September 2019

 “Sensitive” is a word I hear all the time in the context of the work done by background verification companies. Random people one meets ask about our nature of work and, when told, their immediate response is that handling sensitive data and maintaining its integrity must be the backbone of the background screening business.

That hits the bull’s eye. If sensitive information is defined as something that must be protected against unwarranted disclosure, then the information that we in this industry generate is ultra-sensitive. It must be safeguarded for legal and ethical reasons, apart from individual privacy and proprietary considerations.

If information security in the context of background screening gets compromised, it has a severe effect on all three concerned parties — the employer loses proprietary data of current employees to competitors; the individual could have his personal reputation compromised; and, of course, the background screening company could find its hard-earned brand reputation in tatters. The challenge of information security is all the greater considering that it has to extend to all situations, ranging from physical theft to natural disasters. Hence, customers engaging the services of background screeners must look beyond pricing.

To gauge the efficacy of data protection in the background screening process, companies must ask themselves the following questions: – What are the physical and logical barriers to data access? – Is data access in the background screening company allowed strictly on a need-to-know basis? For example in my company, the verification teams are not privy to the name of the client(s) on whose cases they are working on at any point in time, thus ensuring a hard firewall. – Who in the background screener’s organization has access to negative reports? Not long ago, I interviewed a candidate who wanted a job with us after having worked with a competitor.

Nothing exceptional, right? Happens all the time. Well, this individual was carrying 50-odd candidate reports with him to help support his claim that his current employer was doing poor quality work. Imagine — 50 confidential and highly personal reports being bandied about in such cavalier manner. (Needless to add I did not meet this candidate again.) We need to also sensitize our clients on the need to be extremely careful about using sensitive information. A couple of years ago, one of our clients — easily among India’s top 50 companies — sent us a list of their employees whose background screening had to be initiated. The list should have contained employee IDs, name, email and contact address. That’s all.

The sheet we received had their compensation details too. Besides it had similar details of the top leadership hires done recently by the company. In dealing with confidential information, strict adherence to industry standards and government guidelines is a given, but my view is that confidentiality is more a culture-related thing — it goes beyond building technology barriers; it is about creating a culture in the company that respects data security and confidentiality. Organizations seeking enhanced information security should create a culture in which employees are loath to discuss sensitive information with anyone, no exception.

In the emerging global economy, background screeners will be required to continuously expand their business, which will require them to get into more collaborative efforts. As business grows and more collaborations take shape, information security will continue to assume greater importance. Clients will seek, and rightly so, tightening of controls and will need to know about how secure the data being shared across platforms is. In conclusion, I will say that accreditation to certifications related to information security systems will play a key role as our business grows and goes to the next level. However, information security and confidentiality must remain an article of faith for background screeners and those who work in our industry. Not a mere leap of faith.

The Need For Continuous Employee Screening “Last week, nine Sprint employees were charged with misusing their access to the telecommunications giant’s systems to redirect phone charges to other customers by “cloning” their cell phones — to the tune of more than $15 million in fraudulent charges in the first six months of this year. ” The above case has a very important message for companies in this country. We are the world’s leading BPO provider and it is essential that incidents like these do not become commonplace. The continuing success of the industry and of the country depends on the good reputation that has been built up. Today technology is all pervading. Information Technology governs and drives most aspects of business.

While it has made industry more competitive and efficient, it has also made it that much easer for online insider employee fraud and abuse. Data theft and other fraud activities by employees are on the rise. Companies, and by inference HR departments, have to keep a closer watch on the activities of their staff. What is just as important is the need to have strict and strong security systems in place. The security has to be, both, the human and technological varieties.

Some standard practices like separating duties, regular rotation of responsibilities must be implemented. Regular and continuous employee screening should become customary. Most companies assume that once they have conducted pre-employment screening, staff will remain pure and uncorrupted. This sort of thinking can be very dangerous and prove harmful. A whole host of reasons can change the situation of an employee and employers have to keep a sharp look out for danger signs. A sudden change in lifestyle where the person seems to be living beyond their earnings or financial crisis can be indicators to possible inducements to carry out fraud activities.

If companies discover fraud being perpetrated by their employees, they need to take actions to ensure that there is no repetition. Merely punishing or dismissing the erring employees is not enough. Companies need to constantly improve and upgrade their security and control work processes or else they could suffer loss of customer confidence and trust. Information security and employee screening should be strategy to a company not knee-jerk, part-time activities.

There is no nice way to say this – but people lie on their résumés. Especially in areas they can get away with it. Previous experience is such an area and therefore a prime candidate for falsification and exaggeration. Job titles and responsibilities don’t mean the same thing from onpany to another. In rare cases where they do match, the functions or level of reporting will differ. ‘Fine-tuning’ a resume is quite difficult to uncover. It takes a combination or all the instruments of the employee screening process – reference checks and interviews – to pick up the deception. It is done to embellish relevant experience and highlight the applicant’s suitability for the position.

The intensity of competition for jobs pushes people to look for even the tiniest advantage. The resume job title, responsibilities and functions are the basis for assessing the suitability of a job applicant for the position. It is one way of ensuring that the prospective employee meets the overall criteria for the job. Any exaggeration or misleading descriptions can result in an unqualified person handling sensitive information, high tech or hazardous equipment causing losses to the hiring company. While there are many ways to present job titles and responsibilities in the resume and debates on the subject continue to rage. The best way is to be truthful and the job description honest.

Clearly mention the title followed by the list of responsibilities that the job entailed. This will ensure a strong resume and any reference checks will come back with positive feedbacks. It also ensures that the hiring HR person will understand what the responsibilities, duties and functions were. It removes any chance that the work history is fabricated.

Today every business has to compete locally and globally and they cannot sustain employing unqualified people or those with skills that do not match the requirements of the position advertised. It will affect efficiency and ultimately the profitability of the company.