Dear Editor,
The problem with polygraph testing (lie detection) is that a lie can only be detected after it has been told or acted out. This means that a subject’s dishonesty is recorded as a finite historical occurrence. Thus the real benefit of the lie detection process becomes one of simply informing that a dishonest/illegal/inappropriate act was committed sometime in the past. In other words the subject (person being subjected to the polygraph test) first has to commit the offence before he/she can be detected as having committed it.
Assuming that the organization’s interest is better served by being able to predetermine character traits in personnel that may in time lead to transgressive conduct then there needs to be some combination of an early warning system and a continuous monitoring procedure to ensure that a company’s or an organization’s personnel do not get locked into a pattern of behaviour injurious to the organization’s best interests.
In my opinion, these ends can best be achieved by the introduction of regular/periodical psychometric tests. This is a test of the person’s suitability, or otherwise, for the job he/she holds or is applying for. Consequently these tests would be designed with the particular organization in mind, the effective psychometric evaluation will be designed around what the organization expects and wants as normal and acceptable employee behaviour particularly when the employee is under stress.
A carefully put together questionnaire will study and compare responses to multiple and recurring questions posed differently in rapid succession (to allow little time for the cognitive effort required to successfully manipulate responses, cheat or lie).
A well-designed and conducted psychometric test should tell the organization’s analyst how and to what extent a particular individual is similar to, or differs from, the organization’s model employee (a theoretical, idealistic concept defined by organizational best practice and aspects of job suitability) based on factor analysis.
In our uniformed services, for instance, psychometric evaluation could form part of the final selection process during recruitment and could also be used when considering promotion to higher more security sensitive positions. Polygraph tests can then be used to garner specific information or to verify suspicions when a critically defined problem arises.
The task is rather to filter out misfits, potential ‘bad eggs’ and miscreants before they are able to act outside the organization’s best interests and also to discourage opportunistic behaviour before it requires detection by polygraph.
It we are going to use first world methodology in refining personnel management, in crime prevention and the criminal justice system it must be all encompassing and not piecemeal.
Yours faithfully,
F Hamley Case
