85% of UK organisations report candidates failing background checks

-

A staggering 85 percent of employers across the United Kingdom are experiencing candidates failing background checks, according to a recent study by Zinc, a leading background check provider.

This finding jumps to an even more concerning 97 percent among companies hiring over 1,000 candidates annually, exacerbating existing skill gaps and hindering the swift and effective fulfilment of roles in an increasingly uncertain hiring market.

The scale of businesses appears to directly correlate with the likelihood of candidate failures due to issues such as fraud, non-disclosure, and conflicts of interest.

Zinc’s Industry Insights report reveals that 97 percent of companies recruiting over 1,000 employees annually reported encountering candidate failures. Among those hiring more than 500 people, the figure stood at 83 percent.

HRreview Logo

Get our essential weekday HR news and updates.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Keep up with the latest in HR...
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
Optin_date
This field is hidden when viewing the form

 

Small and medium-sized organisations also faced challenges, with 50 percent and 86 percent reporting background check failures, respectively.

Background checks: Inadequate screening practices

For the 15 percent of organisations that did not report any candidate failures, the issue was attributed to inadequate screening practices. These organisations were found to be 50 percent less likely to express confidence in their background checking process and 46 percent less likely to have automated it, increasing the risk of overlooking potential issues.

Sectors with the highest background check failure rates include publishing (35%), logistics (32%), and telecommunications (29%). The unique challenges faced by these industries, such as reliance on freelance or gig work and the verification of international credentials for global networks, contribute significantly to the difficulties in thoroughly vetting candidates.

Luke Shipley, CEO and co-founder of Zinc, expressed concern over the impact on employers, stating, “Candidates falling at the background checking hurdle undermines both the quality and speed of the hiring process, placing HR teams at risk of compromising diligence in the interest of expediency.”

Shipley emphasises the importance of improving the candidate experience and leveraging automation in the hiring process to alleviate the burden on HR teams. “Automating sections of the hiring process takes the burden off HR teams and speeds things up for candidates, ensuring a smoother recruitment process,” he added.

Accelerate your hiring practice

Despite the overwhelming consensus among HR leaders that hiring quickly is essential (71%), only 9 percent of companies can complete background checks within a week. For larger businesses employing over 501 people, the majority take as long as a month to complete the process.

Zinc’s study suggests that accelerating the entire hiring process, from interviewing to onboarding, can mitigate delays caused by verification issues and improve an employer’s reputation. However, the need for speed should be balanced with attention to detail to avoid negative impacts on an employer’s image.

The study also highlights the growing importance of rechecking employees annually (51%), particularly with the rise of remote work, as it has become easier for employers to mislead HR during the screening process. Regular and accurate reviews of employees are deemed imperative to ensure companies are not misled and that the hiring process remains effective in the face of evolving work trends.

Amelia Brand is the Editor for HRreview, and host of the HR in Review podcast series. With a Master’s degree in Legal and Political Theory, her particular interests within HR include employment law, DE&I, and wellbeing within the workplace. Prior to working with HRreview, Amelia was Sub-Editor of a magazine, and Editor of the Environmental Justice Project at University College London, writing and overseeing articles into UCL’s weekly newsletter. Her previous academic work has focused on philosophy, politics and law, with a special focus on how artificial intelligence will feature in the future.

Latest news

Employers plan smaller pay rises for 2027 despite inflation uncertainty

Early forecasts suggest organisations are becoming more cautious on reward budgets as cost pressures persist and economic conditions remain uncertain.

Employees opting for home working ‘to escape noisy offices’

More employees are choosing to work from home to avoid noisy workplaces, with many saying office distractions are affecting concentration.

The org chart isn’t dying. It’s being demoted.

AI is changing how companies organise work, raising questions about middle managers, accountability and workplace governance.

Heatwave sparks renewed calls for legal maximum workplace temperature amid ‘heat strike’

Unions are renewing demands for stronger protections as organisations assess how to keep staff safe and productive during periods of extreme heat.
- Advertisement -

Return-to-office mandates linked to narcissistic leaders, researchers claim

Workplace attendance policies may be influenced as much by leadership style as by concerns about collaboration, culture or performance.

Mark Leisegang: What the World Cup can teach HR about the art of unlearning

When the FIFA World Cup 26 kicked off, some of the world’s best footballers were asked to adapt, fast, to a completely different context.

Must read

Anton Roe: The Work Programme – what effects will it have?

The Government’s exciting announcement about ‘The Work Programme’ has...

Khyati Sundaram: What is the ‘AI sigh’, and what can HR leaders do about it?

You know there’s a problem when you’re faced with dozens of identical applications, and we all know the culprit. Cue the “AI sigh”.
- Advertisement -

You might also likeRELATED
Recommended to you