Source: frameworks/kit-referral-program-strategy/04-quality.md

Quality — Referral Program Strategy QC Checklists

Gate 1: Binary — all items must pass before building starts. A single failure stops the build.

Gate 2: Weighted — 100 points total. Pass threshold: 90/100. Run after every build and before deployment.

Both gates must pass before any referral program is deployed.

Gate 1 — Pre-Build (Gap Protocol)

[ ] Audience identified (who will be asked for referrals)
[ ] Audience segmentation confirmed (different communications for different groups, or one unified ask)
[ ] Incentive structure discussed (bonus or no bonus, and if bonus — amount, eligibility, conditions)
[ ] Client approval for incentive confirmed or flagged as needed
[ ] Communication channels confirmed per audience
[ ] Referral submission method defined
[ ] Referral acknowledgment process defined
[ ] Referrer update protocol defined (what referrers learn, what they don't)

#	Check	Points
1	Every identified audience has a defined referral communication	6
2	Incentive structure is documented and approved (or explicitly confirmed as no-incentive)	5
3	Referral submission method is clear and accessible to all audiences	4
4	Acknowledgment protocol defined — every referrer hears back	5
5	Referral routing defined — how referrals enter the screening pipeline	4
6	Referrer update protocol defined — what referrers learn at each stage	4
7	Program timeline defined — launch date, duration, close	2

Completeness failures are blocking. A program without acknowledgment or without defined routing is not deployable.

#	Check	Points
8	Referral ask is specific enough that referrers can identify appropriate candidates	6
9	Communications are differentiated by audience (board ≠ staff ≠ external)	4
10	Tone is appropriate for each audience	3
11	Confidentiality language included where the search requires it	4
12	Position summary is included or attached — referrers know what the role is	4
13	Clear instructions on how to submit a referral	4

#	Check	Points
14	Incentive structure approved by the appropriate authority (board, executive, HR)	6
15	Communications reviewed and approved by client before deployment	5
16	Social media content coordinated with marketing/communications team	4
17	Launch timing aligned with communication cascade — no referral ask precedes the search announcement for that audience	5

Alignment failures are blocking. A referral program deployed without client approval creates organizational liability.

#	Check	Points
18	Organization name matches reference data in every communication	2
19	Role title consistent across all communications	2
20	Incentive details (amount, conditions, eligibility) accurate and consistent across all communications	3
21	No content from a prior client's program carried into this build	3

#	Check	Points
22	Referrals tracked in the candidate tracker with source attribution	3
23	Acknowledgment sent to referrer within defined timeframe	3
24	Process for unqualified referrals defined (how the referrer is told, if at all)	2
25	Confidentiality boundaries clear — referrers know what they'll learn and what they won't	2

#	Check	Points
26	Referral bonus does not create a conflict of interest for the referrer (e.g., board members typically not eligible for financial incentives)	3
27	Communications do not promise outcomes ("we'll definitely interview your referral") — only process ("we'll review their qualifications")	2

Pass threshold: 90/100

Blocking failures:

Failure	What It Looks Like	Root Cause	Fix
Vague referral ask	"If you know anyone who might be interested, let us know"	Ask not grounded in position profile; referrers can't identify appropriate candidates	Rewrite with specific criteria from must-haves: who to look for, what background, what experience
Unauthorized bonus	Communication promises a $2,000 referral bonus; board never approved it	Practitioner assumed incentive was approved based on verbal discussion	Secure written approval before any communication mentions a bonus
Premature launch	Referral ask goes to staff before the search is announced	Program launch not coordinated with communication cascade	Map program timing to cascade; referral ask follows announcement, never precedes it
Referrer ghosting	Person refers a candidate and never hears anything	No acknowledgment protocol; referrals enter process without loop-back	Build acknowledgment into the process — every referral gets a response within 48 hours
Board member conflict	Board member eligible for referral bonus; creates appearance of financial interest in hiring outcome	Eligibility not segmented by audience	Board members excluded from financial incentives; recognition-only acknowledgment
One-and-done	Single email sent; no follow-up; referral pipeline dries up after week one	Program designed as one communication, not a sustained campaign	Build in follow-up cadence — reminder at 2 weeks, update on progress, renewed ask