The exit interview for employees, suppliers and delivery personnel is significantly different from that for customers.
Mostly, customer interviews focus exclusively on theft situations. As well, there is one objective: restitution or recovery of merchandise. There are very few situations where you will be looking to past thefts, as you will not have documentation and proof beyond the current incident.
Like suppliers, drivers and staff, though, you will need to choose whether you will be asking the courts, through the police, to lay charges. In fact, police, themselves, do not lay charges. They recommend to the crown prosecutors, who make that decision based on information the police provide to them.
My recommendation is to focus on restitution rather than punishment, since your business’s profitability depends on recovery of shrinkage from any source.
With the focus on restitution, your interview emphasis and strategies also will orient differently than for shoplifters.
The interview will be an extension of the apprehension process.
If you anticipate that you will use an interview area more than a few times, your interview room should meet certain standards.
First, the room should be private, so that you will be free of interruptions during the process. A busy, public area will limit the willingness of the subject to talk freely. It also should not be crowded with stuff. An uncluttered room enables you to move the interviewee’s focus where you want it. At the same time, if you are interviewing someone who has the potential to react violently or unpredictably, having potential weapons that the person can use on you is dangerous. While private, the room should have clear lines of visibility, so that when you are dealing with a person of the opposite sex, there is no risk of false claims of sexual misconduct or abuse. Windows are recommended.
In many countries and some states of the USA, an audio of a conversation can be recorded if one of the parties to the conversation has approved, either tacitly or directly, the use of recordings. In all but areas where a person has an expectation of privacy (washrooms, locker rooms, etc.), video can be recorded. Since your business is your own property, there is no expectation of privacy in an interview room and you can video freely without repercussions or informing the interviewee. Cameras are advised, where possible, but they should not be intrusive.
It is very important that the layout and the items in the room reflect your need for safety, and to not have anything that can be used as a weapon against you.
Layout of the seats in the room, too, should be to your advantage. This is part of using body language and positioning to influence the interview. Often, I like to take a position in front and to the side of the suspect, forcing them to turn sideways to me. I also give them a slightly lower chair, to establish dominance but not overwhelm them. My chair always is between the interviewee and the door.
In one interview, the suspect was a very large, tall man who had been belligerent with the employee who accompanied me to the room. Not only did I deny him a comfortable chair, I told the employee to take the second seat and the suspect to sit on an upturned milk crate. This placed him at a huge disadvantage.
He had not been aggressive with me, even though he was larger. I had manipulated him back into the store and the detention room using a thumb hold, and it seemed to intimidate him.
However, when he began the process, he would not speak or answer questions. I opted to further “bully” him.
When he declined to give his name, I moved on. “Weight?”
He didn’t answer. “225,” I stated, leaning in and looking him up and down.
“285” he growled.
“No, that’s mostly loose weight. Fat. I’m 220 and you are not in the same shape as me. 225.”
I knew he was well over that, but I was diminishing a person who took pride in his size. He was 285, at least.
“F… you. 285”
I wrote down 225 and called it out.
“Height?”
He ignored me. I tapped the crate with his foot.
“Stand up.” I told the employee to do the same, directing him to stand next to the man. The two complied. The employee was over six feet,
“6 foot 2.”
I was 5’11” and he was at least six inches taller.
“6 f…ing 7. F… you.”
He was angry and I wanted him more rattled.
“Maybe 6’4”. “
“Bastard.” He sat down. I smiled.
“Name?”
Now he was more compliant.
“Raymond H. Jestadt.”
And he no longer tried to remain silent.
Both verbal and physical manipulation had persuaded him. He had been cornered and then cowed. It seemed relatively insignificant, but it also served to make him reluctant to be physically confrontational.
Body language is very important, from both sides. Watch the cues to direct your interview. Leaning in when needed and crowding, leaning back when being complacent and condescending, steepling, crossed arms… The signals and gestures are myriad, and far too abundant to be discussed in this forum. Very good psychological papers and books by authorities on the subject are available if you anticipate that you or your security personnel will be doing numerous interviews.
In an exit interview where recovery or restitution is important, do not attempt to have the suspect admit to the full amount of the theft, or even to a modest amount. They want to deny it, for several reasons. They do not know what legal jeopardy they are in. They don’t know what you know. They prefer not to acknowledge their crime even to themselves. Start small.
One contractor began by admitting to stealing a half dozen screws and washers. It did not take long, once I had pointed out that a theft of any amount is still a theft, and that I had documentation of a few other items, to get him moving along the track to a full confession. $18,000. He needed to be nudged at first, not hammered.
Danielle was a customer service clerk and night balance supervisor. My interview was so effective and forceful that she admitted to $10,000 in theft and fraud. The problem was that, afterward, I tracked all her transactions, and she could not possibly have taken more than $1,900. She even admitted to techniques that were not possible. She was so eager to extricate herself from the uncomfortable interview that she would have done anything. Be cautious that you are not overzealous.
Reward steps in the process. Even if you have been aggressive at the start, once the suspect starts to comply, acknowledge the progress and maybe even state that their cooperation works in their favour. Don’t promise them anything, though, as that can negate any confession. It is a form of psychological shaping behaviour, in the same manner that a dog handler trains a dog. Except you use more reward than punishment and correction.
Force eye contact when interviewing and asking questions. By making obvious eye contact, the suspect can either turn away and give off signs of being evasive or maintain eye contact. As you present your first bit of evidence, lock eyes. It tells them “I have you!”
Reading that person’s body language also suggests that you should not give off signals that can be misread by them. Remember that you are in control. One little move I like is to move closer when I show some evidence, as if sharing a secret. Then, I do not move back for several moments, to create some discomfort.
Don’t reveal everything at once. When I began in the business, I would bring in a dozen or so VHS tapes and “randomly” select one, already cued to just before an incident. I would ask if they wanted to see the evidence before I decided what I was going to do with them. The insinuation was that I might be considering calling the policed or might not. I never committed or promised. Often, they would wnt to see what I had.
I had no problem showing one. Then I would ask the “why did you do that?” question or ask for an explanation. Every person reacts differently in an interview, and many would provide an excuse as to why it was not like it looked. I might somewhat agree, or I might challenge them on it.
“So, how many times do you think that you did something like this?”
Usually, it would be “that was the first time.”
I would turn to the stack of tapes.
“Want to see more?”
They might, or might not, but always would deny further transgressions.
I would grab one tape, supposedly at random, and put it in the player.
“You know, if we are going to do this one baby step at a time, I might as well decide what to do and get on with my day. It’s your choice.”
By threatening to end the interview, I would force the suspect to choose to bluff or confess. Inevitably, these tactics would lead to another minor revelation.
At some point, I would switch from urging to frustration.
“I’ve had enough of this b……t. I know, and you know, where we stand.”
Then we would get into the meat of the interview, projecting losses and estimating how much they would have to reimburse the client.
While VHS and even CDs are relics of the past, setting up a folder with fifteen or so files, all labelled with the suspect’s initials and a few random numbers, and allowing the suspect to see your folder, acts the same way as having a stack of VHS tapes. It intimidates. It’s a game of poker.
The only times you should display anger or frustration is to establish control or move the interviewee further along in the confession. To display anger at their evasiveness or before any confession gives them a little edge that you do not want to impart.
Learn to empathize. Even if you cannot relate, if the suspect feels that you will understand and express compassion, they may be more cooperative.
One woman ultimately admitted to stealing $35,000 from her employer. During the interview, she talked about how her husband wanted to return to the Middle East for a visit and demanded that she get the money. I knew a bit about the couple and knew he was very domineering to the point of being brutal. I also had direct evidence of thefts totalling $12,000, so she and I both knew that, since she could not make restitution, the company owner likely would insist on charges.
I did promise this woman that I would try to intervene but stressed that, since the owner had a gambling problem, he also likely would gamble on getting his money back. We also talked about the probability that she would be deported. She was from an adjacent country to that of her husband, so it provided modest safety from his reprisal, if he decided to go back home after she left.
My empathetic tactics led her to confess to the full amount. She actually was conteite.
However, things took a slightly humourous twist after the owner did insist on charges and the police took over the formal interview. She would only admit to $16,000, regardless of how intensely the two detectives questioned her.
One of them later returned to me and blasted me. “Damn, you, Bob. She wouldn’t go higher than $16,000. What’s so special about you?” It was all in humour, but the difference was empathy.
Empathy is important in interviews for a few reasons. First, confrontation rarely moves a suspect in the direction you want emotionally. However, if you take the time to understand their position and background, it provides you with a clearer direction for your exit interview. Knowing their background also can alert a suspect to the understanding that you have taken the time to research them, which also means they are less likely to think they can manipulate you in the interview.
One of these people who felt they could manipulate the interview had been the regional head of a national pharmacy chain. He had hired me specifically, and our company, to do various investigations of employees in the chain stores. Sam always sat in on our exit interviews and no amount of cajoling would convince him that he was actually harming and slowing the process.
The other problem was that Sam, over dozens of interviews, observed the trick and techniques that I employed to get a confession and to lead them to admit top the totality of their thefts or frauds. So long as he, himself, was not under investigation, this was relatively innocuous, but Sam, when the chain was bought out by another company, went to work for another of my clients, setting up and expanding their pharmacy chain.
Sam had an inherently devious nature and also had an outsized ego. That meant he was a likely suspect for embezzlement, at some point. It did not take long: three years after he started in his new position.
Same knew how to fly under the radar. He made sure that any side deals with the company suppliers did not occur where anyone in the operation could observe. He met with his supplier cohorts away from the city where the head office was, and even, sometimes, in more remote settings like fishing lodges and a farm he owned. Ther was no paper trail to say he was embezzling. Yet, other pharmacies were receiving benefits and rebates that his boss was not receiving. That set up red flags.
We began pursuing Sam on his excursions. We were in a bit of a legal grey area, because e could not record conversations (we were not party to them), and we could not use video on private property. It was all old-fashioned live detective work. Many times, we were convinced of a deal he had made but could not garner absolute proof. With him, we needed it.
Our break came about six weeks into surveillance, when Sam received two cartons of goods from a supplier, moving them to his vehicle in a public parking lot adjacent to the restaurant where they met. They were readily identifiable, matching other “freebies” given to other pharmacy chain buyers. But he kept them for himself. It was all we needed. One relatively small theft, when he probably had taken tens of thousands of dollars in kickbacks in the prior six months. $300.
But it gave us the break we needed. We knew he had taken more but had no solid proof. The interview would have to be our weapon. It wasn’t. For three hours, I worked Sam, but he knew every trick I had available, because he had watched me in his prior job. He knew them, and he pointedly told me so.
About halfway through, I showed him the video of the two cases of goods. He claimed they were empty. The problem was, we already had interviewed the supplier, who admitted to the transaction. Sam didn’t know that. He finally admitted to the theft when we showed him the statement signed by the rep. But he would admit to nothing else.
He was terminated for cause, losing a $200,000 per year job over, ostensibly, a $300 theft. But we used our knowledge of his habits and the eagerness of the reps who had done deals with him to come clean and save their jobs to ultimately prove he had stolen $43,000. It was much more than that, but Sam would not go one penny over what we showed him as proof, and he knew there was no value in having him charged criminally when he agreed to restitution. He understood us, we understood the reps and suppliers. That understanding and a degree of empathy was what we needed to apprehend and dismiss Sam.
It is an axiom of exit interview technique that you are always in control of the interview and the interview room, like a good lawyer in court. This is important so that you remain safe, but also so that you can steer the interview the way you want it. Have a plan before you start. I have seen very haphazard and clumsy interviews that usually get nowhere. They remind me of the Stephen Leacock, story where the hero jumps on his horse and rides madly off in all directions. Ultimately, having no true direction leads nowhere.
Your plan needs to be focused on the confession of the initial amount (a small theft or fraud) and the progression to the full amounts. It has to focus on keeping the suspect under control. It has to focus on never making claims that may not be true, as that provides an opening for the suspect. It needs to focus on keeping your interview within legal and ethical boundaries. It needs to have objectives along the way, but an ultimate goal.
The process of the interview involves a few psychological tricks to maximize the return of the business assets, as much as possible. For retail or any business involving customer theft, the only amounts you likely will recover are the amounts involved in the immediate theft or fraud, but suppliers, drivers and employees should be interviewed with an eye to restitution beyond the immediate incident an the length or intensity of the interview should be in proportion to the amount to be recovered.
Begin by convincing yourself that, if you are the owner of the business, the event should not be taken personally.
Walter, whom I mentioned elsewhere in this program, operated several related businesses and had a central office where much of his ordering and recordkeeping was completed. He had promoted a young woman, in her early twenties, to his second-in-command in the office, partly because she was adept at the work and partly because she was attractive and Walter fancied himself to be a ladies’ man.
When we caught the young lady defrauding the operation, he sat in on the interview. We had a difficult time maintaining flow and direction, because as soon as she admitted to a relatively minor amount, he felt wounded.
“Why would you do that to me? I thought we had a special relationship?”
They didn’t, partly because she was twenty-one years his junior.
“You’re my boss, “she replied.
This hurt Walter even more, because he felt that, with his charm, she saw him as something of a mentor or confidant. Beyond work, they did not interact.
Throughout the rest of the interview, he almost whined whenever she admitted to more larceny. He was taking it personal. No interview should be personal. It’s business, and while you can empathize or sympathize, it still is not personal. Most often, the thief is not doing it out of vindictiveness, but out of opportunity. And that is the fault of the business for not having sufficiently cautious standards and policies.
The interview objectives generally are to recover as much as possible of your losses and to ensure that the employee is not enabled to repeat the deviance. Usually, this means that, at the end of the interview, the employee is terminated. Not at the start, or in the middle because, oddly, many of the people interviewed think that, if they are cooperative, they will keep their jobs! They should be EXIT interviews. By properly interrogating the employee, you should learn more about how to theft-proof your operation.
Listen carefully to everything the employee says. You don’t have to believe it all, but the suspect should know that you are listening. This path will often reveal lines of questioning that you may have not anticipated. It may reveal theft or fraud patterns you did not detect. It may lead you to other deviant employees.
Even though you are recording the audio and maybe the video of the interview, the employee may not be aware. Whenever they raise matters of which you doubt the veracity, write it down. Whenever the employee makes an impactful comment that may lead to a further line of questioning or possible problem area, write it down. When discussing precise amounts, be casual about writing it down. Don’t do it immediately, but sometime later in the conversation. This may tell the suspect that the amount isn’t important.
Occasionally refer to “facts” that you have written down prior on a separate sheet. The employee will believe that you have extensive documentation, when it may be as innocuous as your grocery list. Your job is to manoeuvre or manipulate the interviewee into a full confession.
The body language used in an exit interview should start off more gently than in an external theft apprehension and interview, because the shoplifting incident is cut and dried, while the employee or supplier interview is more nuanced. Throughout, though, rely on what you have learned about body language in general to manipulate the suspect as needed.
The interview ends with a signed confession and an acknowledgement of termination, along with a promissory note as to when and how reimbursement will occur. In rare cases, you may need to proceed to small claims court (or higher up, depending on the amount), nd all your documentation will form the evidence for this proceeding. It is standard procedure to also provide a trespass and bar from premises statement, too.
Each interview will have its own flavour and flow, and no two interviews proceed the same. However, following a template will make your job easier and more successful.