AngelaS wrote:"Be warned people do talk" - what do they talk about? Why ask for the applicant to give references if the committee is doing their own version of reference checking outside of what was asked for and supplied? This seems unprofessional and unfair. Why wouldn't committees respect the process they designed? They set an expectation for the applicant, but what should the applicant really expect?
Checking references and talking to a supervisor are very different conversations. Some organizations call or talk to supervisors whether they are listed or not. The point of references is that you provide people that can acknowledge the work you did, and from your view are often very positive. Often talking to supervisor is to discuss the employee-supervisor relationship. In many organizations, only a supervisor is even given the permission to speak to the questions asked when checking a reference.
When I said "be warned people to talk", I was talking about informal conversations as well. We are a very small and open profession. People strike up conversations about who is hiring, who is looking, etc. at meeting, conferences, in passing, etc.
I have never seen an application anywhere that say "we will only call the references you list". That expectation seems not justified by the hiring process. Maybe I never had such expectations because working the corporate world I know there is no such expectations. Supervisors, instructors, HR people, etc. can and are called. People that know people ask about candidates informally as well.
It goes both ways. I know I received the interview for my position because someone from my past organization put in a cold, unsolicited call on my behalf from administrator to administrator.
Brian C. Gray
Head of Reference & Engineering Librarian
Kelvin Smith Library
Case Western Reserve University
http://blog.case.edu/bcg8bcg8@case.edu
