Table of ContentTopic Page NumberIntroduction 01Background Case 01Problem Statement 02Options to solve the case 02Recommendation 03Conclusion 03
1. IntroductionThe most widely used selection technique is the evaluation of the job application blank or the resume. Suchevaluation may take place as part of the interviewing process itself or as a prelude to further screening(Edward L. Levine, 1975). Job applicants are evaluated, in part, on the basis of their credentials (Nemec &Legere, 2008).It is not unusual for job applicants to exaggerate their qualifications in an attempt to present them morefavorably and obtain a job. Although exact figures are not known, estimates of individuals who exaggeratetheir resumes range from 40% to 70% (George and Marett, 2004).2. Background of the caseAmanda Nerl and Jack Wiley are both staff account appointed at the same time as Staff accountants. Thejob specification for the position included a requirement for college degrees which both employees claimedhave received. The employees have signed the waiver allowing the HR officials to verify all the informationin the forms, unfortunately verification was not done. This was only clarified after two years have steered anarray of problems.Many human resource (HR) professionals recognize that lying on resumes or applications is a seriousproblem In addition, hiring individuals who lie on their resumes can create financial and legal burdens fororganizations (Babcock 2003), including recruiting and hiring replacements, potential lost customers, andlegal fees/settlements associated with negligent hiring claims.3. Problem StatementProblem identified is the produce of false credentials by employee during the selection process has onlybeen identified after two years in service. The failure of the organization to clarify the matter via a strict andsystematic selection process has led to problem in the organization. The Accounts Manager has to decide onthe best way to deal with Miss Nerl’s situation as well advice the HR Manager to move to a better selectionprocess.
4. Three options to solve the problemFirstly based on the company policy, as signed by all the job applicants, in the case of any misrepresentationor false information the company reserves the right to discharge the employee. Even though in the case ofMiss Nerl the organization has all the rights, the organization also sees Miss Nerl as an asset to theorganization apart from the case filed on her.The company policy can be overlooked to safe guard the interest of the company as research by Prater andKiser (2002) study of small businesses and Fortune 100 companies indicated that only 36% of respondentsfired employees after uncovering a lie on their job applications, while the majority did not.Secondly the organization may look in to the selection process in practice at the organization. As mentionedby the HR Director the recruiters failed to make any verification regarding the details provided by theemployees.As mentioned by Roselius & Kleiner (2000) Past employment references and educational credentials can bechecked. Most companies will only verify the position held and dates of employment,but this can screen outapplicants who may have stretched the truth about their previous positions or dates of employment (orunemployment) on their applicationThirdly the organization could also resort to suspension of the employee for a certain time period as apenalty of her misconduct. This will also prevent the organization from losing a talented employee in longterm. Suspension could be smoother decision to make as it safes face for both sides, does not burden theemployee for too long yet it may cause some trouble in term of loss of respect by the employer andcolleagues towards the employee.5. RecommendationBased on the discussions provided above, I would advise Miss Young to retain Miss Nerl by only issuing awarning letter to affirm that the decision to falsify the credentials is a misconduct, but what is moreimportant for the organization is to tighten the selection process and improve on the policies of the
organization. The HR department must make sure they verify the applications received before called for theinterview. This verification stage should be made a must to ensure no future reoccurrence of this problem.6. ConclusionEven though there has been misuse and misconduct in term of presenting the credentials, the employee hasdone a good job in providing the company with valuable service which has to be taken in to considerationbut any how research has shown that some applicants believe that employers expect a certain degree ofexaggeration (Robinson 1998). This gives some breathing space for Miss Nerl to survive even though herrelationship with her colleague is damaged
ReferencesBabcock, P. (2003). Spotting lies. HRMagazine, 48, 46–52.Edward L. Levine, A. F. I. (1975). Evaluation of Job Applications - A Conceptual Framework. PublicPersonnel Management, 378–385.George, J., &Marett, K. (2004).The truth about lies.HRMagazine, 49, 87–91.Nemec, P., & Legere, L. (2008). Workforce credentials. Psychiatric rehabilitation journal, 32(2), 138–40.doi:10.2975/32.2.2008.138.140Roselius, W., & Kleiner, B. H. (2000). How to hire employees effectively. Management Research News,23(12), 17–23. doi:10.1108/01409170010781993Robinson, W. P., Shepherd, A., & Heywood, J. (1998).Truth, equivocation/concealment and lies, in jobapplications and doctor–patient communication. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 17, 149–155.