Backdoor Hiring Check
Verify a candidate's record through people they did not nominate
- Difficulty
- Moderate
- Time to result
- ~weeks to results
- Steps
- 5
- Confidence
- 96%
Rubin does not rely on references selected by a candidate. He first identifies people in his own network who genuinely know the person, then asks about the candidate's record, ability, and behavior with colleagues. He treats prior evidence of winning as a useful predictor, while separately testing whether the person creates disruption, politics, or collaboration problems. The process also verifies ownership of claimed achievements by asking informed people who actually did the work. This creates a triangulated hiring decision rather than an impression formed in an interview. Rubin says he spends a meaningful share of his working time interviewing because people are Fanatics' most important asset. The framework is strongest for senior appointments, where a polished interview can conceal weak execution or destructive behavior and where a wrong hire has broad consequences.
Origin
Rubin says he interviews extensively but has never requested a conventional reference. Instead, he uses shared contacts to investigate candidates independently. Extracted from Aspire with Emma Grede.
Core principles
- 01Candidate-provided references are selected and prepared
- 02Past results offer useful evidence about future performance
- 03Collaboration cannot be judged from an interview alone
- 04Specific achievement claims should be verified with informed people
How to run it
- 1
Map independent sources
Find people you know who have worked directly with the candidate or observed their results. Do not default to the names the candidate selected.
- 2
Calibrate the source
Ask how well the source knows the candidate and in what context. Weight the rest of the feedback accordingly.
- 3
Verify the track record
Ask how the candidate has performed and whether they repeatedly found ways to produce results. Check specific achievements rather than accepting broad labels.
- 4
Probe collaboration
Ask how the candidate works with other people and whether they introduce disruption or politics. This tests behavior that is difficult to observe in an interview.
- 5
Triangulate the decision
Compare feedback from several informed sources with the interview and the candidate's claims. Investigate material contradictions before hiring.
In the wild
Rubin uses a hypothetical candidate who claims to have invented a leading SKIMS bra. Rather than accepting the claim, he says he would ask Emma Grede, Jens Grede, or Kim Kardashian who actually invented it. The check separates genuine contribution from a polished interview story.
→ The hiring team gets independent evidence about whether the candidate's achievement claim is real.
Common mistakes
Calling only nominated references
Candidates can prepare the people they nominate. Independent sources can provide less scripted evidence.
Confusing intelligence with team fit
Rubin says a very smart person can still be disruptive. Assess results and collaboration separately.
Accepting inflated ownership claims
Candidates may overstate their role in a successful product. Verify contribution with people close to the work.
Is it for you?
Best for
It is best for high-impact hires where the candidate's past work can be checked through a trusted network.
Not ideal for
It is not ideal when independent sources cannot speak from direct experience or when checks would violate hiring law or candidate privacy.
From the transcript
“I've never asked somebody for a reference in my life.”
“Track record is the best prediction of the future.”
“When you interview somebody, you can't see how they work with others.”
From the episode
The Founder Playbook: How Michael Rubin Built Fanatics by Betting on Obsession
The Founder Playbook