Increasing numbers of public and private organizations are using some form of drug test in an attempt to establish drug-free work environments. The most common method is urinalysis. However, the chemical analysis of hair samples has emerged as an alternative in recent years. Hair analysis is more effective than urinalysis in identifying long-term drug use. It is also less intrusive than the testing of bodily fluids. However, hair testing also has disadvantages. It is expensive and cannot detect immediate impairment from drug use or recent drug use. Researchers also do not know whether environmental exposure to drugs will affect hair analysis tests. Only 5 percent of Fortune 500 companies and less than 1 percent of State governments currently allow the use of hair analysis to screen for drugs. Several managerial, ethical, and legal implications of drug testing remain unresolved. Therefore, managers and supervisors should learn to recognize the signs of drug intoxication or impairment and currently and objectively document evidence of increased job absences or low productivity if they suspect drug use. These steps will enable a supervisor to confront an employee and decide whether testing for drug use is necessary. Reference notes