Hiring managers say lying about your degree could cost you your job

[Evo]

Before you send in that resume, you should read this.

While hiring managers hate all resume lies, a recent survey finds some lies are worse than others.

The jobsite TopResume asked 629 professionals to rank the most serious of 14 categories of resume lies. Nearly all respondents, 97 percent, said they'd reconsider candidates with any type of lie. Nearly half those surveyed were HR professionals, recruiters or hiring managers.

Topping the list were lies about technical capabilities, licenses and criminal records. Yet the biggest deal breaker, according to respondents, was lying about an academic degree. 89 percent of hiring managers felt this was the most serious lie, inching out even criminal records.

It's one of the most common lies that applicants tell, says TopResume career advice expert Amanda Augustine. Many candidates don't want to be disqualified from a search when a job listing asks for candidates with degrees.

Still, it's a dangerous lie to tell, says Augustine. Employers can easily verify this information through a background check.

continued...

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/hiring-mangers-share-no-1-165600928.html

 

[mfb]

Before you send in that resume, you should read this.

"Don't lie about degrees" should be obvious. If someone needs that type of advice they need to learn a lot more...

PS: Can we put that directly into the title? The current title looks buzzfeed-like.

 

[Evo]

"Don't lie about degrees" should be obvious. If someone needs that type of advice they need to learn a lot more...

PS: Can we put that directly into the title? The current title looks buzzfeed-like.

Is that better?

 

[CrysPhys]

Before you send in that resume, you should read this.

continued...

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/hiring-mangers-share-no-1-165600928.html

Key phrase in the linked article appears to be:

"Nearly all respondents, 97 percent, said they'd reconsider candidates with any type of lie."

I'm not sure how to parse this. They're talking about candidates, not employees. What does "reconsider" in this context mean? Give them a second chance? Withdraw an offer, if one was tendered? Something else?

 

[symbolipoint]

Candidates lie? Probably most candidates will lie about something. How important is any lie on a resume? It is supposed to be a document to represent the candidate which the candidate writes on his own. Bending the truth? Some of it is understandable. Lie? Not acceptable. What is important is, what kind of lie.

I did not read the article. Be aware, some candidates may have poor, deficient skill or knowledge in some essential area. Any candidate who seriously misrepresents it, would hopefully be caught and rejected from candidacy. Lie about having a degree in something when not actually have that degree? University & College Transcripts!

 

[EngWiPy]

Don't employers verify education and past employment before giving an offer?

 

[symbolipoint]

Don't employers verify education and past employment before giving an offer?

Either, YES, or, you would expect so. It was done, in my experience.

Maybe some employers will trust now, and check later. If so, someone who lied about having a degree, could bet caught. If employer asks for school transcripts, then new-hire must cooperate with this - otherwise, job will not last long. After graduating, ALL of my jobs involving science or technology or other related things were obtained along with my providing my transcripts.

 

[StatGuy2000]

Either, YES, or, you would expect so. It was done, in my experience.

Maybe some employers will trust now, and check later. If so, someone who lied about having a degree, could bet caught. If employer asks for school transcripts, then new-hire must cooperate with this - otherwise, job will not last long. After graduating, ALL of my jobs involving science or technology or other related things were obtained along with my providing my transcripts.

In my own experience, either the employers themselves or a third-party contractor specializing in recruitment would request transcripts (along with references and a criminal background check) as part of the employee screening process, which can take process either at the moment a formal offer is made (conditional on the results of the screening) or immediately before the offer is to be made.

 

[mfb]

but I don't believe people should be passionate about what they do. A more important quality is to get the job done, even if you don't like it.

People tend to have a better performance if they like their job. Not necessarily for "sit here for 8 hours and sort X into Y" jobs*, but for everything where you have contact to customers, for everything that needs creativity or somewhat qualified work, and so on.

* and I don't think employers expect enthusiasm for these jobs.

 

[symbolipoint]

EngWiPy said: https://www.physicsforums.com/goto/post?id=6059474#post-6059474

but I don't believe people should be passionate about what they do. A more important quality is to get the job done, even if you don't like it.

mfb responded:

People tend to have a better performance if they like their job. Not necessarily for "sit here for 8 hours and sort X into Y" jobs*, but for everything where you have contact to customers, for everything that needs creativity or somewhat qualified work, and so on.

* and I don't think employers expect enthusiasm for these jobs.

I do not find EngWiPy's quoted part in this topic. Either way, this #9 posting, not quite on topic.

But I agree with both of you. I wish some employers would understand that people look, sometimes for jobs, which are not a perfect fit, or for which the job-seeker may actually accept any job offered (ALMOST), just to get new employment. Some candidates ARE disciplined enough to stay in a job, just to maintain employment, even if candidate is not "passionate" about the job. One must not determine a job choice according to passion.

Now maybe, back to "lie about having a degree"?

 

[mfb]

@EngWiPy deleted the post I was quoting.

 

[EngWiPy]

People tend to have a better performance if they like their job. Not necessarily for "sit here for 8 hours and sort X into Y" jobs*, but for everything where you have contact to customers, for everything that needs creativity or somewhat qualified work, and so on.

* and I don't think employers expect enthusiasm for these jobs.

I think the job will be easier if you like it. I deleted the post before you posted and I didn't notice that, but what I said was that people don't have to be passionate about what they do. Not hating what you do is enough, I think. Of course if you like it, that is better, but it is neither necessary nor realistic in many cases, because what if what you like to do doesn't pay well to have a decent life? Do most students study something they like, or something they hope to pay off later to have a better life? But most recruiters and employers want to hear from you that you are passionate!. Even more, they want to hear that you are passionate about their company and solutions, and working with them is your dream job. I don't think this is realistic. This is where applicants start to lie. That is why I said that the hiring process encourages lying in a sense. I know they want to make sure that an employee won't leave soon, but I think the reality is that most people apply for jobs to have a job to survive. It is a mutual interest. Employers need someone to do the job to generate profit, and employees need a job to be compensated for what they do and live a decent life. I think whether an employee will stay or not has more to do with how an employer treats them; the respect, the compensations, the benefits, the incentives, the working environment, ... etc. Employers expect employees to be loyal to them even before they hire them, while employers won't be loyal to their employees when they have a budget cut.

 

[symbolipoint]

I think the job will be easier if you like it. I deleted the post before you posted and I didn't notice that, but what I said was that people don't have to be passionate about what they do. Not hating what you do is enough, I think. Of course if you like it, that is better, but it is neither necessary nor realistic in many cases, because what if what you like to do doesn't pay well to have a decent life? Do most students study something they like, or something they hope to pay off later to have a better life? But most recruiters and employers want to hear from you that you are passionate!. Even more, they want to hear that you are passionate about their company and solutions, and working with them is your dream job. I don't think this is realistic. This is where applicants start to lie. That is why I said that the hiring process encourages lying in a sense. I know they want to make sure that an employee won't leave soon, but I think the reality is that most people apply for jobs to have a job to survive. It is a mutual interest. Employers need someone to do the job to generate profit, and employees need a job to be compensated for what they do and live a decent life. I think whether an employee will stay or not has more to do with how an employer treats them; the respect, the compensations, the benefits, the incentives, the working environment, ... etc. Employers expect employees to be loyal to them even before they hire them, while employers won't be loyal to their employees when they have a budget cut.

Good analysis.

 

[StatGuy2000]

When it comes to the issue of honesty versus deceit in the job application process, we need to distinguish between motives and qualifications. Lying about whether you have a degree or not is about misrepresenting your qualifications for the particular position, which could be costly for employers when/if it turns out the candidate that ends up being hired is not up to the job at hand. And so a good case can be made for fraud on the part of the applicant.

What @EngWiPy (and @mfb and @symbolipoint ) is referring to earlier here is about "lying" (or really exaggerating) about motives for applying to the said position. It is absolutely the case that when many people are searching for work, the main motivation is to simply find a job to survive, and employers should come in with the expectation that you wouldn't expect each and every candidate to be passionate about the company or the position, although to an extent I sympathize with the prospective hiring manager who wants to know whether the candidate is going to stick with the employer and not simply bail on them after a few weeks, given how expensive it is to engage in the interviewing and hiring process. So a certain level of exaggeration about your "passion" for said job is to be expected, and I don't see anything wrong with this at all.

As far as loyalty is concerned, loyalty to your employer should be very much contingent on the following, in no particular order:

1. How well you can perform on the job.
2. How well your employer treats you as an employee.
3. How likely will you be able to advance within the employer's organization.
4. How likely will your direct reporting manager (or their bosses) will go to the bat to keep you on when the employer's organization needs to cut its budget due to loss of revenue or similar reasons.

If any of (1)-(4) is lacking, the employee shouldn't worry about showing loyalty and move on to a new position or company/organization (I've done so numerous times). And just as importantly, employers should expect that this would happen fairly regularly.