Staring into the pool of social media reveals much. But judge with care—your own biases will also be reflected.

Social media has become history’s greatest reflecting pool, where billions of people choose to show their personalities, values, beliefs, and behaviors for others to see. Narcissus in the old Greek story has nothing on 21st-century people agog with their own lives online. With social media, many people let their hair down, losing inhibitions they might have in personal interactions and becoming cavalierly candid about what they like, love, and care about—sometimes passionately, often indiscriminately, and even embarrassingly. A select few are gravely serious about crafting a certain personal brand—a false self—which raises different problems for candidate analysis. Either way, carelessly dashed or carefully curated, what a person posts on their social media holds at least some answers to who they are as a person.

Traditional background checks focus on a candidate’s criminal record, education, and employment history. A social media background check, on the other hand, can give real-time, unfiltered insights into a person’s habits, personality, and character. For companies striving to build cohesive, values-driven teams who also want to hire with as little waste or as few missteps as possible, incorporating social media background checks into the hiring process is a good idea. But in the process of evaluating others, we must also watch out for our own biases. Judging others is a tricky game and should be approached with care, since social media appropriateness is also in the eye of the beholder. We are influenced by our age, gender, politics, and background as much as anyone.

Social Media Checks Give New Insights

When hiring, it’s critical to understand not just what a candidate has done in their career but who they are as a person. Social media and lifestyle platforms like LinkedIn, X, BlueSky, Instagram, Threads, Facebook, Twitch, Rumble, Reddit, TikTok, and more can provide a window into a candidate’s habits, lifestyle, personality, politics, communication style, and values—elements that don’t always come through completely in résumés or interviews.

Social media checks offer near real-time insights into key areas that can help you shape a clearer understanding of a potential hire. For instance, does the candidate consistently display professionalism or engage in inflammatory or inappropriate content? Are their values, hobbies, and interests aligned with your organizational culture? How do they interact with others online? Do they demonstrate empathy, tact, and respect, or are their interactions combative and disrespectful? What do they post a lot of? What lifestyle or hobbies do they show or talk about?

To some extent, “you are what you post,” and social media can help confirm a candidate’s alignment with your company’s mission and values.

Social Media Background Checks Go Beyond the Resume

Fascinatingly, it’s been in the news more than a few times in recent years: the grade-school teacher caught moonlighting on OnlyFans. Instead of facing down embarrassment and angry parents, school districts would have done well to spend a little more time checking into other kinds of popular platforms past the standard ones that spring to mind.

The benefits of a social background check for an organization are many:

• Enhanced Risk Mitigation: Social media can reveal risks such as discriminatory behavior, violent rhetoric, or engagement in illegal activities. This information allows companies to avoid costly hires that could harm workplace culture or damage the company’s reputation.
• Improved Decision-Making: A social media check complements traditional screening methods by providing context. For example, a candidate might claim they are skilled in communication, but their posts might show otherwise. Conversely, their content could validate claims made during interviews, providing confidence in your hiring decision.
• Demonstrating Due Diligence: Failing to review social media during the hiring process can leave companies vulnerable to reputational risks. Investors, customers, and stakeholders increasingly expect companies to align their internal culture with their public values. By conducting these checks, organizations show they’ve taken every step to protect their brand.
• Revealing Passion and Commitment: Beyond uncovering potential red flags, social media can highlight a candidate’s enthusiasm for their industry or cause. A marketing professional actively sharing insights on trends or a software engineer contributing to open-source projects demonstrates a level of engagement that might not be apparent in their résumé.

Some Ethical Considerations

While social media checks can provide valuable insights, they must be conducted responsibly to avoid ethical and legal pitfalls. Furthermore, what you might think is appropriate on Instagram, as an example, might just be what you think is appropriate. It might be completely acceptable to channel content standards and the cultural or age subset to which the candidate belongs.

For example, you might not personally like tattoos, but the candidate under review has an IG channel called “I 😍 neck tattoos and want to show you all of mine.” Personal likes and dislikes should not be important factors here, but it can be difficult to separate ourselves from our personal biases. There is a multi-colored rainbow of people and personalities out there who could be great hires if screened with meaningful discernment. Social media is now the way people express themselves publicly, which means social media background checks should be done dispassionately, looking at the total candidate holistically and establishing clear guidelines for reviews.

Here is a basic review guideline you can use to frame your social media screening:

• Define Criteria: Establish what you’re looking for in a candidate’s social media presence—both positive traits and possible red flags.
• Relevance: Focus on information that is job-related. A candidate’s political or religious views, for instance, should not influence hiring decisions unless directly tied to the role.
• Nuance and Context: A single post taken out of context may not accurately reflect a candidate’s character. Patterns will help you form a more rounded perspective.
• Bias Avoidance: Ensure that the person conducting the check is not involved in final hiring decisions to minimize bias. It helps if this person has a wide understanding of cultural and contextual differences.
• Transparency: Inform candidates that social media screening is part of your hiring process and obtain their consent in advance.
• Combine with Other Methods: Social media checks should complement, not replace, other background checks and interviews.
• Continuous Review: For certain roles, particularly public-facing ones, periodic reviews of social media activity post-hire can help mitigate future risks.

A Professional Differentiator

Although some HR firms offer comprehensive background checks, not all do. It’s worth asking your HR partner if they provide this service and how they go about executing a review. This is particularly relevant for executive-level hires, where the stakes are higher, and the impact of a poor hiring decision can ripple across the organization. An HR partner who conducts thorough social media checks demonstrates a commitment to full due diligence and an understanding of the importance of modern social media.

#FinalThoughts: You Are What You Post

Social media offers unparalleled insights into a person’s real-time behavior, values, and communication style, making it a crucial tool in the hiring process. However, conducting these checks requires expertise, discretion, and a commitment to fairness, ensuring a thorough and balanced approach to candidate evaluation.

By integrating social media checks into your hiring practices, you can make more informed decisions, protect your company’s reputation, and build teams that truly align with your organizational values. But don’t spend too much time staring into the social pool—you might find yourself stuck there overlong, like poor Narcissus.