Hi,
How to judge a candidate based on the reference check and the background verification for the IT industry. Reference is given by the candidate and that would be a person whom the candidate knows, whereas the background verification is from the previous organization:
1. What if the candidate didn't leave the organization with good notes (in many cases the previous employer might not relieve them from duties or kept their salary on hold since the notice period; so they get absconding (Reference is a mid-sized & small companies).
2. Concern is not only with the Operational team but also supporting teams like Marketing, HR, Finance.
3. Isn't the background verification and reference check contradictory in itself?
Cheers!!! Neethu
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
3How to judge a candidate based on the reference check and the background verification for the IT industry. Reference is given by the candidate and that would be a person whom the candidate knows, whereas the background verification is from the previous organization:
1. What if the candidate didn't leave the organization with good notes (in many cases the previous employer might not relieve them from duties or kept their salary on hold since the notice period; so they get absconding (Reference is a mid-sized & small companies).
2. Concern is not only with the Operational team but also supporting teams like Marketing, HR, Finance.
3. Isn't the background verification and reference check contradictory in itself?
Cheers!!! Neethu
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Neethu,
When you hire an employee, what is most important to you? Remain clear about how much historical information is important to current decision-making. Objective data validation is entirely different from a subjective version of an employee's behavior.
A background verification allows you to validate the data, including education, past employment, travel/passport, and certain personal details such as family status for issuing medical claim.
Whereas, a reference check will require the ex-reporting managers to comment on the employee's performance. If you can manage to get the ranking, it will give you a comparative view of the annual performance measure.
However, a manager's feedback will have incidents narrated to support the manager's view to the employee.
You have to decide where you can draw a line between hearsay and data. Future performance will depend on the environment you create for your employee. Hence, the choice is entirely yours.
An exit process is often mismanaged both by the employee and the employer. When you receive feedback on this area, please weigh the details. If an employer claims that Knowledge Transfer was not done even after the notice period was over, doesn't that speak volumes about the employer's processes? Whereas if an employee absconded without completing the formalities or even serving the notice period, it needs to be investigated with the employee. There can be genuine reasons, but that needs to be supported with data.
I am not clear about your second question. Please explain it a little more for us to comment.
I have already answered it. However, if you have any further questions, please revert.
Regards,
(Cite Contribution)
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
When you hire an employee, what is most important to you? Remain clear about how much historical information is important to current decision-making. Objective data validation is entirely different from a subjective version of an employee's behavior.
A background verification allows you to validate the data, including education, past employment, travel/passport, and certain personal details such as family status for issuing medical claim.
Whereas, a reference check will require the ex-reporting managers to comment on the employee's performance. If you can manage to get the ranking, it will give you a comparative view of the annual performance measure.
However, a manager's feedback will have incidents narrated to support the manager's view to the employee.
You have to decide where you can draw a line between hearsay and data. Future performance will depend on the environment you create for your employee. Hence, the choice is entirely yours.
An exit process is often mismanaged both by the employee and the employer. When you receive feedback on this area, please weigh the details. If an employer claims that Knowledge Transfer was not done even after the notice period was over, doesn't that speak volumes about the employer's processes? Whereas if an employee absconded without completing the formalities or even serving the notice period, it needs to be investigated with the employee. There can be genuine reasons, but that needs to be supported with data.
I am not clear about your second question. Please explain it a little more for us to comment.
I have already answered it. However, if you have any further questions, please revert.
Regards,
(Cite Contribution)
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Background check verification and reference check are two different aspects.
Reference check is provided by the prospective employee to the employer to receive feedback on them, which is usually positive (almost all the time).
Background check verification is conducted by an external agency. This agency verifies whether the details provided by the prospective employee are true or not.
Background checks are typically carried out for individuals at managerial levels as they will be handling highly sensitive and confidential company data. Therefore, to maintain company confidentiality, it is essential to conduct a background verification. This practice is beneficial for the company in the future if it is conducted for all new employees expected to join.
Regards,
Bharghavi
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Reference check is provided by the prospective employee to the employer to receive feedback on them, which is usually positive (almost all the time).
Background check verification is conducted by an external agency. This agency verifies whether the details provided by the prospective employee are true or not.
Background checks are typically carried out for individuals at managerial levels as they will be handling highly sensitive and confidential company data. Therefore, to maintain company confidentiality, it is essential to conduct a background verification. This practice is beneficial for the company in the future if it is conducted for all new employees expected to join.
Regards,
Bharghavi
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear All,
I suppose this is going to be a very rare thing, but it really gives a bad/negative impression to the HR. How are you going to deal with the negative feedback received against the employee from his ex-employer when it seems to be false information in nature? This is purely due to conflict and misunderstanding between the employee and his superior (ex-employer). At times, due to a grudge on employees, ex-employers have given false information.
1) How are you guys going to deal with such a situation?
2) What is the best way to secure realistic feedback about the employee?
With profound regards
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I suppose this is going to be a very rare thing, but it really gives a bad/negative impression to the HR. How are you going to deal with the negative feedback received against the employee from his ex-employer when it seems to be false information in nature? This is purely due to conflict and misunderstanding between the employee and his superior (ex-employer). At times, due to a grudge on employees, ex-employers have given false information.
1) How are you guys going to deal with such a situation?
2) What is the best way to secure realistic feedback about the employee?
With profound regards
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hello,
In the first place, the purpose of an interview is to get an "internal view" of the candidate to see/learn those aspects of the candidature that are not necessarily evident from the resume and/or related documents. Easier said than done! Almost similar to writing a three-hour question paper and securing a good grade is not necessarily a guarantee of the competence of the candidate; the art and skill of interviewing remain inadequate to provide complete knowledge about the candidature!
Yet, to be safer than sorry, the profession has devised various mechanisms to improve the selection process. Regrettably, even those are NOT infallible!
Reference checks can become an exercise in futility as I have never come across a reference reporting adversely about the candidate. Yet, we may insist upon references to be provided from teachers at the school or college level who will remember the candidate as a student! Similarly, background checks, whether done by an external agency or departmentally, should focus on earlier employers rather than just the previous employer! We may ask for references from clients that the candidate may have serviced in the past if he had such an interface at all.
Whatever is done, both the reference check and the background check are not contradictory, though they may be futile. In the ultimate analysis, if cold data, comprising subjective responses of some human beings, were used to decide the fate of the candidate, it would be unfortunate. Like Lee Iacocca said about decision-making being an art of collecting and analyzing all possible data and then taking a "leap of faith." Even in the HR field, this "leap of faith" is essential to be taken. Collect all possible data about a prospective candidate, but YOU decide! In any case, no decision is right or wrong when it is made. It is proved right or wrong always in retrospect. At least in the HR field, I have found it to be so true, and it drove the fear of decision-making away!
Kindly note that I am NOT undermining any method. There is no conflict among various methods. To get the most out of such methods, it is essential that the human mind is applied!
Regards,
Samvedan
October 30, 2012
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In the first place, the purpose of an interview is to get an "internal view" of the candidate to see/learn those aspects of the candidature that are not necessarily evident from the resume and/or related documents. Easier said than done! Almost similar to writing a three-hour question paper and securing a good grade is not necessarily a guarantee of the competence of the candidate; the art and skill of interviewing remain inadequate to provide complete knowledge about the candidature!
Yet, to be safer than sorry, the profession has devised various mechanisms to improve the selection process. Regrettably, even those are NOT infallible!
Reference checks can become an exercise in futility as I have never come across a reference reporting adversely about the candidate. Yet, we may insist upon references to be provided from teachers at the school or college level who will remember the candidate as a student! Similarly, background checks, whether done by an external agency or departmentally, should focus on earlier employers rather than just the previous employer! We may ask for references from clients that the candidate may have serviced in the past if he had such an interface at all.
Whatever is done, both the reference check and the background check are not contradictory, though they may be futile. In the ultimate analysis, if cold data, comprising subjective responses of some human beings, were used to decide the fate of the candidate, it would be unfortunate. Like Lee Iacocca said about decision-making being an art of collecting and analyzing all possible data and then taking a "leap of faith." Even in the HR field, this "leap of faith" is essential to be taken. Collect all possible data about a prospective candidate, but YOU decide! In any case, no decision is right or wrong when it is made. It is proved right or wrong always in retrospect. At least in the HR field, I have found it to be so true, and it drove the fear of decision-making away!
Kindly note that I am NOT undermining any method. There is no conflict among various methods. To get the most out of such methods, it is essential that the human mind is applied!
Regards,
Samvedan
October 30, 2012
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Looking for something specific? - Join & Be Part Of Our Community and get connected with the right people who can help. Our AI-powered platform provides real-time fact-checking, peer-reviewed insights, and a vast historical knowledge base to support your search.