Picture this: You run a company and just received an inflammatory employee complaint accusing a high-level executive of misconduct. Based on the Complainant’s history with the company or your personal knowledge of the Respondent, you have little reason to believe the allegations. But, rather than shrug off the complaint as frivolous, counsel suggests contracting with a third party to conduct an impartial investigation into the complaint. The investigation will comply with legal obligations and (you’re confident) will result in an unsubstantiated finding clearing the name of the Respondent. Fast forward to the end of the investigation and, to your surprise and dismay, the investigator substantiates the allegations.
Or, consider the opposite hypothetical: You have long suspected the Respondent of misconduct and commission an investigation to confirm your suspicions. But, the investigator does not find sufficient evidence to substantiate the allegations contained in the complaint.
In either scenario, your knee-jerk reaction may be to toss out the investigation as a useless endeavor in which the investigator clearly got it wrong. However, if—as is the case with ILG’s investigations—the investigation yields a thorough, accurate, and thoughtful report from the investigator who had access to the witnesses, documents, videos, and any other evidence that led to the findings, the finalized investigation may serve the company more than you realize.
One tangential benefit to commissioning an impartial investigation is to workplace culture. The rumor mill in many workplaces means employees are often aware of complaints once they are filed. An investigation that takes the complaint seriously and protects witness participation promotes a culture in which employees feel their concerns are worthy rather than ignored.
More concretely, a good investigation report will tell an employer what conduct was witnessed first-hand, what is rumored but unverified, how many witnesses corroborate certain claims, and, perhaps most importantly, assesses the credibility of witnesses and parties using objective, research-based strategies for making such assessments. The value of a good report lies in its capacity to notify an employer of future risks (or the lack thereof), meaning company leaders can implement necessary changes to prevent the problem from occurring again and have objective, fact-based sense of its legal risk if the complaint morphs into litigation.