<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" > <channel> <title>Interview and Interrogation Training Archives - Wicklander-Zulawski</title> <atom:link href="https://www.w-z.com/tag/interview-and-interrogation-training/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /> <link>https://www.w-z.com/tag/interview-and-interrogation-training/</link> <description></description> <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Feb 2023 22:20:20 +0000</lastBuildDate> <language>en-US</language> <sy:updatePeriod> hourly </sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency> 1 </sy:updateFrequency> <generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.2.6</generator>  <item> <title>Take 2: Lessons Learned in the Interview Room</title> <link>https://www.w-z.com/2016/09/21/take-2-lessons-learned-in-the-interview-room/</link> <comments>https://www.w-z.com/2016/09/21/take-2-lessons-learned-in-the-interview-room/#respond</comments> <dc:creator><![CDATA[Dave Thompson CFI]]></dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 21 Sep 2016 13:07:55 +0000</pubDate> <category><![CDATA[Interview Strategies]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Professional Development]]></category> <category><![CDATA[CFI]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Dave Thompson]]></category> <category><![CDATA[developing rapport]]></category> <category><![CDATA[do not disturb]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Interview and Interrogation Training]]></category> <category><![CDATA[interview room]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Practical Aspects of Interrogation]]></category> <category><![CDATA[rationalization]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Wicklander-Zulawski & Associates]]></category> <category><![CDATA[WZ]]></category> <category><![CDATA[WZ Method]]></category> <guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.w-z.com/?p=5613</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>We’re human and we all make mistakes. It’s inevitable. At some point in your investigative career you’ll find yourself making a mistake during the interview process. Many times the person you are interviewing will be unaware of the mistake, but it’s always a good idea to keep a mental record of your “interview bloopers” to prepare you for the occasional situation that will require you to recover and overcome from an unexpected error. At Wicklander-Zulawski (WZ), we are consistently reviewing our interviews or interrogations and critiquing each other in an effort to learn from our mistakes. In the spirit of embarrassing myself, while hoping to educate others, I’ve compiled some “bloopers” or mistakes made during my own interviews. Do Not Disturb You have spent an extensive amount of time setting the interview room up for optimal success, or at least you think you have. About 10 minutes into the interview you realize you forgot to unplug the phone, put a sign on the door, or take your “Practical Aspects of Interrogation” textbook off of the desk. I’ve experienced interruptions more often than I’d like to admit – but there is a recent example that comes to mind immediately. While changing...</p> <p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.w-z.com/2016/09/21/take-2-lessons-learned-in-the-interview-room/">Take 2: Lessons Learned in the Interview Room</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.w-z.com">Wicklander-Zulawski</a>.</p> ]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We’re human and we all make mistakes. It’s inevitable. At some point in your investigative career you’ll find yourself making a mistake during the interview process. Many times the person you are interviewing will be unaware of the mistake, but it’s always a good idea to keep a mental record of your “interview bloopers” to prepare you for the occasional situation that will require you to recover and overcome from an unexpected error.</p> <p>At Wicklander-Zulawski (WZ), we are consistently reviewing our interviews or interrogations and critiquing each other in an effort to learn from our mistakes. In the spirit of embarrassing myself, while hoping to educate others, I’ve compiled some “bloopers” or mistakes made during my own interviews.</p> <h6><strong>Do Not Disturb</strong></h6> <p>You have spent an extensive amount of time setting the interview room up for optimal success, or at least you think you have. About 10 minutes into the interview you realize you forgot to unplug the phone, put a sign on the door, or take your “Practical Aspects of Interrogation” textbook off of the desk.</p> <p>I’ve experienced interruptions more often than I’d like to admit – but there is a recent example that comes to mind immediately. While changing the subject’s perspective, an integral step in the WZ Method, another employee decided to walk into the office and interrupt our otherwise productive meeting. It wasn’t until after the interview that I discovered that the subject who interrupted us had actually played an active role in the embezzlement scheme I was discussing with my primary subject. Unfortunately for him, he became my next interview subject.</p> <p><em>Lesson learned – Put a sign on the door</em></p> <h6><strong>Don’t I Know You From Somewhere?</strong></h6> <p>Investigators spend most of their time and energy on the investigative process that leads them up to the interview. During this process, multiple things are happening which could include interviews of witnesses, collection and examination of evidence, and research into motives and rationales. Even when an investigator feels as if they’ve eliminated any loophole and have a strong strategy for the interview – sometimes the simplest of things may have been overlooked.</p> <p>A few years ago I was interviewing a subject who was alleged to be defrauding a company through the falsification of some documents. As we progressed through establishing her baseline and then developing rapport I started to feel an awkward uneasiness on her part. I thought it was just anxiety caused by being in the conversation, until I realized it was much simpler than that. I started to explain that I wanted to share with her some information about “who I am, and what I do”. At that moment she proclaimed, “You don’t have to do that”. Before I could muster up a response, she stated – “You explained all of that the last time we had one of these talks”. Yes, I interviewed her about a year prior to this and completely forgot, at least she was kind enough to redirect me.</p> <p><em>Lesson learned – Have a plan “B”</em></p> <h6><strong>Line, Please?</strong></h6> <p>During an interview or an interrogation, most investigators utilize a strategic and sometimes scripted but fluid approach. Most good interrogators are excellent communicators and have the ability to keep a conversation flowing while having a response to anything tossed at them. Many interviews do not go as planned and the investigator is forced to react on the fly, while not going down a path that results in a negative outcome. This can be a difficult task, but one that separates good interrogators from the great ones.</p> <p>I believe to possess the wit and ability to successfully manage a conversation or interrogation while reacting to denials, excuses or objections. However, on a few occasions I’ve had those brief moments of silence that seem to feel like forever while I process my next thought. Often times this happens when the interviewer has memorized their technique so well that they feel as if they don’t have to think about it when delivering – this poses some huge problems. I remember one interview specifically where I was telling a rationalization story about peer pressure that I have used countless times. Unfortunately, because I told the story so many times I started to drift off a bit while delivering this piece of information to the subject. I’m sure I was thinking about something important, like who to start in my fantasy line-up or what to have for dinner that night, but this is the wrong move. Because of my lack of focus, the subject asked me a question during the rationalization and I was completely blank on what story I was even telling. This caused a few moments of awkwardness, a shot to my credibility and another lesson learned to deposit in my experience bank.</p> <p><em>Lesson learned – Keep your head in the game</em></p> <p>If you ask any experienced interview if they have ever made a mistake during the interrogation process and they say “no” – either they really aren’t experienced or they are lying. Mistakes can be as simple as the ones I’ve mentioned above, or several others that I’ve made including; forgetting to ask the subject to turn their phone off which resulted in the interview being recorded, calling the subject by the wrong name after a stretch of multiple interviews or closing out the interview and realizing on the way home that there was more you forgot to ask about.</p> <p>Overall, mistakes or “bloopers” are how we learn and improve. Continue to reflect back on your investigations, solicit feedback and be open to criticism. Most importantly, act like you have been there before. I have yet to have a subject tell me that I’m doing the interview wrong or out of order – allow yourself to be in control of the conversation while still adapting to the ever changing subject in front of you.</p> <p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.w-z.com/2016/09/21/take-2-lessons-learned-in-the-interview-room/">Take 2: Lessons Learned in the Interview Room</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.w-z.com">Wicklander-Zulawski</a>.</p> ]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>https://www.w-z.com/2016/09/21/take-2-lessons-learned-in-the-interview-room/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> <item> <title>Identifying Intent: An Auditor’s Guide to the Truth</title> <link>https://www.w-z.com/2016/05/19/identifying-intent-an-auditors-guide-to-the-truth/</link> <comments>https://www.w-z.com/2016/05/19/identifying-intent-an-auditors-guide-to-the-truth/#comments</comments> <dc:creator><![CDATA[Dave Thompson CFI]]></dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 19 May 2016 10:07:49 +0000</pubDate> <category><![CDATA[Interview Methods]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Interview Strategies]]></category> <category><![CDATA[auditing professionals]]></category> <category><![CDATA[auditors role]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Certified Forensic Interviewer]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Dave Thompson]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Interview and Interrogation Training]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Loss Prevention]]></category> <category><![CDATA[participatory approach]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Wicklander-Zulawski & Associates]]></category> <guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.w-z.com/?p=5266</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>Another day, another audit. The routines of compliance or auditing professionals may seem very rigid, full of checks and balances, checkmarks and scores; sometimes even the announcement that an auditor is onsite will cause a location or department to completely derail from their current focus and scramble to satisfy all of their required tasks to remain compliant. However, there is more to compliance than pass or fail and those in the profession have a great understanding for the weight of their role. Whether it is to maintain compliance in accordance with DEA protocols for the control of pharmaceuticals, comply with OSHA standards for the safety of their employees and customers or monitor workplace efficiencies to ensure a profitable business; auditors play a major role in sustainability. The best return on investment for an audit is not by providing a score, but instead by recognizing training opportunities or negligence by employees and reacting accordingly. The task of separating the two is sometimes difficult, and often a question that is asked by operational partners. “Were they trained incorrectly?” or “Did they intentionally ignore procedure?” Ultimately, if an error is identified through the course of an audit there are generally three potential causes...</p> <p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.w-z.com/2016/05/19/identifying-intent-an-auditors-guide-to-the-truth/">Identifying Intent: An Auditor’s Guide to the Truth</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.w-z.com">Wicklander-Zulawski</a>.</p> ]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Another day, another audit. The routines of compliance or auditing professionals may seem very rigid, full of checks and balances, checkmarks and scores; sometimes even the announcement that an auditor is onsite will cause a location or department to completely derail from their current focus and scramble to satisfy all of their required tasks to remain compliant. However, there is more to compliance than pass or fail and those in the profession have a great understanding for the weight of their role. Whether it is to maintain compliance in accordance with DEA protocols for the control of pharmaceuticals, comply with OSHA standards for the safety of their employees and customers or monitor workplace efficiencies to ensure a profitable business; auditors play a major role in sustainability.</p> <p>The best return on investment for an audit is not by providing a score, but instead by recognizing training opportunities or negligence by employees and reacting accordingly. The task of separating the two is sometimes difficult, and often a question that is asked by operational partners. “Were they trained incorrectly?” or “Did they intentionally ignore procedure?”</p> <p>Ultimately, if an error is identified through the course of an audit there are generally three potential causes of such error; training was insufficient, laziness of the responsible individual, or an integrity issue. All three have the potential to result in loss to the bottom line, but may have different approaches in their resolution.</p> <p>At Wicklander-Zulawski & Associates, we often utilize an interviewing approach, the participatory method, which helps distinguish the truth from any other variation of an answer the employee may provide. We know that if an employee is presented with a failure on an audit or compliance requirement, they often respond with “I didn’t know that was wrong” or “this is the way I have been trained”. Although sometimes this may be true, the goal of the participatory approach is to help identify that response with more accuracy.</p> <p>Understanding some auditors or compliance officers will conduct a “field interview” whereas others may be responsible for a more intimate one-on-one interview, this method can easily apply to both. The general concept of the participatory approach is to withhold the evidence which is known to the interviewer (process error, falsified paperwork, etc.) and by doing so allows the subject to commit to levels of understanding of a process or procedure with minimal resistance.</p> <p>A successful participatory approach is strategized and prepared prior to the conversation actually taking place. When planning to utilize this approach, the interview should reverse engineer the process, by anticipating what the possible explanations or excuses the subject may have. To illustrate this process, we can take a simple example of an auditor identifying that an employee has not been consistently signing off on cash deposits. Assuming this is a requirement, auditors now may have several options of disposition at this point. One, an auditor may fail the question and report it to the operational team with little or no contact with the responsible party. Secondly, an auditor may immediately resort to retraining the team with hope that the mistake will not happen again. The third option, and the one advocated here, is a brief conversation with the responsible party to determine their knowledge of the process and therefore identify the proper path to take next.</p> <p>If the auditor takes this third approach, but immediately questions the subject on their knowledge of the cash deposit process, they would be advertising the goal of the interview therefore causing the subject to make an excuse anticipating they are about to be accused of wrongdoing. Because of this mentality, the participatory approach is used. The auditor would have strategized this interview and identified different topics that may be relevant to the cash deposit process. The conversation would begin with the least related topic to the issue of concern. In this example, the auditor may begin the conversation discussing the background of the employee including topics such as hire date, typical job duties or regular tasks they may get involved in. The auditor, while concealing the direction of the conversation, would then logically move into another topic that brings them closer to the cash deposit. Questions regarding how other processes or procedures work will allow the subject to prove their knowledge of areas of the business. Because the surrounding topics would not cause a fear to the subject, the likelihood of them speaking truthfully is increased. As the conversation strategically and logically progresses into the cash deposit process, the subject is committed to answering truthfully as they have throughout the conversation. This will then allow the interviewer to determine if the subject has limited knowledge on processes and needs to be retrained or if the subject understands the procedures but instead was negligent in performing their duties. With this knowledge, the auditor can now make a well-informed decision on how to proceed.</p> <p>This technique, although abbreviated in the above example, is used in a variety of investigations and interviews across a broad range of organizations. The ultimate goal is to clarify the truth for the interviewer by eliminating subject excuses, locking them into an alibi and therefore allowing them to participate in supplying potentially incriminating information.</p> <p>Auditors and compliance officers that have utilized this technique have found a greater return on investment for the jobs they perform by contributing this information and disposition to their organizations. By identifying if the cause of the error was intentional, ignorance or unawareness it allows the appropriate resolutions to follow suit. Anytime in which we can find the least resistant path to the truth will enable all of us to complete our jobs more effectively and ultimately produce better results.</p> <p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.w-z.com/2016/05/19/identifying-intent-an-auditors-guide-to-the-truth/">Identifying Intent: An Auditor’s Guide to the Truth</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.w-z.com">Wicklander-Zulawski</a>.</p> ]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>https://www.w-z.com/2016/05/19/identifying-intent-an-auditors-guide-to-the-truth/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>3</slash:comments> </item> <item> <title>A Tale of Two Headlines: Persuading vs. Reporting</title> <link>https://www.w-z.com/2015/09/18/a-tale-of-two-headlines-persuading-vs-reporting/</link> <comments>https://www.w-z.com/2015/09/18/a-tale-of-two-headlines-persuading-vs-reporting/#respond</comments> <dc:creator><![CDATA[Wicklander-Zulawski]]></dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 18 Sep 2015 18:38:18 +0000</pubDate> <category><![CDATA[Bias]]></category> <category><![CDATA[False Confessions]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Behavior]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Detecting Deception]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Interview and Interrogation Training]]></category> <category><![CDATA[media]]></category> <category><![CDATA[media bias]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Negotiation]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Wicklander-Zulawski & Associates]]></category> <guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.w-z.com/?p=4811</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>Guilty or Innocent?  Right or Wrong? Apparently it depends on which article you read and the author’s motive. In a culture where the most controversial stories result in better ratings, it is inevitable that these persuasive reports will exist.  However, it causes unfair and unjust consequences for those parties involved when an uninformed society makes a judgment based off a biased report designed to persuade the reader toward a particular opinion. Depending on the city in which you are watching the news, or the media outlet providing you the story, you leave with a bad taste in your mouth for one side of the argument.  If your goal is to have your opinion dictated to you or your mind made up for you, then this system works in your favor.  However, if you are someone who likes to obtain all the relevant facts before making a conscious decision or opinion, then you should feel as slighted as I sometimes do with these baseless reports. Let’s take, for example, the variety of incidents over the last year alleging police brutality.  I’m not here to discuss the validity or non-validity of this as an issue, but rather the reporting with which it...</p> <p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.w-z.com/2015/09/18/a-tale-of-two-headlines-persuading-vs-reporting/">A Tale of Two Headlines: Persuading vs. Reporting</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.w-z.com">Wicklander-Zulawski</a>.</p> ]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Guilty or Innocent? Right or Wrong? Apparently it depends on which article you read and the author’s motive.</p> <p>In a culture where the most controversial stories result in better ratings, it is inevitable that these persuasive reports will exist. However, it causes unfair and unjust consequences for those parties involved when an uninformed society makes a judgment based off a biased report designed to persuade the reader toward a particular opinion.</p> <p><span id="more-4811"></span></p> <p>Depending on the city in which you are watching the news, or the media outlet providing you the story, you leave with a bad taste in your mouth for one side of the argument. If your goal is to have your opinion dictated to you or your mind made up for you, then this system works in your favor. However, if you are someone who likes to obtain all the relevant facts before making a conscious decision or opinion, then you should feel as slighted as I sometimes do with these baseless reports.</p> <p>Let’s take, for example, the variety of incidents over the last year alleging police brutality. I’m not here to discuss the validity or non-validity of this as an issue, but rather the reporting with which it seems to be accompanied. Last year, a Grand Jury decided not to indict Darren Wilson for the incident that occurred in Ferguson, MO. Immediately after the decision was announced, both Fox News and CNN released a push notification to anyone subscribing to their service. They read as follows:</p> <p><strong><em> “BREAKING NEWS: Grand jury does not indict officer in Ferguson case” </em></strong><em>– Fox News</em></p> <p><strong><em>“No indictment for Darren Wilson, the white police officer who fatally shot Michael Brown, an unarmed black teen” </em></strong><em>– CNN</em></p> <p>I’m not projecting my opinion on that incident, merely pointing your attention to the same incident being delivered to the public in two very different ways. Why such different deliveries of the same piece of news?</p> <p>Another good example, of a much lighter topic, would be the infamous “Deflategate” surrounding the New England Patriots. Upon the first reporting of the alleged deflated footballs, here are two examples from the beloved hometown of the Patriots:</p> <p><strong><em>“#Deflategate: Latest Accusations of the Patriots’ Ways of Cheating Sure Sound Flat” </em></strong><em>– Boston.com</em></p> <p><strong><em> “If not for Patriots, Deflategate would be a non-story” </em></strong><em>– The Boston Globe</em></p> <p>Take a look at the New York version, home of the NY Jets, a divisional rival of the Patriots and the NY Giants who have met the Patriots twice in recent Super Bowls:</p> <p><strong><em>“SLIME BALLS – Report: 11 of 12 footballs used by Patriots were underinflated”</em></strong><em> – New York Post</em></p> <p>Unless you have a pre-determined opinion on this subject, then just by reading this headline you have a bias either for or against the Patriots or the NFL in this incident. All three articles are reporting the same facts, but with a different angle.</p> <p>Another recent incident dealing with “Cecil The Lion” has caused a media uproar (no pun intended). Again, a person may have a stance on this issue based upon their own belief system but if you hadn’t formed an opinion, and instead only glanced at a few headlines, you may have been confused as to how you should feel:</p> <p><strong><em>“Minnesota dentist says he regrets lion’s death, but thought hunt was legal” </em></strong><em>– Foxnews.com</em></p> <p><strong><em>“Minnesota dentist allegedly killed Cecil the lion” </em></strong><em>– USA Today</em></p> <p><strong><em>“Cecil the lion’s killer revealed as American dentist” </em></strong><em>– The Daily Telegraph (UK)</em></p> <p><strong><em>“American Hunter Killed Cecil, Beloved Lion Who was Lured Out of His Sanctuary” </em></strong><em>– NY Times</em></p> <p>All four of these articles were posted around the same timeframe, and as you read them from top-down, the dentist appears to be more guilty or heinous. All articles contain different elements of the truth, but portray it in a different light.</p> <p>Lastly, one more example from the sports world. These articles were all released as the news broke that Adrian Peterson reached a plea deal in his case involving alleged child abuse. Again, the headlines give you an immediate emotional bias about the entire case – but all contain the same basic facts:</p> <p><strong>“Vikings’ Adrian Peterson pleads no contest to misdemeanor charge”</strong> – Sports Illustrated</p> <p><strong>“Adrian Peterson avoids jail time in child abuse case”</strong> – USA Today</p> <p><strong>“Adrian Peterson Dodges Jail for Beating Kid”</strong> – New York Post</p> <p>Most readers will review headlines and either make a snap decision or develop some sort of an impression based solely off a few words. As you read your next article, regardless of the content, look for words that show emotion or bias. Check to see if you are able to withhold judgment when forming an opinion based off facts, rather than based off how the author wants you to feel.</p> <p>In the market of investigations and interrogations, it’s important when documenting the recap of an incident or a statement of fact, to make it nothing more than that. As a fact-finder, investigator or interviewer, our job is to report to the decision maker only the relevant facts in an unbiased manner. If you find yourself in one of these roles, I challenge you to read your latest article or case report and ask yourself… “Am I reporting or am I persuading?”</p> <p>If you find yourself writing with emotion, bias and a persuasive approach, maybe you should reconsider a career choice and find a tabloid hiring near you.</p> <p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.w-z.com/2015/09/18/a-tale-of-two-headlines-persuading-vs-reporting/">A Tale of Two Headlines: Persuading vs. Reporting</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.w-z.com">Wicklander-Zulawski</a>.</p> ]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>https://www.w-z.com/2015/09/18/a-tale-of-two-headlines-persuading-vs-reporting/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> <item> <title>Go Behind the Scenes with WZ: Assigning the Best Interviewer</title> <link>https://www.w-z.com/2015/04/10/go-behind-the-scenes-with-wz-assigning-the-best-interviewer/</link> <comments>https://www.w-z.com/2015/04/10/go-behind-the-scenes-with-wz-assigning-the-best-interviewer/#respond</comments> <dc:creator><![CDATA[Dave Thompson CFI]]></dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2015 18:11:36 +0000</pubDate> <category><![CDATA[Interview Strategies]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Certified Forensic Interviewer]]></category> <category><![CDATA[CFI]]></category> <category><![CDATA[interrogation]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Interview and Interrogation Training]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Wicklander-Zulawski & Associates]]></category> <guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.w-z.com/blog/?p=1455</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>A large source of Wicklander-Zulawski (WZ) training material and ongoing research comes from our very own Investigative Division. Within this division, we get contacted by organizations, both private and public, to assist or lead in an investigation. Once we take on the investigation, part of the process includes deciding who would be the best interviewer for the case. All of the investigators at WZ are CFI’s and experienced interviewers; however, some cases may dictate one interviewer is better suited for the case than another. Taking into consideration that schedules, geographic location, and other logistics may impact the selection process; let’s assume that none of that is relevant for the sake of understanding the real basis for selecting the right interviewer. Here are some of the topics we consider when assigning an investigation to a WZ Interviewer: Biographical Some types of cases may be better suited for a specific gender or age of the interviewer. For example, if we were hired for a possible sexual harassment investigation and the alleged harasser was a male subject I would prefer a male interviewer. In this scenario, it may be easier for the interviewer to develop a rapport and rationalize with the subject. On...</p> <p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.w-z.com/2015/04/10/go-behind-the-scenes-with-wz-assigning-the-best-interviewer/">Go Behind the Scenes with WZ: Assigning the Best Interviewer</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.w-z.com">Wicklander-Zulawski</a>.</p> ]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A large source of Wicklander-Zulawski (WZ) training material and ongoing research comes from our very own Investigative Division. Within this division, we get contacted by organizations, both private and public, to assist or lead in an investigation. Once we take on the investigation, part of the process includes deciding who would be the best interviewer for the case. All of the investigators at WZ are CFI’s and experienced interviewers; however, some cases may dictate one interviewer is better suited for the case than another.</p> <p>Taking into consideration that schedules, geographic location, and other logistics may impact the selection process; let’s assume that none of that is relevant for the sake of understanding the real basis for selecting the right interviewer.</p> <p>Here are some of the topics we consider when assigning an investigation to a WZ Interviewer:<br /> <span id="more-1455"></span></p> <ol> <li><strong>Biographical</strong> <ul> <li>Some types of cases may be better suited for a specific gender or age of the interviewer. For example, if we were hired for a possible sexual harassment investigation and the alleged harasser was a male subject I would prefer a male interviewer. In this scenario, it may be easier for the interviewer to develop a rapport and rationalize with the subject. On the other hand, it may be better suited for a female interviewer to talk to the alleged complainant if they are also a female for the same reason.</li> </ul> </li> <li><strong>Ability to Develop Rapport</strong> <ul> <li>A good interviewer can develop rapport with almost anyone, but let’s make it easier. People like people that are like themselves; so if you can identify that the subject has a passion for sports, cooking, has a family or loves to travel, then you need to be able to connect with that. Based on the subjects’ background, we may select a specific interviewer who can more easily develop a personal connection.</li> </ul> </li> <li><strong>Knowledge of Case</strong> <ul> <li>This doesn’t necessarily mean that the interviewer is the same as the primary investigator on the case. Even if one of the investigators has done the majority of the research doesn’t mean they have to do the interview. However, the interviewer should have a thorough understanding of the facts of the case, but also the methods of investigative tools available. For example, we may be involved in a cash theft case at a restaurant one week, an embezzlement investigation at a bank another week and a criminal case the following week. The interviewer needs to be aware of how each environment operates, and how each investigation could be conducted. At WZ, we may be assigned an investigation into Gang related cases, Drug issues, or Child Abuse. We have a variety of contracted WZ investigators that specialize in these fields that may be used for those cases. Understanding exception reporting and key performance indicators is different than applying the knowledge of fingerprint and DNA analysis.</li> </ul> </li> </ol> <ol start="4"> <li><strong>Reputation</strong> <ul> <li>Some of our investigations are provided for clients that have used WZ multiple times. Over time, a reputation may be established about that interviewer. For example, if Wayne conducts multiple investigations at the same location then employees may start to think “Every time that guy comes here, people get fired”. If the interviewer has established their own baseline or norm, then we may change interviewers to adjust the perspective among the other employees.</li> </ul> </li> <li><strong>Professional</strong> <ul> <li>We take all of the above into consideration when selecting our interviewer. However, it’s also important to remember that if you are a professional interviewer that you can overcome any of those perceived obstacles. Gender, age, background and knowledge of the case can all be a non-issue if the interviewer appropriately develops rapport, establishes credibility and shows understanding. When selecting our interviewer for a case, I feel confident that any WZ investigator could fit in to any type of case with the right preparation.</li> </ul> </li> </ol> <p>To give the interviewer the best chance of obtaining the truth, ensure you are reviewing all of the above when identifying who the case should be assigned to. Ultimately, always remember that if you take the time to prepare for the case appropriately and develop a thorough understanding of the relevant details that you can overcome all the other obstacles.</p> <p>If you want more information about the Investigative and Consulting Division at WZ please contact Dave Thompson, CFI at 800-222-7789 (x125) or via email at <a href="mailto:DThompson@W-Z.com">DThompson@W-Z.com</a>.</p> <p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.w-z.com/2015/04/10/go-behind-the-scenes-with-wz-assigning-the-best-interviewer/">Go Behind the Scenes with WZ: Assigning the Best Interviewer</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.w-z.com">Wicklander-Zulawski</a>.</p> ]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>https://www.w-z.com/2015/04/10/go-behind-the-scenes-with-wz-assigning-the-best-interviewer/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> <item> <title>5 Characteristics of a Professional Interviewer</title> <link>https://www.w-z.com/2014/11/18/5-characteristics-of-a-professional-interviewer/</link> <comments>https://www.w-z.com/2014/11/18/5-characteristics-of-a-professional-interviewer/#respond</comments> <dc:creator><![CDATA[Dave Thompson CFI]]></dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 18 Nov 2014 16:44:04 +0000</pubDate> <category><![CDATA[Professional Development]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Certified Forensic Interviewer]]></category> <category><![CDATA[CFI]]></category> <category><![CDATA[IAI]]></category> <category><![CDATA[International Association of Interviewers]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Interview and Interrogation Training]]></category> <category><![CDATA[professional interviewer]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Wicklander-Zulawski & Associates]]></category> <guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.w-z.com/blog/?p=1426</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>What do you do for a living? A question we have all received, but probably all answer differently. In some way, shape or form, we attempt to tell people that we are professional interviewers in some capacity. After answering this question several times myself, I thought I would highlight 5 characteristics that make an individual stand out truly as someone elite in this profession. If you consider yourself a professional interviewer, especially if you’ve been doing this for a long time, take a step back and evaluate what actually sets you apart. The amount of interviews you’ve completed, or how long you’ve been in your position doesn’t necessarily make you a professional. Our goal is the truth. All too often when we discuss interviews or interrogations we are so focused on the alleged guilty party that we have tunnel vision towards an admission or a confession. A professional interviewer understands that sometimes your prime suspect is innocent, or has a legitimate explanation for the evidence against them. Leaving the interview with the truth, regardless of what it may be, should be the goal of a professional. It’s not just about the Interview. The skills we normally use to describe a...</p> <p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.w-z.com/2014/11/18/5-characteristics-of-a-professional-interviewer/">5 Characteristics of a Professional Interviewer</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.w-z.com">Wicklander-Zulawski</a>.</p> ]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What do you do for a living? A question we have all received, but probably all answer differently. In some way, shape or form, we attempt to tell people that we are professional interviewers in some capacity. After answering this question several times myself, I thought I would highlight 5 characteristics that make an individual stand out truly as someone elite in this profession.</p> <p>If you consider yourself a professional interviewer, especially if you’ve been doing this for a long time, take a step back and evaluate what actually sets you apart. The amount of interviews you’ve completed, or how long you’ve been in your position doesn’t necessarily make you a professional.<br /> <span id="more-4367"></span></p> <ol> <li><strong>Our goal is the truth.</strong> <ul> <li>All too often when we discuss interviews or interrogations we are so focused on the alleged guilty party that we have tunnel vision towards an admission or a confession. A professional interviewer understands that sometimes your prime suspect is innocent, or has a legitimate explanation for the evidence against them. Leaving the interview with the truth, regardless of what it may be, should be the goal of a professional.</li> </ul> </li> </ol> <ol start="2"> <li><strong>It’s not just about the Interview.</strong> <ul> <li>The skills we normally use to describe a good interviewer have to do with the actual conversation, the rationalization and the accusation. However, a professional takes the same amount of pride in their pre-planning and their completed case file. A professional interviewer takes the appropriate time to complete their investigation and develop a strategy. A professional also puts just as much value into the written statement, and their completed case report as they do to the actual conversation.</li> </ul> </li> </ol> <ol start="3"> <li><strong>We solicit feedback.</strong> <ul> <li>Realizing that you always have more to learn, and could’ve done a better job takes a humble and realistic professional. Even after a successful case, a professional interviewer seeks feedback on the process and on the written statement in an effort to become better at their craft. Reviewing your interview through video, audio, witness notes or just by talking it out with your boss or coworker will make you a better interviewer. Professionals still need to practice and develop.</li> </ul> </li> </ol> <ol start="4"> <li><strong>We expand on what we already know.</strong> <ul> <li>It takes a certain skill to obtain the initial admission, even if you have overwhelming evidence. However, a professional interviewer often will walk out of the conversation with admissions to acts they were initially unaware of, a list of names of other involved parties, and possibly additional evidence that could be used to further substantiate the admission. Professional interviewers may enter the conversation with an initial suspicion, but understand the importance of opening every door and leaving no stone unturned. Knowing the importance of identifying root causes, operational deficiencies or other issues during the interview is something that separates the amateur from the professional.</li> </ul> </li> </ol> <ol start="5"> <li><strong>We take pride in being elite.</strong> <ul> <li>Like all professions, being able to separate yourself from the rest of the field takes initiative, continued education and proving through results or measurements that you are elite. There are many avenues to obtain continued education, achieve levels of excellence or further your knowledge in any profession. In the field of interviewing we recommend accreditations like the Certified Forensic Interviewer (CFI), or being associated with groups such as the International Association of Interviewers (IAI). A true professional stands out in their field of expertise and isn’t afraid to have those skills tested. For more information on obtaining your CFI or joining IAI, please visit <a href="http://www.certifiedinterview.com">www.certifiedinterview.com</a>.</li> </ul> </li> </ol> <p>What else do you consider as something that makes you a professional in this field? What would you add to the list?</p> <p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.w-z.com/2014/11/18/5-characteristics-of-a-professional-interviewer/">5 Characteristics of a Professional Interviewer</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.w-z.com">Wicklander-Zulawski</a>.</p> ]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>https://www.w-z.com/2014/11/18/5-characteristics-of-a-professional-interviewer/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> </channel> </rss>