In order to incorporate feedback from the references, it is crucial to select the 'right' references. I always ensure that the talent's references are the folks who have worked or managed him/her directly, then only a balanced, non-biased input can be received. I particularly avoid opting the references from a very senior person in the talent's office if I know that person won't be able to add meat to the matter. Let us please remember that this should not be a popularity contest where talent presents his/her CEO/CFO/CTO and we seek references from them even if they have hardly interacted/worked with the talent.

Reference checks have to be taken with a pinch of salt. Always read the undertones with how the reference is given. Is it true praise or are they happy to get that person being another company' headache. Always, read between the lines and use it to substantiate your decision and not the only criteria.

We use a 3rd-party non-biased online reference platform where the candidate inputs their references and the references receive a questionnaire and told that their responses are submitted confidentially and anonymously. One to two managers are required as part of their references and the other 2-3 references can be non-managers. When we get the report, the input is combined to give an overall score and there is a score in five other areas based on the type of position. The candidate doesn't get a copy, however, if the hiring manager wants to see the results, we can generate a Hiring Manager report. The candidate doesn't get a copy. If there are red flags, I will ask the candidate to elaborate with more details with a behavioral question.

-Proactively Address Weaknesses -Highlight Areas of Strength -Demonstrate Growth and Learning -Discuss Applied Feedback -Use STAR Method for Behavioral Questions -Showcase Professional Development -Seek Feedback During the Interview

I'm against receiving a reference and blindly sticking to it no matter how trusted the source is. I would use it (if it was negative) to probe/further question the candidate and since we're potentially starting an Employment relationship that is to be based on mutual trust, I can bring this to the table (keeping adequate anonymity if needed). Reference checks are to strengthen and validate a candidate's suitability, not determine his/her future.

Assuming that we have identified the right person to get the reference from, we should invest time in crafting meaningful questions to ask. If we don't have meaningful questions then we won't be able to collect critical information to be included in the interview. I personally focus on asking behavioural, situational, and personality based questions as that gives a lot of clarity about the talent. Then I tend to compare it with the interview to see where I am landing with the talent. The questions that we will be preparing to ask the person providing the reference should be based on the job role/seniority/level of people management required in the open role.

By definition, references are an extension of our experience which is, by definition, in the past. They can be useful if they create a pattern or coincide directly with the new role in question but they don’t reflect who the candidate is today anymore than our prom picture from high school. You recognize the person in the photo but time changes us all. With that said, questions built on material from a reference should focus on how the experience has shaped who the candidate is today. How has the experience from that time influenced future decisions? What important lessons does the candidate carry with her/him today? Answers to these questions can provide insight into self awareness and personal growth.

When it comes to hiring a talent then we want to hire a 'perfect' one and in our quest to find a perfect talent, we collect feedback from different sources and then we have a feedback from our own view of the CV/assessments/interviews with the talent. It is crucial to take all of this data and make a comparison to see the pattern that emerges out of there. There will always be a pattern - no matter what. And we want to focus on consistencies, discrepancies, and major gaps found (if any). A lot of talents tend to be extremely good at interviews and the answers from them 'sounds' ideal. And that's where the comparison and contrast of the feedback will prove to be very useful. The idea overall here is to make an informed decision.

Pour intégrer efficacement la rétroaction des références pendant une entrevue, il est essentiel d'utiliser des outils tels que des questionnaires structurés ou des évaluations standardisées pour collecter les commentaires. En les comparant et les contrastant avec les informations recueillies lors de l'entretien, on peut obtenir une vision plus globale du candidat. L'utilisation d'une grille d'évaluation permet également d'évaluer objectivement les compétences et les qualités requises pour le poste. En synthétisant ces informations, on peut prendre des décisions éclairées lors du processus de recrutement.

Follow-up on the progress is essential specially when there is a doubt or you require further clarifications. You should leave no stone unturned in finding all the information that you can in order to make a well-informed decision. There are times when the feedback might be unclear, might have the element of conflict, or won't match-up with your own assessment -- all of these scenarios require further discussion. It is a good idea to talk to the references + also give ample opportunity to the talents to explain their point of view.

Once all the feedback several sources (references, social check, BGC output, interview, assessment, working lunch, et al.), it is important to weight in the feedback to evaluate our hiring criteria for the role. Before arriving at the final decision for hiring, I always do the 'feedback reflection' exercise to analyse reliability, validity, and leadership potential as described in the references vs. what I have observed during my interactions with the talent. We need to remember that no one is 100% perfect. We need to consciously hire for the attitude and coach for the aptitude.

The final step in the process is to communicate feedback to the talents in an open, honest, and constructive manner. Whether we select the talent or not, our aim should always be to provide absolutely top-notch talent experience at all costs - which ultimately helps in building employer branding also slowly but surely. Remember to remain respectful and thank the talents for their time and effort to go through the assessment process with you/your team + for providing references to aid in your decision making process.

Constructive and clear feedback is crucial when providing interview feedback to candidates. Remember, the goal is to help candidates understand their performance and facilitate their growth, whether within or outside your organization.

🚀In the dynamic realm of recruitment, I suspect reference checking appears to lag behind the times. Is it a mere formality or an opportunity to deeply assess a candidate's suitability? The crucial considerations are the selection of referees and the overall intricacies of the process. I advocate the use of reference checks for their strategic use as a tool to uncover uncertainties, validate a candidate's contributions, and provide a relative assessment of their experience. Do the insights gleaned contribute to the selected hire's overall productivity?

Hi Menon ! Very well said... quite essential. However, some recruiters do these ref checks in haste to expedite closure. So that they get their due credit / incentives...this mind set need to change.. Regards