5 Common Background Check Misconceptions
1. MYTH: Online Screening Services are Sufficient for Background Checks
These cheap online companies do nothing but scan public records. As we have mentioned, many of these records are woefully out of date and incomplete. The chance of missing important information is extremely high. You might also receive records for someone else with the same name, or miss records because your applicant has an alias.
2. MYTH: All Essential Information is Already Online
Using Google and social media sites to vet your candidates can land you in some extremely difficult situations. If you decide to eliminate a candidate after looking at their Facebook page, for example, they could claim you never asked them in for an interview because of their race or a disability. It is very hard to prove you DIDN’T use that information when making the decision, and you could end up with a costly discrimination lawsuit.
3. MYTH: All Background Checks are the Same
Not all industries or companies necessarily need the same information on a potential hire, which means the application, hiring and screening processes can vary drastically from one organization to another.
4. MYTH: All Background Screening Companies are the Same
Background screening companies can vary as widely as potential job candidates. It is important to look for companies that have proven their dedication to the industry’s best practices. An accreditation with the National Association of Professional Background Screeners (NAPBS) is essential. These companies are committed to the highest levels of accuracy, dependability, security and transparency.
5. MYTH: Only Large Firms Need a Screening Process
Pre-employment background screening is essential for companies of all sizes. Sometimes the smaller firms actually have more to lose by making a bad hire. Hiring an unfit candidate can cost upwards of $25,000, money that’s tougher for smaller companies to part with. Investing in a quality screening process is wiser than risking the time, money and potential damages of a bad hire.