Executive Reference Check Toolkit

1. Set criteria and obtain permission before contact

Agree the role's essential outcomes before requesting references: for example, operating discipline, cross-functional decisions, team development, or board reporting. Use the same core criteria across comparable candidates. Tailor probes to each reference's working relationship, not to assumptions about a candidate's background.

Obtain and record the candidate's permission for each contact, scope, and timing. Current-employer contact needs explicit, separate approval; do not assume a listed name is permission to alert an employer. Agree alternatives when contact would create risk. Do not seek backchannel opinions, access private records, or collect personal information unrelated to the job.

2. Establish what the reference actually observed

Open with: “The candidate has permitted this conversation about the role. Please share firsthand work examples, not confidential business information or personal details.” Confirm the working period, reporting relationship, responsibilities, and frequency of contact. A reference who observed one project cannot validate an entire leadership career.

Explain who will review the notes and avoid promising absolute anonymity. Record concrete behavior rather than labels such as “strong leader.” For each example, ask about the situation, candidate's action, outcome, and contributions from others. Leave unsupported claims marked as insufficient evidence.

3. Use relationship-specific question scripts

Choose the applicable script below; each relationship offers a different vantage point. Ask for a dated example and distinguish direct observation from opinion.

Former manager

1. What outcomes did the candidate personally own, and what resources and constraints shaped delivery?
2. Describe a difficult decision they made. What alternatives did they consider and what happened?
3. When did you give corrective feedback, and what observable behavior changed afterward?
4. For the proposed role's scope, where would they need support? What experience supports that view?

Peer

1. Describe a cross-functional disagreement. How did the candidate resolve it and share accountability?
2. What commitments did they make to your team, and how reliably did they deliver?
3. How did they communicate a trade-off involving budget, priorities, or operational risk?
4. When a shared initiative struggled, what did they do and what was the result?

Direct report

1. How did the candidate set priorities and explain what good performance looked like?
2. Describe feedback or coaching that changed your work. What specifically helped or hindered?
3. How did they respond when you raised a concern or challenged a decision?
4. How did they delegate decisions and develop other leaders? Give an observable example.

Board member

1. How did the candidate connect strategy to operating milestones and report progress?
2. Describe how they disclosed a material risk or missed target to the board.
3. How did they handle disagreement with directors while respecting governance boundaries?
4. What evidence demonstrated capital allocation judgment and leadership-bench development?

Probe neutrally: “What did you observe?” “What changed afterward?” and “What else contributed?” Do not steer the reference toward a desired endorsement or treat hesitation as proof of a problem.

4. Reconcile conflicting references with context

Capture scope, resources, business stage, and timing alongside each example. A manager describing a turnaround and a peer describing a mature operation may both be accurate. Separate observable behavior from interpretation; avoid counting favorable references as votes or averaging incompatible situations into a misleading score.

For a conflict, identify the exact criterion, compare firsthand examples, and ask a focused clarification within the approved scope. Invite the candidate to explain relevant circumstances without exposing another person's private information. Keep unresolved uncertainty explicit. Record whether the criterion is supported, mixed, or insufficiently evidenced, plus a reviewer and next action.

5. Keep the process fair and within scope

Ask consistent, job-relevant questions. Exclude protected traits, family plans, health, religion, age, and other personal matters from questioning and evaluation. Do not request salary history; applicable restrictions vary, and it is unnecessary to assess leadership capability. If a reference volunteers irrelevant sensitive information, redirect and do not include it in the assessment.

An employer's direct reference conversation differs from obtaining a third-party background report. A screening provider's report may trigger Fair Credit Reporting Act requirements, including applicable disclosure, authorization, and adverse-action procedures. Ask qualified counsel to assess the actual arrangement and local obligations; this guide offers no legal assurance. Restrict access to notes and apply your approved retention policy.

6. Turn evidence into a documented decision

Download the CSV for question-by-question evidence and use the Markdown script for interviews. Both are editable: complete permission, dates, job criteria, and reviewers before use. Compare findings with interview evidence rather than using references as a substitute for assessment. Record the decision rationale, development support needed, and any uncertainty requiring further evaluation.

Free editable downloads

No signup required. CSV files open in Excel, Google Sheets, or Numbers. Markdown (.md) files are editable text documents. Use “Print / save as PDF” for a shareable copy of this guide.

Keep completed worksheets confidential. Browser tools do not submit or save your entries to our servers. Export your work before closing or refreshing; store downloaded candidate information according to your organization’s access and retention policies.

Common questions

Continue your hiring research