Why candidates fail background checks

Interviewing candidates can be a labor intensive process for both parties. Candidates are often nervous about landing a dream position, while companies are keen to find out that they are a good fit through research of CVs and probing questions.

Background checks are a key part of finding out about the history of a candidate, but they can sometimes lead to a hopeful applicant being disqualified abruptly.

International background checking platform, Veremark, investigated why employees were failing checks by looking at 100,000 background checks run by businesses, of all sizes, and across all sectors, in 180 different countries in 2021.

Interestingly, the reasons people are failing checks go far beyond criminal records and can include academic achievement checks – which verify that a candidate did indeed graduate from the university or college they claim to have attended – or ‘conflict of interest’ checks, which consider whether any existing business associations a candidate has could be problematic.

Why are candidates failing checks?

The study by Veremark found that CV gaps were the most likely discrepancy in checks (14%), followed by an employment gap (10%), and a civil litigation case slightly behind with it being an issue in 9% of cases.

In fact, a criminal record only made up 2% of the check discrepancies, while employment history was an issue in 7% of cases, and academic achievement in 6%.

In certain sectors some of these issues were more prominent than others. Notably, in technology and software candidates academic achievement was the most common issue (13%). An employment gap was the most common issue (19%) for HR roles.

Both professional and financial services found that CV gaps were the most frequent issue in checks.

Veremark suggests that employers need to further increase the number of checks they run on potential hires to cover these areas.

One method of performing checks is looking at social media channels. While it may seem like an invasion of the personal lives of candidates, their online activity can identify any offensive or inappropriate behavior. This form of research only made up 0.02% of all checks carried out.

Speaking about the findings, Daniel Callaghan, CEO and co-founder of Veremark, commented: “The pandemic has seen the world of work change massively and HR teams are facing a number of new challenges.

“Remote hiring and onboarding has become more commonplace and, with this, the risks of hiring have increased. Candidates who never meet their new boss face-to-face might find it easier to fib about their credentials, while firms rushing to fill vacancies might inadvertently overlook inconsistencies on CVs.”

However, Callaghan adds that “hiring dishonest or unsuitable candidates could have serious consequences for any business.

“Being able to vet candidates, no matter where they are based in the world, by running multiple background checks quickly and efficiently, and with as little intrusion as possible, has never been more vital.

“Firms across all industries should take note of these findings and consider widening the scope of the background checks they run. While this will potentially increase costs in the short-term, the long-term benefits are invaluable.”

Being honest on CVs

Evidently, checking a candidate’s credentials is important, but there is a stigma that leads to dishonest applications.

CV gaps can be treated as a disqualifying factor, despite millions leaving the workforce this year alone because of burnout and shifts in attitude towards work. In fact, LinkedIn found that 50% are fearful of career gap stigma.

Noting that CV gap bias isn’t going to be held on job adverts could be a method of reducing dishonesty in applications. After all, encouraging an honest culture can benefit employers and the tide does seem to be changing on this stigma.

After speaking to over 500 hiring managers in the US, LinkedIn found that 67% claim they are now more likely to hire someone who has taken a career break than before the pandemic.

Adam Hawkins, head of search and staffing for EMEA and LATAM at LinkedIn, commented on this shifting perception:  “It’s great to see that the stigma has started to lift, however, there’s still a way to go to further normalize career breaks and talent professionals can play a big role in helping here.

“Rather than looking only at a candidate’s most recent experience – whether that’s a career break or their latest job – it’s important to look at the full set of skills they’ve developed throughout their lived experiences, whether those experiences be personal or professional, as well as a candidate’s future potential.”

Knowing the experience of candidates is important, but so is encouraging people to be open without fear of judgment. After all, they may have picked up a few skills you didn’t expect.