October
1998 - Exposing charlatans
There seems a
broad consensus among occupational psychologists
that the job interview is one of the least objective
ways of selecting new recruits.
But the frustration of those
who promote testing is not going to remove the
attraction of the interview to employers. The
enduring appeal of the interview has everything
to do with the human equation.
Most of us believe we are a reasonable
judge of character and trust our gut feeling about
an individual. We might use a test as an aid to
selection but we invariably choose a candidate
who interviews well and has a good set of qualifications
supporting an impressive work record.
But suppose we are being taken
in by the applicant; suppose the individual is
lying or being less than candid. Mike Comer, chief
executive of the Maxima Group, corporate investigators,
outlined some techniques for uncovering deception
at interviews in a recent seminar. While the advice
was aimed mainly at those looking for evidence
of fraud or malpractice, it can be equally useful,
he says, when considering job applications or
appraisals.
Some of the most difficult liars
to detect are those that tell part-truths, rather
than pure fabrication. Mr Comer quotes research
in the US suggesting that 75 per cent of curriculum
vitae (known as resumes in the US) are false in
some respect. He believes the UK figure is much
lower and suggests that the most common sin is
that of omission.
Interviewers should concentrate,
therefore, on areas of uncertainty such as dates
that appear not to tally or previous job descriptions
that seem vague or boastful. Homing in on these
areas will force the candidate to come clean or
enter into further concealment. Once an individual
begins to concoct a story he exposes himself to
inconsistencies which can emerge when the interviewer
presses for more details.
This is the stage, says Mr Comer,
when people often signal their anxiety by their
body language. A single gesture might be dismissed
but a cluster of gestures can be more telling.
Sweat on the upper lip, false smiles, stony faces,
faster blinking, dilated pupils, tight lips, false
yawns or sighing can all indicate untruthful behaviour.
None of this suggests that the
interview should be some kind of interrogation
designed to expose a criminal. But it does suggest
that close scrutiny of a CV can form the basis
of a detailed line of questioning that will either
confirm the suitability of the candidate or unnerve
the charlatan.
© 1998 Financial Times ltd. All rights reserved
Download
as a pdf file
|
