Resume Fraud

Resume fraud? It's an interesting thing, I have hired people who lied on their CV's and admitted it at a later date, and the business reaction has been different each time. One got fired (but he wasn't very good at his job anyway), one got demoted (good but not quite good enough) and several others where no action was taken (because they did what they said they could do).

Employer paranoia is the cause of all this. Stupidly written, straight-jacket job descriptions checked by automation are all part of the problem.

I've been working in Learning and Development for over 10 years, I have headed up learning functions in many large organisations during start up phase, but often have the devil of a time securing a new role because I don't have a degree (l left university due to financial reasons, and fail to see the relevance my studies in physics and chemistry would have on the job I do now), but I am studying for an MBA (with a top university, who didn't see a lack of a degree as an impediment).

I don't lie about having a degree, though I once found myself having to explain to a company I had been working as a manager for, for 9 months, that it was clearly possible for non-graduates to be managers as I was one. At which point I went through an HR investigation as they were positive they didn't hire non-graduate managers, it was an annoying waste of time for all parties.

Want to cut resume fraud? Stop asking for the ridiculous in job descriptions. The other week I saw an advert for a postal clerk in a medium sized business which specified a degree as a mandatory qualification, what utter nonsense.

I'd like my brain surgeons and nuclear physicists highly qualified please, but to be a customer service rep or an HR manager? It's really not the paper that counts, it's the attitude, experience and capacity to learn.

I like Nik Kellingley's take on this. A resume is kind of a cosmetic opening to get a foot in the door. The work accomplished once hired is more important. Although in the posts above the knowledge of lies on resumes was treated differently in different companies/different situations, I'd like to point out that many states like the one I live in, practice "at-will" employment. This means they don't need a reason any way- if they want to let you go, they let you go.
If you didn't embellish and therefore never got a chance to prove yourself, what did you really gain? Further, employers may have used the embellishment as an excuse to let some one go but they may or may not have been the true reason at all.
Devil's Advocate here...don't employers somewhat embellish the job description they're hiring for? especially with regards to "room for growth/promotion" promises?

I like Nik's answer and from my experience their is a lot of validity to what he says. Let me take his words a step further. It would appear in these tough economic times (PC speak for it is very hard for good people to find a job even as the mediocre remain in positions of influence) companies feed the "resume fraud" dilemma by asking for perfect candidates instead of someone who not only matches 90% of what they really want but also does not require relocation, will work for a lower rate and who the employer can then accuse of being a candidate to "jump ship" the second the economy improves.

In my opinion most of the hyperbole regarding resume fraud is a marketing push by background companies to improve their business. Embellishment is there, will always be there and in some respects is human nature. I save $10M sounds more interesting that I saved $100K. That doesn't mean I am advocating for not doing them. I think background checks should be done (reference checks are another topic)

Ask the candidate how they did it. Drill them for specifics and when they can't give them then be suspicious. When they can give them the $$ are not important; the how and their ability to repeat is. Compare what the did in company A with what they did in Company B and how they describe it in their interview answers. Stop with the ridiculous "tell me about yourself" followed by the "why do you want to work here" and concluded with "if you were a tree what kind of tree would you be and why" questions.

There are two types of "resume fraud" and they are quite different. The first, which is quite prevalent, could be described as "elaboration". These are the people who stretch their dates of employment a month or so here and there to cover for a period of unemployment. They are the ones who overstate their personal contribution to projects or achievements. The second, who are relatively rare, are those whose resumes are works of fiction, and backed up by bogus references supplied by people pretending to be appropriate. In the months to come, we will see more of the former, but no more of the latter.

How to catch them?

Its not rocket science. Its tracking down their previous direct managers (not colleagues or subordinates or pastors or chiropodists) and asking them key questions about how that candidate reacted/behaved in situations similar to the ones they are likely to encounter in your job. This type of behavioral reference checking is very hard to fool, and will let you know what the candidates' real skillsets are in the areas you need them.

Don is right in what he says. Make sure you use checking companies who will ask the right questions of the right people.

One final thing I urge all HR people to look at closely. Go through all the departures from your organisation last year, and pick out those ones who, with the benefit of hindsight, would be regarded as "mis-hires" - the people who should never have been hired in the first place. Then, identify what were the key issues that make these people "mis-hires". Then cross reference this list of issues with the issues you try to find out about in your pre-employment checking. If your not checking in advance for the issues that are making people mis-hires, then you need to change the focus of your pre-employment checking.

Imagine! 80% of silicon valley employees lied, and yet... Silicon Valley is just fine. Mmmm.... I smell easy money for not a lot of return.

I made the decision to bend the truth on my CV only with regards to expertise and experience within my sector.

I knew i could do the job, and to a high standard, which was proven with two years service when i out-performed other colleagues in my department.

However, when it came to light that i had bent the truth on my CV i was dismissed.

I'd think twice about doing it again.

Well said Candice, in my experience employers lie about the "wonderful work environment", "superb team atmosphere" and a lot of other things too, and then they wonder why it is so often returned with untruths from a disillusioned workforce.

Realism is the key, if employers ask for things they really need and not fantasy nonsense, they might find people go back to telling the truth.

Adverts like, seeking HR manager for small firm, must have 20 years experience and an MBA and preferably a further HR qualification, must die.

Within the last few years we have seen and heard about more cases of identity theft. Some of this can be attributed to the information that is available about each and every one of us through public sources (i.e. twitter, facebook, etc). Now, with more and more people out of work and/or losing their jobs, I think it is only natural that you will see more embelishing and exaggeration in resumes.

As an HR professional with a strong recruitment background it is important to know and fully understand the reference checking process. Particularly if you are using a 3rd party vendor it is paramount that you are aware of the services they will be providing to you.

Clear communication with your hiring managers is essential so there are no surprises that related to timelines to complete the references and so forth. Be weary of short cuts (i.e. photocopies of degrees, diplomas, etc). Unless you are an expert in this field you likely will not be able to detect academic certificates that have been modified.

Requesting management or supervisory references rather than peer references and a full and comprehensive understanding of the timelines, services provided and the role you can play to action or conduct some of the performance references yourself will go a long way.

While background and reference checks are good "best practices" they are far from full proof. Must people lie about their skill sets and accomplishments and not necessarily where they have worked or attended school. Background checks verifies your dates or employment at listed companies, rehire eligibility/reason for separation and education. They do not focus on a candidates performance.

References tend to be a joke as well. How many people are actually going to provide the names of someone who will give them a bad reference??? Many folks have friends/colleagues as references and they usually prepare the references for the call.

When I conduct references, I don't run through a list of standardized questions. I build my questions based upon "red flags" from the interview. During my years in HR, there was only one instance where I received a bad reference on a candidate and it was due to an unprofessional assistant who provided unsolicited information.

I believe we must try our best to ask the "right" questions during the interviews and have candidates provide concrete examples demonstrating their accomplishments.

What is Resume Fraud, this is not something new. Resumes are glam to attract your attention and stand out. Most people now a days just cut and paste from others including there experiences, either out of being afraid, lack of skill or a combination of both. You just have to cutyour teeth on them and see if they are the right candidate. The easiest way now adays are to get someone capable of interviewing them in there given profession. At the end of the day the real question is can they do the job. People caught up on inconsistencies on a resume. While the previous post is correct as far as criminal background's, the rest is all suspect. For all you know that person has a contact in a university that will vouch for them. Too much talent is past upon by companies that are sticklers for a certain look and feel. The hiring manager or the requestor for the position should give a detailed analysis and post some pre screening questions to ask. Look for certain heighlighted information and go from there. I think what will ultimately happen is you will be alot further ahead. Resume Fraud has existed since the advent of CV's and Resume's. So don't get discouraged, everyone has a degree but I have met personally alot of stupid people who on paper looked great and were very much spot on but when they interviewed were terrible, and I have hired people that it was pretty obvious they lied on a resume but they ended up really knowing there stuff.

Some sobering data points to ponder and a remedy to solve the proble. First some sobering data points...

The Industry Average and Status Quo regarding resume Fraud:

- Approximately 75% to 87% of resumes are “Padded” and/or contain outright misinformation;

- A recent survey by Morgan & Banks found that an alarming 17 per cent of male and 7 per cent of female respondents admitted to lying outright on their CVs to secure a position;

- An astounding 80 per cent of Silicon Valley employees surveyed admit to having lied on their resumes;

- According to some staffing experts, about 30 percent of all job applicants make material misrepresentations on resumes;

- ADP Screening and Selection Services…a unit of the Roseland, N.J.- based ADP payroll and benefits managing company, says that in performing 2.6 million background checks, it found that 44 percent of applicants lied about their work histories, 41 percent lied about their education, and 23 percent falsified credentials or licenses..... that's aproximately, 1,144,000 falsified credentials!

Now a way to address and screen applicants quickly: this doesn't replace the usual background screening tasks such as reference checks, credit reports, etc., OR how well they are done, however it will make an immediate and significant difference in the quality of applicants you present to the Hiring Manager:

- Use the RoleFit Survey® early in the process (Grade 5 reading level) – send to individual applicants, use at job kiosks, include in electronic job board postings;

- A job applicants’ score on the RoleFit Survey® is causally related to predictive success in a specific job – there are currently over 1,200 jobs analyzed in our database, choose the one that fits the job posting you are using, if you don't see it among the 135+ sample jobs in the free trial, send a copy of a detailed job descritpion to Ascentii at info@Ascentii.com and they will analyze it and post it for you to send out to applicants and/or include in electronic job postings within 2 business days;

- Screen job applicants according to the wellness of fit between them and the RoleFit Survey®’s 54 Factor job competency model and 10 behavioural proficiency levels – over 100,000 have completed the survey;

- Once a job applicant has completed and initial RoleFit Survey® they are in your data base and may be considered for numerous other job opportunities;

- Take advantage of the Free 30 Day Trial; got to www.Ascentii.com, scroll down to the middle of the page and click on the Recruiter Portal to register for the free trial. Follow the instructions, post the assessment links in as many jobs and on as many electronic jobs boards as you like - all Job Applicant Screening Reports will be free for 30 days and be posted to your confidential Recruiter Admin Control Panel;

- Convert to a site license and have all the results of your Free 30-Day Trial ported over to your site license account;

- Any questions, call Ascentii at (905) 634-4357 or email info@Ascentii.com

Best Regards/Gary