Recruitment - Taking up References

Most UK employers ask for references and correspondingly give information on ex-employees and staff who have secured jobs with other employers. Cooper and Robertson's study of references in selection (Cooper D and Robertson I, The Psychology of Personnel Selection, International Thomson, 1996) raises substantial questions about their validity of use. They find validity measures are low, averaging 0.14 and seldom more than 0.20. So why bother with them?

References are an administrative chore. We send out letters of request with stamped addressed envelopes, possibility a job description and possibly a pro forma questionnaire. We may seek a verbal, over the telephone reference. The ex-employer (or a personal referee) has to put in the effort to reply. As a tool of information capture the method is cheap - a letter, a stamp, a Fax, an EMail! The referee provides free assessment data on the applicant.

A referee's honesty and integrity is trusted and we assume that references

• bring in more information about the candidate-job fit (provided the referee has an insight to the job performance criteria!). The referee offers and opinion about whether or not the candidate will perform the job well.
• a reference - if it is to be trusted - confirms facts about the applicant. They are who they say they are and they do have the experience and qualifications claimed.

References and Security

Obtaining references is a security device for employers - to verify employee honesty and integrity. It is naive to always assume that the person is who they say they are, have done what they say they have done and are fully open about their background.

How do we test "integrity"?

• We could use an "integrity" test (they exist) which seeks to measure the willingness of candidates to conceal or falsely declare their position. The design, reliability and validity of such tests needs critical examination.

• The cock and bull story
  Questions and questioning strategies at interviews need to be highly developed and thorough to identify questions/answer inconsistencies which may reveal a fabricated history. A candidate may merely filter out negatives to present themselves in a positive light. (Non-disclosure of inadequacies). Is this dishonest? In terms of the person's construction of themselves - the candidate's self-image might be said to be strong in terms of integrity. As he/she sees it, their interpretation of themselves is an honest one!

  Various cases indicate the need for employers to pursue references from reliable others.

  • a doctor or nurse who practises on the basis of a fake qualification
  • the university senior manager whose stated qualifications on investigation were exaggerated
  • the applicant with a criminal charge (nb the Rehabiliation of Offenders Act) whose job qualifications are also falsified.

The UK driving test now requires learner drivers to present proof of identity. In a college examination situation, students must carry their ID card/mug shot to ensure that a "paid professional" is not substituting for them.

An application form may reveal a 15 year employment history. But some of the companies have disappeared or been taken over. Personnel records have been expunged. Staff in those firms who may have known the applicant have come and gone.

In selection terms, exploration of recent, biographical experience is generally the most fruitful albeit that an applicant may have been unempoyed for several years. It is easy to exaggerate the period spent in most recent jobs and the responsibilities and successes in those jobs.

Giving opinions on ability and job-fit
With such low validity measures, is there any point in seeking references giving opinions on ability and job-fit? Will a reference yield better information if the request is structured. i.e. required job competencies are given and referees are asked to rate applicants on these? Clearly the referee must be someone who has observed the performance of the individual concerned and even then semantic rating scales (excellent, good, satisfactory, poor etc) are interpreted subjectively.

Allowing applicants to nominate family friends as referees is likely to be of negligible value.

The Timing of References

Most organisations only take up references if the job offer is to be made (subject to references). They may then - on their own heads be it - not bother.

Applicants may not want their employer to know they are entering the job market. Do we have permission from applicants to contact referees (mainly their current employer) before they accept our offer of employment?

Do we offer finalise a contract of employment before we have heard from referees or rely on a clause in the offer letter i.e.

..this offer is made subject to satisfactory references being received.

Is there an obligation to give a reference?

An employer

• has the right to refuse giving a reference
• if a reference is given - the employer has a duty of care to
  1. the inquiring employer who may "rely" on the reference in selecting the employee.
  2. the (ex-)employee. The employer has an implied duty to take reasonable care in preparing/composing the reference. An employee may suffer damage from an inaccurate reference and may make a claim for negligence and loss due to the inaccuracy.

  In the UK, if an employee is dismissed, he/she is entitled to receive in writing the reasons for the dismissal

The Value-for-money Security Clearances

A recruitment agency will point to its systematic following-up and chasing of references as an indicator of the service quality it is providing. Chasing references may in addition involve

• a more complete security check e.g. for security guards, police or air-side airport staff. Such checks may involve obtaining the services of a specialist security investigating company.
• we may need to see copies of academic qualifications and licences to operate. We will have to verify that these are genuine in many cases e.g. for university academics, doctors and HGV drivers.

Satisfactory and unsatisfactory references

What do ordinary, general, satisfactory references reveal?

• What do we know about the referees, their obligation for honesty and their bias towards the person they are supporting (or otherwise)?
• What is their ability to present a detailed performance-related analysis of the candidate?

References involve trust, interpretation by the receiver and, for personal references, choice on the part of the candidate.

I always give my father-in-law as a reference. He has a different name and address than me. We play golf together. He likes me as mediate with his off-spring (my spouse) who pesters him!

Defamation

What happens if satisfactory references are not received? There is no obligation on an employer to provide an employee with a reference. Unwillingness to give a reference - the ominous silence - may itself be perceived to communicate something.

Factual Information Only

Those giving references must not to be defamatory or mis-represent. Yet a reference may be "thickly-worded" to help someone move on or "thinly-worded" to evidence difficulty in being positive (as indicated by this sentence).

Many companies have a policy of not permitting members of staff, other than the personnel office, to give personal references for past employees. Such company references will only give basic information - facts of past employment rather than criticise the performance of past employees.

the (employee name) worked for the company between (dates), in the post of (job and grade). His basic pay and average earnings at the point of leaving the company was (amounts). In the last year he had (days) of absence. The employee concerned left of his own accord. There were no disciplinary warnings outstanding. Whilst in our employment he was a member of the trade union recognised by the company. He attended three training courses in safety, customer relations and fork-lift truck driving.

Often an informal telephone conversation between managers or personnel officers will reveal more information (or unsubstantiated opinion) than a letter of reference. However, again the problem of defamation looms large.

---

---

BOLA is developed and maintained by Chris Jarvis