A Comparison of Interviewing Techniques: HR versus Fraud Examination
Norman J. Gierlasinski, Don R. Nixon · International journal of business and economics · 2014
Internationally, fraud is a great challenge facing business. One of the best ways to detect fraud is the interview. Interviewing is the systematic questioning of people who have knowledge of information, events, other people and evidence involved in a case under investigation. An interview may be used in the workplace on a daily basis to gather financial information. Asking questions in the proper order and assessments of the answers received can help determine truthfulness or deception. If the interviewer can master the art of developing a rapport with the interviewee, he or she may be able to elicit a more comprehensive answer. Characteristics of a good interviewer include: being a good listener, demonstrating fairness, lacking bias, and projecting professionalism. The types of questions used are: introductory, informal, assessment, and admission-seeking. The interview techniques for hiring decisions follow a different format. The primary purpose is to determine if the applicant has the necessary skills for the job and if they will fit in with the organization culture. There are also many laws governing what can and can not be asked of a prospective employee. The techniques used are prescreening, structured interviews, and behavioral interviews. The prescreening of applicants by Human Resource professionals has expanded to include reference checks, background checks, drug tests, credit checks, and conviction records. The manager can then use either a structured interview, where all applicants are asked the same questions, or a behavioral interview, where applicants are asked to describe significant events in past job situations. The purpose, as in fraud interviewing, is to detect any discrepancies in the verbal interview or with the application information. This paper will compare the similarities and differences between the interview techniques used for hiring employees and those used for detecting fraud. Some similarities discussed are: how information is gathered; presumption of honesty; and, training of the interviewer. Of the many differences some of those that will be compared are: legal aspects; use of stress inducement; and, employee v. non-employee.