Author: Christopher Bachler

The U.S. government has been playing an increasingly active role in an effort to promote the information technology profession. Spurred on by the Arlington, Virginia-based Infor-mation Technology Association of America (ITAA) and other concerned industry groups, the Departments of Education, Commerce and Labor have issued reports, generated publicity, and sponsored major conferences to address the issue. Major funding and other incentive programs have also been launched.

Here are examples of the U.S. government’s current IT development initiatives:

President’s Educational Technology Initiative

This initiative is designed to encourage the advancement of technological literacy among all students by the beginning of the century. The four specific goals of the program, called the “Four Pillars” are:

• Modern computers and learning devices will be accessible to every student.
• Classrooms will be connected to one another and to the outside world.
• Educational software will be an integral part of the curriculum—and as engaging as the best video game.
• Teachers will be ready to use and teach with technology.

Other government steps include:

• Expanding industry involvement in school-to-work: The Department of Education and the Department of Labor will provide up to $6 million in grants for industry groups that expand private-sector involvement in school-to-work. This will give more young Americans the academic and vocational learning they need to pursue high-skill, high-wage jobs in industries such as IT.

• Upgrading the skills of the existing workforce: The Labor Department will invest $3 million in demonstration projects—in partnership with employers and training providers—to train dislocated workers for high-tech jobs.
• Continuing the national dialogue: The Department of Commerce will convene four town-hall meetings this year where representatives of business, academia, state and local governments, and employee organizations can discuss IT workforce needs; identify best practices; and showcase successful models that others can replicate.
• Promoting the use of technology in teaching and learning: The De-partment of Education established a $2 billion Technology Literacy Challenge Fund. The fund will be distributed over a five-year period. The 1998 disbursement was in the amount of $425 million to the state.

Workforce, July 1998, Vol. 77, No. 7, p. 56.

The Microsoft 2000 program is one of the most ambitious corporate-educational partnerships in the country. The program’s far-reaching initiatives, implemented by the Redmond, Washington-based software giant, provide exemplary ideas for other companies that are eager to promote the growth of information technology. Some of Microsoft’s groundbreaking initiatives include:

• The development of a new re-cruitment video designed to dispel myths about the IT profession, and to encourage people from various backgrounds to join the profession.
• Technology training program for Microsoft Authorized Academic Training Program (AATP) instructors at high schools, colleges and universities across the country.
• Co-sponsorship (in conjunction with Servus Financial) of low-rate loans for technical training at Microsoft Authorized Technical Education Centers (ATECs), and AATP institutions.
• A joint effort with The Monster Board, a major recruitment advertising agency, to furnish an employee-recruitment solution via the Internet to Microsoft Certified Solution Provider (MCSP) companies. Employment opportunities can be listed by MCSPs on-line, and prospective employees can apply online.
• An online career aptitude tool at http://www.microsoft.com/skills2000/jobs.htm is available for the benefit of those considering a career in information technology. Questions help visitors recognize their own work-style preferences and abilities in eight different career categories. The tool also provides a technical training road map.
• Sponsorship of career expos in 16 cities in an effort to show MCSP companies better ways to attract more IT professionals.
• Sponsorship of the “Making College Count In-School Presentation Program.” The 1998 program will acquaint 50,000 high school seniors at 250 schools with ideas for success in college, and in the business world.
• A $350,000 donation to Green Thumb Inc., a nonprofit organization, to develop IT training programs for qualified unemployed workers, senior citizens or disabled people for such jobs as help-desk support specialists and network administrators. Green Thumb will be assisted by Productivity Point International (PPI) Inc., a technical education center that is authorized by Microsoft. The Green Thumb organization also works with various private industry councils in implementing training programs and in placing the eligible graduates.

The tremendous structural changes taking place in most companies are stirring up greater demand for outsourcing training than ever before. First, there are shrinking budgets. Next are shrinking in-house staffs, largely due to downsizing. And then there’s the mind-boggling proliferation of specialized new knowledge that needs to be imparted to employees on a frequent basis. No small group of in-house trainers is likely to master so much knowledge. Outsourcing, therefore, isn’t only on the rise-it may well be the wave of the future.

“Because training costs are fairly high,” remarks Mark Fritsch, director of Northern States Power Co.’s Quality Academy based in Minneapolis, “companies that are only doing 3,000-hours worth of business-skills training can’t afford to hire anyone in-house. So they need to outsource it. There needs to be some critical mass of training before you can afford to get your own in-house people.”

Fritsch indicates that local educational institutions are playing a growing role in providing such services. “We’re seeing great interest in outsourcing partnerships with a lot of the existing technical schools and community colleges that are able to reduce costs and improve effectiveness.”

Companies turn to outsourcing as a way to cut costs.
Cost pressures caused Atlanta-based Equifax to develop a creative new approach to outsourcing-one which not only pares internal training costs, but also controls the cost of outsourcing. “Three years ago, we cut our training staff to a few people, developed our own courses and hired contract trainers to teach them,” recalls Lynn Slavenski, vice president of education and organizational development at Equifax.

These free-lance consultants often are displaced professionals or graduate school students who want to break into consulting. “This is different than hiring consultants whom you pay perhaps $2,000 a day because they use materials they’ve developed. Since our contract trainers use our materials, we’re able to pay them much less. We don’t do that with higher-level training, however. Sometimes we need high-priced consultants and need to pay for the expertise they bring.”

Slavenski’s approach also saves Equifax the cost of outside materials which she feels tend to be expensive and aren’t always customized to the company’s needs. “Because we create our own materials or contract to create them,” she explains, “I don’t use a lot of packaged programs. I don’t like paying $200 or $300 a package. For a high-level class I might. But it’s too much for basic classes. I’d rather spend that on other things, like self-study.”

Outsourcing also solves another perennial problem for trainers-the waxing and waning demand for training. Rarely is training provided to the same extent at all times throughout the year. When at times a great deal of training may be offered, little or none will be provided at other times. Hiring a full-time staff capable of meeting the organization’s training needs during peak seasons, therefore, also means paying those same trainers when little or no training is planned. Outsourcing, on the other hand, provides companies with the flexibility to use and pay trainers only as needed.

While corporate downsizing has been one of the primary causes of the growth of outsourcing, not everyone is confident the downsizing trend is permanent. President Richard Silton, of Silton-Bookman Systems, in Cupertino, California, a record-keeping software producer for trainers, believes the trend may turn around. “The downsizing movement hasn’t played itself out yet,” he insists. “I think it will go the other way when people begin to realize they’ve lost critical resources that can’t be acquired through outsourcing.”

If Silton is right, then the implication is clear-HR departments need to make sure they don’t restructure their training programs to the point at which they may find it difficult to reverse them, if necessary. It could be that the pendulum is still seeking equilibrium.

Assuming that a great deal of training will continue to be outsourced-and for the foreseeable future, that’s likely for many organizations-what does that mean for in-house trainers? Most likely, they’re experiencing a change of focus. Vendors need supervision and input. In-house trainers also will need to coordinate their efforts with those undertaken by vendors. And finally, in-house trainers need to learn enough about their vendors so they’ll be able to make intelligent selections.

A recent survey conducted by the OmniTech Consulting Group based in Chicago indicates that among Fortune 1000 companies, 16 percent of all training is delivered through multimedia-based methods, and this figure is expected to double within two years.

“Over the last 10 years, [use of] electronically distributed training has climbed 20 percent,” reports Rich Silton, president of Silton-Bookman Systems, of Cupertino, California, a record-keeping software producer for trainers at Fortune 1000 companies. “Some estimates indicate that before the year 2005, instructor-led training may drop to 50 percent, while electronic training will increase.”

Adds Steve Wood, senior vice president of human resources and corporate affairs for Flagstar Inc., a Spartanburg, South Carolina holding company of six major restaurant chains: “More companies will invest in technology as a training vehicle because they can get better quality training, more consistent delivery and lower training costs. It’s also the preferred delivery vehicle for recipients.”

Consider the benefits of incorporating technology.
Using technology as a tool for instruction delivery allows trainers to train more people,” Syracuse Language Systems’ director of corporate markets, Pete Simmonds, suggests. “In traditional classrooms, there may be one instructor for 20 people. But with the Internet, the student audience potentially can be expanded so that the cost per employee goes down.”

Simmonds says that to meet the rising demand for language training, his Syracuse, New York-based company created a series of self-study multimedia software programs that incorporate the Internet as a tool for interactivity. “Although self-study programs tend to be inexpensive and easy for people to do, the lack of structure makes it difficult for employees to maintain the self-discipline to complete the program,” Simmonds points out. “One-on-one tutors tend to be more effective. But these programs aren’t only more expensive, but also more difficult to schedule…. We combined the best features of self-instruction with teacher interaction through a combination of multimedia software and the Internet.”

Some companies have devised unique in-house technological solutions. One noteworthy example is Silicon Graphics, a Mountain View, California-based producer of workstation servers, supercomputers and software. “We’re doing as much distributed learning as possible and putting it on our intranet in a flexible, accessible way,” says Drew Banks, manager of Technical Education and Distributed Learning for Silicon Graphics. Banks explains, “I want to make training as painless as possible, so when you click on something on the Web, you don’t know whether you’re being trained, just getting information or being entertained.”

Another key benefit of technology is the ability to conduct training over long distances.

Technology is boosting the use of distance learning.
Distance learning is growing in demand. Companies find it too costly to maintain a full-time training staff to teach every necessary course. If you’re looking for flexibility and the least amount of time lost from work, then distance learning is the most effective solution.

Many training professionals agree that distance learning is the best way for students to take courses while remaining on the job. Courses may be offered by mail (shipment of books and CD-ROMS) or via the Internet. Videoconferencing is another method.

Jean Barbazette, president of Seal Beach, California-based Training Clinic, is an advocate for videoconferencing. “It sounds expensive,” she suggests. “But if you want to train people over several days, it’s an easy way to do it…. You don’t need to own a satellite; you can go to Kinko’s and rent a room for a nominal fee.” Some companies, like Arlington, Virginia-based Gannett Publishing, are now using company-owned satellite hookups to broadcast training sessions.

“A lot of our clients can’t send employees out to train,” says Betty Howell, director of Learning Dimensions, a Birmingham, Alabama-based distance-learning firm that provides independent-study programs. “The cost of training is very high, whether it’s conducted in house, or through seminars. Also you can’t be as in-depth in a one-day seminar as you can be in an independent-study program.”

Employees complete work outside of classroom settings and enjoy the assistance of subject experts via phone or e-mail. “They can take an hour a day to do coursework at their desks. The benefit is the immediate application of what they learn to their jobs,” says Howell. Also, since people learn at different rates, or may be slowed down by work or life pressures, there’s an advantage to flexible scheduling.

Although Howell respects technology’s potential, she doesn’t see it replacing more conventional teaching. “I’m excited about its possibilities,” she says, “and it makes learning accessible for people at distant sites. But I think a combination of methods is best.”

Warning: Technology is constantly in transition.
John Faier, principal of OmniTech, suspects that many trainers are diving into technological solutions before they’re fully developed. “Are they ready to take advantage of technology in a way that maximizes its potential? Or are they merely substituting new media for proven methods? It concerns me when organizations use the Web to distribute self-paced workbook study programs. People read 30 percent to 40 percent slower online. The Web is great at some things. But do trainers understand what they are?”

Trainers, according to Faier, still have much to do. “Our study indicates that 60 percent of learning professionals who aren’t involved in the development of multimedia [training methods] today won’t be able to make the transition to future multimedia development goals.” So trainers should be thinking about how they’re going to cultivate these skills.

Rich Wellins, senior vice president for Development Dimensions International in Bridgeville, Pennsylvania, concludes, “Technology is in transition. That creates huge problems. Eight years ago, [employees] studied workbooks or went to class. Now there’s no standard. Different companies want different solutions.” It’s the responsibility of trainers to find the best ones for their organizations-which they certainly can’t do without being up-to-date themselves.

Almost everyone agrees that training budgets are tighter than ever before. That’s not to say that lots of money isn’t being spent, or even that increases aren’t evident in some cases. According to a June 1996 article in Across the Board, a magazine published by the New York City-based Conference Board, American business invested an estimated $30 billion in training in 1996. Late last year, Omnitech Consulting Group, based in Chicago, predicted a sharp increase in corporate spending for multimedia training budgets in 1997. Nevertheless, managers everywhere want to get much more mileage out of their training dollars than ever before.

June Maul, district manager of development and multimedia development for Basking Ridge, New Jersey-based AT&T, says, “As in most other organizations, our training budget is declining. As more corporations are looking to reduce costs, they’re also trying to make sure people get only the training they need.” AT&T’s School of Business and Technology, which Maul oversees, deals in part with its budget constraints by charging its employee-students for the courses they take. Rates, according to Maul, tend to be between 10 percent and 20 percent lower than alternative institutions might charge.

Northern Power’s corporate university system is helping save the company money, according to Mark Fritsch, director of the Minneapolis-based company’s Quality Academy. “We’re probably doing 20 percent more training with 30 percent less resources,” he claims. “Consolidating different training groups in areas that had some redundancy is one way. Also, by measuring the processes of our training, such as looking at what goes into needs analysis, helps us get better at delivering high-quality training in a short period of time, for a very low cost.”

Lynn Slavenski, vice president of education and organizational development for Atlanta-based Equifax, acknowledges that her company also is concerned about cost control, as evidenced by its cost-efficient use of grad-school interns. But she also stresses that budget takes a back seat to needs. “If we need it,” she points out, “we do it. Lots of organizations are realizing that learning is their competitive edge-more than ever before. As long as training departments concentrate on strategies and organizational needs, and work closely with senior officers to make sure they’re on target, then they can usually get funding.”

Not every organization is downsizing its training budget, however. Some are even coming back from sharp cutbacks, and reinvesting heavily in new training. “We believe we may have underinvested in training the past few years,” says Steve Wood, Spartanburg, South Carolina-based Flagstar’s senior vice president of HR. “One thing capital should be used for is more training. In the hospitality industry, what our guests tell us about the quality of service is just as important as the quality of the food we serve.”

Trainers are facing more accountability for their performance than ever before. Increased emphasis on quality control is one reason. The need for better and more comprehensive training in more areas than in the past is another. Special issues—such as affirmative action, ADA and diversity training-are so sensitive in their nature they leave no margin for error. Another reason stems from increased expectations. “The customer’s level of [expectation] keeps increasing,” Mark Fritsch, director of Northern States Power Co.’s Quality Academy based in Minneapolis, points out. “So constantly we need to stay ahead of the curve.” Simply put, the bar has been raised, and every successful organization must either keep up or be left in the dust.

Accountability is meaningless without tools for measuring results.
But given these greater expectations for trainers, how can managers measure results? How can measurement improve training programs? And how might it shape the trainer’s role in the future?

Fritsch says Northern Power makes a dedicated effort not only to measure the impact of its training programs, but also to measure them in the most meaningful and objective ways possible. “First, we measure customer satisfaction. Second, we measure the performance change due to training by looking at productivity changes or improvement of customer interaction which we measure by customer surveys. Third, we measure return on our investment…. Fourth, we conduct pre- and post-training testing.”

But it’s not always quite that easy, Fritsch concedes. Conducting surveys is one thing. But conducting surveys that deliver meaningful results is something else. To do this, trainers should cultivate good relationships with others upon whose cooperation they can depend. “Trainers need to have a partnership with their customers,” he insists. “If [our customers] are running high-performing organizations, they should be measuring the productivity of their workforces [as it relates to our training]. So they often feed us the results.”

Fritsch does acknowledge, however, the dangers that may stem from measuring performance the wrong way. For example, training officials need to distinguish among many competing variables. Are employees’ productivity gains related to the training? Trainers who rely on second or third-hand feedback need to take great care in how they interpret results. When feedback is consistently good or bad over long periods of time, however, the indications as they pertain to training are probably reliable.

Tests collect a range of useful information.
The primary role of formal testing in training programs used to focus on determining how much employees learned from their training. It also was a way of determining how well trainers were doing their jobs. But now, testing can and must do much more. In addition to measuring what the trainee learned, testing is now being used nearly as often to pinpoint what each trainee knows before training even begins. In that way, trainers not only can determine how much the trainee has learned from the session, but also can get a better idea of how to fashion the training session.

“Our test defines the person, how best to train them and in which skills they can most use training,” says Charlie Wonderlic, president of Wonderlic Personnel Test Inc. of Libertyville, Illinois. “We provide specific training placement instruction based on what employees know relative to national standards.” Wonderlic says this method helps employers get the most complete picture of their employees’ skills. “Few employers are using this approach,” he comments. “They’re using more in-house tests. But they don’t give you the important national picture.”

Measurement is only as good as the records that are kept.
Records not only are useful for purposes of substantiating claims, but they’re also important for long-term comparisons. How well did training help one team this year, versus its effect on teams during previous sessions? The ability to make those all-important comparisons, and to substantiate them in concrete terms, can help trainers know when adjustments, or even new strategies, may be needed.

“We exist because companies need to keep records about training in order to measure quality and productivity; to meet ISO or professional certification requirements; or to provide reports to such regulatory agencies as OSHA, EPA or FDA,” says Richard Silton, president of Cupertino, California-based Silton-Bookman Systems. Silton’s Registrar 5.2 for Windows™ program, for example, can handle such tasks as monitoring group progress, establishing individual development plans and forecasting needs for training programs.

Increased expectations of training have again shifted the role of trainers. They’ll need to pay better attention to a set of tools that at one time was likely relegated to secondary importance: testing and tracking scores. They must learn to be on the lookout for better methods of evaluating employees’ skills. Trainers need these measurements to quantify the impact of their strategic roles.

Corporate universities are far from new. But they’re becoming more commonplace than ever before. And they’re evolving to meet changing demands. Lynn Slavenski, who heads up the Atlanta-based Equifax university, defines the concept. “Corporate universities aren’t a place, but a concept for organized learning that’s designed to perpetuate the organization.”

Equifax started its corporate university seven years ago. “Our curriculum is geared to employees on all levels and offers professional management development, self-study programs, and an in-house MBA program offered in cooperation with a local university,” Slavenski explains.

Northern States Power Co., headquartered in Minneapolis, set up its corporate academy just a few years ago. “We wanted to consolidate and leverage the value that corporate universities can bring to organizations,” says Mark Fritsch, director of the company’s Quality Academy. The academy provides training in leadership, team-building, time and project management, technical skills and more. “We have no separate building. We’re a virtual university, meaning we maintain training facilities wherever it makes sense.”

Fritsch says his academy has made a quality breakthrough by cross-training employees. “Some corporate universities don’t align corporate and technical business training,” he says. “But we might train line people to install transformers and to deal with customers. We know those interpersonal skills can enhance the technical skills.”

Basking Ridge, New Jersey-based AT&T requires employees to pay for some classes. On the flip side, June Maul, AT&T’s district manager of development and multimedia development, explains that her students sometimes receive credit toward college degrees. “The University of Phoenix and St. John’s in New York City allow credits for some of our courses, if students take additional courses from them.”

Corporate training programs widen their reach.
While in-house personnel continue to be the trainer’s main focus, some trainers also are being asked to serve such other constituent groups as vendors, customers or even community residents.

“We provide training to other companies, customers and suppliers,” says Fritsch. “If instructors aren’t busy, we can open up classes for external needs. Because of our university approach, it may be cheaper for them to go with us than somewhere else.”

Abbott Laboratories, a pharmaceutical, medical equipment and nutritional products company based in Abbott Park, Illinois, recently began to offer basic skills training to nonemployees. “We went to the local community college and asked [its administrative staff] to review the skills our workforce needs,” says Keith Mitchell, manager of testing and assessment for Abbott. “They developed a training curriculum for such basic skills as reading, math, problem-solving, communication, interviewing, test-taking, mechanical comprehension and documentation.” The company offers free sessions to employment applicants who fail to pass the initial entrance exams three times a year, each over a period of 12 weeks. Local college interns are sometimes used as trainers.

Mitchell started this program to help applicants who don’t pass his employee entrance exams the first time, but who, through remediation, might be given a second chance. “We don’t want to screen out people through testing,” he says, “but to help them improve their skills so they might later qualify for employment. What we get out of the program is an increasing pool of qualified candidates to fill future jobs.”

So you think corporate training is a big job now? When your in-house university opens its doors, you may find your role expanding beyond your company’s walls.

A computer company is preparing to introduce a new type of European software into the United States. Sales potential amounts to hundreds of millions of dollars—if the company can be the first to launch the product. All it needs is to find a specialist in this new type of software.

But qualified candidates are hard to find. After strenuous efforts, the HR department can locate only three. None, however, are interested. The HR manager is at the end of her rope. The company is on the verge of making millions in sales, but it will lose its edge if the search takes much longer.

Fortunately, the HR manager has an idea—if the software was created in Europe, why not recruit someone from Europe? Responses from qualified applicants pour in. Unfortunately, now HR has another problem—choosing the best inpat. How can HR be sure about personal backgrounds, work history and educational credentials? How do HR people research the backgrounds of foreign workers, and how do they compare their credentials to those of U.S. workers?

Some of these issues will be familiar to those who hire nationals overseas. But most are unique to the United States. They are questions a lot of HR people don’t stop to ask until they’re embroiled in a frantic international candidate search—when they need to know the answers already. Take the time now so you can be ready when the call comes—because even if your firm doesn’t dabble in international employment matters today doesn’t mean it won’t have to tomorrow.

Sometimes the best—or only—candidates are found outside the United States.
It’s true that few companies go out of their way to hire foreign workers. It’s generally easier to hire domestically. There are numerous costly and time-consuming immigration restrictions to clear when hiring outside our borders. For one thing, the Department of Labor (DOL) encourages U.S. companies to hire U.S. citizens whenever possible. To be approved by the Attorney General for importing a foreigner as an “H-2 worker,” (the label for a temporary employee) a petitioner must apply to the Secretary of Labor for a certification that:

• There are not sufficient workers who are able, willing and qualified, and who will be available at the time and place needed, to perform the labor or services involved in the petition, and
• The employment of the alien in such labor or services will not adversely affect the wages and working conditions of workers in the United States similarly employed.

If you want to hire an employee permanently, you must jump through even more hoops. To hire anyone who is an immigrant, you have to first bring that person to the United States on a temporary visa.

If the person isn’t employed with an affiliate of the overseas company, the employer must also show that U.S. workers aren’t qualified to take the job. Basically, the only way a company can prove this is by making a dramatic—and expensive—effort to recruit U.S. citizens. If the organization can clear that hurdle, the foreign candidate still must be interviewed for permanent residence status by Immigration and Naturalization Services (INS)—a process that in jurisdictions such as Chicago are backlogged more than a year.

So why would a company put itself through this rigmarole? Sometimes foreign nationals are simply the best—if not the only—candidates for certain industries. High-tech and computer-software firms are prime examples. Even when they can find qualified domestic candidates, those candidates may not be willing to leave their current jobs or homes.

Allentown, Pennsylvania-based Air Products and Chemicals Inc., an international manufacturer of industrial gases, chemicals and environmental and energy systems, hires a small number of foreign-born entry-level scientists and engineers from American universities. Approximately 2% of the company’s new hires last year required special employment authorization because of their immigration status. “Many of the people looking for technical jobs are foreign nationals,” observes Valerie Moyer, immigration administrator. “Foreign nationals are hired [only] when we can’t find suitable U.S. citizens because it can be a grueling process.”

International Computer Services, in Houston, also uses immigrant workers. Because the companies it serves are largely international, the firm sometimes needs people who have experience with European software. Obviously that talent pool is deepest in Europe.

So how do organizations that must regularly hire foreign employees conduct their screening? To tell the truth, a lot depends on the situation and the company. For International Computer Services, the screening process is a thorough one. “I look for people with skills with certain software,” says Teryle Morrow, director of client services and contract employment. “We do preinterviews, technical interviews and reference checks,” she explains. “We verify employment history and degrees. If they’ll be working with our clients, they may go to client offices for personal interviews. They’d know better [than us] whether each candidate would be doing a specific project onsite, and what skills that may require.” These clients have the final say as to whether the candidates will fit the jobs or not.

Since family members of foreign employees may not be happy with the move, Morrow says her HR department also explores the ramifications of that possibility. They talk to the family, particularly each candidate’s spouse. Some, for instance, may reveal that they won’t join their spouses to avoid uprooting the children from their own school systems. “Because we’re aware of things like that, we try to learn everything we can about each person’s life-style, such as whether they’re able to travel,” says Morrow. That way the company knows the issues its candidates are dealing with and can proceed accordingly.

Like many companies, Air Products depends partly on government criminal and medical background screening of foreign nationals seeking permanent residence. “During the application process,” says Moyer, “applicants are asked about convictions in or outside the United States. They’re also required to submit medical exams and fingerprint charts. That’s part of the process of getting a green card.”

Many companies set up a time line for their search process. This may be a very short period, or take several months, depending on the intensity of the screening and the position being hired for. For instance, if a company needs to petition the INS for employment authorization for a prospective employee, the process can take two weeks to two months, depending on the type of authorization needed. A “J” visa status—used to admit business trainees—generally is obtained within two weeks. An “H” status—used to admit people in specialty occupations—can take as long as two months because approval must be obtained from both the INS and the U.S. Department of Labor.

As far as your actual screening goes, it can be as intense as you want, if you know how to conduct it correctly. For companies who need to dip into the foreign-employment pool, the screening process can be boiled down to three areas:

• Educational verification
• Work-experience verification and criminal checks
• Culturally effective interviewing.

Screen a candidate thoroughly in these three areas, and you’re that much closer to a good hiring decision.

Know the ABCs of checking educational credentials.
When hiring a person from the United States, you’d want some verification that your candidate really did graduate from the school he or she stated, with the degree stated. Likewise, you should check foreign employees’ educational backgrounds.

For companies such as Air Products, the screening process is often easy because many candidates are recruited from U.S. college campuses. “Hires must have at least the equivalent of a bachelor’s degree,” Moyer explains. “If their course work wasn’t equivalent, then we’d need to evaluate their experience. But we haven’t had to do that yet.” For applicants holding degrees from foreign universities, the company has the candidate’s credentials assessed by an outside credentials evaluation service.

To get around overseas educational idiosyncrasies, Fairfax, Virginia-based Mobil Corp. conducts its own screening tests. “Where we feel educational standards are different, we develop our own tests and use them to select people,” says Derek Harvey, manager of planning and administration for corporate employee relations. “[But] you have to normalize the tests for the culture you’re dealing with.” For instance, Mobil developed a test specifically for a project in Indonesia, because there was no other method of gauging candidates’ mechanical aptitude or their ability to learn. “To do that in Indonesia, we went to experts at the American Psychological Institute and to Cambridge University in England to help us,” says Harvey. “If you want a test to do what you want, you need to construct it appropriately in the first place. And if you don’t have a valid test, why use it?”

But Mobil has had extensive overseas experience—and Harvey admits the company rarely has to screen because of its general practice of hiring from affiliates. So how do more mainstream companies like Air Products and International Computer Services screen and compare educational credentials? With some assistance. Researching and evaluating the educational backgrounds of foreign applicants is more complex than evaluating those of Americans. That’s why these companies, and others like them, usually turn to outside educational consultants.

Educational evaluations address several fundamental questions. First, is the applicant telling the truth about his or her credentials—did the candidate attend the institutions and earn the degrees indicated on his or her resume? Second, is the institution comparable to American institutions of higher education? Finally, how does a university’s overall training compare to training in the United States? Were courses comparable? Did the applicant take an ample number of liberal arts courses? How do the grading systems compare—is an A in France comparable to an A in America? Is a bachelor’s degree from Burma comparable to the same degree in the United States?

New York City-based World Education Services Inc. evaluates the educational credentials of foreign-born job applicants on behalf of universities, corporations and immigration attorneys. “This has become a large field,” says Nancy Katz, director of the Midwest office, in Chicago. “There are approximately 500,000 foreign students in the United States. Our immigration numbers for employment allow approximately 140,000 people to get nonimmigrant working visas. A lot of them study in the United States and continue to work here.”

The organization’s services can also be useful for companies seeking employees licensed in fields such as physical therapy, teaching, chemical or medical technology, architecture, engineering or other fields requiring certification. “For example, civil engineers in California need to have certain courses before they can be licensed,” Katz explains. “They may need courses in earthquake technology. [Universities in] some countries may offer that, while other countries don’t. So we look into that.”

Katz evaluates each subject’s credentials in depth, determining whether the degree is equivalent to a bachelor’s, master’s or a Ph.D. “We also try to determine document authenticity. You can ask potential employees to have transcripts sent from their universities to their prospective places of employment. But someone from India, for example, may only have a certified copy, or something that doesn’t look like a transcript. Potential employers may wonder about its authenticity. Our job is to find out. If we have questions, we’ll write to the home institution.”

Corporate clients that seek Katz’s help do so because they lack both the time and the special resources necessary to do the job properly. For instance, the organization has a library of a few thousand books about foreign educational equivalencies—not to mention experts in the foreign education field. Katz herself recently co-authored a book on the educational system in Thailand.

Erika Popovych, director of Evaluation Service Inc. in Albany, New York, provides similar services, including in-house translational capabilities. She offers HR departments several precautions in undertaking an educational background check. First, she warns against using translators who are unfamiliar with the technical idiosyncrasies of education. “The translation profession tends to be creative,” she says. “Educational translation requires an understanding of its very own language.”

Popovych also discourages harboring any false assumptions about educational institutions. “Take Harvard,” she says. “Some departments are sterling, and others are coasting along. You have the same situation in other countries. Therefore, you can’t say that because you have a degree from a certain country, that it’s a superior degree. Although most foreign educational systems are patterned after U.S. institutions, some bypass liberal arts and are more specialized. So education isn’t necessarily superior, but different.”

Work-experience and criminal checks round out the screening.
Consultants are also useful in areas outside of educational-credential screening. Again, because they have greater resources and experience, they can complete work-experience and criminal checks more efficiently than most companies. For instance, Fairfax, Virginia-based Knowledge Company evaluates work-related experience of immigrant job applicants, using university-based experts who are published scholars. “We require a detailed evidentiary record that can be corroborated by colleagues from abroad about work projects and the problems they solved,” says Irving Spitzberg, president. “For example, we’ll ask an engineer to submit drawings and plans, and our experts will use that information to compare their knowledge with that of an American university graduate.”

Spitzberg says that he’s amazed more corporations don’t use screening services. “Whether I were hiring at a Fortune 500 corporation, or for a Mom and Pop business, I’d want to know the applicant’s exact qualifications.”

Employers—or their authorized representatives—can encounter certain unique problems in the process of verifying background information on foreign-born job candidates. For instance, Paul Barada, president of Barada Associates of Rushville, Indiana, who specializes in employee background checks for his corporate clients, says that language barriers can be a common problem. “Most of the time,” he reports, “we find that people seeking employment in this country are bilingual, and they tend to provide references who are fluent in English. But the trick is often getting past the receptionist who doesn’t speak English.”

When language is a problem, Barada taps into a broad base of local language experts who service his needs from time to time. “They may get us past the gatekeepers who don’t know English. Or sometimes it may become a three-way phone conversation.”

Nadine Stollenmaier, president of the Honolulu-based Dunhill Professional Search of Hawaii, says that existing laws sometimes present her with a problem when she screens foreign applicants. “We can ask about languages [candidates] speak fluently, but that’s [legal] only if it’s a bona fide occupational qualification,” she says.

Other unlawful inquiries include:

• The applicant’s nationality, lineage, ancestry, national origin, descent or parentage
• The nationality of parents, spouses, or maiden name of applicant’s wife or mother
• What language the applicant commonly uses
• If an applicant is able to read, write or speak a foreign language not directly related to the job.

“Be sure to follow guidelines for pre-employment inquiries,” Stollenmaier urges. “Be aware that foreigners know they can sue U.S. companies.”

So how does Dunhill Professional Search screen foreign applicants? “The same way we screen American citizens,” Stollenmaier replies. “I recently interviewed a woman from Japan who was here on a student working visa. I contacted her former school and employer in Japan, and spoke to someone who spoke English who could send relevant documentation.”

After educational and work-experience screening pan out, HR people still have one more area of inquiry: criminal background. HR professionals should know about law as it pertains to foreign hires, advises immigration lawyer Scott Cooper, partner with Chicago law firm Fragomen, Del Rey & Bernsen.

The criminal screening may be the trickiest part of the process, due to lack of sources. For one thing, there’s no requirement for a police or security check on someone who comes on a temporary visa. Secondly, even if an agency does conduct a check, that doesn’t guarantee all undesirables will be screened out. “The INS has a lookout list containing hundreds of thousands of names,” says Cooper. “A number of agencies feed information into that database, which is then accessed by U.S. embassies and consuls abroad, or by the INS at a port of entry. [But] anybody who hasn’t been arrested and convicted won’t be caught.” Also guaranteed to slip through criminal checks are people who are convicted of a crime overseas that wouldn’t be so regarded here—for example, someone convicted of treason for criticizing their country’s dictator.

However, the main problem with these criminal background checks, says Cooper, stems from the dearth of information that the United States has on crimes committed in foreign countries. “We don’t have that much information exchange on criminal activity, except with Canada. So that lookout list is intended to deal only with serious criminals from the few countries with whom we do exchange information.”

Another problem in checking criminal histories is that certain countries may maintain poor records or may impose legal restrictions. For instance, the United States maintains an open exchange with Canada on criminal activity. This isn’t as helpful as one may think, however, because Canadian law forbids employers to question candidates on criminal backgrounds. So if a foreigner is hired by a Canadian company, that company won’t know of any criminal background that employee may have. “I’ve seen situations in which people are hired by Canadian companies that can’t ask questions about criminal background,” says Cooper. “Then when they’re at a U.S. port of entry, immigration officials don’t let them in.” If a U.S. company hires a foreign employee from a Canadian company, the firm should conduct its own criminal check.

Foreign nationals who seek permanent residence, Cooper says, are a different matter. “They would go through an arrest record check if they were in the United States for any time. If they haven’t been, then most must present letters or police certificates from the countries they’ve lived in for six months or more.”

But Cooper suggests that HR also should be aware of potential legal problems concerning the criminal backgrounds of foreign candidates. Even if an applicant has no official arrest record, there could still be problems surrounding some of his or her actions. For instance, HR people should know not just whether a person has been arrested or convicted of a crime, but whether he or she has admitted to the essential elements of what would be a crime here. One example would be a violation of the American Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which bars U.S. entry of foreign businesspeople who might have bribed government officials in their home countries—even if that isn’t against the law in those countries.

Other rules can also bar someone’s entry. For instance, a person can be excluded if he or she admits to something for which the potential sentence is more than a year imprisonment. Cooper offers an example: “A president of a company subsidiary in Canada, who was to be transferred to the United States, took some wood from a construction site trash pile for his trellis. Canadian police arrested him for taking $40 worth of wood. The man returned the materials and [ended up] paying a fine. But because the potential sentence was more than a year imprisonment, he was inadmissible to the United States forever. Luckily he was married to a U.S. citizen, and they could waive that kind of minor crime.”

What can a company do if something minor like this bars a candidate’s entry? Unfortunately, not much. That’s why it’s important to do pre-hire checks, so you don’t end up with a costly fiasco—a new employee who never will be allowed in the United States.

Keep cultural differences in mind when interviewing.
Cultural considerations also can be an important—and complicated—area in the screening process. “You may have language barriers,” Morrow notes. “They may speak English, but when they get into technical situations with clients, it can be hard to be sure they’re comprehending instructions. You can lose some things in translation.” To avoid this problem, Morrow recommends bringing the technical managers into the interviewing process. Project managers or supervisors are better able to tell during the technical interview whether the candidates know what they’re talking about.

Because cultural differences may also affect work methods, HR departments should evaluate work style during the screening process. Employees conduct themselves very differently depending on their cultural orientation. For instance, some cultures don’t communicate much. The employees might come in and put their heads down to their work. Americans often want to get more feedback from people. Just recognizing cultural differences can smooth potential problems. You can sit down with the candidate pre-hire, explain the U.S. work culture, and see if he or she will be able to make the necessary adjustments to be functional in the workplace.

Experts also warn HR professionals to be aware of cultural barriers that may keep the screening process itself from being effective.

For instance, human resources professionals should be aware that some interview questions considered standard in the United States may be completely taboo to foreign-born candidates. “You should know about the interviewee’s culture before you do the interview so you know what’s inappropriate,” advises Randy Chastain, HR director for Ball Corporation’s packaging division, in Broomfield, Colorado. “But also, you should preface your interview with the point, ‘I’m doing this from an American perspective, so if I say something that’s inappropriate, let me know.'”

Chastain also urges HR professionals to do their homework. One of the best ways, he says, is to consult those who are experienced in dealing with foreign-born workers. Chastain, for instance, talks with human resources managers in the areas in which the company is recruiting. He asks them how they interview, what some of their experiences have been and what to watch out for.

Ian Payne, vice president of global services for Prudential Relocation of Shelton, Connecticut, urges HR managers to make no assumptions about other cultures. “For instance, there’s more similarity between British and Chinese culture than between British and American,” says Payne, who is a British national in residence. The assumption that the two countries share similar lifestyles probably leads to the fact that U.K. and U.S. transfers statistically suffer the highest failure rate. “The important thing about culture is that what you perceive as right or wrong, good or bad, is perceived differently around the world,” warns Payne. “As a result, you find both attitudinal and behavioral differences. You need to understand what drives those differences. Then you’ll have insight into why people think and act the way they do.”

A final word of advice: Keep it all legal. “It’s essential that judgments about education and work experience are carefully crafted to follow the requirements of the law,” Spitzberg comments. “Many evaluations are done by people who… don’t know immigration law, and don’t understand learning systems in other countries.”

Human resources people who aren’t specialists in evaluating foreign job candidates can stay on the right side of the law by seeking advice from people who teach or work in the field or from professional societies. “Generalists are not qualified to evaluate experiential learning,” says Popovych. “Contact your nearest college and consult someone in the department related to your applicant’s area of specialization. These people are professionals and should know variables in the field.”

Stollenmaier also urges HR managers to use outside assistance in the screening process. “HR professionals have to worry about many other things. These agencies can be helpful because they’re specialized in this kind of work and can provide a second line of defense. You’ll have two sources screening the applicants, instead of just one.”

So what ever happened to that computer company and its European software launch? Well, the firm whittled its list down to several foreign candidates. HR conducted educational, work-experience and criminal background checks. The company invited the finalists in for culturally respectful interviews—and hired a new employee in time to launch the line. By following its lead, you can have a similar success story.

Bogus credentials-work documents, diplomas and the like-are not a widespread problem, according to most experts. On the other hand, fraudulent documents aren’t unheard of, particularly among foreign nationals eager to trade turbulent or restrictive homelands for the United States. Although HR professionals can’t be expected to be expert detectives, they can be expected to handle the basics. New York City-based World Education Services Inc. offers the following tips:

1. Don’t be rushed into accepting a credential about which you have reservations.
2. For every copy of a document, there has to have been an original. If you have questions about a copy, try to get the original.
3. Confirm the existence of the institution through reference sources such as the “International Handbook of Universities” or the “Commonwealth Universities Yearbook.” If the institution isn’t listed there, call the appropriate foreign consulate or embassy, either in New York City or Washington, D.C. In addition, large international organizations such as the Institute of International Education or AMIDEAST also might have information.
4. Make sure a program actually is offered by a particular school or university. Write to the institution named, enclosing a copy of the document submitted for verification. Address the letter to the office of the person who signed the credential, not the individual.
5. Examine photocopies with great care. Look at the background for signs that paper may have been pasted over an original section. If a document looks suspicious at all, ask to see the original. If the document can’t be sent, write to the official body involved for verification.
6. Note that transcripts, diplomas or other credentials must always be on school letterhead.
7. Familiarize yourself with the appearance of credentials you encounter most frequently.
8. Compare dates of birth and dates of graduation for logical progression.
9. If forced to accept documents from countries not diplomatically related to the United States, such as Cuba, have the applicant sign a form declaring the information contained in the document is true and ask that his or her signature be notarized. This is more of a deterrent than you may think.
10. Even if the student is transferring from another U.S. school, always request to see his or her original foreign credentials. Don’t rely on someone else’s verification of authenticity.

World Education Services also provides the following telltale signs that may indicate fraudulent credentials:

• Poor copies or copies containing smudges or other marks
• Stains or burns covering key information, such as names
• Records stamped “confidential” or “not to be released to student”
• Applicants claiming to have lost original records
• Different type styles on same document
• Type erasures
• Handwritten additions to typewritten materials
• Typed material that’s slanted or added on an angle
• Evidence of substituted names that are different than on originals
• Unrealistically high grades or course loads
• Credentials consisting of a solitary letter
• Supposedly foreign documentation that seems very American in character
• Credentials received too late to make proper verification possible
• Letters of verification issued by U.S. institutions.

Although preliminary precautions are encouraged, most employers dealing regularly with foreign workers have experienced little or no trouble with forged documents. Valerie Moyer, immigration administrator for Allentown, Pennsylvania-based Air Products and Chemicals Inc., says her experience has been positive. “No one has tried to pull something over on us,” Moyer says. “We had one employee who was too embarrassed to reveal that his spouse had a criminal record when he applied for permanent residence. The issue was resolved with the immigration service and didn’t affect the individual’s employment status.”

Nancy Katz, director of the Midwest office of World Education Services, says that based on her experience, there’s cause for caution, but not alarm. She estimates credentials fraud to be low among foreign job applicants. “Out of 14,000 applications [reviewed],” she reports, “less than 1% were determined to be fraudulent.”

But Katz warns that applicants who come from nations embroiled in turbulence may be tempted to submit fraudulent credentials to get out of their countries, and into the United States. “You get problems when you have civil wars or revolutions,” she notes. “It’s not that they don’t actually have degrees, but that the documents they often present aren’t produced in their home countries. Before the Soviet Union opened up, some applicants used diploma mills. Vietnam and Afghanistan were also problems. And from the former Yugoslavia, we might start to see some weird stuff.”

Bottom line: A little proactivity goes a long way.

Ben’s resume was outstanding. So were his credentials. He graduated summa cum laude from a top university and went immediately to work for a major Fortune 500 company in New York City. Six years later, he accepted an even better position with another Fortune 500 company. Ben’s resume indicated that, at both companies, he distinguished himself by “managing,” “creating,” “launching,” “establishing” and “saving” all sorts of important things.

When Ben submitted his resume for a new job, the HR department was short-handed and under pressure to fill several new jobs immediately. The personnel staff had little time to waste. And Ben seemed to be the perfect candidate for one of the company’s most important new positions.

But despite Ben’s clean-cut appearance, charming demeanor and perfect pre-employment test scores, Ms. Bradley, the HR manager, thought it wise to investigate Ben’s background. During the following week, HR contacted every reference on Ben’s resume, all of which checked out. “It seems too good to be true,” Ms. Bradley said. “But I guess we’re in luck.”

Ben was hired immediately. For six months, he got rave reviews. Ms. Bradley was pleased—until that Monday morning when she received a call from Ben’s superior, Mr. Hastings. “One million dollars of the company’s money is missing,” Hastings angrily announced. “And so is Ben.”

Ben was clever. He knew neither of his two previous employers would do more than verify salary and dates of employment. He knew that because two of his accomplices—each posing as prospective employers—contacted them. And the other two employers that Ben listed on the resume simply didn’t exist. Ben made them up, and gave them phony addresses. When Ms. Bradley’s staff called the numbers Ben listed, they talked to Ben’s accomplices—posing as representatives from the fake businesses—who assured them that Ben had worked for them and that he was the greatest employee they’d ever had.

The story may sound melodramatic. But it’s a classic example of the disaster that can strike when HR people fall victim to phony resumes. Gina Bridges-White, HR manager at Johns Hopkins Hospital, in Baltimore, Maryland, recalls an incident approximately four years ago when one impressive resume like Ben’s cost her department some expense money. “A man from California, who claimed to be a physical therapist, was arranging interviews with different hospitals to get free trips. When we saw his resume, we told him to come out, and promised to reimburse 50% of his expenses. But after he arrived, we learned that several of his claims weren’t true. But because the recruiter thought he was qualified, we still had to pay 50% of his expenses.”

Such are the consequences of resume fraud—a problem that grows as the job market shrinks. Falling victim to those presenting bogus resumes can be costly. But companies don’t have to be had. Knowing the problem exists, and using techniques to guard against it, can save companies’ money and HR staffs’ reputations.

Defining the problem and its extent.
So, what exactly is resume fraud? Just about everyone agrees that blatant lies constitute resume fraud. But what about certain omissions or “creative wording?”

The problem isn’t always easy to define or understand, says Gary Hasenbank, corporate vice president of HR at Pinkerton Security & Investigation Services based in Encino, California. “Fraud is a strong term,” he says. “Misrepresentation is a better word. People tend to gloss over things, put spins on job titles, or get liberal with dates. These days, a lot of people are being coached by outplacement counselors, who teach them to put their best foot forward, or even to ‘tweak’ titles.”

Hasenbank believes that in some cases omissions may constitute fraud, and in other cases, they may not. “Failing to mention a summer job during the college years may not be a problem,” he suggests. “Sometimes people forget to include certain information, or they might think it isn’t important. Also, some applicants concentrate only on the most salient facts. These things have to be viewed in the context of the job sought and the individual’s motives. Some omissions may not be so bad; they might even be sensible.”

Types of “misrepresentations” seem to run the gamut. Lorayne Dollet, vice president and personnel specialist at the Chicago office of Hay Management Consulting and a specialist in personnel management, says: “Sometimes the dates are a little off.” Pamela Koch, assistant vice president of HR for Exton, Pennsylvania-based Environmental Compliance Services says she notices that, “people tend to puff up or reinvent their employment history.” And Toni Grabler, vice president of HR for Portland, Oregon-based Brim Inc., says she has discovered discrepancies in a variety of areas. “Problems,” Grabler notes, “include credentials, degrees or professional attainments the individual doesn’t have.”

Defining fraud in these terms, a 1994 survey, conducted by Menlo Park, California-based AccounTemps, indicates that as many as 33% of all resumes may be fraudulent. The 150 executives of Fortune 1000 firms who were surveyed claimed that at least one-third of all resumes they receive are either fraudulent or lacking in vital information. The survey also disclosed estimates of a 6% rise in resume fraud during the past three years.

“I’m inclined to believe that those studies are right,” says Koch. Dollet agrees. “Today, it’s probably as high as 30% or 40%. As a result, HR people are spending more time verifying resumes than ever before.”

Both Koch and Dollet suspect the same culprit—corporate downsizing—as the cause for the increase. “I think the competition for jobs has increased to such a level that there’s something of a desperation about the process,” Koch suggests. Adds Dollet: “As the average time to get a job has grown from three to nine months, we see more people taking liberties to present themselves favorably.”

It may also be that certain competitive industries see more fraud than others. Gail Duncan, president of Career’s First and CEO Services, of Cinnaminson, New Jersey, who provides technical recruiting and executive search services, has seen several Fortune 500 companies in her area victimized by resume fraud in recent years. She recognizes a particular problem in high-tech recruitment. “Our industry has been plagued by a well-organized group of competent computer people who’ve created fraudulent resumes that look very good,” she says. “They commonly get hired for lightly staffed second and third shifts so they can raid dormant bank accounts, or use company credit to order equipment for themselves.”

Despite intense screening efforts, Duncan says these people are hard to detect because they’re so good at deceiving others. “They might use military references, which HR people are less apt to check than some other company reference. They may also provide phony business references, and have accomplices answer the phone with a standard business greeting.”

Unlike the problems that Duncan encountered in the high-tech industry, Roxanne Hori, vice president of corporate recruiting and support at Chicago-based Northern Trust Bank, says she has encountered only a few cases of fraud. “I think it’s probably less than 10%,” she guesses. “The banking industry tends to be a tight community, and word gets around. So people are reluctant to do that sort of thing.”

A good grapevine also helps the Arkansas State Attorney General’s office minimize its problems with deceptive resumes, according to Director of Administration Diana Vaughn. “I haven’t seen much of a problem because most of our hires are attorneys, and the legal grapevine is great in most communities. Besides that, it’s easy to verify their resumes because they have to be licensed.”

Some HR specialists suggest that resume fraud may be more common among certain types of applicants as well. Grabler says that Brim, which owns and operates 61 hospitals and 20 retirement centers, has had few problems with usual applicants. “It’s probably less than 5%,” she estimates. “But I don’t think our experience is typical. Our experience has a lot to do with the uniqueness of our particular health-care market niche. The kind of people interested in working in our nonurban settings don’t tend to need to pad their experience to fit our openings.”

Grabler touches on an idea that’s echoed by some others. “I suspect it depends on the type of position involved,” Hasenbank surmises. “For professional positions, the number is probably in the 10% range. But as you get more toward blue-collar factory work, I assume it’s more common—maybe as high as 30%. They probably feel they aren’t part of the system. So whatever it takes to get a job is what they’ll do. And they aren’t too worried about three months from now—only about getting that job.”

Dollet suspects, however, the problem is worse at the middle and upper management levels than most experts suspect. “But it’s difficult to measure because it’s an art, and it’s getting more sophisticated,” she says. “People who go to resume writing services have gone from standard, concise, one-page resumes, to more wordy, narrative resumes that cover responsibilities and have lots of detail. In some cases, it’s nearly impossible to glean [important facts] about education and careers from these resumes.”

According to Kathy Zucco, advanced employment specialist at Toledo, Ohio-based Owens-Corning Fiberglass, recent college graduates seem to be the least likely to misrepresent themselves on their resumes. “I work specifically with college students who are taught how to write resumes by their placement offices, and who are told that we will check them. So, in my opinion, I would say the vast majority of these resumes are accurate.”

Zucco is aware, however, that on rare occasions even recent graduates may already have something to hide. She mentions a call she received from a college professor. “He told me about a young lady who needed help in writing down her work experience. Because the girl needed money for college, she worked as a dancer at a local club that’s known for its nude dancers, where she could make $200 a night. Since everyone in our area would recognize the club by name, she wanted to know how to put that on her resume.”

Dennis Guthrie, manager of university relations, Ph.D., recruiting and technical placement for Dow Chemical Co., located in Midland, Michigan, confirms Zucco’s findings. Guthrie, who says his company hires 80% of its new recruits from college campuses, is sure that prior dealings with new recruits helps to minimize resume fraud. “We usually know them,” Guthrie explains. “So we don’t try to determine what’s right or wrong on resumes until we’re working with the candidates. By that time, we usually have an idea about the person through our sources.”

Look for red flags and test for honesty.
Knowing who’s likely to lie on a resume provides HR a starting point when screening out potential frauds. But it’s impossible to know in advance who may or may not lie on a resume. Simply put, there are no clear and certain categories into which people of any background fit. But there are some techniques that can help HR people separate honest from dishonest applicants.

“We look for gaps in employment or vague information, such as listing only years of employment without months,” says Koch. “We also check to see if the applicants include addresses next to company names, or if they only list companies that are all out of business.”

Dollet cautions her colleagues against a number of red flags. “Watch out for long verbal resumes with no dates, listings of college work as opposed to degrees, or indications that the person’s job titles and responsibilities don’t mesh,” she warns.

Hori suggests that functional resumes may be a foreboding sign, since they tend to be long on words and short on specifics. “Functional resumes usually include an employment history,” she says. “But usually you’re not able to attach time frames as to when people performed certain tasks or developed certain skills. With a chronological resume, you can do that.”

Lew Shumaker, manager of college relations and recruitment for Wilmington, Delaware-based E.I. DuPont de Nemours Co., says that DuPont’s way of handling resumes basically nullifies the problem. “We receive more than 50,000 unsolicited resumes each year,” he says, indicating that all new resumes are scanned into a database. “We screen them as we go through them. At that point, we don’t worry about accuracy. That will come out at a much later date.”

Shumaker suggests that a common cause of resume fraud—intense competition for jobs—also may be a saving grace for the HR department. “Most companies have a tremendous oversupply of people right now. There’s something like 4,200 people with post-doctorates, and a three-year’s supply of PhD chemists waiting to find regular employment. So, from our standpoint, the sheer volume of people to choose from enables us to skim from the top of the list. And we find that most of those people are pretty straightforward.”

For those HR personnel who doubt the validity of information on a resume, however, there’s a wide variety of outside services to turn to, all designed to help them get the facts. Hasenbank points out that his company, one of the oldest and largest investigative services in the country, is frequently used by major companies that desire pre-employment applicant checks, workers’ compensation or fraudulent insurance claims investigations, personal background investigations or undercover surveillance.

As a security company, Pinkerton must ensure its own workers are honest, and thus uses a number of methods to ferret out potential misrepresentations. “We may do pen and pencil honesty tests, or touch-tone phone honesty tests,” Hasenbank says. “We also may conduct criminal background checks, credit checks or other details. But we typically only check employers.”

According to Paisley Neeb, corporate services executive at Laramie, Wyoming-based Aspentree Software, one of the best ways to verify the accuracy of a resume is to verify the basic honesty of the applicant. Her company offers a computerized honesty test for this purpose.

“Our Greentree computer software asks the applicant approximately 120 different questions,” she explains. “But the same questions are asked more than once, and in several different ways, and with different wording each time. The applicants, however, can’t go back and change their answers. So if they get caught in a lie, it’s hard for them to get out of it.”

According to Neeb, the Greentree program addresses numerous vital issues. “For example, it asks how long they plan to work for the company,” she says. “During a personal interview, the applicant may say years and years. But on the computer, they may be honest and say only six months because they’re planning to go back to school.”

Programs such as Greentree also help HR people spot inconsistencies that may emerge during the application process. “We examine the information people give on the computer to see if it matches what they put on their resumes or applications. In other words, the computer is set up to spot contradictions. If a person says he or she is currently employed, for example, but then says he or she can start working for the new employer immediately, that might suggest some deception.”

Verify skills through tests and interviews.
In addition to outside services, there are myriad services that an HR department can administer itself. Wonderlic Personnel Test Inc. of Libertyville, Illinois, for example, provides personal and professional testing services of this type. “We help those who want to know certain things that are verifiable through assessment,” explains company president, Charlie Wonderlic. “It may be proficiency in office skills or with certain software.”

Bruce Steinberg, spokesman for the National Association of Temporary Staffing and Services based in Alexandria, Virginia, confirms the growing emphasis of many organizations, such as his own, on verifiable skills. “We’re more concerned about the person’s actual skills,” he says, “than with what’s on a resume. There’s an increasing tendency in our field to evaluate on the basis of demonstrable skills, rather than accomplishments claimed.”

Verifying skills is important, but so is ferreting out deceivers. That’s why, in addition to screening and testing, some HR managers have developed creative techniques to catch fraudulent information. Duncan uses the mail. “I have a policy of sending mail to someone, to see if it comes back saying: ‘Addressee Unknown.'”

Duncan also has developed some reference-checking techniques that can help HR people identify individuals who arrange for impostors to answer the phone on their behalf. “People need to know that just because something’s on a piece of paper, and confirmed by a voice on the phone, doesn’t make it a fact. If you’re given a company phone number and the name of a department head,” she advises, “call personnel to be sure the person worked there. Also, look up the company’s phone number to make sure it’s a legitimate company. In fact, start with the operator,” she adds, suggesting that such a technique is a great way to make sure you’re not getting sucked into a set-up.

Hasenbank emphasizes that interviewing is a great way to catch people in lies, and endorses the idea of conducting several interviews that involve several people in the process. “HR people who have to hire someone without having time to do an adequate check should still do the check,” he suggests. “Finding out a week after hiring the person, and then doing something with the individual, is better than not knowing.”

Koch warns that being thrown off-guard by well-prepared interviewees is common today. “I find more and more that people are prepared to come in and make a sales pitch,” she observes. “Interviewers need to keep control of the interview so they can get the information they need. Many times interviewees are told they should respond to the question in such a way that they turn the tables around, and get the interviewer to do most of the talking.”

Koch makes a point of training department managers to use some of the methods she uses in the screening process. “We urge our managers, during interviews, to ask deep, probing, open-ended questions. Are the applicants talking in ‘We dos,’ or ‘I dos?’ When the interviewee tells us what they did while with a previous employer, we’ll stop and ask them what exactly they did, and how they did it. We try to get our managers into the habit of asking the ‘Rolling Whys.'” Grabler combines interviewing with external screening and internal testing. “We have an external source that pre-screens the resumes to determine the validity of the facts,” she says. “Then our hiring office does the initial interview. Next, the applicant is put through an assessment battery, including testing and executive-level profile assessments, which are handled by a clinical psychologist. Finalists then go through another series of interviews.”

Persons under consideration for such sensitive positions as chief financial officer must undergo an intense credit check, Grabler says, after permission is obtained from the applicant. “We find that when you have to run a credit check, and you let the people know, those who have a problem tend to opt out.”

How to handle a fraudulent case.
Although some applicants may voluntarily take themselves out of the running, others will stand firmly by their deceptions. HR managers develop techniques for spotting fraud that best suit their own particular needs. The consensus is to not hire a person who has lied. Because of the complexity of the issue, however, some HR people look upon “misleading resumes” in a flexible manner. Hasenbank, for instance, acknowledges that some material on the resume is more important than other material. “My main concern is with people who lie about past employment experience or reasons for leaving an employer,” he says. “But we absolutely refuse to hire anyone who has lied. Our employees are on job sites where they’re responsible for the safety of our clients’ equipment and personnel.”

While Koch regards an outright lie as definite grounds for dismissal, she also says that she approaches the situation cautiously. “We would definitely address it,” she explains. “Educational credentials must be 100% right, because I can’t see how anyone can mess that up. If it had to do with employment dates, we would confront the individual and expect an explanation. I don’t want to hang someone who’s made an honest mistake. So I would try to give them the benefit of the doubt if they proved to be worthwhile employees.”

Barring exceptional circumstances, sympathy for the deceptive applicant is nowhere to be found. Shumaker sums up the consensus on the issue. “If they lied, they wouldn’t be hired. If they were hired and a lie was later discovered, they would be fired. When you run a chemical operation, you can’t risk the environment and your own people. So you can’t deal with people who you can’t trust. We use moving machinery and processes that require skilled people. So we have no tolerance for dishonesty at all.”

Dollet says it best. “Never hire a liar,” she counsels. “In the team environment of today’s workplace, it’s important that you can respect and trust your team members.”