As the Government has learned to its cost, not following a good recruitment process can be extremely damaging. The Prime Minister’s judgement has been called into question with the latest hiring and firing of Peter Mandelson.
Such reputational damage will normally be the preserve of governments and other employers in the limelight. But there are many other “costs” to getting recruitment wrong. Not least the fact that the Government is introducing day one unfair dismissal rights, making it much more difficult to quickly correct hiring errors.
Recruitment is expensive. Advertising, appraising applications, interviewing, and then the resources required to train them up. When it doesn’t work out, it may be back to the drawing board, back to your bank account!
Fail to spot a bad apple and you might find your company culture eroded by a disruptive attitude, poor attendance or persistent underperformance. And then there is the opportunity cost of not picking the gamechanger – the person your business was crying out for that slipped through your fingers.
A survey in 2024 found that more than 50% of hires left their role within the first six months because of “shift shock” – a role not meeting their expectations.
With so much at stake each time you hire, it pays to have strong recruitment processes; and better still, work on improving them every time.
From job description and person spec to interview and induction, there is a process to follow and care and judgement to be exercised. In light of the Government’s recent high-profile error, I want to single out the importance of background checks and collection of references.
Collecting references
It is typical to ask for references relating to the two most recent employments. Where possible, ask for these in writing. If they are given by phone, take detailed notes and keep them on file.
You may already be clued up that it is inadvisable to give subjective references (due to legal risk), so you may only receive a brief “job title, salary and dates of employment”. Or, as long as it is fair and accurate, a reference may include details about performance and the nature of the employment’s end.
Unless the previous employer operates in a regulated industry like financial services, or there was written agreement to do so, they are not obliged to provide a reference at all. It is possible to draw conclusions by an absence of information too.
However, in this circumstance or where, say, they do not have previous employment, you could ask for a character reference. When requesting this, be precise in what it is you want the reference to cover.
Further background checks
Some roles, particularly those which involve working with children or other vulnerable people, will require DBS checks, of which there are three levels: basic, standard and enhanced. These can be initiated online.
Where qualifications are important to the role, you should always ask for physical copies of the certificates. Looking on LinkedIn to check these match what they are telling you in their CV and job interview is not foolproof, as information can be fabricated.
Don’t forget the requirement to perform “right to work” checks. There are expensive, punitive consequences for failure to do this. For a British or Irish national, a robust check of a passport is all that is required. For overseas workers you have other options (which is a whole other topic in itself).
What about if a reference is not satisfactory? Well, it is time to use your judgement. You may choose to sensitively raise it with the candidate to gain their perspective. Perhaps they have learnt from a mistake or can explain it away.
Or maybe you have just dodged a bullet. As Jim Collins, author of Good to Great, famously said: “People are not your most important asset. The right people are”.
