Is Employee Verification not compatible with your Business Model?

India with its large pool of qualified work pool has become the premier outsourcing destination. In the start the outsourcing model presented a unique opportunity with large profit margins. However the large profit margins attracted more players and soon the profit margins began to dwindle. The outsourcing business model in India has come to the point where all extraneous expenses have to be bled out to ensure a decent profit. Most companies in an effort to offset increasing expenses, try to maintain a low paid staff.

The low paid employee model may perceive the employee verification process a wasted effort for the following reasons:

1. The focus is on finding low paid employees that meet minimal hiring qualifications
2. There already exists a likely tendency to overlook obvious discrepancies in the resume
3. Employee verification is considered as a unwarranted cost.

There seem to be obvious pit falls in the “save as much as possible through anyways possible” business ideology. First off the market awareness that a company does not conduct background checks is more likely to attract candidates that have something to hide or carry falsified educational or professional information. Such candidates if hired may provide less than optimal output, which overtly results in other employees having to contribute more and leads to faster employee burnout and dissatisfaction.

The hiring of an unverified employee may result in creation of a vicious fast-hiring-fast-firing circle leading to higher employee turnover. A high employee turnover not only has monetary implications but also results in dampening the morale of other employees.

If hiring a low cost workforce is your business model then so be it, low cost does not default to low quality, however a quality check in terms of a thorough employee background verification can ensure that you get the most bang for your buck. The advantages of employee verification are many but the key benefits would be as follows:

1. Statistically, employees that are hired after a thorough background check are likely to stick around longer.
2. Lower employee turnover implies more stability, less loss of knowledge base and more profits.
3. New hires perceive the presence of large number of long term employees as a positive aspect about the company

It is said that for the need of a nail…the war was lost, is this scenario true for your business? Think long term, act now and win the battle of the profits.

Background Check Lessons learnt from the Struggle for the Jan Lokpal Bill

So the struggle for implementing a non-government centric Lokpal bill is in full swing. The struggle itself is an epitome for the need for transparency not only on part of individuals but also on the part of different government entities. This struggle is redefining the Indian mindset and holds valuable nuggets of information that can be integrated as part of an individual or corporate growth.

In principle a background check is needed to validate the candidate’s integrity. Integrity in terms of being able to truthfully declare educational, professional qualifications, presenting valid residential information and essentially being responsible for the actions that lead to the candidate’s current level of qualification. Also it’s imperative that the candidate should ‘under promise and over deliver’ as any inconsistency in the promises made during the background check can have adverse effects. Drawing direct parallels is the failure of Baba Ramdevji in being able to fire the nation’s imagination towards his cause. The cause though noble was smeared by evidence of secret pacts with the reigning government and a lack of transparency in the Baba’s and his aide’s background. The opaque background left Baba Ramdevji open to government attacks and for the lack of better information most of his followers became his critics.

Corporate identity is defined by the company’s employees. Both employees and companies are two ends of the same spectrum. A lack of check by companies on its hires can spell doom for the company’s progress and possibly image. The most recent example is Danish Riyaz, who was arrested by the police for involvement in the July 13 Mumbai blast and was working in an IT firm in Hyderabad. A direct comparison to the Jan Lokpal struggle would be the utter failure of the reigning government to keep a check on its party members. The involvement of its party member in umpteen cases of money siphoning has not only led to its image getting tainted but also presents a bleak future for the party’s evolution.

In many of the previous blog articles I had discussed the need for thorough background checks for individuals joining political parties. However as usual we continue to hire and believe people either due to their supposedly spectacular lineage or at face value.

It’s time to say JAGO CORPORATES JAGO…conducting background checks allows companies to hire and retain employees for a longer span of time. This means lesser losses in terms of employee attrition. Less loses to the company equals more investment by the company equals more employment equals a happier India.

Think…Process and Implement.

Updated Pricing for People Search

As mentioned in one of the earlier posts (Paid Subscriptions for People Search), we had moved over to paid model of People Search service as the entire process of building the People Search database and continuously maintaining and updating it, requires fair bit of continued efforts and associated costs. Next, we had launched a limited time period offer for Hourly Pass at Rs 19 to serve the individual buyers (as against corporate buyers who prefer Monthly and Yearly Passes).

Now, based on better understanding of our customers’ requirements, from 12th August 2011, we are moving over to the following subscription variants:
• Day (24 hour) Pass at Rs 29 – primarily for the individual consumers
• Monthly Pass at Rs 499 – primarily for corporate buyers to try out the service
• Yearly Pass at Rs 1999 – for corporate buyers

Like before, each of these variants allows unlimited searches during the period of subscription. Also, as newer data sources or updated records are added during the subscription, they are automatically included in the subscription package. As always, support will be available via email, phone or live chat.

If you are an individual who requires looking up a person or a few persons, the Daily Pass will be the best option. If you are a business and want to try out the service, the Monthly Pass will be suitable. Once your business sees value in the service after trying out the service for a month, you should consider going in for the Yearly Pass as it gives the best value and maximum discount.

As always, I look forward to your comments and feedback.

US, S&P Ratings and a Need to redefine Background Checks

Off late there is but one news that is makings the headlines over all media of broadcast – the change in the US S&P ratings from AAA to AA+ status. There are a million explanations being offered for this rating change, ranging from less than practical US debt management policies to its ‘spend now think later’ mindset. The policies and mindset did have an implication on the economic crises that have lead to the revised S&P rating but the element that has been downplayed is the role of the thousands of employees that work at the hundreds of financial institutions across the USA.

Now I am not stating that all the employee in the US financial sector have a role to play in the countries current financial crisis nor am I saying that there is lack of an effective background checks system in places for hiring new employee. On the contrary the major credit for introducing background check policies would go to the US. However it is important to look at the issue from a workforce perspective. Based on historical evidence almost all financial crises are accompanied by a set of underlying malpractices.

The question then begets that if  there is nothing wrong with the current set of background checks in place and the employees that are hired are well suited for the job then where would the limitation lie and how do we resolve it? The way I see it the background check process, like all other processes, needs to evolve to cater to the demands of the new circumstances. There has to be two sets of background checks in place, one can be labeled as the basic background check and would include the absolute necessary checks such as the education, residential and professional background checks.

Basic level of background check would suffice for markets where jobs are primarily related to back office responsibilities. However for markets where the core financial and transactional decisions are made, we would need to include an advanced level of background checks. This level should include a test to check the employee’s aptitude, ethical quotient and identification of traits in the candidate’s professional career that reflect his/her integrity.

The ideologies of a company are created and implemented by its employee. There needs to be a substantial change in the current self preservation, profit through any means corporate mindset. This mindset change can only be brought about by hiring candidates that maintain a certain level of ethical decorum. Then again I am all for companies making as much profit as possible. The suggestions that I have made are for introducing employees that bring a certain level of do-right attitude to the company. All big changes start from small initiatives, if implementing the above suggestion can bring a sigh of relief to even a small percent of 401K holders then I would presume it to be a good start.

Terror in the Work Place

Of late a new breed of terrorists have come to light. These terrorists lead a dual life. They are part of a skilled labor force during the day and spend their nights planning their next terror strike. The point in case are Danish Riyaz, who was arrested by the police for the July 13 Mumbai blast and Mansoor Peerbhoy, suspected to have a hand in another Mumbai blast case. Both the suspects had been working in IT firms in Hyderabad and Pune. As usual the companies involved claim to have done the necessary background checks along with police verifications and the police blame the companies for not being proactive and relying entirely on the police for candidate verification.

I think that rather than playing the blame game it is more critical to understand who is ultimately at loss? My take would be the company that unknowingly harbored the criminal. Take into consideration a scenario wherein you get up in the morning, and pick up the paper to read that the person that sits next to you in the office was involved in a bomb blast – what would be your reaction? After the initial surge of disbelief and fear, your anger would be directed towards the company for not being able to provide you with a safe work environment. Your experience would then be moving via word-of-mouth and before you know it more than half of the employees would want to exist the company ASAP.

Come to think of it – demanding the background check of a colleague should be an inherent right of a company’s employees.  We spend most of our adult lives at work and our colleagues are the best indicators of our mood and personality change. Though a little farfetched I think that allowing a colleague to request a post employment background check on another co-worker may help uncover aspects that may have been overlooked in the past background checks.

For all aspects of professional success it’s important to have a good harmony between the company and its employees. Then why should creation of a safe work environment and the employee and company harmony in achieving it be another issue? Think about it, it’s the duty of the company to ensure that the right people join the company. Similarly it should be the obligation of the employee to ensure that the work place remains safe and to bring to the notice of HR managers any co-worker activity than may be deemed dangerous to the work environment.

This interdependence between the employee and the company would help create a criminal free work place and would work in the advantage of the both the parties involved.