Made up your CV? Lied about your past? They'll find you out

YOU may think you're the best man or woman for the job. Your mother may be certain of it. But how do you convince an employer of that fact, particularly when your credentials for the role are not quite good enough to swing it?

At one stage, it was relatively easy in some arenas to fake parts of your CV and get a position simply by "interviewing well". Shady pasts and made-up degrees were all too easy to disguise and invent; they were even applauded by colleagues if you got away with it. But with companies becoming increasingly aware of the costs of recruiting the wrong person, some are exhibiting a reluctance to accept candidates simply on the strength of an interview. Many organisations, particularly in the financial sector and, more recently, in the public sector, are choosing instead to bear the cost of sending all shortlisted candidates to a specially-designed assessment centre rather than risk ending up with a plausible but permanent liability.

Recruiters who still use traditional interview techniques should train themselves to spot dissemblers, recommends psychology professor Adrian Furnham, of University College, London, who gave a seminar entitled "Creating the Right Impression" at last week's recruitment conference organised by the Institute of Personnel and Development. Following research which analysed how somebody deliberately lying would respond verbally and visually in a given situation, the professor drew a number of conclusions which he believes will help those in the recruitment business.

"Companies are more and more concerned with trust, honesty and integrity, and you therefore want to know if a person who you are going to employ has those virtues," he explains. "The interview is a rather bad way of getting this, because it's about information management, and the candidate thinks: 'I'm going to conceal certain things'. Most interviewers don't spend much time planning. They might look for certain characteristics, but they need to think through which questions and answers will tell them the most."

Using a formula may help. Interviewers (or observers) can establish "base rate" behaviour by watching the candidate in a relaxed environment, and can subsequently look for sudden changes in vocal, verbal or visual behaviour in response to questions. Next, the interviewer needs to note any mismatch between what is being said and how it is being said, and form a hypothesis as to its cause; and ultimately, can test this theory by bringing up a relevant topic and seeing how a candidate responds. So, for example, if an interviewee has underlined a certain achievement on his CV but appears subdued when talking about it face-to-face, the interviewer can frame questions which probe further.

Candidates who attempt to deceive - whether because they believe their own embellishments or through conscious intent - often give themselves away, ironically enough, by exaggerated calmness; their gestures decrease because they sit on their hands or clasp their chairs. Or they might touch their nose a lot, squirm around, shrug with their hands and smile with the mouth but not the eyes. To cover up their true feelings, they might fake an emotion such as enthusiasm which is, says Professor Furnham, given away by a lack of forehead expression. Reddening, pupil dilation, sweating and a stream of vehement rhetoric were also indicators.

Conversely, assessment centres which offer three-way selection - aptitude testing, self-appraisal and observation - can help to eliminate untruths and paint a more accurate picture of candidates. "These centres are frighteningly expensive at about pounds 2,000 per candidate, but you do get different types of data," says Professor Furnham. Consultant psychologist Orla Leonard, who helps devise tests for the centres, predicts that companies in the manufacturing sector will begin to select employees in this way, and that there will be a move towards using the centres to recruit for more junior positions. The Civil Service and the Army are among organisations using the method. "You conduct group exercises, write down everything a person says and does, and have a 'wash-up' at the end, where you look at each candidate and have an objective discussion from a multiple perspective," says Ms Leonard. "Some companies are simply going for a more structured interview approach, but I think the assessment centre is the way most people are going."