| I prefer the reference letter system over the personal references system popular in the US because the letter decouples you from former employers. They don't get calls every time you're in talks with a recruiter. The amount of information that's passed along is standardized (even if it's a weird standard, but see below) and better controlled. It's possible to request interim reports, and when doing it semi-regularly (every two years, say), it doesn't provide signal to current employers about you intending to leave or not. As for the peculiar language, that was quite the talk in the 90s when this scheme was "uncovered" by the media. By now, people generally know what to expect, while HR is typically aware if a letter is written "in code" or not (and have no problem if it's not). More than the "code", these letters can also refer to more concrete traits, so the best course of action with the reference letter is often to write it yourself, have your manager sign off on it and get the HR stamp of approval. That way it states what _you_ think is important, not what the manager sees, or the even more remote HR department. (source: have German HR folks in the family who explained the reference letter business to me, starting when the "code" fluff flared up in the media for the first time. also did some clerical work in HR in the distant past) |
No judgement of valor, no personal stuff, it confirms the dates, the name of the company and the job title (be careful if you have been promoted internally without your official title adjusted).