Why internal investigations may lack trust

“No one ever told me this part.” That’s what someone said to me after a recent investigation. We were at the end. Findings delivered. Process complete. But the comment stuck with me. Because I hear versions of it all the time. From complainants. From respondents. Witnesses. It’s not that people expect investigations to be easy. But they do expect to understand what’s happening. And too often, they don’t. Not because someone’s being intentionally vague, but because in the effort to get it right, we forget how much clarity matters. We assume people know what “neutral third party” means. Or what “balance of probabilities” really looks like. Or that “we’ll be in touch” doesn’t mean tomorrow, but also doesn’t mean silence for weeks or months. Transparency isn’t just about telling people what they want to hear. It’s about making sure they’re not left in the dark. Especially in high-stakes processes that already feel vulnerable. When I lead investigations, or train others to, this is something I come back to again and again: You don’t build trust at the end. You build it at the start. And then in every step that follows. By being honest about what’s happening. By naming what’s unknown. By explaining the why behind the what. Because people can handle a lot, even hard outcome, if they understand the process that got them there. So if your role puts you in the middle of hard conversations, Whether as an HR leader, an investigator, or someone people turn to for support, Don’t underestimate the power of clear, steady communication. It’s not just about compliance. It’s about empathy and care. And these are some of the most important tools we have.

Are you digging deep enough? Let's discuss the importance of conducting fair, thorough, and unbiased workplace investigations. In a recent employment discrimination case, the plaintiff, a Black employee, claimed his termination following a workplace investigation into complaints about his conduct at work, was racially motivated. The employer tried to dismiss the case, but failed. Here's what happened. The plaintiff, a Director of Compliance and Risk Management, supervised 25 employees. A contractor under his oversight complained about the plaintiff’s behavior, alleging he made a racially charged comment—stating he "preferred chocolate cake to vanilla cake" as an explanation for his management style. The contractor interpreted this as favoritism toward Black employees over white employees. This complaint led to an internal investigation. The investigation found the plaintiff had retaliated against the contractor and had not fully cooperated. However, the court noted that white colleagues in similar roles were not subjected to the same scrutiny or discipline. The court emphasized that "a reasonable jury could find that the plaintiff’s white colleagues, who were aware of and involved in the same termination decision, were not disciplined or investigated in the same manner, despite being subject to the same policies." 🔍Employer Takeaways: Three Ways to Keep Investigations Above Board 1️⃣Fair and Thorough Investigations: Workplace investigations should be objective and comprehensive. This means considering all relevant parties, gathering all necessary facts, and avoiding premature conclusions. A rushed or incomplete investigation can undermine the credibility of employment decisions and expose employers to legal risks. 2️⃣Document Everything: Keeping detailed records of investigations and disciplinary actions can help defend against claims of bias or unfair treatment. 3️⃣Consistency is Key: Similarly-situated employees should be held to the same standard. Conversely, unequal treatment of employees in similar situations can create legal exposure. Following written policies and procedures consistently helps promote fairness and reduce legal risks. ⚖️Final Verdict: Handle with Care (and Experience) A well-handled investigation can resolve workplace issues effectively, but a biased or incomplete one can create serious legal and reputational risks. This case underscores the need for employers to take workplace investigations seriously. Investigations don't have to be perfect. However, employers should ensure investigations are fair and thorough and that those conducting investigations are experienced, well-trained, and equipped with the necessary skills to assess facts objectively. #TheEmployerHandbook #employmentlaw #humanresources

This Week in Employee Relations: Jan. 26-30, 2026 This week’s headlines were a reminder that when employee voice meets weak systems, the consequences are no longer theoretical. Enforcement, investigations and accountability all moved from background risk to front-page reality. 🔎  Warner Bros. Discovery Points to Internal Investigation in Busfield Case Resolution A recent Hollywood Reporter article on the Timothy Busfield matter raised an issue that comes up often in investigation work. Not the allegations, and not the outcome. What stood out is something ER leaders know well. Investigative independence is achievable, but it does not happen by accident. It depends on discipline and the ability to hold firm when pressure exists. → ER Insight: Independence is not just about who conducts the investigation. It is about guardrails. Clear scope. Control over evidence. No outcome steering. 🚨 NLRB Secures $1.2M Settlement with Health Provider After Wrongful Termination Ruling The National Labor Relations Board announced that Peak Vista Community Health Centers agreed to a $1.2 million settlement after findings that clinicians were terminated for raising patient care concerns. The case was resolved following an NLRB ruling. ➝ ER Insight: Cases tied to employee voice continue to draw serious scrutiny and financial impact. ER teams should ensure termination decisions involving protected activity are reviewed early, consistently and with clear documentation. 💼  Employment Law Trends That Will Shape ER Work in 2026 Legal experts point to discrimination, retaliation, disability accommodation and emerging AI issues as top areas of employer exposure this year. Many of these risks stem from inconsistent handling rather than bad policy. → ER Insight: Most organizations already have policies. What they lack is visibility into patterns. ER leaders should be using data to see where issues repeat, where managers struggle and where early intervention would change outcomes. ❗When Internal Investigations Go Wrong, the Stakes Multiply Recent legal analysis reinforces that investigation failures are rarely about one bad decision. Delays, uneven documentation and unclear ownership often do more damage than the original allegation. → ER Insight: Investigations are a credibility test. A consistent, well-documented process protects employees and the organization. ER maturity shows up in how predictable and transparent that process feels to the people involved. #ERInTheNews #AI #EmployeeRelation HR Acuity

You don’t earn trust during an investigation. You earn it in the months before anyone even reports a problem. That idea has been sitting with me, and it came up again in a recent conversation with Charlotte Wiback, a communications and crisis‑management leader with more than twenty years of global experience helping organizations protect credibility in high‑pressure situations. Her background includes crisis communication work for government agencies, the UN system, and other complex multi‑stakeholder environments. When we talked about what actually makes an HR investigation feel fair to employees and strong enough to withstand scrutiny, a few themes stood out: 1) Preparedness matters more than polish. If an organization only thinks about investigations after something happens, trust is already on the back foot. The strongest outcomes come from building clear principles and expectations before a case ever shows up. 2) Transparency is something you design, not something you explain later. Employees shouldn’t feel like the investigation process is hidden until the moment it affects them. When intent, scope, and safeguards are understood early, trust is easier to maintain. 3) Independence has to be real and visible. If reporting lines are conflicted or channels loop back to compromised leadership, the issue stops being HR and becomes governance. Prepared organizations stress‑test these weaknesses before anything goes public. Charlotte framed it well: legal rigor protects you, communication protects your reputation, and real preparedness is what brings them together. -- So here's a follow-up question - Charlotte, in your experience, what is the one signal employees look for that tells them an investigation is genuinely grounded in fairness, not just compliance? -- Thumbs up if this resonates. Drop your comments below to join the conversation.

Employees don’t trust HR. Here's why: Employees don’t question HR’s competence first. They question HR’s intent. From the employee’s perspective... HR only shows up in moments that already feel threatening: - Layoffs - Complaints - Investigations - Policy enforcement - Performance issues Only few employees interact with HR when things are great. So HR seems like a red flag and not supportive. There’s also a deeper truth employees sense early in their careers: HR works for the company. That’s not wrong. But it changes how everything HR does is interpreted. Trust evaporates. When a high-performing manager is protected. Assumptions fill the gap. When decisions happen behind closed doors. HR becomes a threat. When an employee raises an issue and nothing visibly happens. And employees rarely see the things HR goes through. Even when HR fights hard internally for fairness. They only see outcomes. And outcomes without context feel like betrayal. Over time, a quiet belief forms: “Going to HR won’t help me. It might even hurt me.” Once that belief takes hold, employees stop speaking up. Silence replaces trust. THE BOTTOM LINE Trust isn’t granted. It’s earned. And the CHROs who understand that aren’t waiting for permission. They’re already rebuilding HR’s role. One hard decision at a time.

🔎 Are Your Investigations Helping or Hurting? ⚠️ We invest so much in investigation frameworks, analysis tools, and workflows, believing they’ll give us better results. But here’s the uncomfortable truth: Garbage in, garbage out. If the way we ask questions is flawed, no methodology can fix the outcome. That’s why interviewing skills are so critical. 💡 At last week's Safety Curiously Live, Emmanuel Raggi shared some insights from air accident investigations where getting accurate information is crucial. There are some simple but effective interviewing techniques that can improve how we investigate workplace incidents: 🚀 Investigate to learn, not to blame – If accountability is mixed into the process, witnesses will shut down or omit key details. Keep them separate. 🚀 Investigator independence is crucial – Bias distorts reality. If investigators are too close to operations, pressure to assign blame creeps in. 🚀 Drop the hierarchy – If the interviewer is seen as a senior leader, expect guarded answers. People speak freely when they don’t feel intimidated. 🚀 Environment matters – A director’s office = stress and caution. A familiar workspace = relaxed, open conversations. Simple, yet often overlooked. 🚀 Culture isn’t one-size-fits-all – National, organisational, and professional cultures shape how people respond to questions. Investigations must adapt accordingly. 🚀 Open-ended questions unlock real insights – Instead of “Why did you do that?” (which triggers defensiveness), ask “What happened?” and let the story unfold. 🚀 Ditch the notepad – Writing notes breaks eye contact and trust. If witnesses see you jotting something down, they might worry they said something incriminating. Instead, actively listen and write key points immediately after. 🚀 Protect witness anonymity – If people think their words might be used against them, they’ll stay silent. Reports should capture learning, not names. When we stop interrogating and start understanding, we build trust, uncover the truth, and create safer workplaces. Want to transform your safety programme from predictable to powerful? Let's add some Safety Curiously sparks and make safety engaging, memorable and impactful. Let's connect and make it happen! 📩 Enjoy this? ♻️ Repost to help others in your network, and follow Urbain Bruyere for more.