Take the 2-minute tour ×
Programmers Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professional programmers interested in conceptual questions about software development. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Moderator comment

Please note that this is a two year old question that has just been migrated from Stack Overflow. Please take your time to read all the answers and ask yourself "would my answer add anything to this?".

I'm conducting technical interviews to fill a few .NET positions. Many of the people I interview really do know .NET pretty well, but I find at least 90% embellish their skillset anywhere between "a little" to "quite drastically". Sometimes they fabricate skills relevant to the position they're applying for, sometimes they don't.

Most of the people I interview, even the most egregious liars, are not scam artists. They just want to stand out among the crowd, so they drop a few buzzwords on their resume like "JBoss", "LINQ", "web services", "Django" or whatever just to pad their skillset and stay competitive.

(You might wonder if a person that lies about those skills is just bluffing their way through a technical interview. My interviews involve a lot of hands-on coding and problem-solving – people who attempt to bluff will bomb the hands-on coding portion in the first 3 minutes.)

These are two open-ended questions, but it would really help me out when I make my recommendations to the hiring managers:

  1. Regarding interviewing etiquette, should I attempt to determine whether a person really possesses all of the skills they claim to have? Can I do this without making the candidate feel uncomfortable?

  2. Regarding the final decision, should I recommend candidates who are genuinely qualified for the positions they're applying for, even if they've fabricated portions of their skillset?

share|improve this question
4  
@jmein: Nope. It is not programming related, therefore it should not be here. –  Geoffrey Chetwood Feb 19 '09 at 19:00
19  
Just because something could be relevant to non-programmers doesn't mean it can't live on SO. This is highly relevant to developers responsible for hiring and developers looking for jobs, and here we can focus on hard technical aspects, rather than generic "lying" as you'd find on Monster.com –  Rex M Feb 19 '09 at 19:48
4  
Kinda hard to earn a living at it if you can't get a job –  kajaco Feb 20 '09 at 16:10
4  
@m4bwav: there is no criteria that defines what should or shouldn't be wikified. Wiki is used to prevent people from gaining rep (read "winning the pissing contest") for "fun" questions. My question is not "fun", it's technical merit and utilitarian value is certainly applicable to programmers. –  Juliet Feb 20 '09 at 16:21
4  
Stack Overflow is not a career advice site. You might be interested in either careeroverflow.com or advice.personforce.com. –  Roger Pate Apr 7 '10 at 10:42
show 13 more comments

migrated from stackoverflow.com Jan 24 '11 at 6:33

This question came from our site for professional and enthusiast programmers.

closed as not constructive by Mark Trapp Oct 21 '11 at 8:59

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

37 Answers

Assuming the lie is serious...(ex. I've got 12 years experience with c++)

Dismiss them. If somebody is purposefully lying on their resume, I'm not going to be too concerned for their comfort. Hiring a liar can cause you considerable financial loss.

If somebody has no problem lying in other areas, they have no problem lying at all. I certainly wouldn't want to hire anybody who feels lying to a potential employer is acceptable.

Assuming the lie is not so serious..(ex. I only write valid markup/css)

I would base the hiring on their portfolio. I really am a stickler for standards, but you might find a target="" in one of my xhtml 1.0 strict projects from time to time.

share|improve this answer
show 1 more comment

1) Regarding interviewing etiquette, should I attempt to determine whether a person really possesses all of the skills they claim to have? Can I do this without making the candidate feel uncomfortable?

Shouldn't you worry if he has the skills you need?

2) Regarding the final decision, should I recommend candidates who are genuinely qualified for the positions they're applying for, even if they've fabricated portions of their skillset?

Depends how serious that lie is, of course.

share|improve this answer
add comment

1) Regarding interviewing etiquette, should I attempt to determine whether a person really possesses all of the skills they claim to have? Can I do this without making the candidate feel uncomfortable?

No. Find out of they posess the skills needed for the job you need them to do (and if they're "Smart and Gets Things Done").

2) Regarding the final decision, should I recommend candidates who are genuinely qualified for the positions they're applying for, even if they've fabricated portions of their skillset?

Yes. Then make fun of them mercilessly about a month after they started as your coworker. This is assuming they lied about knowing Java, and not lied about getting that Master's degree.

I haven't worked with C in a couple years, and if I sat down with a terminal and gcc and tried to write something in it I'd be going to google every 5 minutes. If I had to write C code on the whiteboard I'd forget all sorts of stuff like what malloc returns when it fails or the right syntax for declaring a typedef. I still feel I know C, and I'll still put it on my resume. I don't think I'm "lying", it's just writing a paragraph for every language on my resume explaining my experience with it, and how out of practice I am is impractical.

share|improve this answer
1  
Based on your description of your C knowledge, you are not "experienced" with C, and therefore it should not be on your resume, unless you say that you are merely "familiar" with it. –  Robert Harvey Aug 8 '10 at 17:17
16  
Disagree Robert - If someone has 10 years of experience with C, but has been doing other stuff for the last few years, I would expect them to be rusty with C, but be able to get back up to speed very quickly. Like riding a bike. –  red-dirt Jan 24 '11 at 10:50
show 2 more comments

Regarding question 1, it's their fault if they feel uncomfortable from lying. Attempt at all costs to determine if they possess the skills they claim to have. Otherwise, you'll have a perpetual problem (as opposed to problem solver ;) ) at your company.

Regarding question 2, if they fabricate on a resume, how can you trust them not to lie about other parts of the job, such as if bugs were REALLY fixed in that new version ready to go to the miffed client.

When I don't know something being asked during an interview, I flat out state that I don't know. In my cover letters, I'll make it crystal clear that I do not fulfill Requirement #34 of the 184 technologies they are asking for :)

share|improve this answer
4  
One thing I have discovered from doing a lot of reading resumes and then meeting people, lying on your resume is akin to speeding; somewhere north of 98% of applicants lie a little, and honest players are mugged by a failed system. Like speeding, you only bother weeding out the worst offenders. –  Colin Pickard Mar 4 '09 at 16:20
2  
If they're asking you to fulfill rule #34, you might want to send your "other" cover letter. –  intuited Jun 15 '10 at 16:51
add comment

A little fudging might be ok. Adding "Scala" if your scala skills are mediocre (assuming that scala is a fairly peripheral skill to the job you're applying for) is probably not quite so bad as would be claiming that if you know next to nothing about it. Much worse, I'd think, would be puffing skills that are central to the gig. Fabricating previous positions is also much worse and (I've heard) can be grounds for termination in some places if you're found out.

I personally really dislike working with co-workers that have bluffed their way in, and are getting paid what I'm getting. Thankfully this seems to have become much less prevalent since the end of the boom.

As for discomfort, I think anything you want to ask is fair game, and should be accepted as such, as long as it's not either illegal (personal questions and such) and as long as you're not rude about it. When I'm in an interview and I flub a question it's nobody's fault but my own.

share|improve this answer
add comment
  1. Regarding interviewing etiquette, should I attempt to determine whether a person really possesses all of the skills they claim to have? Can I do this without making the candidate feel uncomfortable?

    Yes -- just ask them to describe past projects. You don't have to get into really gory details, but you can at least ask them to describe the project that they used those skills or APIs on. They don't need to have the API memorized, but they should be able to give a well-reasoned response that shows they know the API and what it's good for.

    That said, a lot of applicants will list skills that they only have slight exposure to, which is perfectly fine, as long as they're forthcoming about their experience when you ask them. If they don't specify their level of experience on their resume, that's forgivable, but applicants should be honest when you ask them about it.

    What you want to watch out for is people who are blatantly trying to mislead you to get a job. If they say they're an expert C++ programmer but can't talk intelligently about a major project they've completed in the language, then you have a problem.

  2. Regarding the final decision, should I recommend candidates who are genuinely qualified for the positions they're applying for, even if they've fabricated portions of their skillset?

    No. If they blatantly lied about something on their resume, you have to wonder what else they'll lie about. Honesty should be a top priority. You're going to have this person around for a while, and you're probably going to pay them a lot of money. Make sure it's someone you would actually want to work with! It'll save you money and energy in the long run.

share|improve this answer
show 2 more comments

In your phone interview, you could mention that next level interview will have lots of hands-on coding exercises. That should scare most of the people trying to bluff their way through.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Regarding interviewing etiquette, should I attempt to determine whether a person really possesses all of the skills they claim to have? Can I do this without making the candidate feel uncomfortable?

Sure you should and sure you can.

Just ask him to explain the a LINQ / C# / SQL trick he discovered recently. If he comes with "wow, there are outer joins there!", then you and him just don't match. And you may just thank him and he will not feel embarassed.

Regarding the final decision, should I recommend candidates who are genuinely qualified for the positions they're applying for, even if they've fabricated portions of their skillset?

If you're not hiring them for the George Washington's Cherry Tree website, why not then?

share|improve this answer
add comment

Should I attempt to determine whether a person really possesses all of the skills they claim to have?

Why?

To determine if they're a big fat liar? Or to humiliate them? Or to prove your total technical superiority?

Or to make a hiring decision?

Be sure to distinguish between doing the right thing in hiring and being a jerk about nuances on someone's resume.

Some people say "experienced" but you wish they said "exposed". Does that make them a evil liar? Or does that mean that their definition of experience isn't as rich, varied and deep as yours?

If you suspect they're lying -- and it would be a bad hiring decision because of this -- remember your real goal.

You're just making a hiring decision.

If they're big fat liars, don't hire them.

If you think they've "overstated" their experience, perhaps your use of the words are just as wrong as theirs. Does it matter? Do they have to be converted to your way of writing a resume? Or can you simply determine what they mean by the words they use?

If you're not sure, probe their experience. You don't have to make someone uncomfortable to arrive at a meaningful, useful assessment of their skills.

share|improve this answer
2  
In general, when I talk to people, I like to get a feel for their technical background. I came across a guy who put JBoss on his resume, which is a pretty heavy technology, so I asked him to describe the apps he's written with it -- turns out he couldn't even define what it is, and (cont...) –  Juliet Feb 19 '09 at 19:14
3  
(...) was embarrassed that he'd been exposed. Oops! Not my intention. However, from a hiring perspective, a diverse skillset can affect a person's salary -- a good bluffer might be able to weasle his way into a senior position, and the company gets a smaller ROI for hiring the guy. –  Juliet Feb 19 '09 at 19:18
3  
In my experience, being modest on the resume is a Bad Idea. I wouldn't worry about somebody being as favorable as possible about themselves, short of actual dishonesty. –  David Thornley Feb 19 '09 at 20:47
3  
+answer: I was discussing this issue with the hire-ups, and they wanted me to go down a person's resume line-by-line to see if their skillset checked out. They even wanted me to intimidate people by asking them to cross off anything on their resume which "may have been inflated". (cont...) –  Juliet Feb 20 '09 at 20:17
2  
@sleske: Good advice, but "Built" might be too vague. The correct combination of "Designed", "Coded", "Tested", "Deployed into a web server", etc., should be included to describe what you actually did. –  S.Lott Oct 15 '09 at 11:22
show 18 more comments

You have to assume that anyone who claims to know anything on their resume is lying. There are many different definitions of "experienced" or "fluent", and until you agree on those, claims on a resume are meaningless. The only thing you should care about is what they have done in the past and whether that means they will be able to help your company in the future . The point of the interview is to determine what they have actually done and how that will apply to the job you are interviewing them for.

That being said, if someone is obviously a good liar, send them to sales :)

share|improve this answer
16  
One can't be obviously a good liar. It's an oxymoron. Or the nearest rethorical figure. –  Adriano Varoli Piazza Feb 19 '09 at 19:11
10  
+1 for the sales joke. It was a joke, right? Right...? -cries for humanity- ;-D –  Adam Davis Feb 19 '09 at 19:17
6  
+1 for last sentence –  ryeguy Feb 19 '09 at 20:01
8  
Sales Rep on call: "We can do it", looks at developer emphatically shaking head no we cant!!, "we can do it and we will finish 1 week early" –  BigBlondeViking Sep 22 '09 at 16:01
3  
If everyone lies on their resumes, then what's the point of asking for a resume? –  Robert Harvey Aug 8 '10 at 17:16
show 2 more comments

I generally don't care too much about the specific skill sets listed on the resume. I just ask them about the work they do/have done. The word matching part of resumes is unfortunate for all concerned and I blame the recruiters.

If the person is/does blatantly lie about experience then of course you want to consider if they are a good fit for you.

I never really let the specific buzzwords and acronyms and languages get in the way of figuring out of the person is good for hiring. People in our field are supposed to be able to learn and solve problems. Knowing a specific technology is not a big deal, hiring for a specific skillset is not a good practice in my opinion.

share|improve this answer
1  
I would nearly always agree. The disagreement is when we decide we need someone for a whole new technical area that we don't yet know. Then the buzzwords become important - also alas we are less able to judge truth from embellishment. –  MarkJ Sep 22 '09 at 16:07
2  
Knowing a specific technology is not a big deal, hiring for a specific skillset is not a good practice ..But employers do it anyway. –  Robert Harvey Aug 8 '10 at 17:18
show 3 more comments

You can't learn very much definitive about a candidate in a technical interview. (That's one of the reasons there are so many questions about interviewing.)

But you can learn whether or not someone's a liar. I'm trying to think of an upside to working with a liar and I really can't.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Regarding #1.

I don't actively do this but it's a side effect of my interview technique. Usually when looking at a resume I attempt to find some recent project that I have at least a minimum amount of knowledge about. I then spend some time researching it on the internet before the interview. I use this project as an ice breaker for the interview. I've found that people tend to relax if you are talking about a subject they are familiar with. Senior projects tend to be something people are both familiar with and proud of. Much better than throwing my actual question at them straight off the bat.

The side effect of this is I can usually quickly root out who lied and who didn't about their senior project. If you do 5-10 minutes of research you can usually root out the blatant liars.

The point of the pre-amble though is that I don't optimize my interview for the liars. I optimize it for the honest people who are looking to get a worthwhile job (and maybe stretched just a bit on their resume).

Regarding #2.

I classify this in two ways 1) people who are inflating their resume and 2) people who are bold face lying. People who fall into category #2 won't get an thumbs up for me. I don't care what their skill level is. You can't work with people you can't trust. #1 for some reason really doesn't bother me too much.

share|improve this answer
add comment

1) Regarding interviewing etiquette, should I attempt to determine whether a person really possesses all of the skills they claim to have? Can I do this without making the candidate feel uncomfortable?

This is very dangerous ground. If you are an EOE (equal opportunity employer), questions not related to the actual job can get you into some hot water. I'd recommend putting together a solid list of the known skills that you believe the position requires now. It wouldn't hurt to add a few of the nice to haves for future projects.

Also just to play a little devil's advocate... Just because they put something like LINQ or JBoss on their resume does not imply in itself that they are not being honest. They may know a little bit about it, but are not experts. This is why you'll see people score the needed competencies for a job on a 1 - 10 basis to make sure they have the required skill base for that technology for the job.

share|improve this answer
show 4 more comments

If it's at least 90%, as you mention, the best answer is, "Take it in stride." People have plenty of reasons, both good and bad, to embellish their resume beyond the strict truth.

When conducting interviews, I view the resume as a road map to the questions I'm going to ask. If the interviewee can't answer them, I don't really worry about whether it's lying, bad communication skills, nervousness, or a gap in real knowledge. I can't do that much second guessing.

For the sake of this question, let's address what a wrong answer means. Sometimes, an answer is so fundamentally wrong or uninformative, it's a clear indication that the interviewee doesn't know the subject matter But, even that doesn't mean they've never worked with the technology.

For example, I have ten years of working with SQL Server on my resume. The current application, which I've been building and supporting for almost five of those years, has a SQL Server database on the back end, but we use it very sparsely. I've probably spent less than forty hours on the current job writing stored procedures or ADO.net. Certainly, my skills have atrophied, but that doesn't mean my resume is a lie.

The only time I would worry about lying on a resume is if it's overtly pathological. I worked with one guy who claimed to be an ex-Green Beret. There was no hiring advantage to the claim and he would mention it at least once a week. Eventually, after he was fired for other things, it was demonstrably proven to not be the case. That sort of lying is potentially dangerous. Claiming two professional years of C++ when you've only used it in hobby projects isn't, provided you can demonstrate ability commiserate with your claim isn't.

share|improve this answer
add comment

My opinion:

Regarding interviewing etiquette, should I attempt to determine whether a person really possesses all of the skills they claim to have?

Yes you should:

  • You're interviewing them because you're interested in hiring them
  • You're interested in hiring them because of their resume
  • Therefore you ought to know whether their resume is truthful

Can I do this without making the candidate feel uncomfortable?

Ask pertinent questions. When I'm the candidate, I'm not uncomfortable: I expect it, I know what you're doing, and I know why you need to and ought to be doing it.

Regarding the final decision, should I recommend candidates who are genuinely qualified for the positions they're applying for, even if they've fabricated portions of their skillset?

I wouldn't. If you know they've lie about things you know about (e.g. their resume) how could you trust what they say about anything else?

There are only a few things I want to know from an interview:

  • Is the resume (and the candidate) telling the truth?
  • Do the candidate and I seem to understand what we're saying to each other?
  • Does the candidate want to work here?

It's not that complicated.

share|improve this answer
add comment

1) Regarding interviewing etiquette, should I attempt to determine whether a person really possesses all of the skills they claim to have? Can I do this without making the candidate feel uncomfortable?

This might depend you mean by determining if they know all of the skills or not. One thing to remember when interviewing is that people get nervous and may screw something up, or forget it, even if they know it like the back of their hand. This is normal and unless they clearly demonstrate no knowledge for other related questions, you should give them the benefit of a doubt. Generally you are not going to be able to prove if someone has all of the skills they possess or not in the limited time of an interview. As such, focus on what you think are the deal breakers if they don't have those skills and come back to the other ones if you have time.

2) Regarding the final decision, should I recommend candidates who are genuinely qualified for the positions they're applying for, even if they've fabricated portions of their skillset?

I'm not sure I understand your question because if someone is genuinely qualified for the job, then odds are you are not going to think they fabricated portions of their skills et.

Also, something that you should keep in mind is that some people define "experience in" differently than others. This is why you need to ask people how much experience in something they have, where they would rate their knowledge of that skill, and when the last time they used it was. There are quite a few skills that you might use, get very knowledgeable in (e.g. C programming) and then not use for awhile. If the interviewee is confident that they would get back in the groove in a fairly short amount of time (or before their actual start day, remember that someone that gets offered a job might not start right away and may have sufficient time to prepare prior to their first day of work) then you should give them the benefit of a doubt if your overall interview impressions are positive.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Joel Test #11 always works for me: "Do new candidates write code during their interview?" http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000043.html

share|improve this answer
show 2 more comments

What I would do is give them a complicated piece of code and ask them to tell you exactly what's going on, or some similar test. Watch them closely - often they'll be able to guess, but you will be able to tell from their facial expression what they're thinking.

If they look like a deer caught in the headlights, then chances are they did lie.

share|improve this answer
add comment
  1. No. Only test them on the skills pertinent to the job.
  2. If it is small embellishment, recommend them. If it is outrageous, don't.

My reasoning

In Pragmatic Thinking and Learning( By Andy Hunt. One of the co-authors of The Pragmatic Programmer) Andy mentions a study where research determined that most people unknowingly exaggerate their skill set. They found that people really thought their skills were that good. If I remember right Andy point out more than one study that confirmed this.

Andy also points out to become a Guru in any particular skill, It takes most people 10 years. He referenced several famous people in several fields. This is why I like those 1-10 scales. I tend to put the number of years I have experience in a skill with some sort of weight one way or another. The problem is even though I like them, people that process applications think that I am not particularly knowledgeable.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Here's my magic question to sort out exaggerated claims.

You have [insert technology] listed here in your skills... How comfortable are you with answering technical questions about that?

Honest candidates will tell you outright if they haven't worked on that technology for five years, or only have had basic exposure, or studied that in college twelve years ago and barely remember anything (and that's perfectly ok with me)

In those cases, I have no problem going easy on them or even skipping that part of the interview if that's not central to the skills they need for the job.

But if candidates tell me they're comfortable with the technology, they better be able to answer those questions.

share|improve this answer
2  
Technical questions can only show that you know a precise point. I would start with "Where/How did you use [insert technology]?" to get a overview of the experience. And then ask technical questions. –  h3xStream Jul 26 '10 at 3:57
1  
The point of that question is mostly to give an easy way out to an otherwise honest candidate who overinflated his skills in some technology. I'll also ask about projects using that technology, examples of architectures, etc... –  Kena Jul 26 '10 at 14:36
add comment

Unfortunately, in many cases, people feel they need to embellish their resume in order to even be considered for a position they know they are qualified for. The reason is that many resume's have to make it through an HR person before they get to a hiring manager, and HR people filter on things which are often impractical. 10+ years of experience in a language that has only existed for 5, for instance.

I list a lot of things on my resume that I have only passing familiarity with, and in an interview I will tell the interviewer that I'm "familiar" with them, but not an expert. My expertise lies in such and such an area. Then I let them decide if that's what they want or not.

Of course I won't usually even go on an interview unless I think they're looking for my primary skillset. I don't want to waste anyones time by interviewing for a job I know i'm not qualified for.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Most techies overstate their qualifications to some degree, but you need to distinguish between a positive spin and an outright lie.

If I were interviewing someone with Java programming experience, I wouldn't necessarily expect them to answer subtle questions about esoteric features or standards. But if after a few questions it became obvious that the sum total of their experience was playing in the language for twenty minutes, I'd find a polite way to end the interview and move on.

Personal note: I hate interviews were they give me stupid programming tests. Once I passed 'junior', I considered it insulting to have to prove myself on something trivial. Also, I come to interviews in 'conversation' mode, which is very different from 'deep thinking' mode. The context switch is disruptive (I either pass the test and fail the remainder of the interview or vice versa). Generally, I'll just pretend to fill out the code and leave as fast as I can. If the company doesn't already have someone who can tell if I'm any good, then I probably don't want to work there (unless I'm in charge).

Paul.

share|improve this answer
add comment

I have little tolerance for this sort of thing. If someone is playing fast and loose with the truth before hiring, there is no reason to think they will be scrupulously truthful after hiring.

That said, I tend to ignore the typical alphabet soup skills listing section of the resume. Everyone understand that the acronym cloud is intended for the resume screening software and not for people. I focus on those skills actually related to accomplishments, or related to the job.

Regarding question #1 (how much/hard to explore) ... don't be concerned about candidate comfort as interviews are uncomfortable by nature. And they should be prepared for questions about anything they choose to put on their resume. I would worry first about those things most relevant to the job, but if I "smell a rat" I would explore it as well.

Regarding question #2 (recommend qualified liar) ... qualified or not, if there are significant falsehoods I would pass. Technical acumen is not the only consideration. Remembering Joel Spolsky on hiring (here, at the bottom) ...

If you’re having trouble deciding, there’s a very simple solution. NO HIRE. Just don’t hire people that you aren’t sure about.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Google them and take their resume with a grain of salt. We don't bring people in until they pass a thorough phone and online test gauntlet.

With a thorough interview process, and if you do your homework on the candidates, you won't have to worry as much.

Sadly, nearly everyone misrepresents something on their resume. Some don't even mean to do it.

share|improve this answer
show 2 more comments

Are you "Still Hiring" from Bob Lewis' blog entry?

It seems to me that virtually every "expert" I have talked to or read recommends that one embellishes one's resume if it will help get the interview.

Not original to me here, but yes, it's okay to ask about the interviewee's skill set, especially as it pertains to the job for which they are interviewing. If they really have the skills, they shouldn't get any more uncomfortable than they already are. If you ask the question correctly (i.e. don't just ask "Do you know about technology XYZ?", to which the answer could be "Yes" even if they only read a single blog entry about it yesterday) it should be possible to tell if they have embellished a bit; at this point you want them to be honest and say they only have a little knowledge in the area.

As for hiring, if it's a minor embellishment, I don't see a problem, since that's what's advised these days (and would they have gotten through the door if they hadn't done that?). If it's something major, turn them down.

share|improve this answer
add comment

I disagree, anything you put on your resume is game. If it doesn't pertain to the job, don't add it. It's not going to make you look any better because you did COBOL for a school project.

About lying. I heard somewhere that you will lie/embellish three times in a ten minute conversation. Not everyone who lies is a bad person. The person may be a quick study and can learn faster than you drive down the highway, I've worked with those people.

I would be more concerned about someone who lied about credentials than about having 6 years with LINQ experience. Ask yourself, how does this affect me or the company?

share|improve this answer
add comment

1) Regarding interviewing etiquette, should I attempt to determine whether a person really possesses all of the skills they claim to have? Can I do this without making the candidate feel uncomfortable?

Are all of the skills necessary for the postion? If so, aren't you wasting your time finding out if they possess them all? And, if so, is it worth the time you are wasting?

In general, you are aiming to find out whether the candidate can do the job. If they are a pathological liar rather than an embelisher, I would cut the interview short and state "don't hire the pathalogical liar". To do otherwise is a waste of time.

But, spending time knocking someone down for skills you have no use for just makes you a royal ass. You can call them on it later when you are in the position to do it as a friend, if you care enough.

2) Regarding the final decision, should I recommend candidates who are genuinely qualified for the positions they're applying for, even if they've fabricated portions of their skillset?

Yes, but you should make a note of any serious fabrications. I say that with a grain of salt, however, as a qualified candidate whose resume is 90% garbage should bring up major flags.

share|improve this answer
add comment

JMO on these:

1) No, to do so would likely take weeks if not months for every single skill someone claims to possess. Could you write down every ability you possess and then test that within a week? I doubt it as this would be likely dozens of skills to test your proficiency without getting into the question of how to grade various levels of expertise like how yould you test someone that thinks they can cook gourmet meals or drive a tank easily? On the second question I'd say no, most people in interviews will feel uncomfortable at some point given that the environment is likely a foreign one.

2) Depends on the values of the employer, IMO. If the employer has questionable ethics and is OK with those that lie or cheat then I'd say recommend. OTOH, if the employer stresses honesty and would loathe hiring someone that lied, I wouldn't recommend the person in that case. Another factor is what skill set was communicated in error, is it crucial to the job? If someone said they spoke fluent Russian but the company doesn't do any business involving Russia or Russians then it may not be worth exposing the person if the company isn't rigid on honesty and integrity.

share|improve this answer
show 3 more comments

Generally speaking if I discover in the interview that the CV has blatant lies I don't hire the person - if I cannot trust a person to even write an honest CV how will be able in the future to trust him when he is working for me? E.g. if a person says he is a very experienced C++ developer but doesn't know what a pointer is then I have serious doubts about his other claims in the CV.

share|improve this answer
show 1 more comment

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.