Services / Hiring integrity verification
Hiring integrity verification
Remote hiring has a new failure mode: the candidate who interviews well, starts work, and is not who they said they were.
What is happening
Fraudulent job candidates have moved from a curiosity to a recurring problem in remote hiring. The tooling is cheap: a generated CV tuned to the ad, a rehearsed script, real-time assistance during technical interviews, and in the more serious cases, video manipulation or a different person entirely sitting the interview.
The motive is not always espionage. Often it is simply someone holding several full-time jobs at once, or an agency substituting a cheaper person after the interview. Either way you pay for someone you did not hire.
Who is most exposed
- Small businesses hiring remote technical staff without an in-house recruiter.
- Anyone hiring contractors through offshore agencies.
- Businesses where a new hire gets access to customer data or finances quickly.
- Teams that have never met a colleague in person.
What I build with you
- A screening protocol: what to check before you spend time interviewing, and what genuinely indicates a problem rather than just being unusual.
- Interview technique: question structures that are difficult to answer with real-time assistance, without turning the interview into an interrogation.
- Identity verification proportionate to the role, and lawful under Australian privacy obligations, which matters because over-collecting identity documents creates a different problem.
- Reference integrity: confirming a referee is a real person at a real organisation.
- Onboarding controls: what access a new starter gets in week one, and what waits until they are established.
- An escalation path for when something looks wrong mid-process.
What you get
A written protocol your team can follow without me, sized to how you actually hire. No enterprise verification platform, no per-candidate licence fee, no security theatre that makes good candidates walk away.
The protocol is designed to be defensible: it treats candidates fairly and consistently, and it collects only what is necessary for the role.
Common questions
Is this not just a background check?
Background checks confirm that a real person has a particular history. They do not confirm that the person doing your interview is the person who will do the work, or that the answers are theirs. This is about the integrity of your process, and it works alongside conventional checks.
Will this put good candidates off?
Not if it is proportionate, which is the point of designing it around how you hire. Verification steps that feel arbitrary cost you good candidates. Steps that are explained and consistently applied generally do not.
Can we not just require everyone on camera?
It helps, and it is no longer sufficient on its own. It also raises privacy questions about what you record and retain. The protocol covers both sides of that.
Related services
Start with a free check
I run a short external diagnostic and send you what I find. No obligation, and no pitch if there is nothing worth fixing.
I assess your systems and documents against published standards, identify where the gaps are, and give you the documentation to show you have addressed them. This is not legal advice.