How to engage reluctant witnesses during a workplace investigation

One of the most common challenges in workplace investigations is engaging individuals who are reluctant to participate – a reluctant witness. Whether you’re dealing with a grievance, disciplinary matter, bullying complaint, or misconduct allegation, witness cooperation can significantly impact the quality and fairness of the investigation. So how can you influence a cooperation from a reluctant witness?

As an external workplace investigator, I regularly work with managers and employees who are hesitant—or sometimes outright resistant—to being interviewed. While it is ultimately the investigator’s role to establish the facts, there are often practical steps that can help individuals feel more comfortable participating in the process.

In this article, I explore why witnesses may be reluctant to engage, what employers can do to encourage cooperation, and how a skilled investigator can build trust while maintaining independence and procedural fairness.

Why are witnesses reluctant to participate?

In my experience, reluctance most commonly arises among witnesses rather than complainants.

Employees who have raised concerns through a grievance process generally understand the need to be interviewed. In many cases, they see the involvement of an independent investigator as reassurance that their concerns will be examined thoroughly, fairly, and impartially.

Witnesses, however, often have different concerns. They may not have chosen to become involved in the matter and can feel anxious about the implications of participating.

Individuals may be reluctant because they are concerned about:

• Potential repercussions if they provide information involving a manager or senior colleague.
• The stress and anxiety associated with being interviewed.
• A belief that they have little or no relevant information to contribute.
• The potential impact on workplace relationships.
• Being perceived as supporting one party or acting against another.
• Confidentiality and who may ultimately see their statement.
• The wider consequences of becoming involved in a sensitive workplace matter.

Understanding these concerns is often the first step towards securing meaningful engagement.

Can you require someone to attend an investigation meeting?

In many organisations, the answer is yes.

Depending on the wording of the organisation’s disciplinary, grievance, or investigation policies, employees may be required to participate in workplace investigations. Some contracts of employment also contain provisions requiring employees to cooperate with reasonable investigations.

Even where policies do not explicitly mandate attendance, an employer may be able to direct an employee to attend an investigation meeting as a reasonable management instruction.

However, attendance and cooperation are not the same thing.

An employee who feels anxious, unsupported, or distrustful of the process may physically attend the meeting but provide limited or unhelpful information. Investigators frequently encounter responses such as:

• “I can’t remember.”
• “I don’t recall that incident.”
• “I wasn’t paying attention.”
• “I may have been off that day.”
• “I honestly don’t know.”

While these responses may sometimes be genuine, they can also reflect an individual’s discomfort with participating in the investigation process.

For this reason, relying solely on policy enforcement is rarely the most effective approach.

Why securing witness cooperation matters

A workplace investigation is only as robust as the evidence gathered.

The investigator’s role is to identify, obtain, and assess all relevant evidence before reaching findings on the balance of probabilities. Where a witness may hold key information, failing to obtain their account could undermine the quality and credibility of the investigation.

This becomes particularly important if the matter progresses to an appeal, regulatory review, or employment tribunal.

Employers and investigators should be able to demonstrate that reasonable steps were taken to obtain relevant witness evidence and that all available lines of enquiry were properly explored.

A thorough and defensible investigation requires more than simply inviting witnesses to attend—it requires genuine efforts to secure meaningful engagement.

How experienced investigators engage reluctant witnesses

Every reluctant witness is different.

Some individuals are worried about confidentiality. Others are concerned about workplace relationships, while some simply find the prospect of being interviewed intimidating.

The key is to understand the reason for the reluctance before attempting to overcome it.

Empathy plays an important role here. Taking the time to listen to an individual’s concerns can significantly increase their confidence in both the investigator and the process itself.

Witnesses often need reassurance about:

• The purpose of the investigation.
• The investigator’s independence and impartiality.
• How their information will be used.
• What confidentiality measures are in place.
• The overall fairness of the process.

A useful principle is:

Seek first to understand, then to be understood.

Where appropriate, a brief informal conversation before the formal interview can be extremely valuable. Some individuals feel more comfortable discussing their concerns verbally rather than committing them to writing.

Practical ways to encourage witness participation

The following approaches can often help reluctant witnesses feel more comfortable engaging with a workplace investigation:

1. Normalise the process

Many employees have never participated in a workplace investigation before.

Reassure them that workplace investigations are a routine and necessary part of managing employee relations and that anyone with relevant information may be asked to contribute.

2. Focus on facts, not sides

Witnesses sometimes worry that they are being asked to support one person or oppose another.

Explain clearly that the purpose of the investigation is not to gather evidence “for” or “against” anyone. The objective is simply to establish the facts.

3. Be transparent about confidentiality

Confidentiality is often a major concern.

While it is important to reassure witnesses that information will be handled appropriately, investigators should avoid making promises they cannot keep.

Instead, explain honestly:

• How information will be recorded.
• Who may have access to investigation materials.
• How witness evidence may be referenced within the final report.

Transparency helps build trust.

4. Give witnesses ownership of their statement

One approach I have found particularly effective is explaining that witnesses retain ownership of their statement.

Following the interview, they will have the opportunity to:

• Review the statement.
• Correct inaccuracies.
• Clarify wording.
• Add further information.
• Remove information they believe has been misunderstood.

Knowing they have control over the accuracy of their evidence often reduces anxiety and encourages participation.

5. Offer alternative ways to provide information

Where a witness is particularly anxious or resistant, some flexibility may be appropriate.

For example, it may be helpful to:

• Provide interview topics or questions in advance.
• Allow additional preparation time.
• Invite written responses before the meeting.
• Conduct the interview remotely if appropriate.

While these approaches may limit some opportunities for spontaneous follow-up questioning, obtaining relevant evidence is generally preferable to obtaining no evidence at all.

The value of an independent workplace investigator

One of the advantages of engaging an external workplace investigator is their ability to build trust with individuals who may be reluctant to engage with an internal process.

Independent investigators bring:

• Objectivity and impartiality.
• Specialist interviewing skills.
• Experience managing sensitive workplace issues.
• An understanding of procedural fairness.
• Credibility with employees who may be sceptical of internal investigations.

In many cases, witnesses who are hesitant to speak with internal managers are more willing to engage with an independent investigator who has no stake in the outcome.

Final thoughts

When faced with a reluctant witness, it can be tempting to immediately cite policy requirements or issue formal instructions to attend an interview.

However, the most effective approach is often to first understand the reasons behind the resistance.

By listening carefully, addressing concerns with empathy, and explaining the process clearly, investigators can frequently build the trust needed to secure meaningful cooperation.

A witness who feels respected, informed, and supported is far more likely to engage constructively than one who feels pressured or compelled.

For employers and HR professionals, this approach not only improves the quality of evidence gathered but also strengthens the overall fairness, credibility, and defensibility of the workplace investigation process.