The core problem with document-based screening
A convincing degree certificate, experience letter, relieving letter or salary slip can be produced in an afternoon for a few thousand rupees. There is a functioning market for exactly this, and the output is good enough to pass visual inspection.
What cannot be fabricated is the institution's own record, the former employer's HR confirmation, or the awkward fact that a listed previous employer has no record of the candidate at all. Verification means contacting the source. Everything else is document review.
Red flag 1 — The designation gap
The single most common discrepancy we find. The person worked at the company and the dates are accurate, but the designation is one or two grades above what the record shows.
It survives screening because the employer confirms employment and dates, and nobody asks the follow-up question about title. Ask for the designation on record, not just confirmation of employment.
Red flag 2 — Dates stretched across a gap
Employment dates extended by three to six months at either end to cover a period of unemployment, a dismissal, or a short job the candidate would rather not disclose.
Look for the pattern rather than the individual date: employment histories where every role ends in the same month the next begins, with no gap anywhere across a decade, are worth verifying carefully.
Red flag 3 — The reference who is not a manager
A reference contact whose phone number is personal, who is unexpectedly available, and whose account is enthusiastic but non-specific.
The check is simple and rarely done: verify that the reference holds the position they claim at the organisation, through the organisation rather than through the number provided.
Red flag 4 — The incomplete qualification
A course begun but not completed, described as completed. This is more common than outright fabrication and considerably harder to spot, because the institution, the programme and the dates are all genuine.
Verification with the institution should confirm conferral of the degree, not enrolment. These are different questions and institutions answer whichever one is asked.
Red flag 5 — The undisclosed business interest
A directorship or substantial shareholding in an entity the candidate has not disclosed. For roles involving procurement, vendor selection or anything with a conflict dimension, this matters more than most of the checks typically run.
An MCA search by name takes minutes and is almost never done.
Designing a process that works
Scope to the role rather than running a fixed package. A warehouse supervisor and a finance controller carry different risks and should get different checks.
Obtain written consent — it is good practice, increasingly expected under India's data protection framework, and it makes institution verification substantially easier.
Verify at source for anything material. Add a directorship search for any role with a conflict dimension. And require the report to state the basis for each finding, so you can see which conclusions rest on a document and which on a confirmation.
Talk it through before you commit to anything
If this guide leaves you unsure whether your situation needs an investigator, the quickest way to find out is a short call. It is free, and you will get a direct answer — including when the answer is that nothing should be commissioned.