I get calls on a regular basis to provide formal and informal references on people in my industry.
First things first: Reference checks are not background checks.
Reference checks are subjective. Reference checks are unreliable and invalid ways of measuring someone’s knowledge, skills and abilities. Reference checks are what you do when you want to know if someone is a jerk.
Background checks give you facts like name, rank, and serial number. You’ll learn about prior convictions and educational achievements.
The difference between a background check and a reference check is essential. Background checks will tell you if someone has been arrested or convicted; however, reference checks will give you gossip and tell you if someone is an itinerant drug addict.
When I’m asked to provide a reference for someone, I have a few rules.
Now I just gave you my three guidelines on reference checking, and I have to tell you that I violated one of them just recently.
An executive asked me what I thought about a man in our industry. I had a pretty strong reaction because, frankly, I don’t like the candidate. He’s a dick.
I sat with my words and thought, Jesus, that’s not fair. This dude seems like a good husband and parent. I don’t know him beyond industry events and social media. While I have an opinion on just about everything in this world, my viewpoint is layered with my personal bullshit and baggage.
And I had to admit that he has what it takes to move this company to the next level.
So I called the recruiter and ate some crow. I walked throrefereI think this guy could do the job.
(He was hired!)
So remember that, unless you’re protecting an organization from a serial killer or a child molester, you should either decline to offer a reference or stick to my three rules.
You never know when those three rules will help you out, too.
This was originally published on the Laurie Ruettimann blog.