Running Strong Reference Checks

Part 1: Choosing the right people

Reference checks are a core part of my interviewing process. I can't recall the last time I hired someone without thoroughly understanding their past collaborations with people I trust will be open and honest with me.

The reality is that both candidates and companies engage in this elaborate dance, each trying to present a polished version of reality. There are even strategies on how to spin weaknesses into strengths. Rough edges? Smooth them out!

We all need to go through this process. But it has quite a few issues.

1. As a hiring manager, your mission is to understand your team and unearth the potential within each member. This means identifying not just strengths but also areas they need support with — especially new hires.
2. Even the most candid individuals can't provide a full 360° view of themselves. We all have our truth and are biased by our narrative and blind spots. We're all a bit like Swiss cheese, riddled with holes of biases and blind spots.
3. In startups, the margin for error is small. A misfit may cause a rift in the culture, potentially setting you back half a year or more, especially in key roles. And when there's a fire under you to fill a role, it's easy to miss the warning signs.
4. The same applies to candidates, too: it's not in their best interest to join, and in the process reject offers from other companies, only to find out a few months later it doesn't work out and they need to job hunt again.
5. People who have developed the skill to present themselves well and sell a good story (including salespeople) have an advantage. That's great — presentational skills are important but hardly so important in the daily grind of startup life.

I'm following a process for reference checks that is atypical and heavily based on trust, clarity, and open communication.

The basic principles are also applicable in reverse: the candidate running references on the company.

Run references after you're sold on a candidate

References are not just tools to collect data and validate your decision — they're tools to challenge it. They're meant to try and change your already made-up mind. They're like test cases in code: they're there to validate your work and introduce variables you haven't considered.

Hold off on references until you're convinced you've got an A-player on the line. Only after you've hashed out the details—compensation, start date, the whole nine yards— should you get information into their past through the eyes of others.

It's important to fully go through this process in order to build the trust and information you need so you can filter what you hear and evaluate the information you're getting.

Transparency is key

Ensure the candidate understands your process and how you will handle the feedback. Explain your hiring process early and in detail — it will help them know what to expect.

Inform the candidate about whom you'll speak with. Ask them, "What should I expect to hear from this person?". Give them the opportunity to help you understand the biases in the information you receive.

This is the first trust test with the new employee: do they trust you talking to these people and handling their input, especially if they haven't parted ways amicably? The way the candidate handles this is a good source of information. Are they okay with you talking to the people you chose, or are they adamant about not doing so?

Always ask yourself: How would a top performer, an A player, that one super awesome colleague of yours everyone is relying on, handle this discussion? I have found that high-performing, radically candid individuals who show strong ownership over their work, relationships, and choices not only don't mind references but also encourage them. They believe in clarity and transparency — even if they haven't amicably parted ways.

Who do you ask for a reference?

The hardest thing about this process is to get people to speak honestly and openly. To get real, good, hard feedback. You're not looking for positive references — you've already decided to hire this person.

To get that, it's important to choose people who deeply care about the company. These people will likely care about other companies and your role, too. For smaller companies, founders, CEOs, long-standing executives, and key employees (e.g., CTOs, Head of Products, Staff Engineers, etc) are always a good bet.

The references the candidate wants you to talk with are nice, but most times, they don't match the above list. Quite often, the ones they didn't provide are more important. You need to choose which people you need to talk with.

As a guide, these are the people I suggest talking with:

1. Their manager's manager. Two levels above. For example, in a small company, if it's a Software Engineer, then the CTO; if it's an Account Executive with a Sales Manager, then the VP Sales; if it's a CTO, even go to a Board member. Their direct manager is often biased and too connected to the person to provide really good feedback. There's also the chance that the whole team was underperforming, and in that case, the manager won't have a trustworthy point of view.
2. An influential peer or manager. A senior, impactful person in the company who has watched the person work and has interacted with them. They're senior and important for the team. For example, for a People Ops position, it could be the Head of Engineering. For an Engineer, a seasoned Product Manager, or even the Head of Product.
3. A direct report, if hiring a manager — someone who has stayed with the company for a long time.

As long as you have built the necessary trust with the candidate and with the people you reference, this process works well.

How do you find and contact these people?

The best source is the candidates themselves. Strong A-players will have many people in a company that would want to help them find a great new place to hang their hat. Simply ask them early on in your interviews:

• "Who did you report to, and who did they report to?" or "Who was the VP of Sales at that time?". Can you share their names?
• If it was a manager, "Was there a direct report of yours that was with the company for a long time? Who was it?"
• "Was there a person in the company in another team, or managing another team, that you worked closely with? How long have they been with the company?" or "Who was a person in the company that had a big impact and a lot of respect in the company that you had some interaction with?"

When the time for references comes, simply request the candidate to contact them and share that you'd like to talk to them briefly about the work you did together. Most people will respond positively. If the candidate doesn't get a response, email them yourself, use LinkedIn — anything to get a response and a call.

What about the candidate's current company?

This is the trickiest part. If someone has only been one year with the current company, and you can find strong references from past ones, it might be OK to skip the current one. But if they have been there for more than 2-3 years, you have to talk to them — they're a very different person than three years ago.

In this case, the right path is to fully agree and sign the offer letter with the candidate. Make absolutely sure they're the right fit and that they feel safe with the whole process. You'll need to explain very clearly where you stand: this is about finding out how it is to work with them every day from the eyes of others and hear their colleagues' stories, double-check the information you have. They may want to first resign before you talk to the people you need to. If there is strong trust (and there should be with any new candidate!) this process will roll easily and in a smooth way.

In Part 2 of this topic, to be published in the near future, we'll review how the call itself can go, how to filter the information you're receiving, and how to handle the various types of feedback.

Thanks for reading and for sharing with your team and others! 🙏