When Your Google Reference Check Isn't So Good
from the whoops dept
While people have been doing Google-based background checks on dates for many, many years, it appears that recruiters are finally discovering the same thing. Earlier this year we had an article suggesting that rather than have "references available on request" on a resume, some people might want to put references available on Google, since Google has become something of that "permanent record" we were always told to fear in elementary school. Of course, there's a downside to that as well... if your permanent record doesn't look so good, that's increasingly going to be a problem. Apparently, some recruiters are discovering resume discrepancies, information about being dismissed from previous jobs and strong personal opinions that scare them off. The article has suggestions for those whose Googled selves don't look so good, from asking for certain information to be taken offline (good luck with that) to at least preparing a response that deflates any potential negatives. Of course, what the article doesn't talk about is how to deal with others who have the same name, even if they appear smarter than you.






Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
Lucky me
I googled my name with and without city, state, employer, and other keywords, and found tons about other namesakes but not me. I guess keeping in mind since '93 that anything that goes on this Internet about me might never go away was a good thing. But... So do I submit a list of references and put at the bottom, "If you Google my name for background, keep in mind that few if any of the items pertain to me"?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Lucky me
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Add Your Comment