If they lied to get the job, they've demonstrated a willingness to be dishonest for personal gain. What will they do on the job if an opportunity presents itself?
~Everybody lies to get jobs. The interview process demands it. "Why do you want to work here?" being a common one. In most situations you can't answer that honestly without being rejected, and there are other similar, very-common questions. You're supposed to be socially-aware enough to tell the right sort of lie. 10:1 you've repeatedly been lied to regarding "tell me about a time that..." questions, if you ask those, and had no idea it was a lie (though you may have caught, or suspected, some poorly-done ones). Why? The good story will beat the truth every time, unless you've lucked into your truth also being a good story. At a minimum most of the ones that give a good impression have had a lot of editing and embellishment.
I do agree that outright fabricating credentials is a worse lie, but the job market and interview process is morally corrosive by nature.
I totally agree with this, In particular with the typical "Why do you want to work for this company?" or "Why are you leaving your current job?"
The honest and most common answer "I want more money" makes you look greedy and you had to come up with a more acceptable excuse, Like "Your product is very interesting", "I'm "Looking for new challenges".
kind of like the initial steps of dating where you kind of know what the other is up to but you don't talk about it until you had evaluated each other and decided that "yeah I want to be your girlfriend" or "yeah I want to hire you" and then you finally can take your mask off and talk with honesty.
There is no need to lie though. "I didn't feel that my compensation matched my responsibilities, for e.g. ---- "
These are just normal human things. Like for e.g. How to give negative feedback to a direct report, while not discouraging them to keep trying harder and motivating them. You need to have tact and be strategic in how you approach that conversation.
The common retort "Well I just want it straight without sugar coating, corporate speak sucks!" doesn't address that not everyone is the same, and you need to apply a layer of human sensitivity to certain types of conversations. The more you know someone the more you will be familiar with their mental state, and the more freely you can say things without this 'emotional handshake'.
You can answer most 'tell me about a time' questions without outright lying. A question can be taken at face value, or you can recognize the intention behind the question, and rehearse an answer that goes to the heart of the issue. The concern from the other side is perhaps a reassurance that the candidate can think critically, or how they work in a team, or handle conflict, etc.
> The good story will beat the truth every time, unless you've lucked into your truth also being a good story.
I'd argue this is about story telling capability. Telling a story well, is an art. Chances are you've seen a number of stand up comics tell an otherwise factually boring story - but somehow made it hilarious. This is why there is the "they were so funny when they said 'foobar'....guess you had to be there."
The problem here though is now your interview process is evaluating stroytelling skills rather than job skills per se - well unless you're looking to hire a good storyteller. On the other hand, interpersonal communication is important...
> What will they do on the job if an opportunity presents itself?
What kind of opportunity are we talking?
I think it highly depends on the circumstances. Job performance and lying to gain entry don't necessarily correlate. The "dishonest for personal gain" argument goes out the window in this profit-driven world. If anything, it's encouraged with the precedence already being set by the employer market itself. Employers will cheat candidates out of whatever they can get away with; that's the norm not the exception.
If a candidate has more work experience than their would-be college educated peers, you've effectively shut out a valuable asset for no good reason. Maybe they've assessed the position and determined it's an arbitrary barrier for getting hired, but honesty would be far too risky. If they passed your interview, then either your education requirement is unnecessary or your interview process sucks and you're allowing bad candidates in regardless. Maybe this trait of fabricating education credentials means they're actually resourceful and understand risk assessment?
FWIW I'm a high school drop out, no degree. I work in FAANG and I'm going on 17+ years of work experience in tech. Lack of degree has never been an issue for me. If I see the requirement there, I still apply and each time the employer has waived it. I'm just playing devils advocate here.
