It’s common knowledge among human resources departments that screening candidates is imperative to prevent making a nightmarish hiring decision. And yet, a number of companies continue to forego the process of adequately screening candidates before employing them.
Common forms of candidate dishonesty
According to statistics published by the Human Resources Social Network, it’s routine practice for prospective candidates to be dishonest about a number of things when they apply for a job. HRSC detailed some fairly common infractions that potential employees often commit. The most common form of dishonesty, according to HRSC, involved being untruthful or unclear on a job application. HRSC found that just over half of candidates had been guilty of bending the truth. More shockingly still, the statistics revealed that over 30 percent of candidates included blatant lies in their resume. The lies concerned things such as educational background and former work experience.
It’s important to keep in mind that dishonesty isn’t the only factor that can lead to a poor hiring decision. A candidate’s background and personality must be evaluated to determine if he would be a good fit for the office culture. As explained in a CareerBuilder study, a lack of effort and poor attitude from an employee can be equally damaging for the office culture, even if the individual in question is qualified for the position.
The many consequences of a poor hiring decision
So what happens when an HR department makes a poor hiring decision? Well, the consequences impact two areas: the poor choice can negatively impact a business’s finances, as well as place stress on the office atmosphere.
The CareerBuilder study found that 69 percent of employers in 2012 reported that a bad hiring decision had placed a strain on their company. In terms of finances, a significant 24 percent of companies reported that a bad hiring decision had cost them well over $50,000, with a larger 41 percent of businesses reporting a figure of over $25,000. The HRSC survey breaks this down further: It can cost over $40,000 to replace an executive employee, and anything from $7,000 to 10,000 to replace an entry- to mid-level employee.
According to Entrepreneur magazine office morale can also be damaged by a poor hiring decision. Entrepreneur, citing a Robert Half survey of financial professionals, argued that the executives found that in 95 percent of cases, a bad hiring decision can affect office morale, at least to some extent.
The following statistics are surely concerning, which is why it’s important that HR departments take sufficient steps to safeguard themselves against hiring poor candidates. The most effective way to ensure this is a comprehensive background check and a detailed interview.