Writing a recommendation letter for peer candidates is weird. It’s inherently awkward. You’re sitting there trying to figure out how to praise someone you grab coffee with without sounding like you’re just doing them a favor because they asked nicely. Most people mess this up. They use the same tired adjectives—"hardworking," "dedicated," "team player"—and those words have basically lost all meaning in a modern HR stack. Recruiters see right through the fluff.
If you’ve been asked to write one, you’re basically a character witness. You aren't their boss. You don't have the "authority" of a VP, but you have something better: the ground-level truth. You know if they actually help when a project is crashing at 4:45 PM on a Friday. That’s the stuff that matters.
📖 Related: Marriott International Stock Price: What Most People Get Wrong
Why the Peer Perspective Actually Beats a Manager’s Note
Managers often write from a 30,000-foot view. They talk about KPIs and "deliverables." It's sterile. A recommendation letter for peer colleagues, however, offers a glimpse into the day-to-day cultural fit. Companies are terrified of hiring brilliant jerks. They want to know if this person is easy to work with when the pressure is high.
I’ve seen a lot of these letters go across desks. The ones that work don't just list skills; they tell a story about a specific problem. Honestly, if you can't think of one time this person saved your skin or made a meeting less miserable, you probably shouldn't be writing the letter. Specificity is your best friend here. If you say they are "good at communication," that's a zero-value statement. If you say they managed to explain a complex API integration to a non-technical marketing team without making anyone feel stupid, that is gold.
The Structure Most People Get Wrong
Forget the five-paragraph essay you learned in high school. This isn't that. You need a hook that establishes your relationship immediately.
"I've worked side-by-side with [Name] for three years in the trenches of the DevOps team."
That’s a strong start. It tells the reader you actually know the person. Then, move into the "Evidence Phase." This is where you pick one or two traits. Don't try to cover everything. Nobody is perfect at everything, and trying to claim your peer is a superhero makes the letter feel fake. Focus on their "superpower." Are they the person who catches the bugs no one else sees? Or are they the one who keeps the team's morale up during a merger?
The "How We Worked" Section
Describe the dynamic. It’s okay to be a bit informal here. Mention the shared Slack channels, the late-night troubleshooting sessions, or the way they handle feedback during a peer review. This is where you prove you aren't just an AI bot spitting out a template. Use human language. Talk about "bouncing ideas off each other" or "collaborative friction that led to a better product."
The Technical vs. Soft Skill Balance
In a recommendation letter for peer situations, people often lean too hard into the "nice person" territory. Don't do that. Balance the "soft" stuff with "hard" evidence. If they're a coder, mention their clean documentation. If they're in sales, mention how they share leads rather than hoarding them.
Real World Example: The "In the Trenches" Approach
Let’s look at an illustrative example of how this looks in practice. Imagine a peer letter for a project manager named Sarah.
"I worked under Sarah’s project coordination for two years at X-Corp. Most PMs just send calendar invites. Sarah actually understood the constraints of the design team. When we were hit with a sudden pivot on the Delta Project, she didn't just pass down the orders; she stayed on the call for an extra hour helping us re-prioritize our task list so we didn't burn out. That kind of empathy is rare in our industry."
That works because it's specific. It names a project (even a fictional one for this example) and describes a behavior (staying on a call to help) rather than an abstract quality.
Avoiding the "Friendship Trap"
One huge mistake is sounding too close. If it sounds like you’re best friends who go to brunch every Sunday, the recruiter might discount your opinion. You have to maintain a professional distance while being warm. Avoid nicknames. Avoid inside jokes. You are a professional witness to their work ethic.
Keep the "I" statements to a minimum after the introduction. The letter is about them, not about how much you like them.
The Logistics of Submission
Usually, you’ll be asked to upload this to a portal like Workday or Greenhouse. Sometimes it’s just an email to a hiring manager. If it's an email, keep the subject line clear: Peer Recommendation for [Name] - [Job Title].
Short paragraphs are better. People skim. If you give them a wall of text, they will skip to the last sentence to see if you recommend them and call it a day. Break it up. Use bolding for a key sentence if you really want it to pop.
Why Honesty is Actually Better for Your Peer
Sometimes we feel pressured to lie or exaggerate. Don't. If you say someone is a master of Python and they get hired and can't code their way out of a paper bag, it reflects poorly on you. Stick to what you’ve actually seen. It’s okay to say, "While I didn't work with [Name] on the financial side of things, their leadership during the creative phase was unmatched."
Actionable Steps for Writing Your Letter
- Ask for the Job Description: You can't write a good recommendation letter for peer success if you don't know what they’re applying for. If the new job requires "heavy client interaction," focus on their people skills.
- The "One Story" Rule: Think of one specific time they impressed you. Write it down in two sentences. That is the heart of your letter.
- Check the Vibe: Read it out loud. Does it sound like you? If it sounds like a legal document, delete the "wherefores" and "heretofore" and just use normal words.
- The Conclusion: End with a "No-Brainer" statement. Something like: "I would honestly hire [Name] myself if I were in a position to do so. They make the teams they're on better."
- Proofread for the Wrong Name: It sounds stupid, but if you’re using a template or writing multiple letters, people forget to change the name. It’s a death sentence for the application.
Writing a recommendation letter for peer colleagues is an act of professional generosity. It takes time. But when done with a bit of "human" flair and a lot of specific evidence, it carries more weight than almost any other part of the application. It’s the proof that the person is actually a decent human being to work with for 40 hours a week. That is what hiring managers are actually looking for.
To get started, ask your peer for the three key traits they want you to highlight. Match those traits to one specific memory you have of working with them. Draft the letter focusing on that "proof point" first, then wrap it in the professional context of your working relationship. Keep the word count between 300 and 500 words—long enough to be substantive, short enough to be read.