Often, new clients relay horror stories about how a hire did not work out. And, time after time, they reveal they never checked references.  (What??!!) So, to help avoid some predictable problems, here are my suggested “Rules of Reference” for hiring:

Request at least three references: If a candidate can’t initially come up with three work/professional references, there’s a problem.  Make it a requirement to provide them. But, don’t stop there.  As the candidate progresses through the recruiting process, ask for additional references. Start your reference checking with a former supervisor of the candidate. Don’t speak to a candidate’s current boss until an offer is on the table. Speaking to current managers or even to persons who are with the candidate’s current employer can put the candidate in a bad place if he or she doesn’t accept the position you are offering. One good tactic is to have an offer contingent on a reference from the current supervisor.

Take everything in context: In my mind, there are no “good” and no “bad” references. What I do is put together a series of specific questions addressing the candidate’s ability to do the job for which my client is hiring.  From there, I assess the candidate’s ability to work in the client’s culture. So, for instance, if a reference says the candidate spent too much time on the details and not the big picture, that can be a good thing – even if it is given in a negative context – if my client is looking for someone detail oriented and focused on specifics.

Also, you need to really listen to what the reference says and how the references phrases responses. As my Mom says, “Many a truth said in jest.” Therefore, hearing a jovial, “Oh, he really loved to flirt with the staff,” is actually a signal that you may want to further investigate the situation.

Make questions specific to the job: Create a list of position- and culture-specific questions.  For example, ask, “How many visits did he make to prospects each month?” not “Did he have contact with donors?” The reference process should be used to see a full picture of a candidate. If references give the same adjectives and to describe the candidate, it can help confirm those qualities – good and bad.

Asking follow-up questions to get specific information will get the reference talking.  Try saying, “Can you give me an example of . . .?” which will always give you more information than asking a “yes” or “no” question.  Other good follow-up questions include, “What did she do when that happened?” or “How did he handle that?” These are questions that will keep a reference talking.  And, the more a reference talks about the candidate, the better it is for you and the assessment you are trying to make.

Questions, not conversation: Often, candidates will provide names for references of people we already know as colleagues. Inevitably, when we call them, the conversation turns into a friendly chat. A reference check is only helpful if you get more specifics on the candidate, so you must make sure that at the end of the reference check you do, in fact, have the information about the candidate you need.

Character references are not work references: We all want to work with trustworthy and upstanding people, but if they can’t do the jobs for which they were hired, then we have done them and our organization a disservice. Particularly in nonprofits, people can be well-intentioned but misinformed about what is actually required of holding certain positions.  When checking references, we could hear that the person is “so dedicated to the mission” or that “She was my daughter’s Brownie troop leader.”  Both statements are great to hear and imply a certain level of character, but you then need to determine if the information is applicable to the position.

Having strong, personal characteristics is not the same as being qualified for particular positions.  So, if someone isn’t qualified for the job, don’t hire that person! Invite that person to dinner, but DON’T extend an offer for employment.

For the life of me, I will never understand why organizations are not more diligent about reference checking. With concerns about legal issues aside*, referencing is part of properly vetting candidates.  (*Actually, in most states, a reference is considered “privileged communication,” and as long as the person giving the reference acts without malice, the former employer is protected.)  Conducting an informative reference check involves time, but isn’t investing time better than having someone depart less than a year or so into a job because he or she wasn’t a good fit (and that could have been foreseeable with more information from those who know the person)?

What are your concerns about conducting references? What experience can you share that can help others in referencing candidates? Send me a comment so we can make this an easier process for hiring managers.

Next, I’ll share my rules of reference for job candidates to follow.

Carmel Napolitano is a New York City based independent executive search consultant for the philanthropic, nonprofit, and public sectors. With over 20 years of experience, Carmel started her career in higher education fundraising, She has an exceptional track record of placing senior staff at local, regional, national, and global organizations. For more information take a look at her website, http://www.cgnassociates.wordpress.com or email her at cgnexecsearch@gmail.com.

#