<\/p>\n
Who can blame candidates for trying to make a good impression in an interview? This means to embellish a little now and then, or to not be so accurate with certain facts. However, the line between a little gloss and an exaggeration isn\u2019t always so clear cut. If a recruiter asks a question that isn\u2019t any of their business, such as one in regards to family planning, lying can be desirable. Cheating in an interview happens more often than you would think. But can you tell when a candidate is trying to fool you?<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
We won\u2019t discuss here the moral-philosophical question of when each degree of embellishment is reasonable, justifiable or indispensable. In recruiting, it is clear that the suitability of a candidate can be distorted by not quite accurate statements, which can lead to hiring the wrong person<\/strong>. But do recruiters have any chance of discovering this? Since the line between making a good impression through a little exaggeration and fraud is not so simple, a generally accepted term regarding recruitment interviews is \u2018impression management<\/strong>\u2019. This comprises of behaviours intended to portray or control a certain impression.<\/p>\n Several research teams (eg Levashina & Campion, 2007) studied various tactics. Here is the result.<\/p>\n 1.) The “soft” tactics:<\/strong><\/span> This is the most harmless kind, and involves making yourself look a bit better.. one percent more revenue growth, ‘Head of..’, actually in the last company I did the same things and therefore am the perfect fit, etc ….<\/p>\n 2.) The “harder” tactics:<\/strong><\/span> This means \u2018making oneself more qualified\u2019, and takes a little more creativity. Constructing and inventing: What was your biggest achievement? Replacing the printer paper with eco-paper? Sounds kinda stupid. So they declare themselves as the salvation of the world, or at least the sales department or project itself. This also includes taking the success of a friend or colleague and claiming it as their own.<\/p>\n 3.) On the defensive:<\/strong><\/span> Inquiring questions can cause a candidate to quickly become defensive. Here there are several proven tactics: omitting \/ overriding \/ masking \/ distancing: What was my role was in this project? It did not fall into my responsibilities! I was the only one who saw that the project would go down like a lead balloon.<\/p>\n 4.) Flattery: <\/strong><\/span> Using flattery to make a good impression. Agreeing with the interviewer\u2019s opinion or talking up the company: Yes I completely agree, totally, absolutely, but of course, we fully agree … and why I am applying? You’ve got three awards as an employer of the year …<\/p>\n Definitely. Several studies have shown that an effective impression management has a positive effect on the recruiter\u2019s judgement. However, not all tactics and not when applicants overdo things.<\/p>\nThe tactics of the candidates<\/span><\/h5>\n
Does it help candidates?<\/span><\/h5>\n
Do recruiters know when a candidate is “cheating”?<\/span><\/h5>\n