For many employers, the background screening of a new hire is essential. While that’s to be applauded, it’s important not to overlook the value of interviews in tandem with background checks.
As an example, take Manager “X”. He looks over Applicant “Y”‘s resume and decides Applicant “Y” is perfect for the job. So Manager “X” brings Applicant “Y” into the office for a very cursory interview — more of a “meet and greet”, really. After all, Manager “X” just figures that the background check on Applicant “Y” will be the deciding factor on whether Applicant “Y” is offered the job. Eventually, Applicant “Y”, after passing the background check, joins the organization but never really fits into the culture thanks to Manager “X”‘s misplaced attitude regarding the importance of interviews.
Do some supervisors actually adopt this kind of lackadaisical attitude when it comes to hiring? The short answer is “yes”. It’s a case of relying too heavily on background screening results and not heavily enough on HR responsibilities.
Ideally, background screening should be an integral part of any hiring process… but it shouldn’t cast the deciding vote. Even if a background check comes back clean as a whistle, managers still must evaluate other aspects of the candidate’s personality and skill set before making a job offer.
The moral of the story? It’s wisest to use background checks as one tool at your disposal to find the best individuals to join your company’s team.
HAVE YOU VOTED YET? CHECK OUT OUR POLL REGARDING H.R. 3149.