Executive Careers with Fexingo · 2026-07-03 · 9 min
Key moments - from our scoring
Substance score
54 / 100
Five dimensions, 20 points each
Most candidates treat reference checks as pure administration, but senior leaders who advance use what Lucas calls the two-question reference check - a structured pre-briefing that dramatically improves outcomes. Rather than hoping references perform well, you schedule a fifteen-minute call beforehand and align on the two questions that appear in ninety-plus percent of executive reference calls: how they performed under pressure and their real business impact. ExecuSearch's 2025 survey found that sixty-two percent of hiring managers downgrade candidates when references sound vague or caught off-guard; a well-briefed reference avoids this trap. The method isn't about scripting lies - it's ensuring your actual track record gets told through specific, honest anecdotes. Lucas walks through a real example: a CFO named Mark prepped his former CEO reference to discuss a Q3 2024 systems migration win under pressure and a three-hundred basis point EBITDA improvement for business impact. The counterintuitive power move: include a strategic failure story (Mark's reference mentioned inheriting a material weakness in internal controls that he fixed in ninety days), which makes the entire reference sound authentic rather than like a PR release. For internal promotions, the two questions shift to handling cross-functional conflict and direct-report leadership. Timing matters too - brief your reference a week out so they can internalize the framework naturally.
The first is 'How did this person perform under pressure?' and the second is 'Tell me about a time they had a real impact on the business.' These appear in ninety-plus percent of executive reference calls, making them the foundation of the two-question reference strategy.
A failure-and-recovery story (like Mark's CFO example of inheriting a material weakness and fixing it in ninety days) signals authenticity and self-awareness. Purely positive references sound like PR releases and trigger hiring-manager skepticism, while a credible setback followed by a solution demonstrates resilience and judgment.
Give them specific true anecdotes and the key points to hit, but let the wording be theirs. Point them to the right story, warn them to answer honestly if asked a different question, and schedule the briefing at least a week out so they can internalize the framework naturally.
For internal moves at the VP level and above, shift to 'How does this person handle cross-functional conflict?' and 'What would this person's direct reports say about them?' - the factors that make or break internal promotion decisions.
Schedule it at least one week before the hiring manager will call, giving your reference time to think of their own examples and internalize the story so it sounds natural rather than forced.
Our reviewer’s read on each dimension, with quotes from the episode.
The episode presents a concrete tactical framework (the two-question reference check with pre-briefing) that many operators would not have considered, but the core insight - prepare your references and give them talking points - is relatively straightforward. The additions (include a failure, prepare a wild card story, adapt for internal moves) add layers, but the fundamental substance is thin: the episode is essentially 'brief your references on what to say.' Most of the runtime is explanation and reassurance rather than novel operational insight.
You give them a story to tell. The wording has to be theirs. You're just pointing them to the right anecdote.
The best senior leaders sometimes ask their reference to mention a failure - a specific mistake they made, how they handled it, what they learned.
The two-question reference check is presented as a proprietary framework, but the underlying idea - preparing references, coaching them on key talking points, and including a failure to seem authentic - is not particularly novel. Reference prep is common knowledge among executive coaches; the framing as a structured two-question method adds minimal originality. The internal promotion variant is slightly fresher, but the episode lacks contrarian or first-principles thinking.
They run what I call the two-question reference check.
if the reference says, 'Yeah, she struggled with the board reporting at first - but here's how she turned it around in two quarters,' that signals authenticity.
Lucas appears to be a career coach or consultant (possibly from Fexingo), not a practitioner who has lived through senior-level hiring at scale. The episode features no external guests - only a host and co-host discussion format. The anecdotes are secondhand (Mark the CFO, references described, survey data cited) rather than direct operator testimony. This is conversational advice-giving, not a substantive peer-to-peer exchange with someone who has executed major hiring processes.
A CFO I work with - let's call him Mark - was up for a role at a mid-cap fintech.
ExecuSearch did a survey in 2025 - sixty-two percent of hiring managers said they've downgraded a candidate because the reference sounded rehearsed, vague, or caught off guard.
The episode includes one concrete example (Mark the CFO with specific details: Q3 2024 systems migration, 300 basis points EBITDA improvement, Q4 2024 audit with material weakness fixed in 90 days). One survey is cited (ExecuSearch 2025, 62% of hiring managers). However, most claims are illustrated through vague scenarios or generic principles rather than hard data. No information on success rates of the method itself, no other named examples, and no comparative evidence showing this approach outperforms alternatives.
Q3 2024 systems migration where we hit every deadline despite a vendor collapse. When they ask about impact, mention the EBITDA improvement of three hundred basis points in eighteen months.
ExecuSearch did a survey in 2025 - sixty-two percent of hiring managers said they've downgraded a candidate because the reference sounded rehearsed, vague, or caught off guard.
Luna asks clarifying questions ('Doesn't that feel manipulative?' 'What does that briefing actually sound like?') and one pointed challenge ('But what about the risk that the reference sounds like they're reading from a script?'). However, Lucas is never genuinely pushed on soft spots: no interrogation of whether this approach is actually ethical, no debate on whether references *should* be pre-briefed, no challenge to the survey findings or claims of efficacy. The conversation is collaborative and exploratory but lacks teeth - Luna accepts the premise and asks for elaboration rather than testing it.
Doesn't that feel… manipulative?
But what about the risk that the reference sounds like they're reading from a script? You mentioned that's a red flag for hiring managers.
Computed from the transcript - who did the talking, and the words that came up most.
Episode 90 of Executive Careers with Fexingo: Lucas and Luna unpack a specific tactic senior leaders use to turn reference checks into career leverage. Instead of handing out a generic list of names, they pre-brief each reference with two questions the caller is likely to ask - and the precise story they should tell in response. Lucas explains how this transforms a passive compliance step into an active narrative tool, citing research from a 2025 ExecuSearch survey showing that 62% of hiring managers downgrade candidates whose references sound rehearsed or vague. Luna pushes back on whether it feels too controlling, and Lucas shares a counterintuitive example from a CFO who told his reference to mention a past failure. The episode closes with Luna asking whether the tactic works for internal moves too - and Lucas offers a practical framework for adapting it. If you're a VP or above making your next move, this one gives you a concrete edge.
Transcribed and scored by The B2B Podcast Index.
Lucas: There's a moment in every senior-level hiring process that most candidates treat as pure administration - the reference check. They send a list of names, maybe give a heads-up email, and hope the call goes well. Luna: And hope is not a strategy. So what are the best leaders doing instead?
Lucas: They run what I call the two-question reference check. Before they even submit a name, they schedule a fifteen-minute call with that reference and say: 'Here are the two questions the hiring manager is almost certainly going to ask. Here's the answer I'd like you to give - in your own words, but hitting these three points.' Luna: So you're literally scripting your reference?
Doesn't that feel… manipulative? Lucas: It would be if you were scripting a lie. But you're scripting your actual track record - just making sure the right stories get told. The alternative is leaving it to chance, and the data says that's risky.
ExecuSearch did a survey in 2025 - sixty-two percent of hiring managers said they've downgraded a candidate because the reference sounded rehearsed, vague, or caught off guard. Luna: Interesting. So the unscripted reference often hurts you, and the scripted one - if done right - actually helps? Lucas: Exactly.
The key is the two-question structure. First question: 'How did this person perform under pressure?' Second question: 'Tell me about a time they had a real impact on the business.' Those two come up in ninety-plus percent of executive reference calls.
If you pre-brief your reference with a specific, honest story for each, you're controlling the narrative without fabricating anything. Luna: What does that briefing actually sound like? Walk me through it. Lucas: Let me give you a real example.
A CFO I work with - let's call him Mark - was up for a role at a mid-cap fintech. His reference was a former CEO he'd worked for. I told Mark to call the CEO and say: 'When they ask about pressure, please talk about the Q3 2024 systems migration where we hit every deadline despite a vendor collapse. When they ask about impact, mention the EBITDA improvement of three hundred basis points in eighteen months.'
Luna: And the CEO was okay with that level of direction? Lucas: He was relieved. Most references are nervous too - they don't want to say the wrong thing or forget the key achievement. A structured briefing makes them look good, which makes you look good.
Mark got the offer. Luna: But what about the risk that the reference sounds like they're reading from a script? You mentioned that's a red flag for hiring managers. Lucas: That's why you don't give them a script to read.
You give them a story to tell. The wording has to be theirs. You're just pointing them to the right anecdote. And you also warn them: if the interviewer asks a different question, answer honestly - just pivot back to one of those two stories if it's relevant.
Luna: So it's more like providing a highlight reel than a teleprompter. Lucas: Exactly. And there's a counterintuitive layer here. The best senior leaders sometimes ask their reference to mention a failure - a specific mistake they made, how they handled it, what they learned.
Luna: Really? Why would you volunteer a negative in a reference call? Lucas: Because a reference that's only glowing sounds like a PR release. Hiring managers are trained to spot that.
If the reference says, 'Yeah, she struggled with the board reporting at first - but here's how she turned it around in two quarters,' that signals authenticity. It also shows self-awareness and resilience, which are two traits every senior leadership team wants. Luna: So you're strategically including a flaw to make the whole story more credible. Lucas: Exactly.
The same CFO I mentioned - Mark - he told his reference to bring up the Q4 2024 audit where they found a material weakness in internal controls. He'd inherited the issue, fixed it in ninety days, and the auditor signed off. That story - a problem, a fix, a result - was more powerful than any flat positive. Luna: I love that.
It's like the 'pre-emptive reframe' we talked about in episode 79 on career stumbles. You're owning the narrative before someone else puts a negative spin on it. Lucas: Right. And this whole approach works because the reference check is the last gate before an offer.
The hiring manager has already read your resume, met you, liked you. The reference call is the final sanity check. If you leave it unmanaged, you're letting someone else write the last chapter of your story. Luna: Let me ask about a nuance.
Does this work for internal moves - when you're applying for a promotion within your own company? Lucas: It works even better, actually. Because your internal reference - your current boss or a peer - knows the context intimately. You can be more specific.
And the stakes are higher: a bad internal reference can damage your day-to-day relationships, not just a job offer. Luna: So for an internal move, how does the two-question method adapt? Lucas: Same structure, but the questions shift slightly. For internal moves, the two questions are usually: 'How does this person handle cross-functional conflict?'
and 'What would this person's direct reports say about them?' Those are the ones that make or break an internal promotion at the VP level and above. Luna: And you'd pre-brief your reference with stories that illustrate those two things specifically. Lucas: Exactly.
One more thing - timing. Don't send a last-minute email the day before the call. Schedule the briefing call at least a week out. Give the reference time to think of their own examples that fit your suggested framework.
The best references sound natural because they've had time to internalise the story. Luna: This is genuinely useful. And if it helps someone land their next role, that's exactly the kind of practical edge we're trying to give here. Lucas: Yeah.
And look - if today's episode saved you from leaving a reference call to chance, the way we keep doing episodes like this, ad-free, is entirely through listener support. If you found value in it, you can buy the team a coffee at buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo. That's buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo. It directly keeps these episodes coming without sponsors or ads.
Luna: And honestly, it's a small way to say 'this content matters to me'. We appreciate it more than we can say. Lucas: Now - back to the reference check. There's one more twist I want to mention.
What if the hiring manager asks a question you didn't anticipate? Like, 'Tell me about a time this person disagreed with you.' Luna: That's a tough one. How do you pre-brief for that?
Lucas: You include it as a bonus. I tell clients to give their reference three stories: the two main ones, and one wild card. The wild card should be a time when you pushed back respectfully and were right. That's a story that hiring managers love - it shows judgement and courage.
Luna: So you're essentially giving your reference a small portfolio of stories to draw from, rather than a single script. Lucas: Exactly. And you coach them to listen for the subtext. If the hiring manager asks, 'Was there ever a time you doubted this person?'
- that's a landmine. The reference needs to answer honestly but pivot to growth. 'I had concerns about their speed early on, but they consistently delivered ahead of deadline after the first quarter.' That turns a potential negative into a learning curve story.
Luna: You're almost acting as a coach for your own reference. That's a different mindset from the typical candidate, who just hopes the reference will say nice things. Lucas: It's a mindset shift from passive to active. And it's not just for the candidate - it protects the reference too.
A well-prepared reference comes across as thoughtful and credible, which reflects well on them. Luna: Final question: if someone is listening and they have a job interview next week, what's the one thing they should do today? Lucas: Call your top reference. Not email - call.
Say, 'I'm going to put you down as a reference. I'd like to spend fifteen minutes this week making sure we're aligned on the stories I think will come up.' If they push back, you know they might not be your strongest advocate. If they're eager, you've just turned a passive reference into an active ally.
Luna: And that alignment - that's the difference between a reference check that just clears the bar and one that actually helps you clear it. Lucas: Exactly. And the beauty is, it's not about manipulation. It's about making sure the truth you want told actually gets told.
Because your career story is too important to leave to chance.
Other episodes covering the same guests and topics, from across The B2B Podcast Index.
Episode 28, Part 1 - Rory Brown: Forecasting Truth, Not Storytelling, in the BoardroomThe Growth Workshop Podcast · on Board reporting77 / 100
Driving Value with Scientific Pricing StrategiesPrivate Equity 360 · on EBITDA improvement68 / 100
What if HR and IT weren’t separate functions, but one team? (Manuela Paoletta, SVP of People and Culture at AlayaCare, and Kahina Ouerdane, CPO at Workleap)Leading Culture: Building the Future of Work · on Systems migration60 / 100
Mert Erkan | Driving Private Equity Value through Supply Chain OptimizationM&A Masters · on EBITDA improvement57 / 100
Data Debrief: How to Translate your Work into Commercial Terms for an InterviewDriven by Data: The Podcast · on EBITDA improvement49 / 100
How Senior Leaders Use Strategic Ignorance to Stay Focused76 / 100How Senior Leaders Use the Five-Year Backward Resume76 / 100How Senior Leaders Use a Career Syndicate Strategy90 / 100How Senior Leaders Use Personal Branding to Control Their Career Narrative75 / 100How Senior Leaders Use a Career Narrative Strategy72 / 100