Truly helpful reference checking
The vast majority of reference check calls should really be labeled validation calls.
December 10, 2012 at 02:15 AM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
The vast majority of reference check calls should really be labeled validation calls. Once you have selected a winner, you have a few pleasant conversations with folks who will offer comforting, and hopefully enthusiastic, thumbs up on the candidate you want to hire. The dutiful among you will press references for some insights on perceived weaknesses or areas needing improvement.
But it is a rare reference call that will cause you to actually change your mind on a candidate. In fact, many busy general counsel will delegate reference checking to a recruiter (internal or external).
I offer two best practices thoughts on making reference checks more relevant and valuable. First, reference check while the interview process remains competitive. When you are down to two or three finalists, reference conversations can really inform your selection. You may notice a difference in enthusiasm levels, and if so, that can help guide you toward the right hire. And if reference comments raise yellow flags on a candidate, you are more likely to let that new information influence your decision. It's far more difficult to pull back on a choice you have already made.
If this best practice sounds too time consuming, you can delegate some calls to the recruiter in charge of the opening. Just be sure you trust the recruiter to make useful calls. Because recruiters want to get the position filled, they tend to throw softballs. Because I value my long-term credibility, I have delivered yellow- and red-flag reference comments to our clients. Again, this feedback is most helpful when two or three strong finalists are still competing.
Recognizing that most candidate-proffered references will be positive, my second best practice suggestion is a simple technique for getting added value from those calls. When a reference is a “no reservations” cheerleader for the candidate—those are good calls—make this disarming comment: “Thank you, I think Jane would be an excellent addition to our team.” Followed by: “If she joins our department, I want to make sure that we maximize her potential. I would welcome your thoughts on the management style that, in your opinion, is the most conducive to getting the best from Jane and keeping her happy.”
This approach often yields helpful comments on what makes the candidate tick. Everyone wants to hire self-motivated inside counsel, but motivation is always influenced to a degree by management style. Some people respond well to constructive criticism, for example, while others get defensive. A little insight from a former supervisor can help you get the new hire off to a fast and sustainable start.
Lastly, you may be tempted to call one or two people who are not on the candidate-proffered reference list. As a recruiter, this approach makes me nervous, but not because I fear negative comments. I worry about confidentiality issues when a candidate is currently employed. So if you must make a “behind the scenes” reference call, please be careful. Worst-case scenario, though rare, your company could face liability if candidate confidentiality is breached and a termination results.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllBallooning Workloads, Dearth of Advancement Opportunities Prime In-House Attorneys to Pull Exit Hatch
The Reason a GC Abruptly Departs May Not Be What You Think
Trending Stories
- 1Can The Threat of a Bar Complaint Be a Settlement Tool?
- 2Sentencing Commission Addresses Inconsistent Definitions of “Loss”
- 3What Are Forbidden Sexual Relations With Clients?
- 4AEDI Takeaways: Demystifying Hype, Changing Caselaw & Harvey’s CEO Talks State of Industry
- 5New England Law | Boston Announces New Dean
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250