Hiring managers are always eager to quickly get candidates on board who check all the boxes for them. This generally stems from the desire to not loose out on top talent to a competitor just because they weren’t efficient enough with their hiring process.

Although it’s a logical concern, it still does not mean organizations should cut corners in their background screening process or worst, not have one in the first place.

The reason background checks are of such significance is because the candidate can tick all the boxed but what happens when you find out later that they have been involved in fraudulent activities in the past and might potentially cause losses for your organization as well?

Such instances can be easily addressed by thoroughly conducting background checks to identify any potential red flags in a candidate. Not only is it safer but it’s also more cost effective as prevention of frauds in relatively easier than recovering your losses after the fraud has been committed.

In this blog, we aim to discuss 3 red flags that you should definitely identify early on in the hiring process to prevent monetary and reputational damage to your organization.

Candidates with Criminal Records

Perhaps the most obvious one, but certainly of most significance as well. As knowing whether a candidate has been involved in activities like theft, robbery, sexual assault, hate crime, or even gang violence can be a game changer for your organization as individuals with such records generally need to be filtered out from the get go.

If your workplace involves children or elderly, it’s even more critical for you to account for such people for the safety of everyone in the organization.

However, it’s important to note that candidates with lighter sentences should not be judged the same as the more extreme examples we’ve talked about.

A person can be convicted on the wrong terms as well. Even if they aren’t, you should still identify the depth of their crime and whether they’ve repented from that or not.

Suppose a man was convicted for theft 10 or 15 years ago, but he’s repented by bring involved in community service and helping over the years, then it’s pretty safe to give them a chance if they’ve had a clean record after all that time.

Document Deception

It’s not uncommon for candidates to lie on their resumes in order to increase their chances of getting the job of their dreams. However, this only serves to push back candidates that might actually be ideal for the role and are highly motivated to be a part of your team.

So, it’s become essential for recruiters to identify these red flags and find out whether a candidate has listed out the right credentials such as their previous employments, their educational documents, and even their certifications or licenses.

For example, if you’re hiring for a role that requires someone to be on the road for most of the time, then it’s your job to know whether they have a valid driving license for that vehicle and ensuring it’s not expired or worst, a fake one.

If not taken into consideration, these checks can become the difference between life and death if such an unfortunate incident were to happen. That is exactly why thorough background checks are so emphasized when it comes to public safety and security.

Poor Credit History

For those who don’t know, a credit history gives an idea of a candidate’s financial activity. A good credit history indicates that a person has returned the borrowed loan or any debt they’ve incurred over the years within the required time frame.

The reason it’s important to know of this when you’re on the lookout for red flags in a candidate is because if the revolves around financial transactions, integrity and a clean record would always be preferred over someone with poor credit history.

This is especially true in a regulated industry like a bank, insurance, telecommunications, or healthcare where a poor credit history will result in outright rejection of a candidate due to compliance issues.

To Summarize things up, it’s true that in order to acquire a near ideal candidate, organizations need to accept the fact that it would take a great deal of time and effort. But on the flip side, they ensure that the person would end up driving more sales, better branding, or a healthier work culture for the company in the long run.

Of course, nothing is a 100% percent guarantee. But it’s still disproportionally more advantageous for organizations rather than picking out the first candidate the deem good enough from the get go.