In parts One and Two of this four-part series, I outlined the “homework” required to best prepare yourself, a candidate and a reference for a formal reference interview. In this entry, details of the actual process, from questions to ask to delivering the results, are outlined.
Sample Questions
I have a list of questions I ask in almost every reference check. Among those questions, I avoid any inquiry directly based on family matters, gender, sexual identification/orientation, politics and religious affiliations. These kinds of inquiries trigger legal issues and can expose you and/or your organization to liability.
There are plenty of legal questions that reveal much about your candidate. These include:
- How long have you known him/her and in what capacity?
- What are his/her most obvious strengths?
- How would you rate or rank him/her amongst his/her peers?
- What do his/her supporters say about his/her leadership?
- What do his/her detractors say about his/her leadership?
- How does he/she handle conflict? Is this method effective?
- How does he/she manage change? Is this method effective?
- Do you see him/her as a compelling public representative of the organization?
- How will he/she address the challenges in the position description? Will he/she succeed?
- Do you see him/her as a fit for this leadership role? Explain.
While the actual answers to these questions are helpful, the most useful data I get comes from the follow-up to these questions or from nuances in the reference’s tone, pace and demeanor. If you have established good rapport with your reference, you can detect when to press further and how to get more information about sensitive topics. To gain that additional information, ask for examples and illustrations from the past as they tend to reveal a whole range of subtle, personal qualities and management traits that would not have otherwise surfaced.
I also get good data by asking references for quantitative rather than descriptive responses. For instance, if a reference with financial knowledge states the candidate “grew” the financial base of the organization, I will follow up and ask for a more precise dollar amount or percentage of growth. Or, if a reference reports that morale improved under the candidate’s leadership, I try to get evidence supporting the claim. If a reference gives a candidate a “nine” out of “ten” as a leader, I will not only ask about the specific qualities earning him/her a “nine,” but I will also ask what was missing that would have earned that “ten.”
Going beyond the obvious is key to acquiring your best information. The references can take you beyond the general traits listed on the resume into the territory of ultimate “fit” and “fitness” for a particular role. They can provide just the data needed for a decision to build a successful team around the candidate or to decide that the candidate would be a better Executive Director than a Chief Operations Officer. When you can shift the reference discussion from being an implicit endorsement to an explicit one, you have also increased the positive impact of that reference.
Reporting the Results
I let references know, up front, that their input will be treated with utmost confidentiality. Having said that, I have worked with hiring directors who want to see transcript-like documentation of the references’ commentary. I have also worked with those who require an oral report. Others want a summary synthesizing input from multiple sources.
No matter the format a client selects, I am able to report with greater clarity, detail and precision when I have concrete notes to support the analysis. Therefore, my preferred work style is to take detailed notes. After the references are concluded, however, I often destroy or discard written product.
More difficult than providing hiring directors with feedback is when the question arises about what to report to the candidate — especially when the reference, whose name was given in good faith by the candidate, turns out to be a detractor. While honor-bound to keep content confidential, if asked directly by a candidate about the reference process, I will sometimes suggest that the candidate “review” his/her list. Savvy candidates take the hint and go through their lists to detect any potentially damaging reference persons.
Whether or not a candidate has ever been surprised by a detracting reference, it is a good idea for candidates to periodically review their reference lists replacing “stale” references with more current ones. They are wise to also share their resumes and aspirations with those who become new additions to their reference list. The better a reference knows a candidate, the more likely the comments ring true. This will raise the level of accuracy of the candidate’s profile.
Now that we have explored the process of using references, the upcoming Part 4 brings the pieces together to define “A Great Reference” in the conclusion of this series.
#
Last updated on September 19th, 2012 at 11:01 am
Share this:
Thanks Karen for all the great write ups in all parts. I would like to thank you for the efforts you have put in composing this article.