Reference checking is used to confirm a candidate’s experience and performance. Just as importantly, it should provide insight into something less visible in the recruitment process: how a person actually behaves at work.
To explore this further, we analyzed anonymized data from the Refapp platform, covering hundreds of thousands of completed reference checks across industries and countries.
One of the patterns that stands out is that around 10% of candidates show deviations in responses related to counterproductive work behaviors (CWB), meaning behaviors that may indicate risk in a work context.
Counterproductive work behaviors include actions that can negatively affect colleagues, customers, or the organization.
In many roles, especially those involving trust, safety, or responsibility, these types of behaviors can have real consequences over time.
That around 1 in 10 candidates show some form of deviation in this area does not tell the whole story, but it does highlight an important point:
The risk dimension in hiring is real.
These behavioral signals are rarely visible in a resume or during interviews, but they can influence workplace dynamics, safety, and performance over time.
Even small signals can be relevant, depending on the role. In positions where responsibility, judgment, or trust are central, behavioral patterns may carry more weight than in others.
One reason these patterns become visible is the use of structured reference questions.
Rather than relying on general impressions, structured questions ask references to evaluate specific behaviors using consistent formats.
Research shows that structured reference questions can improve both reliability and validity, making it easier to interpret feedback and compare candidates more fairly.
They also help surface behavioral signals that might otherwise go unnoticed.
Examples can include questions about attendance, punctuality, interpersonal behavior, or whether any formal actions have been taken.
By asking structured and clearly defined questions about potential risk-related behaviors, hiring teams increase the likelihood of receiving honest and actionable feedback.
Being transparent about why these questions are asked also matters. When references understand that the purpose is to ensure a safe, well-functioning work environment, they are often more willing to provide candid responses.
In other words, how you ask matters just as much as what you ask.
Reference checking is not only about confirming past performance. It also adds another layer to the decision-making process.
By including structured behavioral feedback, hiring teams can move beyond a narrow focus on competence and experience alone. Instead, they gain a broader perspective that includes how a candidate is likely to act in real work situations.
This makes it possible to identify potential risks earlier and to better understand how those risks relate to the specific role.
It is important to interpret these signals with care.
In this sense, reference checking is not about excluding candidates, but about making more informed and balanced decisions.
While modern recruitment involves various steps like resumes, interviews, and assessments, they often rely on a single source of information: the candidate.
This is why reference checking is essential. Expanding your data collection beyond the candidate is a crucial step in any reliable process. Relying on multiple perspectives gives you a much more complete and accurate picture of how the candidate actually performs in a real work environment.
By combining structured questions with verified reference input, hiring teams can strengthen both the quality and the credibility of their decisions.
This is particularly important in environments where hiring decisions carry significant responsibility, whether that relates to safety, customer impact, or team dynamics.
Taken together, the data suggests that reference checking can contribute more than confirmation. It can help identify patterns in behavior that are otherwise difficult to observe.
Around 10% of candidates showing deviations in risk-related behaviors is not a conclusion, but an insight. It highlights the importance of including behavioral perspectives in hiring decisions.
When used thoughtfully, reference checks help hiring teams build a more complete understanding of each candidate and make decisions with greater confidence🤝
This article is part of the Reference Checking Trends Report: Insights from Refapp Data, a series based on anonymized data from the Refapp platform.
By analyzing hundreds of thousands of reference checks across industries and countries, the series explores how reference checking works in practice today and what hiring teams can learn from real behavioral data.