing to engage in counterproductive work behaviours.
Which questions you should ask in the reference check depends on what the purpose of the reference check is. Some questions aim to verify the candidate's background. For this purpose, questions like the following can be used:
"Can you give a brief description of the duties/responsibilities that the candidate had when you worked together?"
Other questions aim to investigate whether the candidate is likely to exhibit counterproductive work behaviours. For this purpose, questions like the following can be used:
"Has the candidate ever been absent from work without valid reasons?"
Refapp offers a library of questionnaires based on characteristics that are relevant to different professional roles. You can read more about this here.
Several studies have shown that when referees use free-text responses to assess candidates, there tends to be a gender bias that risks disadvantaging female candidates. An example of this gender bias is that male candidates tend to be described with more standout adjectives (such as 'outstanding' and 'exceptional') compared to female candidates.12,13 New research on digital reference checks shows that when referees assess candidates using numerical rating scales, the candidate’s gender does not affect the assessment.14 Another advantage of using numerical rating scales is that you can easily aggregate the data collected from different referees, thereby increasing the reliability of the reference check.
If you are working with a competency framework, you can ask competency-based questions during the reference check to create consistency across the entire recruitment process. Refapp collaborates with several competency framework providers, whose competencies are available in Refapp. An updated list of these can be found here.
In this guide, you will find more detailed information on what questions to ask during reference checks.
If you ask questions based on the practices described above and have done so with the basis of a well-defined job profile, you are on the right track! However, you must be careful when dealing with sensitive personal information. According to GDPR, some personal information is particularly sensitive and therefore practically forbidden to collect and store (if you do not have proper consent).
The European Commission considers the following data to be sensitive personal information:
The GDPR is always applicable when it comes to reference checking regardless if it is done digitally or manually via phone or other conversation and the data gets stored digitally or in any other kind of searchable format. As mentioned in the previous paragraph, it is not allowed to collect and store any kind of data that is regarded as sensitive personal information without the candidate’s consent.
For a candidate, succeeding in the different steps of a recruitment process can potentially yield income, security, and improved self-esteem.15 Since such rewards are incentives to lie16, you as a recruiter should expect that there are candidates who are willing to lie in the reference check to get the job. There are several documented cases where candidates have used false references to secure a job. In many cases, the candidates provide contact details for what is described as a previous employer, but in reality, it is the candidates themselves or an acquaintance acting as the referee. Refapp has several features to detect such fraud:
When referees answer questions about the candidate in Refapp, they are asked to verify their identity. By doing so, you can be confident that the referee is indeed the person they claim to be. A report from the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention highlights that identity verification in reference checks can reduce the risk of being infiltrated by criminal networks.17
When using Refapp for digital reference checks, you will automatically receive a fraud alert if two or more referees respond from the same IP address, phone number, or email address. The same applies if the candidate who entered the referees has the same IP address, phone number, or email address as one or more of the referees. A fraud alert does not necessarily mean that the candidate has actually committed fraud. Therefore, Refapp also provides suggestions for actions to assess the risk in the specific case.
In addition to the features provided by Refapp, it can sometimes be relevant to conduct your own investigative work to resolve any uncertainties.
We hope this guide has answered your questions about reference checks. Is there any information you are missing? Please feel free to reach out to us!
Would you like to know more about how digital reference checks can help you gain better insights about the candidates while also improving the candidate and referee experience? Book a demo, and we will show you!
1 Zvi, L., & Shtudiner, Z. (2021). Resume fraud and counterproductive behavior: The impact of narcissism in the labor market. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, 93.
2 Weiss, B., & Feldman, R. S. (2006). Looking good and lying to do it: Deception as an impression management strategy in job interviews. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36(4), 1070-1086.
3 Sackett, P. R., Berry, C. M., Wiemann, S. A., & Laczo, R. M. (2006). Citizenship and counterproductive behavior: Clarifying relations between the two domains. Human Performance, 19(4), 441-464.
4 Bowling, N. A., & Gruys, M. L. (2010). Overlooked issues in the conceptualization and measurement of counterproductive work behavior. Human Resource Management Review, 20(1), 54-61.
5 Gruys, M. L., & Sackett, P. R. (2003). Investigating the dimensionality of counterproductive work behavior. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 11(1), 30-42.
6 Boudrias, V., Trépanier, S. G., & Salin, D. (2021). A systematic review of research on the longitudinal consequences of workplace bullying and the mechanisms involved. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 56.
7 Penney, L. M., & Spector, P. E. (2005). Job stress, incivility, and counterproductive work behavior (CWB): The moderating role of negative affectivity. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 26(7), 777-796.
8 Roberto, K. J., Johnson, A. F., & Reed, A. (2022). The use of fourth party references in the selection process. Journal of Employment Counseling, 59(3), 120-127.
9 Hedricks, C. A., Robie, C., & Oswald, F. L. (2013). Web‐based multisource reference checking: An investigation of psychometric integrity and applied benefits. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 21(1), 99-110.
10 Taylor, P. J., Pajo, K., Cheung, G. W., & Stringfield, P. (2004). Dimensionality and validity of a structured telephone reference check procedure. Personnel Psychology, 57(3), 745-772.
11 Zimmerman, R. D., Triana, M. D. C., & Barrick, M. R. (2010). Predictive criterion-related validity of observer ratings of personality and job-related competencies using multiple raters and multiple performance criteria. Human Performance, 23(4), 361-378.
12 Madera, J. M., Hebl, M. R., Dial, H., Martin, R., & Valian, V. (2019). Raising doubt in letters of recommendation for academia: Gender differences and their impact. Journal of Business and Psychology, 34(3), 287-303.
13 Schmader, T., Whitehead, J., & Wysocki, V. H. (2007). A linguistic comparison of letters of recommendation for male and female chemistry and biochemistry job applicants. Sex Roles, 57(7), 509-514.
14 Fisher, P. A., Robie, C., Hedricks, C. A., Rupayana, D. D., & Puchalski, L. (2022). Little cause for concern: Analysis of gender effects in structured employment references. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 30(3), 361-377.
15 Mc Gregor, D. (1989). The human side of enterprise. In J. W. Newstrom & K. Davis (Eds.), Organizational Behavior (pp. 14-24). McGraw Hill.
16 DePaulo, B. M., Kashy, D. A., Kirkendol, S. E., Wyer, M. M., & Epstein, J. A. (1996). Lying in everyday life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(5), 979-995.
17 Skinnari, J., Hurve, K., & Monti, A. (2019). Möjliggörare för kriminella nätverk: Om möjliggörare i kommunal, statlig och privat sektor. The Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention.