Police talk tactics translate to the office, finds Diana Clement
When Jonathan Davison watches Border Security or Cops with Cameras on television, he can't help but think of ways the officers involved could improve their interview skills.
It's not surprising. Davison specialised in interviewing criminal suspects and went on to train other police officers from Britain and Europe.
These days,
thanks to falling in love with New Zealand and finding that he'd take a pay cut to be a police officer here, he runs a company that teaches interviewing skills to corporates. His clients range from insurance investigators to human resources staff.
You'd think from watching TV that bullying was the way to get accused people, and sometimes victims and witnesses, to talk. But that's not the case any more, says Davison.
Several high-profile UK court cases collapsed in the 1980s, sparking the police hierarchy to do something about officers' interview skills. Those cases included "the Birmingham Six" - alleged IRA members accused of pub bombings in Birmingham, but freed from prison after their convictions were quashed thanks to inadmissible confessions.
One chief constable at the time, Michael Todd of Greater Manchester Police, famously said that his officers could learn a lot about interviewing from watching TV programme The Bill.
Todd went on to put his money where his mouth was and set up one of Europe's top interview skills training centres. "Investigative interviewing" replaced "interrogation". And building rapport replaced bullying.
Manchester, where Davison was based, led the way - eventually setting up the Stephen Oake Interview Suite - a training facility for talk skills - which Davison taught at before moving to New Zealand for a better work-life balance.
Bullying accused people is an absolute no-no these days - and not for PC reasons. The British police's "cognitive interview model" - the one Davison teaches to corporates - helped them get to the truth faster. Instead of shouting and asking leading questions, interviewers use an approach that allows them to remain open-minded and to evaluate the information obtained from interviewees, which can then be tested against the facts gathered in an investigation.
Police interviewers now build a rapport with suspects and witnesses and allow them to talk, with suspects sometimes incriminating themselves in the process.
One classic example of this approach's success, says Davison, was the Soham murders, where caretaker Ian Huntley was initially interviewed as a witness in the case of two 10-year-old girls who had disappeared. He turned out to be their killer.
Davison calls that the "chips and beans" example - one that can be used by investigators here - be they working for the IRD, Customs, police, insurance or other fields where it's necessary to find out the truth.
In that case, the police interviewers listened to Huntley, the last man to see the two schoolgirls alive, say he'd fed them chips and beans. Still thinking he was a witness, Huntley was asked what brand of beans and how the chips had been cooked. He didn't know, and when police found no rubbish at his home, they knew something was afoot.
The structure of an interview is incredibly important. Instead of banging a file of papers on to a desk and rifling through them for facts, for example, a modern interviewer will have key points on one piece of paper.
Becoming a good interviewer, says Davison, involves a number of techniques. British police developed the PEACE interviewing model, which involves:
P - planning and preparation;
E - engage and explain;
A - account;
C - closure;
E - evaluation.
Using this structure, the interviewer starts gathering background information and explaining the process of the interview.
Interviewing isn't necessarily intuitive. One mistake new interviewers make is not being aware of their "inner editor", which means that our brains automatically:
* Delete or omit information;
* Integrate - mix information;
* Generalise;
* Construct - assume or infer.
It's also important for interviewers to understand how the mind processes information and what constitutes good questioning behaviour.
Lying to police, recruiters or anyone else isn't easy, says Davison. And being aware of the hurdles a liar has to overcome is important. A liar has to anticipate being questioned, create a storyline, cope with being questioned and - the biggest hurdle - remember what they have said so far. Huntley's storyline didn't include the brand of baked beans, and when he made one up, he couldn't remember it.
Another problem that inexperienced interviewers have is that they try to bite off too much at once - meaning that crucial information can be lost. Instead the Soham interviewer, says Davison, spent a considerable period of time just discussing chips and beans with Huntley - which was crucial in identifying the witness as a suspect.
By jumping on the first inconsistency, interviewers don't give the interviewee the opportunity to finish their story - which may reveal more inconsistencies, says Davison.
It's also common for modern interviewers to use what's called a "questioning tunnel" which starts with "tell me, explain and describe" questions, the answers to which are always summarised back to the interviewee. These are followed up with the five Ws: what, when, where, who and why (and how).
A large proportion of suspects readily make admissions. But if the interview is closed early because witnesses clam up, there is no opportunity to get the full story. That may be the same for a tax fraudster, illegal importer, CV cheat or bad tenant.
The interview skills training offered by Davison may sound one-sided on the surface. But there are definite benefits for both sides, says Insurance Council of New Zealand chief executive, Christopher Ryan, whose members are likely to take the training.
Good interview skills and summarising information back to interviewees helps customers understand the policies they are buying and their need to provide all relevant information to the insurer at the time of taking the policy out. It can even help in the sales field by helping salespeople better understand their customers' needs.
Other business benefits include:
* Better leads from interviews containing more relevant checkable facts.
* Better fraud detection.
* Time saving - because repeated interviews or follow-up calls aren't needed.
* Raised staff confidence levels, leading to increased job satisfaction.
Jane Fanselow, director of CareerDynamix and previous president of the Recruitment & Consulting Services Association (RCSA), says both recruitment staff and employers can benefit from interview training - without which they can make the mistake of employing a "mini-me".
Staff employed by member firms of the RCSA typically go through competency-based behavioural interview training. They learn, for example, not to ask general questions about previous experience, but to ask questions that require a depth of response.
These days many corporates have greater tools at their disposal to find the insurance cheat or creative CV writer who adds a degree they don't actually have or increases their salary.
Winz is also a victim of fraudulent benefit claims and other government departments such as the IRD and Customs can benefit from improved interview skills.
The insurance industry is one sector that has taken the initiative to detect fraud. It estimates it pays out nearly $200 million a year in fraudulent claims.
So the Insurance Council of New Zealand set up an Insurance Claims Register in 1999 - allowing companies to access the register and determine if a claimant has a history that is worth investigating.
