A workplace investigation is a structured fact-finding process designed to gather and assess relevant evidence relating to a concern at work. The purpose of the investigation is not to determine guilt or innocence, but to establish the facts as objectively as possible so that an informed decision can be made.
When conducted properly, the investigation report provides a fair, balanced, and evidence-based account of the issues under consideration. This allows managers and decision-makers to proceed with confidence, knowing their decisions are based on facts rather than assumptions.
A thorough investigation typically involves:
Whether the issue involves alleged misconduct, a grievance, poor performance, discrimination concerns, bullying allegations, or a customer complaint, a workplace investigation is often the critical first step in understanding what has happened and deciding what action, if any, should follow.
Employee grievances: colleagues may raise concerns relating to bullying or harassment; discrimination; unfair treatment; management decisions and workplace relationships.
Allegations of misconduct: Managers may raise concerns relating to breaches of company policy; attendance concerns; inappropriate behaviour; misuse of company resources and alleged gross misconduct.
Performance concerns: Investigations can help establish whether employee issues relate to capability; training gaps; support requirements or conduct issues.
Customer or third-party complaints: External complaints from clients, customers, stakeholders and partners often require independent fact-finding before action can be taken.
Every investigation is different, but common objectives are shown in the graphic below. The answers to these questions help employers make fair and defensible decisions.
Who should be involved in a workplace investigation?
A successful investigation requires clear separation between the individuals involved in different stages of the process.
The investigator gathers evidence and establishes the facts. They should be independent of the issues being investigated and have no prior involvement in the matter. Many organisations choose to appoint an external workplace investigator where impartiality, expertise, or resource constraints are considerations.
The decision-maker reviews the investigation report and determines what action should be taken. This individual should not be responsible for conducting the investigation itself.
The appeal manager hears the matter if the case progress to an appeal and should be someone who has had no prior involvement and possesses sufficient authority to review the matter objectively.
Jump to the guide ‘Who should conduct a workplace investigation?’.
There is no universal timeframe for workplace investigations however, unnecessary delays should be avoided. The appropriate timeframe depends on factors such as:
Where an employee is experiencing stress, uncertainty, or suspension, prolonged investigations can create additional risks for both the individual and the organisation. Maintaining a documented investigation plan can help demonstrate that the matter has been progressed diligently and without undue delay. Read more details in our guide to ‘Investigation timescales’.
Suspension should never be an automatic response. Each situation should be assessed carefully, considering whether alternative arrangements could adequately manage any identified risks. Possible alternatives may include temporary redeployment, adjusted duties, changes to reporting arrangements and remote working arrangements.
Where suspension is considered necessary, employers should clearly document their rationale and explain why less restrictive alternatives were not appropriate. Suspension should remain a neutral act and not be viewed as a disciplinary sanction or punishment. Jump to our guide ‘Suspending employees’.
Read all about the pros and cons of internal and external investigators, including:
How to conduct a workplace investigation
Who should investigate?
Suspensions during investigations
Interviewing witnesses
Confidentiality
Gathering evidence
Writing reports
Timescales
