Time pressures impacting on recruitment processes

As employment pools dry up and the fight for talent becomes fierce, industry experts have warned against companies relaxing their recruitment practices to secure talent. 

Greg Newton, managing director of Verify, said the most common argument raised in resisting rigorous assessment practices is the potential negative impact on recruitment timeframes if organisations were to adopt such a 'strenuous' assessment regime.

"I don't think that the recruitment process has inherently changed in any way, aside from the fact that recruiters are always on a deadline to finalise the offer so expedience in any background checking is becoming increasingly important," he said.

"Recruiters, both internal and external, have for long adopted the same basic recruitment model, one that emphasises the interview process with a dose of basic reference checking.  Increasingly, however, they are recognising that this model does little to validate a whole range of facts about the candidate that may be essential for the job such as work rights, criminal record, credit history, academic qualifications, drivers licence, and so on."

Newton added that, in reality, background verification services can usually be delivered within the same timeframe it takes for a potential employer to undertake the full recruitment process. Solid partnerships with third party information providers and high speed online communication technology means that most checks - such as identity, criminal record, credit history, and bankruptcy - can be completed in less than 24 hours. 

"It's usually the old reference check that continues to drag the chain as referees are often away or unavailable when you want them. Of course the biggest delays continue to be in the candidate giving their consent to the process, which is mandatory in Australia," Newton said.

Verify has recently introduced online candidate consent, which can be done via iPhone, for over 90% of their checks, thereby doing away with the often time consuming process of paper based consent.

While it would be ideal to start the process at the candidate short-list stage, Newton conceded that realistically few clients want to incur the cost of verifying candidates that won't be selected. "We'd always recommend that clients prepare to move to background verification on their preferred candidate prior to or at worst, at the time of offer," he said.

"It's important to get it right," Newton added. "A bad hire has been estimated to cost up to a year's salary even when the person is terminated within the first three months. A very comprehensive background check on a middle manager usually costs less than $500 so the risk doesn't make sense."