A prospective employee may lie in an interview but how can you tell? Without the use of a lie detector the ability to separate truth from embellishment or uncover obvious dishonesty can save the company embarrassment and, at worst, considerable financial loss.
To root out dishonesty in a company, you should avoid employing dishonest individuals in the first place. Candidates are likely to make exaggerated claims concerning their qualifications and experience, or even to lie, in their anxiety to make a good impression
HOW THE OTHER HALF LIE
Current statistics claim that twenty five percent of the workforce are fundamentally honest and as much as twenty five percent are fundamentally dishonest. We must be aware that the remaining fifty percent can be swayed by temptation.
The key in the interview stage for discovering where the truth lies is not what an individual says but what they do. Managers often believe that they are capable for distinguishing between fact and fiction yet it is the signs you must look out for.
Stan Walters, adviser to US military and government agencies as well as author of Interrogation etc states that there is no single behavioural indicator to prove truth or deception; rather the interviewer should look for changes having, established a norm of behaviour.
Primarily, how the potential employee communicates in an interview must be observed. Stan Walters speaks of changes occurring in certain areas when an interviewer hits a sensitive area. These areas are the facial expressions, quality of voice, content of words and the overall body language.
Patterns of behaviour have been identified as displaying themselves when an individual tries to distort or hide the truth. A deceptive interviewee is very likely to attempt to control these signs, but they are evidently hiding something if they react every time a certain subject is brought up.
Before attempting to find these visual clues of deception, a behavioural baseline must be established. In other words, the interviewer takes note of the interviewee’s behaviour and gestures towards unobjectionable topics such as the weather and their journey to the interview.
THE COMUNICATION CONTEXT
Gestures may be interpreted in different ways and the implications of non-verbal signs vary hugely. To be sure of accurate interpretation, the interviewer must take into account the entire context of the communication. Facial movements are insufficient evidence alone; despite the obstacle of a desk separating the interviewee, the manager needs as unobstructed a view of the individual as possible.
If the interviewee is accustomed to dishonesty and aware of the techniques used to detect it, one has reason to believe that he has the tools to deceive the interviewer. However, Stan Walters believes that this is not the case. He states that even if the candidate is controlled in this way, small and fleeting non-verbal signals will still leak out and that an experienced interviewer should still be able to detect them. He also believes that trying too hard to hide something can be a hindrance, causing the possibility of making it visible higher.
There is also the case of the deceiver being duped by the interviewer. The applicant is not questioned when he lies and therefore he becomes over-confident in his ability to lie. This can then be detected by the experienced interviewer.
It is necessary to know what signs to look out for as interviewees are very unlikely to be able to control their behaviour:
TELL-TALE SIGNS
- Manipulating clothing (i.e. straightening tie, picking at imaginary fluff)
- Leaning back on chair with arms and legs crossed
- Waffling
- Rise in voice pitch
- Placing a file or bag on the lap to create a barrier between them and the interviewer
- Shifting chair position
- Hands covering mouth
- Talking through fingers
- Gestures significantly reduced and close to the body
- Moving away from the interviewer
|
