Saturday, August 1, 2015

Deception and Premeditation in Hiring

The Dept of Justice, almost 15 years ago, produced a study that showed that when a company places an ad in a newspaper for employment that concluded:

4 of 10 applicants intend to steal from the company before even being hired. 

A lot has changed since then.

This theft does not include various and popular fraud techniques that have become a trend in recent years, such as "phobic" abuse.

This means that the new "victim status" has empowered liars to file fraudulent claims against companies such as various forms of discrimination that have one thing in common:

obtaining money that their own hands have not earned.

This new "victim status" is now met with a new "entitlement" mentality, particularly strong among young applicants.

Take these two elements in addition to the 40% finding of the DOJ from 2001 and still add in another element:

Lying has become more accepted due to the increase in outright deception by our political leaders, coupled with yet another factor:  a lessening element of civility in public.

Had enough?

I'm not finished.

There is also another element to add to this mix:  a growing disrespect for authority, in general, by our population.  This is seen in everything from the disparagement of police, to the outright blaming of teachers for student violence.

In other words, personal responsibility is one of the most unpopular theories of American society today, with judges and courts bending over backwards to rule for the "little guy" against...

Ok, here is my last additional factor.

It began in Europe in the early 2000, and then in 2008, became "the" stance of American politics:

disparagement of the successful.

This was both in word, "you didn't built that!", but also in practice, as legalized and institutionalized envy:  debt means nothing, the rich aren't doing their share, we need to punish the successful and lower their grades.

In France, the "90% tax on the rich" led to violence, and successful people frightened for their lives and their children's lives as they were, more and more, demonized and targeted.  When one of their own left the country, he was "unpatriotic" for not wanting to hand over the extortion payments to the French government.

The risk taking, hard working successful among us are falsely portrayed as "preying" on the common person, calloused, uncaring, and ruthless.

What is left?

The person who risks his or her own finance and family name in order to make money, if successful, is an easy mark for everyone who wishes to steal from them, with the cooperation of the government.

Human nature, however, does not change and when you find certain elements present, you are looking at a society of thieves, including:

a.  Confusion.

Calling theft "moral" and "ethical"; that is, including words like, "justice" or even "restorative justice" and even the marxist "redistribution of wealth" that has led to third world nations becoming third world nations instead of progressing.

b.  Polarizing.

Demonizing that which was once praised, including hard work, personal ambition, and responsibility.  Now it is "us versus them", with one side being portrayed in the negative, not just financially, but socially, and ethically.  False claims of racism enter the statements, with truth sacrificed as any means, including illicit or even illegal means, praise worthy if they produce the "ends" identified.

c.  Cynicism.

Those who believe in "ideals" are ridiculed, since "everyone lies" and "only the smartest" get away with it.  This is seen in policies where we, the public, are considered incapable of making our own decisions in life, for ourself and our families.  When enough scandal is published, an "immunization" of sorts hits, where "everyone is doing it", so why not just join in?

I once caught a couple forging their time sheets, running up extreme overtime.  In the interview process, Statement Analysis revealed that their claim of duties was a lie (passive language), which, once confronted, led to a confession.

Their defense?

"Everyone else gets away with it, why shouldn't we?"

Although the couple was in their late 50's, they showed no internal remorse for stealing, only anger at me for catching them, and anger at those who (they thought) had gotten away with it.  They showed no moral internal distress over corruption.

d.  Contempt.

This is seen even within victim-groups.  When Julie Baker pulled off her "Relentlessly Gay" scam, she plotted how to do this, and considered members of the LGBT as her "easy mark", and knew that by using religion in her fake hate note, she would raise more money than, for example:

*A family seeking money to buy a tombstone for their deceased child
*A family who suffered loss of everything due to fire
*A myriad of requests for money due to  catastrophic health events

She knew which buttons to push and which population to exploit.

She knew that hatred would scam better than love.  If it wasn't for concerned citizens, the scam might have worked.  These few discerning citizens were labeled as..."hateful."  See point "b" in deceptive scamming.

Understand:  this scam, like so many others, were planned.  They hold others in contempt and when applying for a job, go into it believing that they will get their hands on money, one way or another, that their hands have not lawfully earned.  They believe those around them "too stupid" to catch them.

The Lindenhurst family knew they were caught and did not bother with Go Fund Me.

The pizza owner wanted money so badly that he was willing to not only file a false report, but even whack himself over the head to make money.  It wasn't  a "cry for help"; he left more than $20,000 in donations on the table, forced to return the money.  That was just defense lawyer jargon.

Baker has $43,000 on one hand, waiting to be cashed in, with a prison sentence on the other.  When the Daily Mail got whiff of it, she knew that to do so was not only to risk prosecution, but with the nation watching, Baltimore investigators would not take kindly to be humiliated by her.  Simply put, even without the analysis, her other public rants had the same writing quirks.  Even while still playing the victim role with false claims of "death threats", she continues to deceive her shrinking fan base.

Those involved in these scams are not "hot blooded" panic thieves, grabbing a loaf of bread for starving children, or making "cries for help" (see above) but are cold, calculating, opportunists.  They are no different than the lazy employee who walks all over his supervisor, knowing that his supervisor fears disciplining him because he belongs to a minority.  He may have long term negative effects on hiring, but he cares nothing but for himself.

A family owned company has two major hooks on the line:

The family's wealth is invested into the company.  The risk is all their own.  Should they lose, they lose it all, and while workers can simply apply elsewhere, the family is left bereft of their life's work.

The family's name is now on the hook, too, which is something that the pre-meditating scammer knows well:

He is not suing no-name face-less corporate headquarters for discrimination:

He is punishing the family's finance, and reputation in the community, so that their family name and xyz accusation, are forever linked.

What does the family do?

They pay their deductible and their insurance rates go up.  This, of course, can lead to more scams.

What can a company do?

The company can, and must seek to hire the best and brightest, who have become "the best and brightest" through honest, hard work, while the liar, the entitled, the scammer, the professional victim, always wants the short cut, the easy way, the instant gratification.

This is who they are, and we are known to be who we are by our words.

Statement Analysis used in the interview process will dramatically and quickly yield the result of taking the 40% who premeditate damage to the company, and weed them out.

This is accomplished through training of Human Resource professionals, who are often intuitive and sharp, anyway.

Companies are profit driven, in spite of the vilianization of capitalism today.  Companies that exist to pay their employees so much money that no profit is realized, may be praised today, but it will be gone tomorrow.  Only governments can operate at a loss year after year, and push off their failure by either printing money, or saddle the next generation, but ultimately, it comes to an end.  Since a company cannot print money or run debt forever, it closes down.  It receives the praise of social warriors, right up the path of bankruptcy.  Those marvelous companies who provide good, honest service, pay a good wage, and run a profit, have been, traditionally, praised as their "American spirit", or "American exceptionalism" was recognized.

This is why profit driven companies do not care about gender, sex, pigmentation, or anything else but talent, ambition, ability to learn, emotional intelligence, and so on.

Herein lies the key:

Train your company in Statement Analysis and each applicant who is deceptive is withdrawn from consideration, and watch as Statement Analysis identifies the strengths and challenges of the applicant, allowing for the company to place the employee in the right position.

Statement Analysis identifies, specifically:

a.  strengths
b.  challenges
c.  emotional intelligence
d.  whether to work with others, or individually
e.  drive and initiative
f.  maturity
g. wisdom
h.  specific talents

But it also identifies:

a.  deception
b.  inappropriate motives
c.  acute deficiency in work ethic
d.  troublesome personalities; especially relevant for sales, or positions where close cooperation among employees is important
e.  those who lack self awareness, humility, or the ability to get along well with others

The training is comprehensive and the interview training is legally sound interviewing, accredited by the University of Maine's Continuing Educational Units (CEUs) for resumes and professional licensing.

It is then supported with 12 months of assistance in which we help formulate strategy, assist in interviewing, and check all work.  Those who successfully complete the course are eligible for our monthly training program.

Companies enrolled in the training should expect immediate results.  

For information on setting up a training program, please see HYATT ANALYSIS SERVICES

Should your company enroll in our training, the first claim or suit threatened or filed, is handled by us, including a written report for the company's attorneys, as assistance given until HR is ready to handle such cases on their own.

Our record of closed cases, victory in unemployment claims, and dismissed rights violations is 100% because:

1.  We tell the truth
2.  We document everything.

Your company should also expect an immediate improvement in the hiring process, leading to a drop in theft, drop in fraudulent claims, employee complaints, and so on.

As our nation's climate has become more and more hostile towards success, and more lenient towards theft, the truth is your best defense.


Trigger said...

Theft by deception has always been a fruitful enterprise for those seeking to obtain money without working for it.
They pick a target and work out the details knowing that their will be a payoff if the target has deep pockets or assets that can be turned into cash easily.

Employers now have the option to screen their applicants for deception and fraud before they are hired.

Some how this is contrary to what we have been told by law enforcement.
"We can't do anything until a crime has been committed."

Employers will not need law enforcement if they can screen out employees who have a hidden agenda to steal or defraud.

This is a valuable tool for employers.

I wish women who have children would use this tool to screen their men before letting them into their homes. I wonder if they would even believe the results of statement analysis if they were told that their boyfriends were deceitful or dangerous. How many children would be spared from abuse and death at the hands of the mother's boyfriend.

"the truth is your best defense"

foodnerd said...

Thanks for all of your invaluable insight and education on here, Peter! Your training package is well worth its cost, and first on the list after working down the medical bills.

Meanwhile, can you please explain what confuses me most (so far)? What and where is the line between a subject's repetition of a word being sensitive, and their using a synonym the next reference being a red flag as a change in language?

Another thought, since you don't have nearly enough ideas and tangents to pursue, or activities to fill your time :

A slightly modified statement analysis training course would be invaluable to the medical field, from receptionist to surgeon, in taking patient histories! Not so much focusing entirely on intentional deception, although malingering is a huge and expensive problem, but sensing what the patient is too embarrassed to express or not sure how to articulate, feeling what is sensitive to them in your questions, reading their body posture, picking out key words and phrases, etc.

Anyone with 20 minutes experience in the medical field will tell you history taking is considered one of the lowest, least technical or impressive skills, rock bottom of the medical team's food chain. But they'll also acknowledge it's one of the most important to get right, and one of most easily and frequently gotten wrong at every level. There so many little signs to read and hear, little quirks and ways of trying to communicate (or not) that people have in common, that nobody teaches.

Yes, of course there are courses and training on history taking, but none using the skills of statement analysis despite many efforts to learn how to take better and more thorough medical histories!

foodnerd said...

Peter, I had a facetious sarcasm font note on that, but I made it look like an html tag and the system ate it. Usually it just displays closed tags as regular text when they aren't real and didn't have matched opening tag.

Sorry if it didn't come through in the words themselves since my insurance policy failed miserably.

:^D :^D

foodnerd said...

Time to knock myself out and finally SLEEP; the sarcasm part refers only to your level of ideas and activities taking up your 28-hour day. :^D