“We” Are High Performers: Vicarious Self‐Promotion Underlies Managers' Leniency in Online Reference Checks

Structured online reference checks (SORCs) are predictive of job performance and cost effective given that they can be completed quickly and require no “live” interview by HR personnel. Additionally, they appear to reduce gender bias—a problem identified with other reference checking methods. However, additional research is needed to examine possible threats to this method's effectiveness. One such threat is leniency bias, which has been leveled as a general criticism of reference checking by both scholars and practitioners. The present research, involving eight experimental studies, represents the first systematic investigation of leniency bias in SORCs. The results, involving data from over 1700 full‐time managers in the U.K. and U.S., indicate that: (a) quantitative ratings of direct reports' performance, organizational citizenship behavior, and counterproductive work behavior are more lenient in a SORC condition than when reporting private assessments; (b) vicarious self‐promotion (i.e., managers' presenting themselves positively through lenient ratings of their employees) helps to account for this bias; and (c) leniency is reduced by providing instructions that encourage the referee to take the perspective of the hiring manager rather than the job candidate when completing the reference check. While this research suggests that SORCs are likely to suffer from leniency bias, it also identifies a promising and relatively simple method to mitigate leniency. Implications for future research and practice are explored.