A reference check should go beyond a general question about strengths and weaknesses. For a project developer, employers need to understand which phase the person personally managed, which decisions they prepared or made and how they handled risk, timing and interfaces.
This guide helps real estate employers prepare structured reference conversations. It complements interviews and work samples, while the employer remains responsible for the suitability decision and the lawful design of the process.
1. Set the purpose, timing and permission first
Run reference conversations only after the role and remaining questions are clear. The useful point is usually after the professional interviews and before the final decision, when the employer knows which claim still needs confirmation or context.
Tell the candidate which reference you want to contact and why. Use contact details they have approved and record the role and project experience the conversation is intended to cover.
- Record the purpose and scope of the reference check.
- Confirm consent or another required legal basis with HR or data protection.
- Verify the referee’s name, role and working relationship with the candidate.
- Do not contact current employers or other third parties without prior approval.
- Ask only questions relevant to the specific role.
2. Separate the project from the person’s contribution
A successful development does not by itself show what one project developer contributed. Start with verifiable context: asset type, location, project phase, period, team structure and reporting line.
Then clarify personal ownership. Was the candidate responsible for site analysis, feasibility, planning, approvals, marketing or handover? Did they prepare decisions, make them or implement someone else’s direction? This distinction prevents a team result from being attributed to one person.
- During which project phase did you work directly with the candidate?
- Which outcomes and decisions were personally theirs?
- Which tasks belonged to managers, consultants or external partners?
- What was the scale of the team, budget or coordination responsibility?
- Which responsibilities expanded or reduced during the project?
3. Ask eight questions that produce useful evidence
Use the same core questions with every referee. Follow-ups may explore a concrete example, but should not change the assessment standard. Ask for direct observations rather than assumptions about personality.
Record whether an answer comes from direct observation, project records or information from someone else. This keeps the strength of the evidence visible.
- Which project decision did the candidate prepare or manage particularly well?
- How did they handle incomplete site, cost or schedule information?
- How did they make assumptions, risks and required decisions visible?
- How did they work with planning, authorities, investment, construction and marketing?
- Describe a situation where they had to change a recommendation.
- How dependable were their documentation, handovers and follow-through?
- Which management, structure or support helped them perform best?
- For which project phase or responsibility would you employ them again?
4. Connect answers to the selection scorecard
Do not treat a reference as a separate yes-or-no vote. Map each relevant statement to the criteria already used in the hiring process. A difference between the CV, interview and reference calls for clarification rather than automatic rejection.
Keep notes concise and factual. Also record when a referee could not assess an area. A lack of observation is not evidence of a lack of capability.
- Project ownership: personal contribution and decision authority.
- Commercial judgement: treatment of cost, revenue, time and risk.
- Process management: priorities, dependencies and next actions.
- Stakeholder management: collaboration and escalation.
- Documentation: clear assumptions, decisions and handovers.
5. Apply data protection in Germany and Switzerland
In Germany, personal-data processing is subject to principles including lawfulness, transparency, purpose limitation and data minimisation under Article 5 GDPR. In Switzerland, the Federal Data Protection and Information Commissioner states that employers must obtain an applicant’s consent before requesting information from current or former employers and must keep the information relevant to the role.
Before the first call, agree with HR or data protection who may be contacted, which questions are necessary, who may see the notes and when they will be deleted. Cross-border recruitment processes also require the specific data flow to be reviewed.
- Explain the purpose, contact and scope clearly to the candidate.
- Collect only necessary information related to the position.
- Limit access to reference notes to the people who need them.
- Do not use unverified personal or private information in the decision.
- Set retention and deletion through the organisation’s data process.
A useful reference conversation does more than confirm dates on a CV. It shows how a project developer worked, made decisions and collaborated across disciplines. When purpose, permission, core questions and documentation are defined in advance, the reference becomes a fair and traceable additional source for the hiring decision.
Sources and context
MuJobs editorial practice guide, published on 29 October 2026. The questions are adaptable selection aids, not legal advice. Data-protection processes and legal bases must be reviewed for the organisation, role and specific data flow.