December 19, 2016 5:21:59 pm
A four per cent decrease has been noted in the overall level of shortcomings and discrepancies in the last three fiscals in the details provided by aspirants about themselves while applying for a job, a report has said.
The Annual Trends Report on Background Screening in India, published by AuthBridge, has claimed that the general, comprehensive level of misinformation or inconsistencies in the information job seekers provide was marked at 10.29 in 2015-16 where in 2016-14, it was 14.13 per cent.
AuthBridge collected data for the report by conducting checks from 2013-14 to 2015-16. “While striving to improve the quality of hires and enabling trust in relationships, we are now seeing a significant decline in the overall discrepancy levels in information shared by candidates,” AuthBridge founder and CEO Ajay Trehan said.
Trehan also said that technology is motivating background screening delivery and analysis leveraging multiple sources and techniques and is profoundly changing the way relationships and alliances are created.
The report looks at discrepancies in four major areas -employment, education, reference and address.
At 10.06 per cent, the employment area noted the highest inconsistency among all other areas. From specific sections, banking and financial services sector showed most number of inconsistencies in 2015-16.
Discrepancy in the Internet/e-commerce/dotcom industry went up by about 60 per cent in 2015-16 compared with 2014-15 to 14.75 per cent.
The report said tenure and designation/salary are the most manipulated data by candidates while sharing their employment details while fake documents and university/courses are the two major reasons for education anomalies.
For more recruitment news, click here
📣 The Indian Express is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel (@indianexpress) and stay updated with the latest headlines
- The Indian Express website has been rated GREEN for its credibility and trustworthiness by Newsguard, a global service that rates news sources for their journalistic standards.