Investor Reference Call Questions Template
Three documents and two sheets that synthesize reference calls by theme instead of call by call, and track on-list responses separately from off-list ones.
Free download · No account needed
Synthesis Note
[Candidate] — Reference Call Synthesis
Every response is logged against the theme it addressed, on-list and off-list marked separately, then read down each theme's column across every call that touched it.
By theme, on-list vs off-list
| Theme | On-list | Off-list | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| — | — | — | — |
| — | — | — | — |
| — | — | — | — |
The theme with the largest gap between on-list and off-list mentions is usually the finding worth calling about directly.
Eight reference calls on one CEO candidate ahead of a Series B: five names the CEO supplied, three found independently. Logged call by call, each reads as one more opinion next to four others. Logged by theme instead, with on-list mentions kept separate from off-list ones, a number appears. On-list references returned zero negative mentions across twenty-two theme mentions. Off-list references returned five negative mentions out of thirteen, 38.5 per cent, and four of those five land on the same two related themes.
The two negative accounts came from the CEO's prior company: a former direct report and a former peer, contacted separately, who did not know about each other's calls. A third off-list reference, a current employee the CEO did not think to list, raised nothing negative, so the gap tracks one specific period rather than off-list sourcing generally. A reference call feeding an investment memo is only as good as how it gets read; summarized call by call, the same eight calls would have produced eight positive-leaning paragraphs and no visible pattern.
Candidates nominate the references likely to speak well of them, and those references predominantly do; that is the finding of structured research on reference-check content, not a cynical guess. Off-list, or backchannel, calls exist for exactly this reason, and Bain Capital Ventures' own field guide to running them notes the value shows up in patterns across several independent accounts rather than any single call. The same discipline that finds a gap in a first meeting's question set applies here, one call later in the process.
What is in the pack
Reference Register
Every call tracked with a list-type column, on-list or off-list, so the comparison the whole pack is built around exists from the first row rather than as an afterthought
Call Guide by Reference Type
A different question set for a direct report, a peer, a board member and a customer, since each vantage point can honestly answer a different set of questions
Off-list Reference Approach
How to find and reach references nobody supplied, transparently and without routing the request back through the candidate first
Response Register by Theme
One row per theme a call actually addressed, not one row per call, which is what lets a pattern spanning three unconnected calls become visible at all
Synthesis Note
Read down each theme's column across the whole set, on-list mentions compared against off-list ones, with the gap between them stated as its own fact
A theme is judged across the set
The standing rule: no per-call summary stands as the space's primary output, and on-list and off-list mentions live in one sheet, never two
How it works
- 1
Send the list and the work history
Whatever reference list already exists, plus what you know about the candidate's background independently, so off-list candidates can be identified against it.
- 2
Build the register and find off-list references
Every call logged as on-list or off-list before it happens. A prior role with nobody on the list is the clearest place to look for an independent contact.
- 3
Run calls with the matched guide, log by theme
Each response filed under the theme it addressed, not the call it came from, with the specific example attached to the rating rather than the word alone.
- 4
Write the Synthesis Note
Read down each theme's column across every call that touched it. Lead with whichever theme shows the largest gap between on-list and off-list, not the first one alphabetically.
Frequently asked questions
Why split on-list references from off-list instead of just asking better questions?
Because the question is not what to ask, it's who answers. Candidates can only offer people who already lean toward speaking well of them; that isn't dishonesty, it's how anyone builds a list. Splitting the two and comparing them by theme is what turns a curated set of five positive calls into a finding, rather than into eight paragraphs that all sound reassuring.
How many off-list references do we actually need?
At least one for every two on-list references is the working minimum in this pack; fewer than that and a genuine pattern can look like one person's grudge. In the worked example, three off-list calls against five on-list ones was enough for two independent, unconnected accounts to describe the same incident from different seats.
Does this replace the reference checks we already run?
No, it changes how the same calls get read. Most processes already make calls and write a paragraph per call, the same way a data room gets worked through document by document. This pack asks the calls to also get logged by theme, on-list separated from off-list, so a pattern spanning three calls becomes visible instead of sitting unconnected across three summaries.
What if the off-list calls come back just as positive as the on-list ones?
Then that is the finding, and the Synthesis Note says so plainly rather than manufacturing a gap that is not there. A flat, unanimous result across both groups is real evidence the candidate's story holds up independently, which is different from five positive on-list calls that were never tested against anyone the candidate did not choose.
Is it appropriate to contact people the candidate did not offer as a reference?
Yes, done transparently. The pack's own Off-list Reference Approach doc covers exactly this: name the process plainly when reaching out, give an easy way to decline, and never tell one reference what another one said. Reaching a former colleague independently is a routine, disclosed part of diligence, not a covert one.
What does Edit with AI actually do?
It installs the pack as your own private space, then helps build the Reference Register from whatever list and work history you send. As call notes come in, it helps sort each response into the right theme rather than filing it under the call, and drafts the Synthesis Note once enough calls are in to read a real pattern.
What format are the downloaded files?
The Call Guide, Off-list Reference Approach and Synthesis Note download as Word documents; the Reference Register and Response Register download as CSV. Word opens in Word, Pages or Google Docs, and the CSVs open in Excel, Numbers or Sheets with the columns intact.
Find out what your off-list references say that your on-list ones don't
Send your reference list and what you know of the candidate's background. The first pass builds the register and flags which prior roles have no independent reference yet.
Build my reference register