In our modern world hiring is faster, more automated and utilizing digital space more than ever. Background checks have become both more common, and in many cases, far less rigorous.

Over the past few years, while applying for security and risk-related roles, I noticed a pattern that surprised me: many background screening vendors only asked for a few years of employment history, minimal address information, minimal educational verification, and returned results within one or two days. In contrast, I also noticed that industries with higher regulatory standards, such as finance and transportation, conduct far deeper checks that can span from weeks to months.

This discrepancy reveals a significant gap in how organizations perceive risk and raises an important question: What are these “fast” background checks missing?

The answer is: quite a lot.

Identity Is More Than a Document

One of the biggest weak spots in a rushed or automated screening is identity verification. In some systems, applicants can upload their own documents with little oversight, making it easy for expired identification cards, improper paperwork, or even forged documents to be uploaded. Trusted high security industries typically do not allow candidates to do this. Instead, they require documents to be physically inspected and uploaded by a trained screener, eliminating a major source of fraud.

This is especially important today, as we are seeing an increase in sophisticated threat actors obtaining legitimate United States employment to carry out fraud, information theft, and other insider-driven attacks, including recent cases involving foreign hackers securing roles at major American companies.

A candidate’s identity should never be verified purely virtually. Digital submission alone opens up the door to altered PDFs, borrowed documents, and misrepresented credentials. Companies that rely heavily on automation may unintentionally prioritize speed over security.

Fingerprinting: A Human Process in a Digital World

Biometric screening may seem foolproof, but fingerprints are far from “plug-and-play.” People may have worn down ridges, scars, missing fingertips/fingers, overly dry skin, or overly sweaty hands. These variables can make capturing usable prints difficult. Effective fingerprinting requires patience, proper technique, and occasional troubleshooting.

The human element cannot be automated away. A trained technician often catches things that software cannot.

While not all organizations require this level of scrutiny, the philosophy behind it is valuable: verifying character requires more than checking boxes.

Drug Testing: An Easy System to Cheat

Another area where shortcuts can undermine safety is drug screening. While many workplaces administer pre-employment drug testing, far fewer implement continuous or random drug testing, often due to cost. This creates a loophole that some candidates exploit.

In regions where certain substances are illegal, people commonly attempt to dilute their urine by drinking excessive water. Some even bring concealed fake samples into testing sites. According to research, one out of every twenty-nine corporate employees failed their random drug test in 2021. The research reports seeing post-COVID-19 fail rates rise a little over 3% compared to pre-pandemic fails.

Drug testing issues are so widespread that certain regulated fields, such as commercial driver’s license (CDL) test in the U.S., sometimes requires direct observation. College athletics faced similar issues for years; after routine urine substitutions by student athletes, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) adopted monitored collection for select sports.

Of course, most employers cannot, and should not, monitor candidates during the process. But organizations can implement stricter procedures, longer screening periods (60-day, 90-day), partner with reputable testing facilities, and use random testing programs to maintain long-term accountability.

Social Media: The Blind Spot of Many “Instant” Checks

Despite being one of the most revealing tools available, social media is often excluded from fast, automated background checks. Yet online behavior can expose concerning patterns that never appear on a traditional background report.

At a previous employer, a candidate passed their standard screening with no issues. Out of curiosity, I conducted a deeper open-source search and immediately uncovered publicly posted drug use and inappropriate behavior. None of this had been detected by the background vendor.

If you are overlooking social media, you’re doing it wrong.

Professionals conducting deeper due diligence often maintain a separate “burner” account strictly for investigative purposes, never a personal account. One of my personal favorite tricks when it comes to social media investigations is the phone number method. The technique is to add a candidate’s phone number as a contact on a mobile device, sync the device contacts across social platforms, and see which associated accounts appear. Another trendy method is verifying a phone number through payment apps like Zelle to confirm the individual’s registered name.

These small steps can quickly expose discrepancies that warrant further review.

References, Residences and the Value of Real Verification

Another trend contributing to weak vetting is the decline of reference checks. Many companies skip checks entirely or call only generic HR lines that provide minimal information. Younger applicants may list friends as references, knowing no one will check deeply.

Some agencies take a more comprehensive approach. A police chief once described their process to me: they not only interview listed references but also ask those individuals to provide an additional reference. They attempt to contact former partners, visit candidates’ neighborhoods, and speak with neighbors. While not all organizations require this level of scrutiny, the philosophy behind it is valuable: verifying character requires more than checking boxes.

Where High Standards Make the Greatest Difference

Organizations that operate in high-risk environments like finance, pharmaceuticals, education, defense, transportation all tend to understand that background screening is not just a formality. It truly is a risk-management tool! These institutions often require:

• Full address histories
• Multi-layer identity verification
• Professional fingerprinting
• Social-media reviews
• Verified credentials&
• Drug testing that goes beyond a single pre-hire snapshot
• Continuous background monitoring while on the job
• These safeguards reduce liability, strengthen culture, and help ensure the right people are hired.

Final Thoughts

Background checks are only as strong as the standards behind them. Fast, automated systems deliver convenience, but they miss the nuanced human factors that reveal who a person really is. Identity, behavior, honesty, and consistency rarely fit neatly into a template. The most effective screening combines traditional data with human attention, patience, and curiosity.

In a landscape where threats evolve, workplace safety depends not on speed, but on depth. Strong background checks equals responsible risk management. Period.