By: Kym Kurey
An industry veteran, Kym Kurey is the CRO for TrueCordis. She enjoys family, advocating in D.C., pursuing her Doctorate, and is a published children’s author. Kym founded ANEW Life International, a 501(c)(3) supporting trafficking survivors and families of missing children.
Background Screening has been flowing through many of our veins for decades, and several never truly leave the industry completely. We love it – the people, the process, the purpose (all the P’s), and the heart of why we do what we do. In recent years, however, our industry has seemingly undergone significant transformation. What began as a mission-driven service – protecting companies, employees (consumers), and communities by ensuring informed hiring decisions – has slowly eroded into a commoditized, price-driven business. Today, the focus often lies more on volume, automation, and rapid turnaround-time than on the core principles of accuracy, ethics, and public safety that once defined the industry – the very things that ignited and fueled the “Why?” behind many of us getting involved in the first place. Now, while profitability is important, even critical – and we’re all in business to make money and succeed – have quality, integrity and heart been sacrificed and given way to the cutting of corners for a fatter bottom line?
The early days of background screening were rooted in investigative diligence and saturated with integrity. Background checks were conducted by trained, conscientious professionals who understood the nuances of criminal records, employment verification, reference checks, data, and the laws that regulated their use. The work was meticulous, often conducted manually (who remembers books, dial-up and microfiche?), and tailored to the unique requirements and risks associated with each hiring decision.
Screening was seen not just as a procedural step, but as a protective measure – helping businesses build trustworthy teams, avoid negligent hiring and retention claims, and foster safe work environments. Providers prided themselves on the depth and accuracy of their reports, and employers valued and counted on their expertise.
Technology as a Double-Edged Sword
The rise of applicant tracking systems, digitalization of records and automation brought undeniable benefits to the background screening process; it also brought redactions and other crippling consequences to our workflow. Turnaround times dropped from days to hours, costs decreased and access to data became indexed and more standardized; however, these efficiencies came at a price – the human touch became less and less included in the process.
As technology scaled, so did competition. New entrants flooded the market, non-industry money started buying up long-standing companies, logos merged, off-shoring became acceptable – even standard – with many offering ultra-low-cost services that prioritized speed over substance. Background screening became less about investigative rigor and more about checking a box. In this race to the bottom, the service was stripped of its original purpose and repackaged as a commodity.
Businesses were saving on the front end, as contracted court researchers could no longer compete by charging $5/name; we especially see that as we can now pay a bot pennies to pull back (most of) the information humans used to, though at what cost in the end? Class action lawsuits and individual settlements cost thousands – sometimes millions – not to mention your company’s reputation, your client’s reputation and the potential harm caused to the consumers involved. Some companies are even choosing to return results with no human intervention or quality control at all, which – especially to somebody who bleeds QA – is quite alarming. Not only are these companies risking legal action in an ever-increasing and volatile litigious environment, both businesses and consumers are going to be the ones harmed on so many levels. Is it worth the risk? At least some of you are answering, “Yes”.
Today, many buyers – especially in high-volume and high-turnover industries like retail, gig work, staffing, and non-profits – are choosing providers based almost entirely on price and turnaround time. The focus has shifted from quality and risk mitigation to speed and cost. As a result, the industry’s role in promoting informed, ethical hiring has been diluted.
Lost in the Crowd: The Erosion of Differentiation
With commoditization, most background screening providers now offer nearly identical services: instant database checks, automated employment verifications, and automated or ai driven customer service. The messaging is similar, technology stacks are interchangeable, and the customer experience often lacks personalization. The human touch is losing its grip.
This lack of differentiation has led to intense downward pressure on pricing, further squeezing margins and incentivizing providers (and clients!) to cut corners. In many cases, this means:
- Relying on outdated or incomplete data (a critical consideration for FCRA compliance)
- Failing to provide proper dispute and compliance support – which, again, are essential for compliance with the complexities of local, state, federal, and international laws, such as the FCRA, GDPR, DPPA, and DBRA
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, both employers and candidates – and subsequently our communities – suffer from this erosion in quality and integrity.
The commoditization of background screening has several critical consequences; here are just a few:
- Increased risk for employers: A cheap, fast check may miss subtle nuances or key red flags in case information, exposing employers to liability and reputational harm – or worse
- Poor candidate experience: Automated systems often result in erroneous records, slow dispute resolution, lack of transparency, and minimal (if any) communication – frustrating applicants and employers alike – adversely affecting the job opportunities for the moms, dads and humans out there we’re alleging to serve
A Call for Reconnection
Come baaaaaaack!!! To restore value to the background screening process, the industry must reconnect with its original mission, which means prioritizing data accuracy over speed (pretty sure that’s FCRA 607, 613, 623, etc*), thoughtful consultation and product design tailoring checks to the role, industry and legal constraints rather than one-size-fits-all packages, and intentional, personal and good ‘ol fashioned HUMAN communication.
Providers that emphasize these values can break free from the commoditization trap and deliver true strategic value.
It is true that the background screening industry has seemingly drifted far from its foundational purpose. What was once an individualized, integrous, risk-mitigation service has become a race to the bottom line – fueled by price wars, automation, and a transactional, “quick fix” mindset. There are even children’s hospitals and those serving our most vulnerable populations choosing the bare minimum “only what’s needed to meet the requirements” checks (no alias name(s) or additional counties outside of their current residence, or even worse – a national database check ONLY – which isn’t even permitted under the FCRA*) HOWEVER! There is hope and a growing realization – among CRAs, employers and vendors alike – that quality, compliance, communication, and ethical responsibility cannot be sacrificed indefinitely.
In a world where trust, safety, connection, and reputation are more important than ever, the industry must reclaim its original heart – let’s do that! Come back to shore.
*Important: The information contained herein is not to be construed as legal advice; please consult with your counsel for any and all local, state, federal, and/or international law compliance as it pertains to your business.
