A study done in the US found more than 60% of all resumes of people in the workforce were inaccurate in some way. The inaccuracies of college graduate resumes were up to 90%. Studies in the UK showed that more than 50% of all resumes had embellishments to the extent that they falsified the level of expertise or experience.
This is not uncommon outcome when people and organisations try to sell themsleves. This phenomenon has been somewhat politely called "Strategic Misrepresentation". It can be extensive or subtle and the only way to determine the accuracy is through appropriate questioning and analysis of the work that has been stated to have been completed, and solid reference checking.
The biggest problem we have found is over stating the responsibilities and impact of the role and taking credit for what others have done.
It has been said that with the advent of LinkedIn people’s work history is public and they cannot misrepresent themselves. In reality it is less clear cut and the opportunity for misdirection still remains. To be sure the candidate has done what he has stated, it will always be necessary to question and check well. There is a skill to questioning and probing and the best people are cautiously sceptical without being rude. Being inquisitive about the details is a good way to get to the true story of people’s roles and skills