The process of identifying the most suitable candidate to occupy a position can be challenging, ranging from the creation of a job advertisement to the compilation of a shortlist of high-quality interview candidates.
Employers typically evaluate an applicant’s work history, social media presence, responses to interview queries, and occasionally the results of psychometric testing.
It is also common for recruiting managers to verify the references of an applicant by conversing with the candidate’s nominated referees or reviewing their letters of recommendation.
Reference checks are typically the concluding obstacle, serving as a form of background investigation into the candidate’s qualifications and employment history.
Reference checks are conducted by nearly all employers; however, research indicates that there are significant constraints that should be considered.
Inconsistency may pose an issue.
consistent measure of candidate suitability is generated by a reliable selection method. . In other terms, reliability facilitates a direct comparison of each candidate.
However, early research on reference checks revealed that referees frequently assign significantly different ratings to identical candidates.
This inconsistency is problematic because it is uncertain whether a favorable report is a reflection of genuine suitability or if the candidate was fortunate enough to nominate a lenient referee.
Employers frequently neglect to implement a structured methodology for collecting information from referees, which contributes to the issue.
For example, referees may emphasize distinct aspects of the candidate’s past job performance or disregard negative information when they are asked excessively general or vague questions about the candidate.
ReseResearch indicates that the use of a standardized set of queries can result in more dependable results. establishes a more robust foundation for conducting a meaningful comparison between candidates.
Regrettably, referees continue to disagree on their evaluations, despite the use of a standardized assessment.
ThisThis disagreement may still be valuable, as it can reveal significant contextual differences in the candidate’s performance. example, one adjudicator may have observed a candidate leading a team, while another may have only seen their project work.
Nevertheless, it is imperative for employers to comprehend these disparate viewpoints.
A reference is an inadequate predictor of future performance.
A selection method that is valid is job-specific and offers valuable insights into the candidate’s actual performance in the position.
Reference checks are a comparatively straightforward obstacle for candidates to surmount, as referees are typically self-selected and the majority of job seekers can locate at least one colleague who is willing to provide a favorable review.
Additionally, the performance of a candidate in a previous role may not always be pertinent to the position for which they are applying.
Due to these factors, reference checks exhibit only a negligible correlation with employee performance in their new position.
However, employers should not rely exclusively on reference checks due to their limited capacity to foretell performance.
The most effective strategy is to implement a combination of tests.
Structured interviews, pre-employment assessments, and work samples are potentially beneficial methods for predicting employee performance, according to a recent systematic review of employee selection methods.
Pre-hirWhere applicable, pre-hiring assessments can disclose information regarding an individual’s cognitive ability, integrity, personality, emotional intelligence, and job knowledge. e particularly beneficial for the evaluation of a large number of applicants, such as for graduate recruitment programs.
UltimateIn the final analysis, the job selection process should be customized to meet the specific requirements of the position. ple, if a position necessitates exceptional writing abilities, this could be evaluated through pre-hiring assessments or work samples.
Certain candidates may be negatively affected.
A fair sA equitable selection method is one that is impartial and does not prioritize irrelevant information. not discriminate against individuals based on their cultural heritage, age, or gender identity.
Reference reviews possess numerous potential drawbacks from this standpoint.
One possibility is that candidates may not have access to referees of comparable credibility.
For example, an individual from a high socioeconomic background is more probably to have access to senior leaders or experienced professionals in relevant disciplines who are willing to provide positive reports.
Existing disparities may be reinforced through reference reviews.
In most Referees will typically prefer to submit favorable evaluations. eferee is a close colleague of the job applicant, they may be apprehensive that negative reports will be traced back to them and impact their ongoing relationship..
In an effort to get clear of under-performers, employers may be incentivized to provide them with a glowing review.
Referees are unlikely to lose their reputation if they praise an average candidate, particularly if the referee is not part of the employer’s professional network, as the majority of references are challenging to verify.
According to research, letters of recommendation can actually be detrimental to female candidates by raising questions about their capability.
For example, letters regarding female candidates are more likely to include negativity (e.g., “has limited teaching experience”), scant praise (“requires minimal supervision”), and hedging (“has the potential to become a strong performer”).
These statements may result in employers conducting a more stringent assessment of female candidates.
Nevertheless, this bias is not present when a structured questionnaire is employed.
A tool that is valuable despite its defect
While reReference reviews continue to be prevalent; however, their constraints are evident. be unreliable, provide only moderate validity in predicting performance at best, and raise concerns about impartiality.
However,Nevertheless, it is important to retain the reference tests. es can still be incorporated as a final stage in a comprehensive hiring process by incorporating structured questioning and other well-established employee selection methods.
