24 minute read
INTERVIEWING
by David E. Zulawski, CFI, CFE and Shane G. Sturman, CFI, CPP
The History of Interrogation According to W-Z: The Present
Zulawski and Sturman are executives in the investigative and training firm of Wicklander-Zulawski & associates (www.w-z.com). Zulawski is a senior partner and Sturman is president. Sturman is also a member of aSiS international’s Retail loss Prevention council. they can be reached at 800-222-7789 or via email at dzulawski@w-z.com and ssturman@w-z.com.
© 2011 Wicklander-Zulawski & associates, inc.
In the last issue we discussed the past history of interrogation beginning with the story of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden to the Salem witch trials of the 1690s. This column will move forward and review the more recent past, beginning in the late 1800s to the present practices of loss prevention and the police.
The Third Degree
The third degree, trickery, and deceit mentioned by the U.S. Supreme Court in the Brown v. Mississippi decision has its origins in New York City. Inspector Thomas Brynes headed up the New York City detective bureau from 1880 to 1895, when he was forced to resign. Ever the political savvy officer, Brynes was a pro at self-promotion, choreographing arrests to bolster his image with the public. He was critical of Scotland Yard’s ineffectiveness at solving the Jack-the-Ripper murders in London claiming he would have solved the case long ago.
Brynes coined the phrase “the third degree” to describe his technique of eliciting confessions from criminal suspects. The first degree was the policeman who apprehended the suspect, the second degree was the investigating detective, and the third degree was Brynes and his tactics. He would use any means to obtain a confession from someone he believed was guilty, including trickery, deceit, or physical beatings. Besides beatings, Brynes would also use phony witnesses and staged encounters between suspects to convince them their guilt was known.
In 1931 the Wickersham Commission, examining law enforcement practices and prohibition, found the use of the third degree as practiced by Brynes was widespread across the United States. August Vollmer, the primary author of the commission’s report who later became chief of the Berkeley (CA) Police Department is considered by many to be the father of modern law enforcement methods, originating many of the concepts of police work used today.
World War II
Interestingly, after the widespread use of the third degree, Germany and the United States during World War II developed similar interrogation strategies to obtain information from prisoners of war. Hanns Scharff, master interrogator at Dulag Luft, was responsible for interrogating airmen captured during bombing raids over Europe. It was said that he never failed to obtain information from the downed airmen. His interrogation strategy employed a sophisticated intelligence-gathering system cataloguing the minutia of everyday life on the Allied bomber bases. Using this information he would convince airmen the information was already known, thus opening conversations that would confirm and add new information to the database.
In one anecdote Hans was walking with an airman in the woods holding an innocent conversation when he made mention of the change of color of the tracer rounds flash on the fighter aircraft. The airmen innocently told him this was to let the pilot know he was almost out of ammunition. During a later dogfight with a German ace, there was a change in the American’s tracer color and the German pilot disengaged from the dogfight in order to let the American live.
Similar to Hanns Scharff was Major Sherwood F. Moran, USMC. Major Sherwood was assigned to interrogate captured Japanese in the Pacific theater of World War II. The Major had extensive experience with the Japanese culture having lived there
continued on page 16
for years along with a native’s speaker’s ability with the language. Major Sherwood began each interrogation telling the soldier he was now safe. The conversation then turned to the common Japanese experience that they both shared before he began delving into the intelligence gathering process.
Both the United States and Germany had extensive intelligence operations to support their troops. The U.S. had sophisticated camps on both coasts dedicated to the interrogation of POWs from both theaters of the war. These operations were unlike the Japanese, Korean, Chinese, or Vietnamese prison camps where Americans were tortured or brainwashed. It is interesting that the U.S. chose enhanced interrogation methods with terrorists after the success they achieved using non-confrontational interrogation during World War II on both sides of the conflict.
Polygraph
The beginning of an emotional approach to interrogation can be traced to the polygraph. Polygraph examiners found themselves having to interrogate suspects without using evidence. In most situations a suspect was taking a polygraph because he was suspected and had not confessed based on the information available to investigators. The examiner could use the polygraph as a prop during interrogation and then repeat the evidence available, but this was a generally ineffective means of interrogation.
Early polygraph examiners were in a decidedly difficult position since the technique had not been validated and testing sequences were in the early stages of development. As the polygraph examiners conducted more tests they observed physical and verbal responses from the subjects prior to the test that helped them reach a correct conclusion. The polygraph pretest gave the examiner a check and balance against later polygraph charts to assist in a correct truth or deception conclusion. If the examiner observed a deceptive pretest from the subject, he would expect to see deceptive charts during the testing sequence, or vice versa—truthful pretest, truthful charts.
This was an effective means of identifying the subject’s true status independent of the polygraph. In the mid-1970s Douglas Wicklander began working on using the pretest independent of the polygraph to investigate cases. The behavioral interview became a standard investigative tool to resolve general loss and specific issue cases in situations where the polygraph was too expensive or time-consuming to use. In fact, the behavioral interview took the place of the polygraph after Congress passed the Employee Polygraph Protection Act, which limited an employer’s ability to use the examination.
Emotional Interrogation
Polygraph examinations also provided the seminal point for development of the emotional interrogation of a suspect. The early polygraph examiners had several significant needs during the interrogation of a guilty suspect. First, the examiners needed an additional check and balance to assure the accuracy of their conclusion. They already had the polygraph pretest, which would confirm the accuracy of their decision, but they needed something in addition when they were dealing with deceptive charts. What they used was a direct accusation at the beginning of the interrogation to elicit behavioral clues from the suspect that were typical of innocence or guilt. A statement such as, “Our investigation clearly indicates you’re responsible for [insert crime].” The subject’s reaction to this statement helped the examiner confirm a deceptive conclusion. Generally, the deceptive subject reacted to this statement with less aggressiveness than a truthful person, thus adding another confirmation to the examiner’s conclusion.
The examiner now had to interrogate the deceptive subject, but it was unlikely that simply using the evidence or information developed during the investigation would be sufficient to obtain a confession. Generally, that information had been used by the investigator already, and its use had been unproductive. The answer to this problem came from sales. The salesman provides his potential customer with benefits of the product to satisfy the customer’s needs. In the post-polygraph interrogation the subject’s needs tend to revolve around his self-image.
The polygraph examiner could now talk about why the individual participated in the incident, rather than discuss how the crime was committed. In a factual discussion of how the crime was committed, even a small error by the investigator in restating the method of the crime could be disastrous. The polygraph examiners were able to avoid this by simply discussing the reasons why the individual became involved in the incident. This provided the benefit of a face-saving device for the subject, and an opportunity for the examiner to interrogate at length without discussing the evidence.
Sales Techniques
Sales also provided the early examiners with additional helpful components. The way a salesman would handle a customer’s objection, such as “I don’t need more life insurance,” was to agree, yet turn the objection around into another reason why the customer should buy. The examiner, would likely hear, “I wouldn’t do something like that. I have money in the bank.” In the same way that the salesman handled the objection, the examiner handled the explanatory denial by agreeing and then changing the rationalization impulsiveness to support the individual’s self-image.
Another component coming from sales was recognizing the buy signs the customer was ready to make a purchase. The examiners noted the individual making a decision to confess would drop their heads, become quiet, and perhaps even tear up. Recognizing the person was ready to confess, the examiner needed to ask for the admission. Salesman quickly learned if they asked a customer if he wanted to buy their product they were often rejected. Instead, the salesman asked for the sale assumptively. “Do you want 10 boxes or 15?” “Do you want to take delivery today or first thing tomorrow?” The examiners offered a choice question based on the rationalization they were using. “Did you plan it out or do it on the spur of the moment?” “Was it your idea or someone else’s?” Selection of either of the choices was the individual’s first admission to the crime.
It was the early polygraph examiners’ technique that combined behavioral observations, behavioral interview, and the emotional appeal to the suspect into what we use in today’s interrogations. In our next column we will discuss the future of the interrogative process.
Cover feature
THE THREAT OF SOCIAL MEDIA
ten steps to Protecting your Brand
By Helen Levinson
The statistics are in, and the results boast resounding numbers. According to Eric Qualman, author of Socialnomics: How Social Media Transforms the Way We Live and Do Business, 96 percent of Generation Y has joined a social network. Although social media sites like Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube are commonly viewed as a personal activity, they are a goldmine for branding and marketing. So, what does this have to do with loss prevention?
Social media sites have an array of applications; some that may surprise loss prevention professionals. One thing is clear, social media is here to stay. In less than nine months, Facebook added 100 million users, while iPhone applications hit one billion. Sites like Facebook have the ability to boost exposure and profit for a company, but they can also cause major damage to it as well. This is where asset protection and risk management comes in.
Setting up a Social Media Monitoring Strategy
According to a 2009 Deloitte ethics and workplace survey, 74 percent of employed Americans surveyed believe it is easy to damage a brand’s reputation via sites such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube. Although that statistic may be frightening, it is possible for social media and areas like asset protection to have a beneficial relationship.
In the summer of 2009, Dunkin Donuts launched its new vanilla-flavored drink, Coolatta, by organizing a competition on Facebook. When the competition started, the Dunkin Donuts fan page had almost 800,000 supporters. Within one week, their fan base was composed of 1.1 million and kept growing (today it has more than 3.1 million). Companies have the ability to harness the power of social media, but that power comes from the people, the consumers. When left unmonitored, they also have the capability to destroy any brand, no matter how reputable or well known.
While it may seem overwhelming, the following are ten steps to consider for protecting your company and your brand. 1. Assemble a team or small group of individuals to closely monitor consumer feedback 24/7. This team should be familiar with sites like Socialmention, Hootsuite, and Brandwatch. Check them out if you are unfamiliar. There should also be a member of this team on the web at all times. Social media interaction doesn’t end when business hours do, and quick responses can avert a potential disaster. This team should also be responsible for investigating suspicious activity, such as theft, counterfeiting, and other crimes, which will be discussed further. 2. Establish corporate guidelines that are updated frequently. It’s important to document what your company’s expectations are regarding social media. Lawsuits and public relations nightmares are a few consequences of the lack of corporate guidelines on this matter. You need to know where the company stands on this issue—there are no gray areas. As technology evolves, so should these guidelines. According to the Deloitte 2010 ethics and workplace survey, 40 percent of executives say their company does not allow access to online social network sites from the workplace. However, denying access to these sites doesn’t make them disappear. Just because employees cannot access these sites at the office…even though most of them can access them through their mobile device…it doesn’t mean they will not discuss the company, other employees, or your brand. Every company needs to address the responsibilities of the employees when they are on these sites. 3. Establish a response system. Companies need to establish an internal response system when monitoring complaints online. The response system would provide specific protocols based on the nature of the complaint or issue, and from there, a response committee can address the issue. To be most effective, a response committee should consist of one manager or director from each department and follow a set process on how to resolve and respond to a complaint or issue. Don’t make the mistake of assuming that just because you have lawyers, it means you are covered from customer complaints. Today’s tech-savvy consumers beg
Examining your company’s participation in social media sites may lead you to reevaluate the larger issues affecting your company and help prevent future problems. But you have to manage it wisely by creating a team of individuals to oversee the accounts.
to differ. You prepare responses for situations such as severe weather, bomb threats, and fire, so why not prepare for this?
The following scenario showcases a response system in action. On April 13, 2009, a video of Domino’s employees violating public-health laws by sneezing on food and contaminating other ingredients was released on YouTube. Over 100 million views and over 300,000 comments were posted that day. References to it were in five of the twelve results on the first page of a Google search for “Domino’s” and discussions had spread throughout Twitter.
Domino’s Pizza was faced with the challenge of reestablishing their clients’ and investors’ trust. They responded fast and efficiently in order to stop the snowball effect, discredited the content of the video and its producers, and minimized the issue to avoid alarming investors, since the company’s share value had been dancing up and down with the lowest rates in the last five years. They realized they had to reach the same consumers the video had reached. They replied with a YouTube video featuring Patrick Doyle, president of Domino’s Pizza, and created an official Twitter account. Domino’s managed to refocus the attention of clients back to the product—pizza—by building alliances with bloggers and giving away free food in order to reconcile with the product.
Social Media Works Both Ways
Even though the release of the video was a PR disaster, the fact that the employees in the video said their names and then explicitly preformed the violations helped Domino’s out in their LP department. It was posted on YouTube for public view and fair game for investigation.
Social media can work both ways like that. Many people tend to post more than they should, and you have to watch your employees in this
continued on page 20
The asset protection industry may see a shift from worrying about the control of inventory to the control of information, which travels fast and efficiently. You might not have thought social media sites were worth using professionally, but they are a significant resource for areas such as building up a brand, investigation, and gathering customer feedback.
continued from page 19
respect. But the fact that people do post more than they should gives you the upper hand in finding violators. According to GetSafeOnline.org, 25 percent of registered social networking users had posted sensitive personal data on their profiles. The proof is in the post…or the tweet, picture, or video. This brings us to the next steps. 4. Use social media as an investigative tool. People post too much valuable information. People post where they are, what they are doing, and, even more importantly, visual elements of what happened through photos and videos. For example, say you set a Google alert or Bing alert for your company. A blog pops up describing where the blogger found your brand-new product for half the price and included a picture. It might not be worth examining, but it doesn’t hurt to look into it. If you decide to pursue it, you now have a lead in a possible counterfeit or theft investigation. While laws regarding the use of evidence from social media sites are still evolving, electronically stored information (EIS) is becoming an accepted form of evidence. According to E-Commerce News Network, 95 percent of all information is electronic. Utilize this abundance of information for your investigations. 5. Report suspicious activity. Unfortunately, we don’t live in a perfect world. Crime will always be a part of our society, and it has even crept into the world of social media. Companies should also establish an internal response system to report suspicious activity, such as organized retail crime, counterfeiting of goods, dissemination of proprietary information, and cyber-bullying of employees and/or supervisors on social media sites. The response system would consist of a set process on how to report suspicious activity via email and/or a toll-free telephone line. All would be sent to the response committee for internal review, and from there, a set protocol would be established. You are responsible for finding the suspicious activity, so make sure your company knows what to do with the information.
Want to see social media investigations in action? The American Medical News released an article earlier this year detailing cases where social media investigations have led to key pieces of evidence collected in insurance fraud. In one case, a Miami private investigator named Daniel Maya was working for an insurance agency. They were having a hard time keeping tabs on a patient who claimed to be disabled due to injuries from a car accident. Maya decided to look at the 23-year-old’s Twitter account to see if he could find any evidence that proved otherwise. The man was tweeting like everyone else, describing where he was going and what he was doing. One tweet described his plans to go jet skiing. Investigators, armed with a video camera, went to the site where the young man was jet skiing and caught him on tape. This $500,000 lawsuit against the city was saved by a tweet.
Even though people know the cost of tweeting such information, they continue to do it anyways, leaving an opening for LP professionals to get the inside scoop. Many people are realizing that they can get the information they need from social media sites, and you can be one of them. But be careful. Those people may be looking to get their hands on you or your company’s information. 6. Guard your information. With email still the biggest threat to leaking proprietary information, other modes of online communication are quickly catching up. According to Proofpoint, Inc., 17 percent of companies in the U.S. had confidential information exposed on social media sites like Facebook and LinkedIn in 2009. That figure is up from 12 percent in 2008.
By following blogs and message boards, monitoring YouTube videos, and keeping an eye on social networks, retailers can be aware of
continued from page 20
issues that arise and respond quickly instead of simply hoping that nothing comes up. Being a part of these social online communities is a risk, but it’s becoming a necessity as more businesses realize their potential. Just make sure your company is not vulnerable to hackers and the employees know what they can and cannot share. 7. Manage feedback and build brand loyalty. Not all tweets or Facebook posts are going to blow-up like the Domino’s Pizza fiasco, but don’t underestimate their importance. Social media gives companies a chance to directly interact with their customers. Examining this feedback can assist you in looking at some of the ineffective operations of the business. And when a company promptly responds to feedback, positive or negative, it builds brand loyalty. A loyal following is the base of asset protection, and you have the chance to prove you respect your customers with every post or tweet. This also gives you the power to put out potential fires the minute they arise. As mentioned before, this is a 24/7 job for a 24/7 world.
Employees Are Also Using These Sites
It is important to look at what customers are saying about your company or product, but it’s not just the customers you should look out for; it’s also the employees. Many people think that when logging on to social media sites, they become anonymous. They might have some personal information or pictures on these sites, but all too often, people lose their inhibitions when they realize they have the power to type anything they want without a face-to-face confrontation.
Employees need to realize they represent the company, and they need to understand this every time they contribute to social media sites. This is yet another reason corporate guidelines are useful for informing employees that, while they have a right to those sites, they also have a responsibility to uphold the image of the company. Potentially, a disgruntled employee who logs on might do more damage than an angry customer.
In early March 2011, someone who had access to the official Chrysler Twitter account said the F-word in one of the tweets. The tweet was deleted promptly, but Chrysler has over 7,000 followers, and it was re-tweeted immediately. The source of the tweet was Scott Bartosiewicz, an employee from the social media contractor for Chrysler. He was not a disgruntled employee, but he confused his personal account with the brand account; a mistake that cost him his job.
It took seconds for one tweet to tarnish this brand, but don’t let this prevent you from creating an account like Twitter. Chrysler had over 7,000 followers when this incident occurred. They now have over 13,000. Of course, it is not smart to pull an unprofessional stunt for the sake of attention, but it’s a reminder that it’s never the end of the world when it comes to social media. You can rebuild your brand by keeping a professional online reputation.
These next steps showcase how your employees are affecting your company online. 8. Check out what your fellow employees are saying on social media sites. Some might say this is an invasion of privacy for the employees, and they have a right to participate in these sites freely. They do have a right, but by posting statuses and pictures on them, they are opening them up to the public. It’s important to check out what the employees are saying, because they could be discrediting the brand. They have a right to their own opinions, but under the company guidelines that were discussed before, they should keep a level of professionalism even out of the office on these sites.
Think about the content you are posting and how it reflects on you as a person. According to a CareerBuilder survey, 53 percent of employers use social networking sites when researching candidates. This isn’t a free speech issue. Employers are trying to protect their company and brand by
getting a candid look at the people working for them or the potential employees. What is the lesson to be learned—online posts and personas matter. 10. Use “social” etiquette.
9. Check out what your fellow employees are saying on social media sites. This is the same step as above, but it is not redundant. According to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, approximately 75 percent of all employees steal from work, whether it’s time theft, office supplies, or larger products. And 30 percent of all corporate bankruptcies are a direct result of employee theft. How can you bring down these statistics for your company? Monitor your employees’ online profiles. If they tweet twenty times between 9:00 and 11:00 a.m. on a workday, it’s likely they are misusing company time. The reason many people share information online is because they think no one is watching. But if you see an employee is selling a printer on Facebook Marketplace that looks like the one that just went missing around the office, it might be beneficial to start watching.
It may seem too “big brother” to keep such a close eye on employees who participate in social networking sites, but try to think of it as a better-safe-than-sorry technique. Employee theft is a major contributor to shrink, and using social media is just another tool to stop it. This doesn’t mean everyone will admit to everything once they get online; nothing in life is ever that easy. But slipups will occur, and you have to ask yourself if you missed them because you weren’t looking.
This last step is a general rule you should remember whenever participating in a company social networking account.
Everybody knows at least one person who has to blog, tweet, or post about every little thing they did that day, from eating breakfast to cutting their toenails. Don’t be that person. Post something if you have something meaningful to say; otherwise let it be. The fans and followers won’t forget about you. That is, unless you never do it. You should try to keep them engaged frequently with contests, coupons, and events. It’s the whole company’s responsibility to take care of the social media accounts, and that includes building up the brand as well as protecting it. Lastly, don’t berate employees, executives in your company, or even a competitor in any form of social media. Bad-mouthing will not get you anywhere except in trouble.
Social Media Threat Video
A video that speaks to many of the points discussed in this article is available at LP Magazine’s youtube channel, lossPreventiontV, or on the video page of the magazine website, www.lPportal.com.
No Insurance for Social Media Damage
The Internet has changed how we think about the flow of information. The asset protection industry may see a shift from worrying about the control of inventory to the control of information, which travels fast and efficiently. You might not have thought these sites were worth using professionally, but they are a significant resource for areas such as building up a brand, investigation, and gathering customer feedback.
Examining your company’s participation in these sites may lead you to reevaluate the larger issues affecting your company and help prevent future problems. But you have to manage it wisely by creating a team of individuals to oversee the accounts.
There is no insurance policy regarding the damage to a brand’s reputation as a result of unmonitored social media feedback. A large number of tweets complaining about your company or brand can be as damaging as one of those people stealing half of your inventory, but no policy will bring those customers back as it would the inventory. It is up to you to manage your company’s online reputation.
In order to ensure these effects remain positive, your company should embrace the many benefits of social media, be aware of how social media can hurt your company’s brand and reputation, and use social media as a tool to aid your company’s asset protection efforts. If you have not done so, it’s time for a social media audit.
HELEN LEVINSON is cofounder and chief technical officer of Desert Rose Design. With over sixteen years’ experience in the digital marketing and automation arena, she precisely forecasts her clients’ web-based needs and advises others about the benefits and pitfalls of technology. Levinson is a frequent speaker who recently presented on this subject at the Food Marketing Institute asset protection conference. She is recognized as a digital marketing expert, specializing in social media strategies of how to mitigate risk and prevent damage to a brand’s reputation online. Levinson can be reached at hlevinson@desertrose.net; on LinkedIn at www.linkedin.com/in/helenlevinson; and Twitter @helenlevinson.
