[Aurornis]

> Of course the difficulty is how to you assess what the candidate has honestly achieved in prior jobs - what was there personal contribution,

> What was their role, what were their contributions

I got a hard reality check on this when my company was getting close to hiring someone I worked with at a previous company. Their resume claimed a lot of achievements that other teams had handled. Their work was always a problem and had to be quarantined from production systems because they were very careless and would even submit broken code without testing it.

They would spend a lot of time in Slack discussing other team’s work so they got good at talking about it. I think they also used a trick where they claim to have competing offers from other companies and not a lot of time for interviews, pressuring the interviewers to do discussion and resume reviews instead of getting into technical questions.

This wasn’t the only time, just the first time. After that I started doing more checking for claims on resumes, including calling old friends who worked with a person. It’s crazy how often someone will claim some responsibility or experience on their resume assuming that nobody will ever check it.

[sanderjd]

I definitely think checking references should be more core to the process. I don't really understand why it isn't. Legal concerns? Or just because it takes a lot of time?

I would personally feel way better about interviewing for jobs if it was like peer reviews during a performance review cycle.