Letters of Recommendation: Controversy and consensus from expert perspectives Jessica M. Nicklin and Sylvia G. Roch Department of Psychology, Social Science 369, University at Albany, State University of New York 1400, Washington Avenue, Albany, NY 12222, USA. jn0702@albany.edu Letters of recommendation (LORs) are a widely used selection tool with many issues associated with their use. To address some of these issues, 575 professionals in personnel- related professions reported their experiences with LORs. We separated items into consensus, polarized, or neither categories. Experts reached consensus that letter inflation is a problem that may never be alleviated and that more weight is placed on letters written by someone the reader knows or from a prestigious institution or organization. Most items were polarized, suggesting substantial controversy in the field regarding LORs. Some items originally polarized reached consensus within profession (academic vs applied). Academic professionals reported using LORs more and placing more weight on their contents than applied professionals. Implications discussed include recommendations for future research and practice, such as the appropriate use of LORs, LOR formats, and training. 1. Introduction A letter of recommendation (LOR) is a widely used selection tool that describes an applicant’s ability, previous performance, character, or potential for future success in a qualitative format, written by an individual who knows the applicant. On one hand, LORs can give applicants a competitive advantage by granting the writer an opportunity to elaborate on a variety of topics (e.g., Aamodt, 2005). On the other hand, re- search has demonstrated that LORs may be an unreli- able and invalid method of selecting applicants (e.g., Hunter & Hunter, 1984; Reilly & Chao, 1982). Despite these concerns, LORs continue to be used, especially in academia for student admissions and faculty hiring (Bliss, 2001), even though little research has explored LORs in depth. Concerns have been raised regarding LORs (Aa- modt, 2005). Recent concerns include the reliability and validity of LORs (Aamodt & Williams, 2005); potential alternatives to LORs (McCarthy, Zweig, & Goffin, 2005); and ethical, legal, and practical concerns that threaten the use of LORs (Nagy, 2005; Raynes, 2005; Zink & Gutman, 2005). Despite such concerns, no published study has examined professionals’ experi- ences with LORs to determine if academia and industry benefit from their use. A better understanding of the concerns regarding LORs may enable practitioners to implement more effective means of collecting recom- mendations and would also be useful in directing academics’ research questions. The goal of the present research is to provide a comprehensive picture of how LORs are currently experienced and viewed to further both research and practice, highlighting areas of con- sensus and controversy. This approach has been used to further research and practice in other areas of personnel psychology. For example, Murphy, Cronin, & Tam (2003) used a similar methodology to increase our understanding of how intelligence tests are viewed, focusing on areas of consensus and controversy. We adopt their technique in the area of LORs. We believe An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 2006 annual meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychologists. & 2009 The Authors. Journal compilation & 2009 Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford, OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main St., Malden, MA, 02148, USA International Journal of Selection and Assessment Volume 17 Number 1 March 2009