Posted by Greg Moran on Tue, Aug 31, 2010
New webinar announced today -
Candidate Selection Redefined: Better Hires Through Predictive, Online Reference Checking
Overview:
What is the single best predictor of success for a new hire? Technical skills, cultural fit, personality, experience? Could it be all of the above? Most likely, it is a combination of these attributes.
You really need to measure effectively
in all these areas to get the best hires. Sure, assessment tools can tell you about the personality fit, interviewing may give you a good sense of the cultural and skills fit, and the resume can tell you about their experience. But no one hiring tool can tell you more than colleagues who have worked with the candidate before.
That’s why reference checking, when done properly, is so important. It can actually tell you how candidates measure on all of these predictors … and more. The problem is getting a reference to provide any information beyond the basic verifications of salary, title and dates of employment.
No longer. Predictive, online reference checking has changed the rules.
Join Greg Moran, Founder and CEO of Chequed.com and author of Hire, Fire & The Walking Dead (W Business Books, 2006) for this 45-minute webinar. In it we will show you how to redefine candidate selection through predictive, online reference checking (or reference assessment).
Register Now
Topics to be covered:
- Why the phone based reference checking process doesn’t work … and never will again
- What is predictive, online reference checking and how does it vary from the traditional, phone based model
- How the science of predictive reference checking works
- Why predictive, online reference checking is faster, easier, cheaper and more legally secure than traditional reference checking
- How to forecast the ROI of predictive, online reference checking for your organization
- What a predictive, online reference checking tool looks like in action.
Who Should Attend:
1.) HR Executives & Professionals
2.) Sales and Operational Executives with an interest in consistently selecting top talent
Register Now
Posted by Greg Moran on Thu, Aug 26, 2010
In HR technology, you get pretty used to dealing with HR departments of all types. Proactive, innovative and creators of real business value … and the rest. In the most frustrating of days, we really start to wonder what the world would be like without HR.
Consider this scenario… when you show up for work tomorrow, the HR department has disappeared. Your first thought is:
a.) Holy crap. No one is getting paid and the paperwork will be in disarray
b.) We have an HR department? What do they do?
c.) My business is shot. We can’t get or keep the right people to service our customers and operations.
Some of you chose ‘C,’ and immediately thought of the impact losing HR would have on finding the right talent and keeping your team happy and performing. You may have thought of what this loss would mean for customers, revenue and execution. After all, with your HR team gone, these areas would surely suffer.
If this was your line of thought, great. Clearly your HR department and its goals are aligned with your business. It is playing a strategic role in your organization’s success and is driving real business and shareholder value. Give them tools, resources and a voice.
But …
More likely, your first thought was ‘B,’ or worse ‘A.’ It’s the payroll, benefits and employee paperwork that will fall apart. Necessary tasks but not very strategic for sure.
Unfortunately, this is the norm. This perception exists not only with executives outside of HR but often with HR staff as well: HR as the protector of policy (both sensical and non), keeper of the private paperwork and enforcer of the rules. Are these things important? Maybe. Could it be outsourced cheaper with better results? Probably.
A recent (and unfortunately very true) story comes to mind.
HR Manager: Great presentation. Can you send me a proposal with pricing? We are putting our budget together for next year.
ME: Sure, but I am not sure what we are going to be trying to accomplish together. Let’s have a discussion around the scope and the goals.
HR Manager: I really don’t have time. Can you just give me an estimate? We are looking at a lot of technologies right now and I want to make sure that we get them in the budget.
ME: OK but what are the technologies going to be focused on? What are they going to do for the company?
HR Manager: We are not sure yet. We will figure out the technology first and then figure out what to do with it. But, we need to get it in the budget before we loose it.
What this shows is a fundamental misalignment, an HR department without a clue as to how they can contribute (or even if they should). What a waste for an organization.
How you immediately answered the question on the loss of your HR department will tell you a lot on the value of your HR department. Should you actually dump it? Maybe not, but a thorough re-thinking of its structure, people and goals is probably required.
Love this posting or hate it? Keep the dialogue going. Leave a comment.
Posted by Greg Moran on Mon, Aug 23, 2010
Being in the business of predictive, online reference checking, we are assuring people that reference checking is not, in fact, illegal. There are legal considerations, however. We thought the below article might help alleviate some of those concerns
* * * * *
Reference checking may be the most important element of a sound hiring process. Let’s face it: No one is better able predict the future performance of your talent than past colleagues. It’s absolutely critical to get that perspective.
Unfortunately, too often reference checking gets short shrift. It can seem like a huge waste of time. You probably won’t get a call back from the majority of the references you contact. And even if they do respond, their legal concerns usually prevent them from sharing useful or accurate information about a candidate.
But the fact is that a good bit of the risk is only perceived. It’s not real. And the legal risks that are real may surprise you.
Let’s look at the difference between perception and reality and how you can reduce your company’s exposure.
Perception: Providing a reference check is legally risky
Reality: Only 2% of companies are targeted by reference-based defamation
This number comes from the 2004 Reference and Background Checking Survey Report compiled by the Society of HR Management. And those numbers haven’t changed significantly since then—very few companies are taken to court for providing a reference.
In fact, the same standard is applied to reference checking as to newspapers with libel suits. A candidate or employer needs to prove not just harm but also malicious and dishonest intent—which is a very high bar.
According to the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board Report to Congress in 2005, “As a general rule, actionable legal claims result from poor practice. They are not inherent in reference checking any more than libel is inherent in newspaper publishing.”
Managers should of course avoid being insulting, but they can provide the facts.
Perception: Making positive comments or only providing “name, rank and serial number” eliminates the legal risk of references.
Reality: The real risk is negligent hiring
When you think about it, there could be risk not just in making negative comments, but positive comments as well. If you make positive comments about a candidate and the prospective employer hires him and he does poorly, that company could turn around and sue you as a former employer for not disclosing complete information.
More than 40 states have reference immunity laws. These protect employers from civil liability for giving good-faith references or negative, truthful information. Employers who knowingly disclose information that is false or misleading are not protected under these laws—and they lose 72% of those lawsuits.
So, yes, reference checking can be risky, but consider the risks of a hiring manager going into an ill-prepared interview and closing the door behind him. The whole hiring process is risky.
Fortunately there are ways to reduce the risk inherent in reference checking. With predictive, online reference checking (ORC), you use an online questionnaire, job-validated data and then aggregate those responses into one report. This way, you not only assuage references’ legal concerns—you also make your hiring process more effective and efficient.
Let’s look at some more real legal risks of reference checking and how to avoid them.
Real risk: Unstructured reference checking
When reference checking is unstructured, questions are developed usually by the hiring manager, based on her experience and what she knows about the demands of the job. The problem is, that process of questionnaire development is completely subjective, which means it’s also biased. Bias is exactly what you don’t want in your hiring process if you want to avoid legal risk.
Online reference checking virtually eliminates bias because the tool derives reference questions based on data from high performers who have done the job. Questions are close-ended and relevant to the position. You’ve not only taken the subjectivity out of the reference check process, you’ve also made the reference check a dramatically more effective tool for predicting future performance.
Real risk: Reference’s perception of risk generates low response rates
If you hire without getting reasonable response on your reference checks, you’re hiring with only a partial view of your candidate. Without the full picture, you’re risking poor performance and increased turnover.
So how do you help references be more forthcoming about their former colleague?
First of all, you grant them anonymity. With ORC, you can require a minimum number of responses that are all aggregated anonymously into one report. Letting references know this as they begin the survey makes them more comfortable being honest.
Actual reference answers are combined and scored with the answers of the other references. Names, company, job title, contact information and relationship history (to the candidate) are fully disclosed so you know who completed the reference, but how they specifically rated the candidate is
Second, you let the reference request come from the candidate. Think about the dynamic with phone-based reference checking: an HR representative—a stranger to the reference—is calling on behalf of the reference’s former colleague, who may also be a friend. Most people, if they return the call at all, will tend to want to help out their buddy and this can result in “rosier,” less accurate responses.
But since ORC collects responses via a candidate-sent survey link, references are more inclined to complete the survey. In fact, our data for ChequedReferenceÔ, our ORC tool, shows better than 80% of references will respond with the needed data, and not just “name rank and serial number,” despite corporate policies.
Plus, since that survey is formulated to make providing the “right answer” hard to do, responses are more accurate. You’re more likely to elicit responses that reflect the candidate’s true behaviors, traits and skills.
Reference checking, like any other component of the hiring process, can have risks. Common sense can aid in the process a great deal. New technologies such as predictive, online reference checking can also provide not only legal protection but a far better, more reliable and more efficient hire.
If you’d like to learn more, you might be interested in reading our new eBook called Reference Checking Isn't a Waste of Time ... You're Just Doing it Wrong, which looks at hoe to implement an impactful reference checking program in your company.
Posted by Greg Moran on Wed, Aug 18, 2010
Happy to announce the launch of our new eBook today.
Download our complimentary new eBook titled Reference Checking Isn't a Waste of Time ... You're Just Doing it Wrong to learn ...
- The real reason many references refuse to provide information (hint: it’s not corporate policy)
- How to consistently get 80%+ of references to complete with minimal staff time and effort
- A scientifically proven way to gather accurate, reliable, valid and predictive information from each reference provider
- How to reduce legal exposure and liability in your hiring process
Click the eBook graphic above to download.
Posted by Greg Moran on Mon, Aug 09, 2010
Think reference checking is a giant waste of time? Have some positions coming up and want to increase the likelihood of a successful hire?
Our new free trial program of ChequedReference may be just the answer you have been looking for.
First, reference checking is a waste of time ... if you don't do it right. ChequedReference ensures a high completion rate and accurate and candid reference feedback done is 90% less time.
We announced today the launch of our new ChequedReference (TM) predictive, automated reference checking, free trial program. There is no credit card required, no limitations on the usage (it's a fully functioning trial) and no obligation. Here is the link to the press release.
Also, click the button below to register for your free trial.
Posted by Greg Moran on Tue, Aug 03, 2010
Saratoga Springs, NY – 7/15/10 – Online reference checking and pre-employment testing provider Chequed.com, Inc. announced it has closed a financing round from a combination of current and new angel investors. The financing round was lead by Martin Babinec, Founder of TriNet Group, Inc. and current Chairman of Upstate Venture Connect, Inc.
Read the full release ...
Posted by Greg Moran on Wed, Jul 21, 2010
We just posted a new edition of the HR Thought Leadership Series. This edition is with Peter Cappelli. From his new Harvard Business 
Review article, Peter discusses:
- Why having a strong corporate mission and responsibility matters to the bottom line
- How "Employees First, Customers Second" may be the path to success
- The difference between Transformational and Transactional Leadership and why it matters.
Head over to the HR Thought Leadership area to hear the interview.
Posted by Greg Moran on Thu, Jul 15, 2010
Found a great article that is a really quick read on the importance of employee screening in the QSR/casual dining/restaurant industry. Chequed.com has been doing a great deal of work in this area. During the last week in July, look for a new white paper that we are producing called "The Five Most Common QSR/Casual Dining Hiring Mistakes" and then a webinar (soon to be promoted) on August 19 covering the same type of content.
Read the article here ... http://smartblogs.com/restaurants/2010/07/14/q-and-a-tips-for-restaurant-recruiting/
Posted by Greg Moran on Mon, Jul 12, 2010
Here is a link to the formal release.
Here is the gist ... Chequed.com announced today the formal release of our new HR Thought Leader Interview Series. These are a series of interviews with the world's best thinkers on HR, recruiting, employee screening, workforce development, performance management, etc. The interviews are released in either podcast or video (depending on the specific guest). The interviews are strategic in nature and focused on ideas that you can put to work today. The first interview with Dave Ulrich is available immediately.
Click here to subscribe to the feed.
Posted by Greg Moran on Tue, Jul 06, 2010
If you missed the "Recruiting Isn't a Waste of Time ... You're Just Doing It Wrong" webinar on June 25, here is the Q&A. You can also view it online now by clicking here.
NOTE: While many more questions were asked at the live webinar, we condensed and combined many questions for simplicity. We also posted just the most broadly applicable below.
QUESTION: How can you be sure that the references are business references & that the candidate isn't sending the link to friends, family, or “cherry picked” colleagues?
ANSWER: You specify the type of references required. All reference contact info, including phone, email, contextual comments and professional relationship with candidate are provided to the hiring manager. All references are also required to state whether they are willing to be contacted, or not, for additional information.
Additionally, candidates must disclose where a reference provider currently works and the workplace in which they were together. This helps Chequed verify by email domain address.
The problem with phone based reference checking is that most candidates submit references they believe to be favorable. Allowing for anonymous feedback on closed ended, scientifically constructed, competency based questions is the only way to get truly honest, accurate feedback, even from “cherry picked” references.
QUESTION: What is the difference between this type of service and outsourced, 3rd party reference checking, or paying a “fee for information” from a data warehouse?
ANSWER: There are three main differences. 1) With ChequedReference, it’s the candidate that is asking the reference for assistance, not some unknown company or individual asking the reference to answer questions. Obviously, a reference is more likely to heed the request of the reference than a 3rd party. 2) Outsourced services still get mostly “name, rank and serial number”, even from those few references that respond, because of the disconnect between the candidate position and reference checker. With ChequedReference, the request comes directly from the candidate and our data definitively shows over 80% of references will provide the needed data, not just “name, rank and serial number”, despite corporate policies. 3) The cost of ChequedReference is unlimited use, license based, allowing you to check more references, earlier in the process than is economically feasible with any other method.
QUESTION: Do you have any statistics on how many organizations are now utilizing this type of reference check?
ANSWER: Solid statistics on the use of online reference checking are hard to attain as it is an emerging field of employee selection. However, it is gaining significant traction and popularity among large and small companies with a significant portion of the Fortune 500 utilizing some tools today. In addition, the Society of Human Resource Management (SHRM) has documented its growing role in employee selection on numerous occasions in its various publications.
QUESTION: Do you have any suggestions about how to handle references that will only release dates of employment, title, etc. and not performance information?
ANSWER: We would recommend a candidate lead process such as this (combined with confidentiality for the reference provider) to dramatically increase completion rates. By having a candidate provide the “ask” to the reference (much the same was as in ChequedReference with the system generated emails), the reference is much more likely to complete. Recent research shows an average of over 80% completion rates when done in accordance.
QUESTION: If the candidate is interviewing for multiple jobs is the same reference used each time?
ANSWER: All references are correlated to an underlying job profile or benchmark to ensure job relevancy in the reference check. If a candidate has applied for multiple jobs, our suggestion would be to use (1.) Distinct references (if possible) for each job, or (2.) Unique questions related to each position for which a reference is being checked. However, in our experience, typically the references are checked on only final candidates so the instances of the same candidate requiring references for multiple jobs are rare.
QUESTION: With anonymous references, how are we able to build a candidate pool?
ANSWER: While actual reference answers are used in the aggregate only (combined and scored with the answers of the other references), the names, company, job title, contact information and relationship history (to the candidate) are fully disclosed, i.e. you know who completed the reference, you just don’t know specifically how they rated the candidate. Thus, when appropriate and in accordance with relevant policy, the references can be added to your candidate marketing database to maintain contact for future opportunities.
QUESTION: Does ChequedReference integrate with any applicant tracking systems?
ANSWER: ChequedReference is built on the most current open source and XML standards and is simple to integrate with most applicant tracking systems available today.