Need of Background Verification – A Critical Analysis

Very good evening, and thank you all for joining us. A very, very hearty welcome to all of you and our eminent speaker. Elizabeth has been conducting webinars and interactive sessions besides internal for the last more than two years. We have conducted about 135 editions of webinars where invariably two speakers or two scholars give the presentation. Besides that, we have conducted interactive sessions. These sessions have been named Understand and Be Understood.

These are interactive sessions where one scholar gives his presentations and you can interact with him after his presentation and try to understand his report and be understood by him also, I said, what is your report. Today's interactive session is on the need of background verification, a critical analysis. This session shall be addressed by an ambient speaker, Dr Colonel John Cena. With these words, let me move on to introduce about NISSMAT. National Institute of Security, Safety, Management and Applied Technology, an international institute, was established in the year 1990 and started training only in the field of private security, safety, management and technology. With a passive time, NISSMAT has become a think tank organization. We have an association as on date with about 90 scholars for various streets who provide us inputs in the field of security, safety and other current topical subjects.

This was established four wings: NISSMAT Forum for conducting webinars, interactive sessions, seminars, awards functions, etc. Then this was Academy. This Foundation is yet to stop. With these words about NISSMAT, let me now introduce the chairman and moderator of this session, Captain, who took voluntary retirement from the parachute management of Indian Army at a very young age, and he started his own business. He's a businessman who is unafraid of telling the truth. I've seen him speaking on various subjects in various webinars and also interacting with so-called leaders of the industry, but he puts forth his views unofficiency, without any reservation, which he feels the truth, and nothing but the truth.

He's a thoughtful and inspiring leader and has created a number of alliances in India as well as globally. Oh yes, he was a past president and former chairman of Council of International Investigators, USA, and in the body of Malcolm Thompson Award and Kautilya Award by this Council. Having spoken about the chairman, let me now introduce the subject. There's a need of background verification, a critical analysis. All of us know that every time any business group wants to hire or imply a person, he would like to have all the available information about the person being hired, to assure himself and to ensure that he is taking the right decision in hiring the employee concerned.

The background checks involve laborious processes and components which may take quite some time to compile the information about the person being hired. Various components and steps, they take quite some time to compile the information about the person being hired, and thus the compilation is also quite an investment for the organization who is hiring. Pre-screening or background verification may include references and checks about the past employment, education, verification of his knowledge and experience, rep remounts and census is very important during the previous environment, and also a square to ascertain as to whether the employee had adequate knowledge of the governing laws of the country as well as their compliances. Due to rapid globalization and expanding international movement of manpower, background verification checks have assumed all the more importance for any organization, so as to help him in evaluating the person being hired.

It is from experience I can say, and also I have learned from some of my scholar friends, that job seekers at times may project wrong data in their application or resume, by showing proficiency and skill for which actually they are very bigger knowledge, or by showing longer period of employment in the previous company, or by indicating higher salary and prox deceived by him, or by mentioning higher positions he had been acquiring, or more important position he has had previously. Such exhibition can be verified only by background verifications. Very stringent background checks would help the employer to identify the problem before they actually happen by wrong hiring of an employee. This also improves the retention rate of the employees hired.

As an employer, any business group would be responsible to protect the interests of his business, protect the interest of other reliable staff already implied with, protect the interests of his customers, protect the customers' data and ensure legal compliances, etc. It may also require at times criminal checks regarding backgrounds. But I'm like, every company, I feel, should have a background screening policy, provide risk involved in hiring a wrong employee. Our speaker today will elaborate the need of record verification and give a critical analysis on the subject. With these words, I pass on the session to the chairman commodited on the session. Thank you very much.

Well, thank you very much. I'd like to acknowledge participants who have registered themselves for this program today. They are from the United Arab Emirates, the United States, Australia, Aruba, Canada and Belgium. As I speak, we are live on YouTube and on Zoom. The event today has been supported by Premier Shield, which is a manpower guarding company, consultancy and investigations, of which the speaker today is the executive director; India Skills, which is an assessments company, tax course and assessments platform; and JMD Cargo.

A word about our illustrious president. Our president is a Masters in English Literature and retired from the Government of India as a very senior police officer. During his tenure with the police, he raised the Rapid Action Force and was also its first Chief. He also raised the Internal Security Academy in Mount Abu in the state of Rajasthan in India, which is a central police academy. During the service he has been decorated numerous times with the President's Police Medal for Distinguished Services, the Indian Police Medal for Meritorious Services, the Police Special Duty Medal with bar, a seller medal and a number of other recommendations and rewards.

Post retirement, he's worked with the Tatas as a consultant with Tata Iron and Steel Company. He was also the chairman of the Technical Committee of Quality Control of India, which formulated the standards of rating of the private security agencies. He was involved in the development of the curriculum for private security guards training under the Security Sector and Skill Development Council. He was also the head of the committee which designed and worked out national occupation standards for the training of private security guards and qualification packs, and the national occupation standards for firefighters in India. In 2009, post retirement, he was recognized by the President of India as the Security Personality of the Year. He is an advisor to the Asian Professional Security Association, the Indian chapter, and is the honorary Director General to the centralization of private security industry in India and the session of private detectives and investigators. Mr C Paul's face is well known as a dynamic security professional and is frequently called to share his views on various subjects connected to homeland security on national news channels.

Muted, and if you have a question, please indicate to me so that I can sort of call upon you at an appropriate time. The speaker would speak for about 30 minutes, and thereafter we would have 10 to 15 minutes for question and answers. NISSMAT also has advertising the opportunities for other businesses, and should you have any requirement of promoting your own businesses, please contact the NISSMAT headquarters and we will advise you as to what we can do for you. There's a very small cost. We already have about 200,000 people on our mailing lists and we have a vast reach.

A word about our speaker today. Dr John Chanatra is an alumnus of the National Defence Academy and the Indian Military Academy. He joined the Corps of Artillery and later shifted to the Intelligence Corps. Dr John Chanatra is the current executive director for Premier Consulting and Investigations Limited. The firm specializes in background verification of employees, vendors and due diligence on companies. He currently works with banks and insurance companies, healthcare, IT, BPO and ITES sectors. He's a turnaround specialist, having turned around three companies before he joined the PCIL as the executive director. He served about 21 years in the Intelligence Corps and he's been 22 years now serving the corporate world. To listen to him, I would urge all of you to sort of be very attentive to what he says, because the subject that he speaks on is critical to all businesses. Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you Dr John Chanatra.

Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. I thank Captain for that wonderful introduction and, in fact, the overview of the background verification industry. I can assure you, ladies and gentlemen, that the background verification industry is one of the fastest growing and evolving industries in India. It has a long legacy in the United States and Europe, but it is only now that we are feeling the growth in the background verification industry. Now, as far as background verification industry, it is the process through which employers carry out due diligence, check the antecedents and the criminal records and many other things, gather information about the potential employee, and then decide whether he will fit into the company properly, will there be a cultural fit, and then it will mitigate the risk, and that is what background verification is all about.

Now, I will start with two real life stories which have happened in my life, and I can assure you at least one of the stories doesn't have a very happy ending. Here goes the first story. I came up the HR ladder. I was the head HR of one of the companies, and one day when I reached the office — I used to start a bit as to reach the office a bit early — I saw a team of police officers, and one of them was a very senior police officer, waiting at the reception. I went to them and asked them why they were here, and they said that we have come to meet your CEO. You have hired someone who has been involved in terrorist activity and it is as good as harboring a terrorist, so it's very serious.

So straight away I understood where this was going. So I gave a call to my CEO: sir, how are you feeling? Have you received the medicine which I sent? You must be wondering what the hell is wrong with this guy, I should say. Anyway, take care and be well. I just want to inform you that's a small police team which has come and they have to ask a few questions. I'll handle that, don't worry. Now the police officer, the senior one, he told me, see, this is a very, very serious thing and you are actually harboring terrorists. It's not good for you. So I said, see, I have done whatever is possible. I've carried out the background verification. I'll get you the background verification report.

So I asked for it. Police verification, nothing at all. Educational qualification, distinction holder. Employment verification, damn good. Everything was perfect. Then I told him, look, I have done my due diligence before employing this person. I had no idea where, what is this thing was, and by the way, it's a very serious problem, not for me but for you. Law and order is your mandate, it's not mine. I have done whatever is possible. And imagine, that is how we got away. Otherwise, we — you know what would have happened, so I don't have to explain it further.

Now this second story, which doesn't have a very good happy ending. I was again the head HR of a company, and we had a project running in Jalgaon, so we had to pay those workers in cash. So we used to send the imprest, about 10 to 15 lakhs, every time — going on very smoothly — and we had a very trusted employee, and the second one was an office boy, again trusted. He was sent to Jalgaon with about 15 lakhs of imprest. This is a night train. So somewhere down the line, this fellow from the finance team got down and vanished with the money. So the other fellow was in office where he panicked. He called me up. So I said, go and register a police complaint. He did that, and I called him back. I said, you come back to head office, then we'll see what is to be done.

It is here that we realized they have low background verification had been carried out. Some medicine was an imposter, his certificates were fake. John, you got muted. Unmute yourself, John. Okay, I will repeat the last sentence again. I mean, this was directly the responsibility, headache chart, carrier background verification, and I had not done it, and we had never done background verification for anyone else. Otherwise we would have found the imposter. Anyway, my CEO is a very sweet person, amen. I got it hard, but he spared me as such.

And these two stories bring out the importance of background verification. There is nothing more I need to say. If it is not done properly, just imagine the kind of trouble you can get into. And we all know, as companies, we work for years to build a reputation, and all this can be destroyed in a few minutes by the actions of one single employee. We all know that as principal employers we are all responsible for the activities of our employees, and if they get into trouble, we get into trouble. So our entire reputation is at stake, and as a principal employer we are legally liable. We all know the principle of negligent hiring, so we should all make sure that we at least protect ourselves from the legal liability as a principal employer by carrying out background verification.

How deep you need to go, it's completely your problem. Depends on what is the necessity and how much you can really afford. But my advice to all CEOs and headaches are that you must carry out background verification at least to cover the compliance. Background verification also does many other things, including finding out whether the individual is an ideal cultural fit for the company and what you can expect from him. Having highlighted the importance of background verification, I would request, Nakasha, can you please share the slides. Background verification, or BGV: criticality and importance. Next slide, please.

Have you seen what background verification is? What is it that we actually do? What are the checks? I'll quickly read them out for you: employment checks, education checks, address checks — now they are available online also — identity checks, POTUS and criminal records, code criminal records, global database six, global identity checks, drug and alcohol tests, medical and COVID vaccine checks — which was very relevant a couple of years back — reference check, credit check or civil check, psychometric tests, social media profiling, and even handwriting analysis. Many of us, I'm sure, don't believe in handwriting analysis, but at least the Germans put a lot of interest into that. Let's have the next slide, please.

What does background verification actually do? Why is it necessary? The first and the most important thing is it prevents criminal and undesirable people entering the workforce. We have all heard of the saying, a bad apple can spoil the whole lot. So the first important achievement of a background verification carried out is that it prevents criminal and undesirable people from entering the workforce. With this, the workforce stays healthy, the work environment is friendly and forgiving, the cultural fit is good.

See, all companies, depending on the industry and the kind of maturity of the company, have different cultures. Now, if you were an employee, maybe a potential employee, maybe a very, very good job, very complicated, but if he does not fit into the culture of the company — just imagine a person coming from a crude background, very a manufacturing company, he does not so easily fit into a multinational services company. So that balance can be mentaled. And most importantly, you get honest and competent employees. You check their educational qualifications, you check their performance in the previous jobs, and that is how you can get the best fit. This is a means of mitigating the hiring risks as far as a company is concerned. We all know that a person who has got very strong political leanings or unethical associations or undesirable trade union activities can get a company and help into hell of a lot of trouble. Let's have the next slide, please.

What are the advantages of the background verification being carried out? Firstly, it minimizes stress, right cultural fit, safeguards reputation, legal liability as a principal employer, it avoids the principle of negligent hiring, and it prevents the dangers which a company is exposed to. I covered all this. Next slide, please.

Now, this is one of the most important questions and most regularly asked question: how does background verification vary from entry level, middle level and senior level? Basically, there are four factors based on which the checks to be carried out on a particular individual are selected. First is the level of the employee. Is it going to be a CHO or a CEO, a corner office kind of like this thing? But that would like require a lot of details, okay. Or is he a fresher? The checks will be different. Second is the type of industry. We all know that in case it's an airline industry, you might as well not only carry out background verification, you carry out due diligence, you do everything so that you keep your passengers safe.

Third is vulnerability of the position. Now, if you are hiring a finance head, you better confirm that he does not have a very heavy financial liability and he is not tempted to do wrong things. So you will definitely carry out the civil check or the credit check, you may carry out the social media profiling, you may even carry out handwriting analysis — at least the Germans say that you are able to find out a lot of information from the graphology, as they call it. And the last is the location of the person. Does he belong to the Naxalite area or, I mean, a terrorist infected area? Maybe he has had some dealings with them, some ethical, some may be unethical. So these different, this dictate what checks you should carry out.

On one industry — generally, practically every company in a particular industry, it sets down the checks which are required to be done for a senior management, middle management and the fresher or the loan stuff. These we offer as packages. We have four or five checks in each category, and we of course give a small discount on that. Let's go to the next slide, please.

Now, challenges. In case of hiring a senior management person, the management would like to know what is the type of leadership that the person has, what are his personality traits, is he a fair and forgiving person, does he have a criminal record, are there any integrity issues in his previous exposures, is he particular on tax compliance, his credit rating, his director didn't scare it out, obviously his education — whether, if he's saying that he is an MBA and an engineer from IIT, you would like to check up whether he's actually done it. Then, by talking to his colleagues, you may be able to find out whether he's an extrovert, is he a people's person, what are his communication skills, will he bring in the right culture to the organization, what is his track record of success? He claims a lot in his CV, but has he actually done it? By carrying out one or two checks, you clearly know whether the chap has padded his CV or is it really genuine. What has been his exposure to political parties and trade unions, and how successful he has been in handling trade unions at the executive level? These little things make all the difference. You may be technically superb, but if you have a trade union and you can't handle it properly, the company is dead.

Now, as far as the challenges in middle management — so there is a complete battery of checks which are carried out for senior money, and because the decision is so critical, companies don't mind spending a bit on it. The second is the middle management. For this you don't need all — know whether what is the holding, the designation which he claims to be, what was his span of control, whether his education is clearly stated. His employment reference states will clearly give out what his track record was, whether he was terminated or deserted without fulfilling his final FNF. You see, there is a question which we ask: is he eligible to be rehired? More often than not, companies let go of people who should have been terminated by just telling them that you put in your paper, so that it doesn't affect your company. But this question exposes or brings out clearly whether that company would really like to rehire him. If he had created a major problem and still he was let off, this will indicate that there is something wrong over there. Then you further investigations, again, whether he had adverse political or trade union activity, what was his discipline display record.

And this address — we always recommend that his present address and his permanent address, his roots, should be investigated, for obvious reasons. If he runs away with something, you can get a hook on him. Can we have the next slide, please?

Now, for the freshers from campus ID, there is no need to carry out education check. This is first job, so there is no need for employment. Yeah, you would like to check up, had he become a drug addict — some of these colleges have pretty bad reputations of that — does he have a criminal record, and has he taken fake certificates? So this identity check has to be done, and the surest way of carrying it out is through government issue identity documents. Now, the level of or the depth into which background verification goes greatly depends on the industry. Industries like aviation, shipping, banking, schools, educational institutions — they have to be very, very careful, because if one incident like the Ryan International School happens, the reputation of that school or institution is finished. So we have to be very careful. The location, obviously — from where is this person coming, is there a possibility of being a nutshell or adverse training? Let's have the next slide, please.

How do political and religious leanings or trade union affect? Honestly, it shouldn't. The fundamental rights say that we can have any political leanings or religious this thing, and we are free to join trade unions. But this does not make a person ineligible for it. But before a person is hired, the senior management would like to know what is the track record as far as this is concerned. So even if he is hired, they'll always have a question mark, and they can track this employee's activity so that he does not fall back into this. This does not actually devour a person from this thing, but any extreme view or antecedents is not healthy for the company, and it can get the company to track. Especially his decisions should not be based on these factors. Next slide, please.

What percentage inflates their CVs? This is a question which is asked to me every day, almost every day. There is not a day which goes by without. Unfortunately, I don't have a correct answer to it. My experience — it varied from five percent to almost 25 percent people fake their CVs. It is increasing, unfortunately, especially with the technology available. With the Photoshop technology and things like that, an education certificate can be easily photoshopped. But I can tell you, these are easily detectable under a trained eye, and we have trained eyes in the background verification industry, so we are able to detect it and inform the employer that this is the case.

See, it is not just the education that is this thing. It brings out that this person is a liar, and he will lie for bigger things in times to come. So before you hire this person, you better be careful. It can affect the reputation, it can affect the liability as a principal employer. Can we have the next slide, please?

Now, this is the second question which most of my friends — in fact, I am delighted to see so many questions which have been flowing off from the audience, and my friends in the industry — in fact, I have tried to answer some of these questions which they have given me. So this is, I'm not the karta in this. How do you compare the background verification in the U.S. and advanced countries with India? The people who actually started background verification were the Americans, and in fact, Captain Pawan Ahluwalia was probably one of the — in fact, the first person who had an exposure, where a major company — I don't mind, gave me the company, GE — had invited him, because there was no one else doing background verification. They requested him to first learn the process and then do it, which he did very successfully, and that probably was our first client. Am I right, sir? Absolutely.

So this is a thing which we are still learning. We are still in the evolutionary state. In the United States it's very simple: feed in the SSN number, you get his entire janam kundli, as we call it — this is an Indian term, there are foreign attendees, so janam kundli means it gives the history of the person, everything right from birth till that date. So this becomes very easy. Second thing is the word check and databases are available. They are so well organized in the United States that, you know, investigation is very, very easy. Not so in India. Here you go to wrestle with, because databases are not ready. It's fast evolving, but it will take some more time. The police databases are not there, the court records are not integrated, you have to search for each court. There are many, many problems, and that is why the Indian companies do pretty well in the background verification this thing — especially they develop associations, tie-ups and friendships with the universities and the major employers, so that they get the response to their queries very quickly. Next slide, please.

How functional areas affect the background checks. See, you have different functional areas: finance, HR, operations, marketing, sales. You've got different differences. Depending on the functional area, the checks also need to change, although I must admit that most companies have not been adequately educated on this. The checks which are carried out for a finance person should be very indifferent from a check which is carried out on the HR person. For the finance person, you would like to check up whether it is civil or whatever his financial activities are. For the HR person, you need to find out what kind of a people's person is he, how good is he in training, and things like that. So they actually should be, but I must admit over here, we as an industry have not been successful in enlightening the industry as a whole into these important requirements.

Now, the second thing is repetition. How often should background verification be carried on? When should it be carried out? Basically, ideally, background verification should be carried out before the person is hired. But very few companies carry it out before a person is invited for the final interview as well. But in a large, very large percentage of cases, this doesn't get done, and it ultimately ends up after the person has joined, which is a risk, of course, but it is adequately covered by a clause in the offer letter that in case background verification is found defective, his offer letter stands withdrawn. That is not the ideal way to do it, but that is the present situation as such.

Now, the importance of carrying out the background verification periodically — I need to take some time and explain this very clear. Now, when a person is taken, we find out what is lifestyle, what is his bank balance, I mean, his credit rating. After two years, say, suppose he's a finance controller or a major chef who takes decisions, a vendor management person, when a relations person — now when you carry this out after two years, you will find that his credit rating has become much better, his style of living, it's changed drastically. So you get a hint: okay, this guy has made money on the side. And then of course it is always open to investigations, and it's a command decision which the HR and the senior management of a company will take, but it is our duty to get that information to them, because in a large company it's very difficult. It is quite possible that a person has got involved in a crime. See, having a fight with your brother-in-law for some property issue may not affect the company in a big way, but if he has got involved in ethical issues, then yes, you clearly know whether he's misused his authority and made money on the side and things like that.

The next question which I'm often asked is how serious the challenge as far as — thank you. Now, this is one of the biggest challenges that our industry is facing today. We hold what you call the personally identifiable information of individuals. As per the GDPR and across all privacy issues, the ownership of this data is of the individual, and that is why, when we carry out background verification, we have to take a consent letter before we carry out background verification, and we don't start background verification unless we have this consent. Otherwise, we are on the wrong side of the law, and you can understand, you know already, what the kind of penalties as far as GDPR and personality laws are concerned — it can go up to two million dollars, so most of us can't afford it anyway.

This brings us to very important things. The infrastructure has to be — the IT infrastructure has to be very solid. It has to be very solid. We should ensure that there is no leakage of information, and more importantly, there should be a system that we purge or destroy that information about that individual as soon as that information stops being useful to us. That means, once the background verification is completed, cleared, you don't need that information anymore. You should purge that, and that requires every company to lay down a retention policy for the documents.

Which are the checks that need to be repeated? Civil, of course, to find out the credit worthiness, which I covered. Crime — it can happen anytime. Ideally, it is not practicable to do it every day, but ideally we should say that the important checks should be repeated every year. There are chances that a person may go deep under financially because of some large losses in the stock market and things like, through which there is a temptation to make money on the side. Next slide, please.

How do you ensure cultural fit? Here I'd like to tell you a small little story. I was leading a background verification in this thing, and we had a very, very senior person who was a star performer. He was hired. We carried out a social media profiling, and in that we found that a lot of pictures on Facebook industry showed a lot of partying and drugs — I mean, likely drug exposure and all that. This doesn't make a person ineligible, because there is no evidence again, and he was hired, although in the social media profile we had written this. And he joined the company and he remained a star performer. He was an excellent performer. But almost one year down the line, the director HR gave me a call: John, just come over to me immediately. I said, what the hell, I said, tell me what it is. He said, I can't tell you on the phone, you come over. So I drove to him, and then I found out that this guy had become an alcoholic and was heavily into drugs. Again, he continued to be a star performer. We only had to help the company get him into a de-addiction center. But the very fact that this was detected, and this gave guidance to the HR what to do about it — otherwise, it would have been more difficult.

So the social media profiling is a very, very important tool that has now been developed. We have other important tests, like the psychometric tests. We do a couple of psychometric tests. This gives the psychological profile or the propensity of a person to do different things. This gives a very big indication of how he will perform in the company, and many companies do carry it out even before the background verification is carried out, even during the early selection process also. Psychometric — people who don't do it depend on us to get this carried out. Next slide, please. Thank you.

Now, these are questions which our friends have asked. Employees have numerous rights that are protected under the Fair Credit and Reporting Act, including a right to privacy. This is probably a question by a person based in the U.S. Unfortunately, we do not have a fair credit rating act in India, but we have privacy laws, and the latest privacy law is yet to be enacted. So we have to take every provision to do this. It is very true that the privacy acts are very stringent, and that is why we carry out the background verification only after getting the consent letter signed by the individual. We do not proceed otherwise. Otherwise, we are on the wrong side of the law, and I wouldn't like my company to face a 2 million dollar penalty anyway.

This background verification is done after joining or before joining? Ideally it should be done before joining, but a very vast percentage — actually it gets done only after joining because of the exigencies of service and operations. It has to be done, but as I told you, this problem is circumvented by having a clause in the appointment letter or the offer letter that in case the background verification comes adverse, the offer stands withdrawn. Can we have the next slide, please?

Even enrolled employees may turn into red after six months or one year of joining. They may indulge in dual employment, financial frauds. In fact, nowadays the moonlighting law is likely to come in, I believe, where it allows people to work in two places, which in my personal opinion may bring in a lot of conflict of interest, but that is left to the wisdom of the legislators. It is likely to come in very soon, I believe. The last question is, can HR share background checks with the hiring manager? If the hiring manager belongs to the same company, it is not illegal to share the background verification, because you have taken the consent data. But if you are employing an external recruiter who's outside the company's rolls, it becomes illegal to share it. For that, you will have to take another consent from the individual. Next slide, please.

Okay, these are the questions which have been asked, and which I wanted to — but in fact, that is all that I have to present. I will hand you back to the chairman. Probably we will have a question answer session.

Oh, thank you, John. Thank you very much. I begin by asking you a very simple question: what is the difference between a background check and a reference check? A very, very important question that dwells in the minds of many, many people in the correct hierarchy. Background verification is a set subject. Reference check is only one of the checks within the background verification gambit. What actually happens in the reference check is that there are a number of questionnaires, questions, which are posed to a reference which is given by the candidate himself. The reference, or the phone number or the email, is given by the candidate himself. You call that person or email him and get the details.

Questions — in fact, many questions are there. What kind of a person is he, what is his personality. I must admit over here that, you know, this is kind of in the gray area. A person may have an enmity with a guy, so he may give an adverse report. A person may be his personal friend or brother, he'll give a positive report. But when you take two or three, the matter becomes very, very clear. So this is a gray area, but over time we have found this out to be a very, very relevant check. Have I answered your question, sir? Yeah, absolutely.

And John, one of the things that you did mention was, you know, people who live beyond their means. You know, your salary is X, but your living style is 2X. So that is a matter of concern for every industry today, but this is an area where a lot of propagation is required for the senior officers in the organization to get used to the fact that they need to check the living styles of people in due course of time. How do you think it can get promoted? Because it is not a practice that is being followed nowadays.

Absolutely. So this is a very, very delicate point, and an HR head should think twice before actually doing it, because you may lose the trust of employees, okay. So that is a negative factor, and I have often wrestled with this problem as a headaches. But I will tell you, the collective information or the knowledge that is acquired by a company will sooner or later bring out these things. We don't live in isolation in our lives. It becomes possible to identify such chaps, and when you repeat a check, like the civil check or what you call reference checks, these things do come out, okay. And we recently launched a service called the exit interviews. A lot of information is gained from the exit interviews as well. So this is a delicate point, I admit that.

At what point of time do you carry out the exit interview? Immediately as the employee is leaving, or would you sort of leave it for 15 or 20 days after he's exited the company? In fact, my personal opinion is — although there is no set down rule — my personal opinion is that the exit interview, to be effective, should be done after 30 or 40 days, after the full and final is cleared, so that a person doesn't have any legacy or baggage when he answers these questions. And these questions are very, very important. It finds out the work environment and the health and the cultural fit of the company. So these are very, very important. My personal opinion is that it should be done about 30 to 40 days after.

One of the things that, you know, also comes to mind is, when you do an exit interview, some organizations have requested us in the past to sort of check out as to where has the person joined, which is the company that he's joined now. It gives a lot of direction to an organization also as to why the person left company A and joined the company B, if it is in similar domain. Now, this is actually invading the privacy of a thing, and according to me it is unethical. It is unethical to ask this question. However, if during the exit interview the candidate voluntarily brings it up, there is nothing wrong in it. President, what is your opinion? Why is it unethical if you want to know as to why, when an employee leaves you and joins somewhere else, what is unethical in it?

Kindly unmute yourself, Mr Sipat Singh, please unmute yourself. Hello. Yes, now you're okay. In agreement with the chairman or moderator, tend to say that the exhaustive list you have given is not possible, you know, to be undertaken for one individual unless there is a verification policy of particular the area, and for the functional requirement, as you say, and the company asked you that these days. Because otherwise, psychometric tests, it says, is a very, very different and entirely a separate sort of subject. How will you understand, how will you be able to get the psychometric test of Windows you're done before recruiting him? B, you know, the principal employer, or even principle of fire, you are only a person who is going to verify. Here the verification check has been asked by a principal employer to you, and in that verification the principal employer should have highlighted that these are my requirements, and then you go into it.

Otherwise, I am of the view that particularly in the area of police crime investigation, crime and background intelligence background, it is very, very difficult process. You refer the case where police in the north is — refer a case to somebody else, critique months before you get the report. You have to ultimately send some people to meet the local police station, there you have to send some people to the local numbers are there, you have to benefit the local jokes are there. It does not gel. All these tests are very important, they're very, very exhaustive and very exhausting that way. But I think, practical point of view, I agree, general high level, middle level, this is all right, general. But elaborate on each and every test is not possible within the framework of your business. What money you get for background checking? What money is a principal willing to give you? And Visa is elaborate you have gone.

So I am of the view that the policy of the company should be — when we are smoothly, we are the specialist in background verification, we lost the company, what are their problem, what are their main things, where they've orchestra, then we emphasize on that. In general we have to say so others. So my point, sir, is that all these are very, very in this sort of verification which we have said, it will take you a year or six months. Unless you are psychologist also, you are a psychometrics also, you have water and knowledge of law, you have knowledge of crime, you have to get it checked out from somebody as a background verification companies. So my submission is that the labyrinth is fault, because something I give you a case for background verification, you are a background verification as well, then how will you go into all these micro level states?

So may I answer this question? John, I just want to step in here. Will be going to — let's say you want to get your blood tested. We don't get all the blood tests. You choose — the doctor tells you what he wants. Similarly, what John has given out is a list of what is possible to do, and so the principal employer decides as to which of these things he wants to get done. So it is a choice that the HR department of an organization makes, as to what he may want or what he may not want. However, the list is exhaustive. It is good to know as to what is possible to get done. What you decide to get done is a separate issue.

Precisely what I am saying is, that's all right. I've said, in micro level everything is very important, and what should I get done, important or not, that is a point of view of the receiver, that will be his policy. We have to ask if, as a journalist, he doesn't get the broadcast, whether broadcast is for cancer, whether blood test is for some other disease, that will go to the specialist. So what we are giving all the laboratories saying for the criticality — there is absolutely critical criminal background, yes, very critical; the psychological class, yes, very critical; psychometric test, yes, very critical. That ultimately it comes to the same, now that the principal employer, the person who is —

Absolutely. So as a background screening company, John's company works for employers, and therefore the principal employer has to decide what he may want for a particular thing. And in today's world, they've all categorized themselves as to which is the level of employee which requires what background checks for that particular category. So I hope it isn't also nice to the finances, because that is up to them. You see, the principal employer decides as to how much money he wants to spend. It is for John to execute what the principal employer may want. So you see, some tests may be expensive, some tests may be inexpensive. Like, I am personally aware that John has psychologists working for him. Should there be somebody who wants a psychometric test done, we refer that to that person, and he carries out the psychometric test in consonance with the requirements of the principal employer.

Similarly, drug testing. Drug testing today has become a very important subject for a certain category of employees. Now, you can have a five panel drug test, you can have a nine panel drug test, you can have a 13 panel drug test. It just depends upon what is the choice of the principal employer, for what purpose. So he may decide to go in for a 13 panel check, you may decide to have a five panel check. The cost is different. So the principal employer decides as to what is the cost and what is not the cost. John, would you like to explain this? Because I just thought that was my perspective.

Absolutely, sir. Actually, in fact, I would say that, see, background verification is not a full-fledged in-depth investigation. It is just an indicator to find out whether further investigation is required or not. If a person has got a court record entry, if there is an FIR against, a case against him, you need to find out more about it. You carry out a drug check to find out whether there is some exposure, then you find out how deep he is into it. Maybe the HR department still goes ahead and has an alcoholic — that is their choice. The command decision is this. Now, more often than not, being an expert in this field, I often advise my clients that, see, this is your risk profile, we have prepared a risk template for you, these are the cases, these are the checks that you should be doing. It is up to him to make a pick about — okay, out of the ones you have recommended, this, this, this and this I will select, the others I will do later. So the money is his, his affordability. He knows, I don't know it. So this is a mutual discussion, and we periodically update them. Like, if we develop the capability of carrying out graphology or handwriting test, we tell them, see, this is available with us now. Okay, if the hair test for drug abuse becomes available to us, which is at the moment available only in the U.S., we will let them know that this is available to us, and it is up to the principal employer to take his decision.

In the case of multinational companies today, they are also insisting that the subcontractors that they use in the country also comply with the same regulations that they would want to use. For example, let us say company A is a U.S. company and it has employed company B in India as a subcontractor. They have company A also in India, but they are using a subcontractor B. The subcontractor B can be asked to carry out the same tests that company A would like to do for the employees that they take on in their company for the purpose of company A. For all intents and purposes, the complete A is given to company B, and the company B requests down. So this is — company B is not a principal employer that way. So who pays the money to John is the principal employer for jobs. If company A mandates to company B that you please go to John and get these tests done, is concerned, he is getting the mandate from the company that is giving him the work, and who will pay him eventually — what is the relation between company B and company A is something that the A and B will sort out amongst themselves. So I'm clear from your point, but I mean, I only wanted that, according to the principle and priority, I use many time principles, the one who would have forced to Mr John, or Dr John.

Everybody — Deepak, you had a question to ask? Yeah, I want to ask John one aspect. John, you know, this organization which you, Pawan and me have come from, we have a very stringent intake system. You're talking psychometric — at the time of joining, the SSB itself, the psychologist has gone through us. Now, over a period of time, an officer does administrative job, HR job, operational job, is handling various tactical, operational aspects. But unfortunately, because of the pyramidical structure that we have, very large number of officers of the rank of colonels get left behind. It's not because of lack of knowledge or lack of capability, it is because of the structure that we have, the organization. When these officers look for a job, you know, nowadays, moot point — someone said you may have a detailed CV made, some people say you have a CV of not more than one page. A chap has put in 22-23 years of service behind him at various levels, be it staff, instructional or operational. He wants to project himself. How do you like help those fellows? Very large number of officers leave with the rank of a colonel, and colonels around colonels. How do you help those people getting a job?

I've got a confession to make. I've been head HR for many companies, and this is what I admit. I tell people who are applying, making CVs: please write whatever will influence the decision of the recruiter to hire you in the first 10 lines. Honestly, as a headachar, throughout my tenure I have not read beyond two pages of a CV, and your eyes get trained, you know exactly what to look for. But ideally, I advise students whom I teach to put the important stuff which affects the hiring decision in the first 10 lines. No one reads beyond that, okay. That's a good — my confession may not be true, but just the volume, you know, prevents you from going into something.

The other thing is, as a background screening company, he does not write CVs. The CVs are given to him. Yeah. So his job is not to help people get a job. His job is to sort of screen the people who are wanting a job. No, but the fact is, you see, that's exactly what John has mentioned. There's dichotomy in the system. Like, what manpower planning system — they made up bloody brochure on making a CV, blanket, in 10 pages. So people follow that, and then HR people say there are not more than two pages. Now there's a dichotomy. A chap is totally confused and he doesn't know what to do. This point has to be told to the people concerned.

Yes, I would like to add one point over here. So here, the background verification company is only a fact finder. The command decision is not enough to you. I may give five negative things about a company, but the head HR and the CEO, he wants that guy. This is the information that the candidate has revealed, this is the truth. My mandate stops there. Deeper can the problems of investigations — it is facts as found. So I got a point. Yeah. So you don't make up the facts, you just present the facts as they are found. The decision is ultimately of the principal employer, whether he wants to hire the person with the negatives that have been found or the positives that have been found. It is entirely his choice. Roger, got the point. Okay.

Any other point? Anyone? Anyone would like to ask a question, please raise your hand so that I can — all right, if there are none, I hand you over back to the — yes, please unmute yourself.

Yeah, thank you so much. Let me first lower my hand here so that it doesn't stay there. So just one — a very quick one. First one, of course, excellent presentation, Dr John, and already had Pavan not responded — I was actually reaching to respond to Mr Sipa Singh on that, that this is what is available. So he just was presenting what is available in the industry, and not that everything has to be done. And a quick one to Mr Deepak Mehta's point. I have hired hundreds of people for very sensitive positions over the last my 25 years at international level, and have also been myself interviewed for some positions. We say 60 to 90 seconds — this is the absolute, in golden letters written, that your CV will draw attention only for 60 to 90 seconds maximum. So make it — you can still make CV of 10 pages, but if a person is flipping over within 60 to 90 seconds, it should be visible what you want to highlight, and it should be in line with the job profile asked. Many times we have seen people using stock CV, and sometimes they forget to even amend one sentence in the cover letter which they had used for the previous position, and they forget to change the name of the organization even. So such person may be brilliant or outstanding, cannot expect to be even considered for the next round. That was on that.

Now coming to this verification. I don't do verifications, but I have done like scores of investigations resulting from those, the background educational one, where they fail. Many times HR simply — I can quote so many anecdotes, but I won't go into all. One case I investigated in a country — I won't name, one of our neighboring countries, very sensitive place and all that. I went there. This man was submitting educational qualification depending on the job. So one CV has Masters in Statistics, next job after three years he has Masters in Economics, then he has — so all these degrees. Somebody sent an anonymous complaint to HR. Anonymous. HR asked the university to give verification. Universities never respond. So then they came to investigations, then to take it as investigation. Then of course I managed to go there, and physically, we finally just got that man dismissed. So people do create a lot of that.

But now I'm coming to a bit of your industry — it's not my, I mean, verification industry. Sometimes they fail to do, after writing one letter to that, that okay, is this person, was he in this institution? I'm giving my own example. I have been IPS officer. Recently in USA they shortlisted me on the Board of Regents for the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, the global, at a global level. They selected six persons, and then it was to be put to voting. They did my background check, of course, after my initial concurrence — they have to take it. All those companies individually also got my signature. But come, cutting the story short, everywhere, all over the world, the verifications came through very quickly. The only verification, from my childhood till my today's day, which could not reach them, was Indian Police Service — my job in Indian Police Service, in CBI. I was like every day on TV. Anybody — I'm not naming the company, I don't know if one of those companies had this sitting in this audience. So what they write is, they write to Indian Police Academy, you know, NPA, National Police Academy, and then they say that, oh, we have written and no response came. Verifying an IPS officer's service and the training in that — put my name, go to NPA website, you can do so.

This is where many of these — I don't know how much money they must have taken from that U.S. firm just to verify my this service, and they failed to do that. Their reply — I mean, if you just go on website you can see, you put my name plus CBI, you get hundreds of entry, you put my name plus Interpol, you get all of that, where gives my background, how many cases, I used to be invited, I won Prime Minister's essay cup competition, Home Ministry's essay competition. But still, this company — I have their reply, which is from us they sent me. It says that this verification is currently pending, which remained pending till they closed that. Multiple requests have been made to verify this education directly from the institution, however no response has been received. The information will be forwarded if received. And it was never received. Will you call it failure of the institution not to provide information, or the failure of verifying company, like one of these companies? Which one, you say, it is failure of whom? Thank you.

I can say a lot, I mean, as on this one — identity theft, so many other things. But I think on this — is it not failure of that company which is claiming to be a very global international company in India, operating from one of the states? Because they claim, if you go on their website, they have everything possible, as one of the — we are a professional background verification company that adopts modern technology. Thank you so much. With this I close. Thank you so much for your wisdom on this.

C Paul, sir, I hand it back to you to close the session, please. Thank you very much. We had very elaborate discussion already, and quoting from John's words — ultimately, in one of his sentences he said it should not be judgmental. The difficulty is that when such verification take place and the inputs are not proper or appropriate party road, then sometimes you want to become judgmental and give some view which affects the career of a person. Secondly, that instead of using the functional area, there are specific organization specific, but some organization may have various functions, and therefore the functional area and the policy about the functional area is much more important for the company who is doing the verification. They should first ask for — you may be having 100 tools, but they will require just about two, three tools.

For example, psychometric tests. When we conducted, permanent, you realize that when we got in the schools, they wanted psychometric presses, the spectrum of staff, because there was co-education system. They wanted a staff which is positive, or certain cases of sexual harassment and institution — they wanted psychometric rest in respect of that particular school. So the reason for psychometric test also has to be known for you, because the psychometric test is not only compared to A, B, C, or your mindset, whether they're just given that segregation for each other required.

And the last set, but last on it — I think the location also, as you said. Your location, you know, nowadays is almost international, and some people may be terrorist affected today, tomorrow they're not returning, this affected, and they become very peaceful. Under the circumstances, again, it's a question of asking a particular place as to whether he has some background or not. As well as the two examples you quoted — I definitely agree with you that there can be, definitely, in one case, your seven decades of complete failure, you are going to; another case, it was success. So my point is that when we are having the process of backup verification, particularly, I feel, some practical point of view, we have to have some verification from a particular area where they were living or they were employed and all, because that gives you much more concrete. You may go to — I agree, you may go to the digital identification and all, but the objectivity or correct information which was provided by the person who were living with him or were posted there, that is much more important.

With these words, I thank you once again for giving a very elaborate, with all nuts and bolts which is to be implied for such a verification, and I'm sure the delegates must have enjoyed and also learned a lot from your presentation. Thank you very much. Our next webinar, next interactive session, has been depicted now: Background Verification — Essential for Healthy Cultural and Safe Work Environment. The angle is different in this case — not what is a background verification, but background verification is essential for healthy culture and safe work environment. This is going to be held on 4th of February, same time, 7 pm, on Saturday, 4th February. Please make a note of this and be Visa.

This is a second series, and the presenter is again Dr Natra, because he had asked for a very elaborate session and we wanted to divide into two — one particular reason of criticality point of view, and the second particularly from healthy culture and safe environment. This is due on the 4th February at 7 pm. Again, it's about one hour session. I'll request the delegates to join us on that date, and please also come prepared with some questions. We should arouse interest of the presenter so that he also is able to give something. Fear presentation you may not enjoy, but if you ask questions, it's much more enjoyable interactive session. With these words, I thank you once again, the same speaker, and thank you all the delegates who are present. Thank you very much.

It was indeed a very interesting and very, very scintillating session. Thank you very much, everyone. Thank you so much, sir. Thank you all. Thank you again, John. Thank you very much. I think very nice talk, and can you share this, sir? Sorry, is the presentation available? Thank you. All right, thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you.