[IPAC-List] applicants misrepresenting their experience

[RPClare at aol.com]

I agree that the information given is limited to draw a real conclusion,  
however:
It is possible that a candidate's experience could emphasize different  
aspect of their jobs tailored to the position to which they are applying.
It is possible that the candidates memory re: dates, titles, etc. may be  
flawed and may vary from app to app. It may not be misrepresentation but  
more "sloppiness".
Finally, if they really misrepresent themselves, I would disqualify  them 
for all jobs for a fixed period of time (6 mos or a year). There should be  a 
policy regarding this and that policy should have an appeal feature to 
allow  them to reconcile the information. 
 
 
In a message dated 9/11/2014 2:04:37 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
Mark.Hammer at cfp-psc.gc.ca writes:

Without any further information, I'll give the benefit of the doubt to  the 
applicant.  Is it possible they entered the wrong stuff, couldn't  figure 
out how to delete/replace what they had put in, and thought (if  naively) 
that simply starting all over again would fix the problem?
 
I realize it may have been more manipulative/deceptive than I'm  thinking, 
but I figured I'd start with the most benign and innocent  explanation 
possible.
 
Mark Hammer
Ottawa

>>> "Natasha K. Riley"  <Natasha.Riley at omes.ok.gov> 2014/09/11 10:04 AM >>>


IPAC List: 
We have begun using experience-based questionnaires to rank  candidates for 
clerical and entry level jobs where we had used multiple-choice  tests 
before.  The questionnaire is part of each application submitted,  and a 
separate application is required for each posted vacancy for which the  applicant 
wants to be considered.  For those of you using these types of  
questionnaires, I’m wondering what you do when you see a candidate with  applications for 
several vacancies in the same job and the answers they give  are not 
consistent from application to application.  So, it appears that  the applicant is 
misrepresenting his experience by giving different answers to  the same 
questions.  Do you have procedures in place to catch this?   What do you do 
with the applications when you find this?  Do you remove  the candidate from 
the lists?  If so, do they have appeal  rights? 
Thanks in advance for weighing in on this! 
Natasha  Riley 
Director of  Assessment and Testing Services 
State of  Oklahoma 
Human Capital  Management 
Office of Management  and Enterprise Services 
405-521-6361 
_natasha.riley at omes.ok.gov_ (mailto:natasha.riley at osf.ok.gov)     
www.omes.ok.gov 


>  
Ce courriel est destiné exclusivement au  destinataire mentionné en titre 
et peut contenir de l'information privilégiée,  confidentielle ou soustraite 
à la communication aux termes des lois  applicables. Toute divulgation non 
autorisée, toute reproduction ou  réacheminement est interdit. Si vous n'êtes 
pas le destinataire de ce  courriel, ou n'êtes pas autorisé par le 
destinataire visé, ou encore, si vous  l'avez reçu par erreur, veuillez le 
mentionner immédiatement à l'expéditeur et  supprimer le courriel et les copies. 
>  
This e-mail message is intended for the named  recipient(s) and may contain 
information that is privileged, confidential  and/or exempt from disclosure 
under applicable law. Unauthorized disclosure,  copying or re-transmission 
is prohibited. If you are not a named recipient or  not authorized by the 
named recipient(s), or if you have received this e-mail  in error, then please 
notify the sender immediately and delete the message and  any copies.  


_______________________________________________________
IPAC-List
IPAC-List at ipacweb.org
http://nine.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/ipac-list

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nine.pairlist.net/pipermail/ipac-list/attachments/20140911/9c2bd269/attachment-0001.html>