Integrity Testing and Behavioral Assessment Blog Feed Page

Have You Sharpened Your Saw Today?

Employee Theft: Good News and Bad

Balance Within The Workplace

Balance within the workplace. Can that even be possible? Balance and workplace seem to be on two opposing ends of the spectrum. The lines between family life and work have blurred with the high pressure, 24/7 society we now live in. Of course unparalleled wealth can be the result. But let’s really examine the price of this. Statistics can show trends and correlations and help us make sound judgment calls once we have the data. As business owners or managers, I’d assume we’d want the data. I’d assume we’d want to give our company and employees the best chance possible to succeed. There have been numerous studies that have explored work hours and how the employees’ behavior has been affected including their views of their job, their health, and their personal and family lives. In 2001, a publication of the Families and Work Institute explored the question of Feeling Overworked: When Work Becomes Too Much. How prevalent is it to feel overworked? Here are some noteworthy stats that they found:

• 28% of employees felt overworked often or very often in the past three months.


• 54% felt overworked at least sometimes in the past three months.


• 28 % felt overwhelmed by how much they had to do often or very often in the past three months.


• 55% felt overwhelmed by how much work they had to do at least sometimes in the past three months.


• 29% felt they did not have time to step back and process or reflect on the work they were doing often or very oftenin the past three months.


• 59% felt they did not have time to step back and process or reflect on the work they were doing at least sometimes in the past three months.
  

Prejudice Behavior At Work

As employers -- no matter what the environment -- we are accountable in keeping a constructive and proficient workplace. A stumbling block to this would be intolerance and racism in the work environment. As employers, we must expose this and eliminate it in the workplace. In the hiring process, performing pre-employment screening and even behavioral assessments may expose this from the beginning and thus remove the threat of introducing this to our work environment.

Even with screening processes in place -- which can save a lot of future grief -- we may still encounter prejudice at work. So how do we solve this? We can’t combat intolerance with anger, but rather through understanding and education. Behavior such as this is an undeviating result of stereotyping. Stereotyping begins with judging and labeling others which then causes prejudice and in turn results in a negative and critical atmosphere.
So what can we do as employers to help eliminate this problem and create a more harmonious tone?

1. Expand Perceptions. And it all begins with you, the boss. Interact with your employees on a more personal level, creating deeper personal relationships and opening your mind to diversity and trying to empathize with others’ situations.


2. Increase the Cultural Diversity of Professional Contacts. This creates an environment of learning of different cultures within your business.


3. Expand your Knowledge and Make Goals. Study up on methods to remove judgmental behavior at work. Demonstrate to your employees through example and sheer motivation that stereotyping is unacceptable at work. Make it a clear intention to succeed.

Athletic Coaches: Winning vs. Ethics

Life Coaches, we’ve all heard of them and it seems to be a growing career interest among many. Flexible hours, good money and helping people -- doesn’t seem like a job could be much better than that. But what if you’re in the business of hiring coaches, perhaps even more specifically college athletic coaches? When coaching others, in whatever capacity, certain skills need to be apparent.

• Communication. Success of your coach and thus athletes/clients is determined by how well the coach is able to communicate expectations and goals.



• Organization Skills. How often will the coach practice/meet with the athletes, enabling training and enough time for the athletes’ other obligations?



• Understanding of their Responsibilities. Coaches must be aware of all of their responsibilities. A skewed view of always winning while ignoring other school responsibilities can be disastrous.

During the hiring process, not only should the potential coaches be interviewed, but an in depth pre-employment screening should be done. It’s not enough to merely do background checks, but nowadays behavioral and psychological assessments can be performed to help determine certain personality traits and how they may behave under stress. Athletic coaches can be under a lot of stress especially if they feel they must win at all costs.

A recent example in Georgia Southern’s men’s basketball program demonstrates this. There had been claims of academic fraud and an investigation began in December, 2008. Apparently a former assistant coach had written essays and tests and also performed online chats in particular courses for a couple of the players. The two players were subsequently suspended. Although both the school and the NCAA neither named the assistant coach nor the basketball operations director, an assistant coach was fired, the director of basketball operations left after the season, and the head coach resigned after the season. Wins have also had to be forfeited from the 2007-08 and 2008-09 seasons. In addition the men’s program will lose one basketball scholarship each year for three years (Georgian Southern men hoops placed on probation).

Perhaps the responsibilities weren’t clear or the pressure was too great. Either way, as the ones hiring, we must use all avenues to judge if the fit is right and that we make the responsibilities clear. Here is a list of some of the main responsibilities, specifically for a college athletic coach:

1. Compliant to the NCAA rules.



2. Representative for the school. Understanding all appropriate school rules, even cheating.



3. Responsible for visa requirements for international players.



4. Maintain eligibility requirements for their athletes via monitoring their academic status.



5. Organizing team practices and scheduling tournaments.



6. Recruiting athletes.



7. Safely transport players during an away game or other similar trips.

Obviously there is great pressure to succeed and this weight is usually on the shoulders of the coaches and their staff. The college wins more games, they attract good athletes and thus win more and the reputation of the college increases. It can be a vicious or successful circle, depending on if we tip the scale using unethical practices. If we do, it’ll come back and bite us. Do your background checks, your behavioral assessments, and spell out the responsibilities clearly, and the ball will be in your court -- pun intended.

Crazy Employees

To run a successful business, we need not only a good business plan but dependable top-notch employees. Too often we hear stories of staff who show up late and leave early, or employees who are always bickering and gossiping about each other. There are also stories of those workers who simply don't take direction or are needy in some way. As irritating as these scenarios are, probably the most frightening are those where fellow employees or managers feel threatened by a staff member who's lost complete emotional control. Not sure what I'm talking about? Check out this youtube video where an employee goes crazy in the office.

As managers or bosses, we must be vigilant in our hiring process, using all the tools available to us. Times are different and the available resources expand to match the needs of our society. Background checks and employee screening aren't just extras beyond the interview, but rather they are crucial components in the hiring process. We now also have psychological and behavioral assessments available to us. While we can't predict employee behavior in all situations, we are able to shine a light on personality traits and how they may handle stress. No one knows when and if a person will snap, but we can start with all the preventative tools available to us. Say an employee does crack as in the video, what do we do? In these stressful times, we also need to educate ourselves on how to deal with such a situation. We can retaliate, become defensive and even confused. That's the most likely reaction but probably not the smartest. This is the time where we need to prepare ourselves to exert self-control and even some assertiveness. So what are some specifics?

• Remain calm while acknowledging the employee's anger. Be supportive and listen calmly, not becoming angry yourself. Let them speak and vent before you answer. Don't behave anxiously or antagonistically but rather concerned. This can be done through body language and tone of voice and will diffuse the explosive situation.


• Change the environment. You want the atmosphere to be as non-threatening as possible so move to somewhere private where the employee can sit down, relax somewhat and share his grievances.


• Discover the problem and find solutions. When the employee has calmed down, you need to seek out the real problem that's ignited this outburst. So ask questions, focusing on data rather than emotions. Be objective and see if it's time to find a solution. A reasonable person will have hopefully calmed down at this point, if not other measures would have to be taken.

Absenteeism at Work

What's the link between absenteeism at work and stress? A person's psychological make-up along with external factors contributes towards an individual's stress level. A recent survey was conducted by benefits consultant Watson Wyatt Worldwide Inc. They surveyed 282 companies with at least 1000 employees and nearly half of these companies discovered a higher use of counseling and stress management services during this tough economy. And of these surveyed companies, 22 % have seen an increase in unplanned absences (Read the article here).

Clearly we can't control the economy and external factors that may cause stress to our employees, but we can have an awareness of our employees' psychological make-up and how they may respond to stress. Psychological assessments performed in the prescreening phase when seeking out potential employees gives us extra vital information. We will make judgments on where our candidates will perform best, what task they will handle well and where they may need improvement or extra guidance. Foreseeing potential stressful situations for our employees and preparing them accordingly or placing them where they are better suited may decrease health care costs and absenteeism in the workplace.

When we are physically and emotionally healthy, we can deal better with stress. Even prescreening candidates -- knowing what their psychological strengths and weaknesses are -- does not enable us to create a complete stress-free environment. In order to truly have healthy employees and thus a healthy company; we need to incorporate some kind of wellness program. A successful wellness program would target specific health goals of our employees. For example obesity is one main reason for health care costs increasing. Perhaps we could offer weight-loss challenges incorporating better eating habits and an exercise regime. Incentives could be exercise classes offered at convenient times or a fitness allowance at a local gym. We can also offer stress management classes and counseling services.

It's clear that stress affects our health and thus the work environment. If our goal is a healthy productive workplace, we must set the example through healthy balanced living and encouraging this behavior in our employees. Stress will decrease, absenteeism will decrease and health care costs should stabilize.

Check the Box

When a company has a position it needs to fill, there are several criteria that the job candidates must satisfy before they can progress through the screening/interview process and be hired. Employers want someone with relevant experience and a record of success. Frequently, particular skills are required and education minimums must also be met.

Employers prefer to avoid hiring candidates that will later become problem employees. In order to identify these individuals before they become employees, they use a number of tools. One of the most frequently used tools is a criminal background check. This type of check will most often result in a database search for criminal records related to the applicant. Occasionally, researchers can be sent into the courthouse to manually review and verify the records.

But is that enough?

The criminal background check is, by definition, a review of an individual's past for criminal activity. While this is certainly a good thing to check, what about the offenders who have not yet been caught and prosecuted? What of those whose personalities and psychological well being put them at risk to themselves and your employees who would be their coworkers, your clients with whom they might come on contact, and vendors or partners with whom they might interact?

The recruiting, selection, and onboarding of a new employee is a well defined process in many companies. The process may have been defined by the head of HR or by a consultant who specializes in the HR function.

The steps included in the selection process were designed to identify the desirable candidates and separate them from those who are not what the organization is looking for in a new employee. The group or individual who designed the process had this primary goal in mind when they designed the process. However, those whose job it is to execute the process are not always trained on the purpose of the process but instead on how to follow the proces. They are frequently not given much latitude in making decisions about what types of background checks to run. They are instead instructed on how to follow the process, to know which checkboxes need to be checked, and which actions to take in order to get the box checked.

The perverse consequence of this "check-the-box" approach is that organizations can hire the wrong sort of employee and consequently experience the very negative consequences they had sought to avoid. To illustrate the point, let's look at a recent news event.



You may have missed it with all of the news covering terrorist attack by Maj. Nidal Hasan at Fort Hood, TX; but there was another event in Florida involving a former (fired) employee who blamed his former coworkers for the difficulties he was encountering in his life. He returned to the location of his former employer and shot six people killing one of them.


Bear in mind that the shooter was not a recently fired employee, but instead had been let go over 2 and a half years earlier. His life had not gone well after being let go in 2007 (divorce, foreclosure, bankruptcy, periods of unemployment) and he not only blamed his former employer and coworkers for his troubles, but exacted his revenge on them.

There are not any news reports of any prior offenses, so a standard criminal background check (although necessary) would not have revealed his capacity for violence and what may result in a conviction for murder. More and better tools are needed to give light to these possibilities. That's why tools like our very own Tescor Survey should be used more widely as they can provide the opportunity to gain insight into the propensity for violence that a job candidate might have.

Identifying these troubled individuals (and not hiring them) is one of the primary goals of this type of diagnostic tool so that events like the one this past Friday in Orlando can be avoided.

Screening Security Guards

When we think of security guards, we often think of strong, husky men ready to protect both a building and the people within it. At least that's what I picture. Of course these men are stable; after all they're the ones kicking out the crazies. Recently though, the screening for security guards has been scrutinized. What if the security guards have passed all background checks with flying colors, yet they’ve never been psychologically assessed. People snap and scheme even if they have a seemingly clean background.

Recently an unarmed Newark Liberty International Airport security guard -- John Breck of Linden, N.J. -- was charged in a shooting threat against President Obama, resulting with three state felony counts. He was overheard making comments the day before Obama was due to arrive at Newark Airport. Breck had passed all the criminal background checks, but no psychological assessment had been required. Apparently under New Jersey state security guard licensing requirements, no psychological evaluation is necessary. A slightly unnerving thought if they're the ones keeping guard (Threat Suspect had passed Background Checks).

Perhaps you run a security guard business or you require security guards to protect whatever business you're in. A security guard is hired as part of a risk-management strategy; they are there to protect our assets. The problem is that most companies don't really care who the guard is, as long as they have one from their contracted security company. If we aren't the ones employing the security guards -- but rather contract this out to companies who do employ guards -- we never see their references and trust that background checks and a screening process has been performed. If contract security companies then contract to sub-contracted guards who aren't even their employees, then chances are no reference checks have been done, at least to the standard of the security company's employees. And then the business owners who have security guards protecting their premises may need protection from the guards themselves. This guard then has access to everything, even restricted areas.

When hiring a security guard for your company, be aware and ask questions. Does the security company have specific training for their guards? Have they had a background check and as importantly, have they been assessed psychologically? However if you are the security company, it's in your best interest to do these assessments and checks which will result in a reputable company with stand-up security guards.

Job-Fit Success

Looks can be deceiving; a magnetic personality can be a cover-up. We all make assumptions when meeting people for the first time. We like to categorize: outgoing, shy, confident, loud etc., but we are too complex to be labeled and sealed into a box from mere observation. Maybe it can seem harmless -- we miss out on a few friendships that we've judged too harshly too soon, but in the workplace it can be a different story. Hiring is more a process than simply observing the clothes our candidates wear or the cars they drive, and whether they smile, making many claims of their skills or cowers in the corner, mumbling their responses. While these factors are important and can be telling of certain behaviors, it's not enough. We need to go farther and make a valid prediction of job-fit success. How will this candidate's behavior, personality, abilities and values interact on the job and affect his/her work? Employment screening by way of checking criminal history and validating a candidate's skills is crucial but still falls short. A key ingredient within the employment screening process is behavioral and psychological assessments. In this way, personality and abilities can be assessed. Past behavior often predicts future behavior, but not always. Even with no criminal history, an employee can turn and sometimes a psychological assessment is the only clue.

Take the recent case of a plant employee, Derek Valdez, who's been arrested for allegedly kidnapping a co-worker in Pleasant Grove, Utah. It wasn't such a pleasant day for a 21 year-old man, starting his first day at work -- a frosting company for cakes. His trainer, Derek Valdez, offered to take him out to grab a drink, but they never stopped, passing the local convenience store and numerous gas stations. Anytime the victim protested that he wanted out of the vehicle, Valdez sped up. Eventually the 21 year-old man escaped when he ran into a local A&W, claiming he had to use the bathroom. Valdez was caught and booked into jail for investigation of kidnapping. Valdez' employer was bewildered, having had no problems with him and finding no history. Perhaps an involved psychological assessment may have provided some clues (Read the full story here).

We can't control all factors in predicting job-fit success, but a good start is a behavioral assessment. When choosing an employee screening program, don't skip this step. Are our future employees open, agreeable or perhaps a little neurotic? What is their approach to solving problems and executing a plan? Successful employee performance -- one of the goals of all companies -- is motivated by a good personality fit.