You have a finalist for a maintenance leadership role. The r\u00e9sum\u00e9 lists equipment expertise, overnight coverage, and responsibility for a busy production floor. Reference checks need to establish what those claims looked like when equipment failed, staffing ran short, and someone had to make a difficult call.<\/p>\n\n
A former supervisor says the candidate was dependable. That sounds useful, but you still need to know what they personally handled, where they needed support, and whether that experience matches your opening. The value comes from specific examples, not warmer praise.<\/p>\n\n
At a glance<\/strong><\/p>\n\n A reference conversation becomes useful when you know what you need to test. Start with the situations that make this opening difficult, rather than reading the r\u00e9sum\u00e9 back to someone who already knows the candidate.<\/p>\n\n For the maintenance search, those situations might include diagnosing an unfamiliar failure, assigning overnight coverage, or challenging a repair that would return equipment to service too soon. Each creates a different question about judgment and responsibility.<\/p>\n\n Turn broad requirements into observable actions.<\/strong> \u201cStrong leadership\u201d gives a reference little direction. \u201cTell me about a time this person reassigned work during an unexpected shutdown\u201d gives them something concrete to remember.<\/p>\n\n If the brief cannot identify those moments, fix it before making calls. The approach in rewriting a vague job brief<\/a> helps you replace loose expectations with work you can actually assess.<\/p>\n\n Prepare a short set of shared questions for every finalist, followed by questions about their individual claims. Shared questions support comparison; tailored questions investigate the parts of each application that remain unclear.<\/p>\n\n Decide what would count as useful evidence before hearing an answer. That keeps an enthusiastic reference from changing your standard halfway through the search.<\/p>\n\n Before asking about performance history, establish the speaker\u2019s vantage point. A direct supervisor, a project colleague, and an internal customer may all describe the same person accurately while seeing very different parts of the work.<\/p>\n\n Ask when they worked together, how often they interacted, and what responsibilities they personally observed. Someone who attended monthly planning meetings cannot necessarily describe daily troubleshooting or shift handovers.<\/p>\n\n For example, a former manager might confirm that the finalist supervised technicians but rarely watched technical decisions firsthand. A production colleague might offer stronger evidence about how clearly the person explained downtime and repair options.<\/p>\n\n Match each claim to someone positioned to know.<\/strong> Do not let seniority substitute for direct observation. A more impressive title does not automatically make an account more informative.<\/p>\n\n Ask the candidate before approaching people outside the supplied list, particularly anyone connected to their current workplace. Keep contact arrangements clear so an exploratory conversation does not unexpectedly expose a confidential search.<\/p>\n\n The federal reference-checking guide<\/a> provides a useful framework for structuring these conversations. Your working record should identify not only what was said, but what the speaker could reasonably assess.<\/p>\n\n Broad questions invite broad answers. Asking whether someone has a good work ethic often produces agreement without telling you how they planned work, handled pressure, or followed through.<\/p>\n\n Use a sequence: establish the situation, ask what the person did, and explore what happened afterward. Then ask how the reference knows. This separates a remembered event from a general impression.<\/p>\n\n In the maintenance example, \u201calways stayed late\u201d does not settle whether the person worked effectively. Ask whether overtime reflected an unusual emergency, weak planning, or responsibilities beyond their control.<\/p>\n\nStart With the Job\u2019s Hardest Moments<\/h2>\n\n
Check What the Reference Actually Saw<\/h2>\n\n
Ask Questions That Produce Examples<\/h2>\n\n
\n\n
\n \nArea to assess<\/th>\n Question to ask<\/th>\n Useful detail<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n \n Reliability<\/td>\n What happened when a commitment was at risk?<\/td>\n Early warning, revised plans, and follow-through.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Communication skills<\/td>\n How did they explain a difficult delay?<\/td>\n Audience, clarity, and handling of disagreement.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Problem-solving<\/td>\n Describe a failure with no obvious cause.<\/td>\n Checks performed, reasoning, and escalation.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Leadership potential<\/td>\n When did others rely on their judgment?<\/td>\n Influence, boundaries, and support provided.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table><\/figure>\n\n