Reference no: EM131219739

A good consultant

You are the Executive Director of HR for Consulting Associates. Recently, David O'Rouke was employed through the Brisbane office of the firm to provide change management advice to the company's clients and to generate new business. David was one of 4 candidates shortlisted for the job and the job advertisement called for someone with expert knowledge and skills, an appropriate masters qualification and listed a PhD as highly desirable.

The interview panel consisted of Richard Palmer - Partner Management Consulting Services, Denise Williams- Partner Forensic Services and Zara Saleh, a recruitment officer from your HR Department who was in her first week with this firm. (She was asked to fill in at the last minute due to illness of the original HR Representative, Gill Emerson). With the exception of Zara all of the partners had undertake CA's recruitment training on interviewing technique and behavioural interviewing.

David's CV was impressive with a range of jobs with other consulting firms, mostly overseas, and he listed his qualifications as master's degree from an Australian University and PhD from an overseas university

The normal practice was that all shortlisted candidates would have police background checks completed and a review of CV claims and a discussion with referees. Whilst he background checks were completed and David's revealed no previous criminal record, the review of CVs was not undertaken due to the illness of Gill Emerson.

The panel recommended David to be appointed and he duly was some 6 months ago. The feedback from Richard Palmer in Brisbane is that David's work has been excellent and he has delivered several presentations that have brought in new client (lucrative ones) to the firm. Richard also described David as a good ‘bloke' who has fitted into the culture of the firm very well.

Whilst reviewing HR practice last week you noticed that the CV checks were not completed and for the audit and due diligence purposes you asked that this be done for David.

You have just received a report from one of your staff that says whilst David did have a masters from an Australian University, there is undeniable evidence that David purchased his PhD on the internet from a non-legitimate University in the Caribbean. Furthermore, some of the positions he listed with overseas firms have proven to be false.

The firm's managing director has asked you to prepare a presentation that outlines:

What mistakes were made in the recruitment process?

What are the recommend strategies for dealing with David in a way that will protect the interest of the firm and not cause any undue embarrassment?

What discipline measures should be taken in this case?