Trust but verify

Ensuring employee and consultant credentials

By David Quinn

In manufacturing—where the work is fast-paced, technical, and often safety-critical—businesses rely on people who truly know what they’re doing. A single unqualified worker in the wrong role can introduce hazards, compromise product quality, or trigger costly shutdowns. Whether you’re hiring a maintenance technician, a safety consultant, or a process engineer, you need confidence that the credentials they claim are genuine and relevant.

Credential fraud and exaggeration are increasingly common. And while high-profile cases often involve other sectors, manufacturing is affected more often than many leaders realize. So, what can employers do to protect their people, operations, and reputation?

Why credential verification matters

Manufacturing operations depend on expertise. The people responsible for equipment maintenance, process control, welding, fabrication, quality assurance, and workplace safety must have the right training to perform their roles safely and effectively. When someone claims credentials they don’t have, the consequences can go well beyond poor performance—they can put workers at risk.

Consider a technician who claims a trade certification they haven’t earned. They may not understand lockout/tag-out procedures, electrical safety, or proper equipment operation. A consultant who misrepresents safety training could provide incorrect advice that leads frontline workers into dangerous situations. Even a manager exaggerating their experience can create gaps in hazard recognition or regulatory compliance. In a sector where hazards are ever-present and production pressures are real, credential verification isn’t simply due diligence—it’s a core safety practice.

The growing issue of misrepresented credentials

While outright forged diplomas exist, most problems in manufacturing hiring stem from subtler forms of misrepresentation. Some applicants inflate job titles or overstate their responsibility levels. Others list certifications that have quietly expired or suggest that short training sessions were formal qualifications. In some cases, applicants present degrees from unaccredited or non-existent institutions. Consultants may also overstate their technical expertise or regulatory knowledge.

Online “diploma mills” have made it easier for people to present questionable credentials, and social media has created résumé-style profiles that emphasize marketing over accuracy. Rapid hiring cycles—especially during labour shortages—can tempt employers to rely on intuition rather than verification. Smaller manufacturers may struggle with these pressures, but even large companies can find themselves exposed. In any operation where technical competence impacts safety, the risks associated with unverified credentials are too significant to ignore.

Safety risks associated with unverified credentials

Manufacturers understand the importance of hazard controls and safe operating procedures, yet an overlooked hiring risk is allowing unverified or unqualified individuals to influence those controls. The safety implications can be severe. For example, an unqualified worker performing maintenance may unknowingly create unsafe conditions by bypassing or misapplying lockout/tag-out procedures. A poorly trained consultant conducting a safety audit may fail to identify obvious hazards, leaving frontline workers vulnerable. Workers who receive improper training may believe they understand safe procedures when, in fact, they have been misinformed. Regulatory non-compliance is another danger—many roles in manufacturing require certified personnel, and using unqualified individuals can expose companies to liability, fines, or operational shutdowns.

Across Canada, investigations into industrial incidents regularly cite insufficient training, improper supervision, or lack of qualifications as contributing factors. While equipment and environmental conditions play major roles in workplace incidents, human error resulting from inadequate training or fraudulent credentials can be just as dangerous. Verification is therefore a critical component of incident prevention.

Common red flags employers should watch for

Most applicants and consultants are honest about their backgrounds, but certain warning signs should prompt closer inspection. Employers should be wary of credentials from institutions they have never heard of, particularly if the institution’s name sounds unusually generic or international without context. Résumés that lack clear completion dates or present vague timelines for training or experience also warrant scrutiny. If documents appear amateurish—showing inconsistent logos, spelling errors, or odd formatting—it may be a sign that they were not issued by a legitimate organization.

Some applicants may list certifications without naming the issuing body, which could indicate that informal workshops or online videos are being passed off as accredited training. Reluctance to provide documentation or a defensive attitude when asked for verification is also a warning signal. Consultants who lean heavily on years of experience but avoid describing specific technical training or regulatory knowledge should prompt further questions. While none of these signs automatically indicates fraud, they all justify deeper follow-up.

Practical steps for employers

Establish a standard verification process
Every company benefits from having a clear, structured verification procedure for each stage of the hiring process. This procedure should outline how degrees, safety training, trade certifications, professional designations, and previous work experience will be verified. Treating verification as a standard practice rather than an exceptional one both normalizes the process and improves consistency. When every applicant is subject to the same checks, the process reinforces fairness while protecting the company and its workforce.

Use official sources to confirm information
Employers should rely on official, authoritative sources when confirming credentials. Universities and colleges can verify degrees and diplomas through their registrars. Provincial apprenticeship and trades authorities can confirm journeyperson status and Red Seal endorsements. Professional associations—such as engineering, safety, or inspection bodies—maintain registries that show whether a person is certified, licensed, or in good standing. Regulatory bodies also track licences and continuing-education requirements. Direct confirmation through these organizations eliminates ambiguity and reduces the risk of relying on forged or misrepresented documents.

Leverage third-party verification services
For manufacturers who hire frequently, work across borders, or fill roles involving advanced technical or safety expertise, specialized verification services can be valuable. These companies verify that educational institutions are legitimate, confirm international credentials, check professional memberships, and identify questionable documentation. Third-party services are especially useful when an employer must evaluate credentials from unfamiliar institutions or countries, reducing guesswork and ensuring accuracy.

Strengthen reference and experience checks
Experience matters as much as paper credentials, and reference checks provide insight into how an applicant applied their knowledge in real-world settings. Instead of simply confirming employment dates, employers can ask detailed questions about responsibilities, safety performance, scope of work, and problem-solving ability. This step helps determine whether a candidate’s stated achievements align with their actual contributions. Proper reference checks often reveal discrepancies in a candidate’s account of their duties or the level of technical authority they held.

Set clear expectations for consultants
Consultants play a significant role in manufacturing operations, especially in areas like process engineering, equipment commissioning, system upgrades, and safety audits. When engaging a consultant, employers should request proof of all relevant certifications, confirm that training aligns with project requirements, and ensure that any required regulatory qualifications are up to date. Consultants should be transparent about the roles of any subcontractors, and employers should verify those subcontractors’ credentials as well. Consultants who understand the importance of accuracy and safety will readily provide this information.

Integrate verification into safety management systems
Credential verification should be embedded into the wider safety management system. Manufacturers may choose to maintain a centralized credential log for all employees in technical, supervisory, or safety-sensitive positions. Certifications that expire should be tracked and renewed proactively. Contractors working on site should be expected to meet the same credential requirements as employees. Employers can also review credential requirements during incident investigations or near-miss analyses to identify gaps. Integrating verification into safety systems strengthens the organization’s overall risk-management framework.

Train hiring managers to spot risks
Hiring managers often serve as the first line of defence against misrepresented credentials. Providing training and guidance on relevant qualifications, distinctions between accredited programs and informal courses, red flags to watch for, and reliable sources of verification can significantly reduce risk. When managers understand what quality credentials look like—and why they matter—they’re better equipped to protect the organization from unqualified candidates who may inadvertently create hazardous situations.

Building a culture of integrity and safety

Credential verification is ultimately about fostering a culture of integrity and safety. Manufacturers often operate in close-knit communities where trust matters deeply. Verifying credentials reinforces that trust by ensuring everyone meets the same standards and that claims of technical competence are backed by real training and experience.

A transparent and consistent verification process also sends an important message to employees: the company takes safety and professionalism seriously. Workers are more likely to maintain their own certifications and stay current with training when they know the organization values accuracy and invests in diligence. In this way, verification contributes to a culture where safety is reinforced at every level.

Verifying the credentials of employees and consultants is more than administrative due diligence—it is an essential part of maintaining safe, reliable, and compliant operations. By recognizing the risks associated with misrepresented training or experience, looking out for warning signs, and implementing structured verification procedures, employers can ensure they bring qualified, capable, and safety-minded individuals onto their teams.

Trust plays an important role in any workplace—but verification keeps people safe. 

Honorary degrees and the use of “Doctor”

Around the world, many universities award honorary doctorates to recognize outstanding contributions to society, philanthropy, or professional achievement. These degrees are a mark of respect, but they are not the same as an earned academic doctorate.

This distinction matters in professional and business contexts. An earned doctorate—whether in engineering, medicine, or another field—signifies years of specialized training and research. An honorary degree, by contrast, is symbolic and purely titular. It does not confer the academic or technical expertise implied by the title “Doctor.”

So, when is it appropriate to use an honorary title? Traditionally, recipients may be addressed as “Doctor” at the ceremony where the degree is conferred and in university contexts celebrating the honour. Outside those settings, it is generally considered misleading or inappropriate for individuals with honorary doctorates to style themselves as “Dr.” in business, consulting, or professional correspondence. Institutions will often provide guidance that honorary degrees should be listed in one’s résumé or CV as an award, not as an educational attainment.

For employers and business leaders, this is more than an etiquette issue—it’s about clarity and trust. If a consultant introduces themselves as “Dr. Smith” based on an honorary degree, it may create the impression of technical expertise that is not there. A respectful but cautious approach is best: recognize the honorary degree as an accolade, but do not treat it as evidence of professional qualifications.