I am now retired but would really like to put an old situation from my work life “to bed”.
Some time ago, I got a job as a manager in a government instrumentality recovering from a major reshuffle. One of my early tasks was to recruit my direct reports. I advertised internally and got several responses, many of which came from applicants I knew. One, however, I had never heard of – their submission was first class and their actual prior experience seemed unbeatable. In their references they had listed a senior manager I knew and trusted. I decided to give this manager a call.
In this scenario, management may have had good reason to take such a conservative approach.Credit: John Shakespeare
I was told this candidate’s submission was a pack of lies. I considered myself forewarned and didn’t waste any time interviewing them. End of story, as far as I was concerned. But the candidate complained, arguing they should have been interviewed. Senior management ruled that I was wrong to follow up the reference and proclaimed that in future all interviews were to take place before approaching referees. By implication, I had seriously erred and was to blame.
I’d like your thoughts.
You mentioned in your longer email that you were, at the time of your appointment to the manager position, new to recruiting. To a degree, then, you were engaging in some professional ad-libbing, and inadvertently ignoring recruitment customs (more on that in a moment).
From what I can gather, you contacted the referee, not because you had any suspicions – you didn’t think the resume was too good to be true – but because this candidate was the only one you weren’t familiar with. You wanted a bit of background before moving to the next stage of the process.
Management should have had such policies in place before you entered into this process.
With all this in mind, my first response upon reading your email was that senior management’s ruling that you were in the wrong seemed harsh. Yes, it was unorthodox – conventional wisdom suggests that referees only get contacted at the very end of the recruitment process, not towards the start – but it was a sensible decision, vindicated by what you discovered.
I realised, however, after speaking with some human resources professionals, that management may have had good reason to take such a conservative approach. What I assumed was a vague convention – you don’t contact a referee until you’ve decided – is, in fact, a matter of practicality.
