The security clearance process is designed to evaluate trustworthiness, reliability, and judgment, and not perfection. But what happens when you’re worried about a strange or embarrassing situation from a past job coming up during your background investigation?
That’s the question one ClearanceJobsBlog forum user recently asked while going through a Secret clearance background investigation.
They were concerned about an unusual workplace behavior from a past position and whether it might surface during the investigation, or worse, derail their chances of obtaining a clearance.
I have a question about how to handle something unusual that happened at a past job in the context of a background investigation for a Secret clearance.
About two years ago I started a job that I stayed in for just over a year. At that time I was dealing with a significant amount of anxiety related to performing well in the role. As a coping mechanism, I developed what I can best describe as a “work persona.” In some work interactions I spoke with a foreign accent and treated it almost like a character in my own head that represented a more confident version of myself.
During that period I did sometimes say that I was from that country. Some coworkers began to assume that was true. However, I never falsified any forms, employment documents, security paperwork, resumes, or records. I never used it to obtain employment, pay, access, or any professional advantage. My job performance was solid, I had no disciplinary issues, and I left the position on good terms.
At the time I also spoke with a therapist about it. Their view was that it functioned as a stress coping mechanism related to anxiety about performance and that it was not harmful behavior. Over time I developed healthier ways to manage stress and I no longer do anything like this. I have also never done this at any other job I have worked, I frankly cannot even begin to explain why I thought this was my best option, but I decided that it was.
My concern is simply how something like this might be interpreted if it came up during a background investigation.
I think it’s also important to note that my BI has not yet started, I have not yet filled out an SF86 or anything similar, but that process will start soon.
My questions are:
- What is the likelihood that something like this would even come up during a BI for a Secret clearance?
- If a former coworker or supervisor mentioned it, what is the best way to explain the situation to an investigator so that it is understood in the correct context?
This is a serious question. I want to approach the clearance process honestly and make sure I handle anything properly if it were ever to be raised.
If you’re in a similar situation, here’s the good news: a single awkward or questionable workplace moment usually isn’t what derails a clearance. But how you handle it can make all the difference.
What Investigators Actually Look For
Investigators will review employment history, criminal records, credit reports, and may interview references, coworkers, and supervisors as part of the process.
Former employers are often contacted to confirm basic details like dates of employment, the position you held, eligibility for rehire, and any notable disciplinary actions. In many cases, companies provide only minimal information through HR. But if investigators need more context, they may speak with supervisors or coworkers who worked closely with you.
That’s why applicants sometimes worry that a past workplace situation, especially something awkward or unusual, could suddenly become part of the conversation.
Not Every Workplace Issue Is a Security Concern
Many applicants assume that any negative workplace incident automatically raises a red flag. In reality, the clearance process focuses on patterns of behavior and risk factors, not isolated incidents.
Under the government’s adjudicative guidelines, personal conduct concerns usually involve issues like dishonesty or falsification, repeated rule-breaking or behavior that could make you vulnerable to coercion or blackmail. Odd behavior at work that wasn’t illegal, unethical, or repeated, is rarely disqualifying by itself. Investigators and adjudicators evaluate the “whole person”. That means they consider the full context of your history, not just one uncomfortable story.
The Bigger Risk Is Hiding or Misrepresenting It
Ironically, the biggest clearance issue often isn’t the behavior itself. It’s how the applicant handles it. If something potentially relevant appears on the SF-86 or during an interview, honesty is critical. Failing to disclose information or providing misleading answers can raise concerns about integrity and judgment.
Security clearance determinations rely heavily on trust. Demonstrating transparency and accountability can often mitigate past mistakes. A common rule of thumb in the clearance community: bad judgment is often forgivable, dishonesty is not. A brief stint of speaking with a foreign accent or claiming to be from another country isn’t likely to come up in a Secret clearance investigation. If a background investigator asks, it’s important for the individual to be direct, factual, provide context, and focus on what changed and why the behavior is unlikely to reoccur.
If you’re losing sleep over a strange or embarrassing workplace moment, take a breath.
Security clearance investigators have seen it all. Their goal isn’t to dig up every awkward thing that’s ever happened in your career, it’s to determine whether you can be trusted with access to classified information.
Much about the clearance process resembles the Pirate’s Code: “more what you’d call guidelines than actual rules.” For this reason, we maintain ClearanceJobsBlog.com – a forum where clearance seekers can ask the cleared community for advice on their specific security concerns. Ask CJ explores questions posed on the ClearanceJobs Blog forum, emails received, and comments from this site. This article is intended as general information only and should not be construed as legal advice. Consult an attorney regarding your specific situation.
