Over the years, I've seen how background checks often take a backseat in the recruitment process, typically happening after an offer has been made. Sometimes, they’re even postponed until the candidate is already in the role, introducing unnecessary risks.
Imagine this: multiple candidates are screened for the same job, not because we want to be thorough, but as a time-saving measure in case someone drops out. It sounds efficient, right? But what does this mean for the candidate experience? Not to mention the cost implications. Worse yet, there are instances where candidates start working before their background checks are complete. The risk here is significant, and it’s something that business leaders should seriously consider.
But the challenge doesn’t end there. Let’s zoom out and examine the process at a higher level. How do we differentiate screening programs for permanent staff versus contingent or temporary workers? Often, these programs are managed through MSPs (Managed Service Providers), RPOs (Recruitment Process Outsourcing), or neutral vendors, adding layers of complexity. Consistency in screening standards becomes questionable, and we’re often asked to mirror a permanent screening program for a staffing business or RPO managing the contingent side. This apples-to-apples comparison can be complex, leading to misalignment in programs.
It’s not uncommon to face challenges when partners are involved in the process. Sometimes, we’re dealing with a partner, or a partner of a partner—or even a partner of a partner of a partner! This convoluted chain of responsibility often leads to breakdowns in communication and, ultimately, to a process that’s lost in translation.
An organisation’s HR tech stack plays a crucial role in navigating the complexities of managing permanent and contingent labour. Seamless integration with screening partners can help maintain efficiencies. However, when multiple ATSs (Applicant Tracking Systems) or technologies are used, it can create confusion for hiring managers and recruiters, resulting in a poor candidate experience.
For contingent and temporary workers, who are often managed by an external partner, the question arises: Is the partner aligned with the company’s background screening program? This is where the process can again get lost in translation. We frequently receive calls from clients who want us to screen their contingent workers to the same standards as their permanent staff. But it’s not always clear if we’re actually mirroring their program accurately or just taking an educated guess.
When you’re using a partner to manage your contingent or temporary workforce, it’s easy for things to become grey. The ownership and accountability need to rest with the company. Whether the hires are permanent or temporary, the company must ensure strong governance over the screening process through their partners. When communication breaks down, it’s up to the end user—the company—to manage and enforce their screening program, ensuring their risk matrix is communicated effectively through their supply chain.
A misaligned risk matrix can lead to a situation where the company is satisfied with the screening results, but the temporary worker feels the process hasn’t aligned properly with their expectations. This begs the question: Is the candidate journey truly mirroring what is set and governed by the employer?
In the ever evolving world of hiring and screening, embracing partnerships through an effective ecosystem is crucial. A well-integrated partner ecosystem streamlines the process by bringing together various services and technologies. It provides improved candidate experiences, scalability, better compliance, and global reach. But it’s essential that companies maintain strong oversight and communication with their partners to ensure that nothing gets lost in translation.
Tim Stokes, Business Development Director & Channel Partner Lead at Matrix Security Watchdog
