The FAIRER workplace investigation process– preventing the rogues

I don’t know if you’ve noticed but the Home Office is to introduce a new system of regulation for private investigators to protect the public from unscrupulous activity. The idea is to prevent rogue investigators unlawfully infringing on the privacy of individuals.

Workplace investigations are luckily not dogged by such rogue individuals but it does sometimes feel as though organisations do not put a high priority on supporting and quality assuring their investigators in what is a complex, risky role.

I’ve recently distilled People Resolutions’ vast experience of workplace investigation into the FAIRER model and I hope this will help those of you who are assigned to investigating workplace grievances, disciplinaries, bullying and harassment allegations and other matters.

This is how it works. First the FAIRER acronym captures the spirit of the central value of effective workplace investigation. Investigators need to be demonstrably fair – recognised as fair by a range of stakeholders, parties and their representatives in their management and recording of the process, in their verbal exchanges, treatment and respect of the parties, and in any written material they process or produce.

Fairness isn’t just in the head or heart. It involves preparation, following designated structures and principles and rigorous attention to detail. Policies give some guidance on process and many organisations do have maps, templates and model documents to help investigators act consistently across a range of situations with a range of stressed, demanding parties often with polarised perceptions.

The structure of thinking and working provided by the FAIRER model supplements and dovetails well with workplace policies and procedures.  

F- Find out – what is to be investigated and agree the terms of reference (investigation plan), what are the issues and allegations, what is the evidence, what happened and what can help understand and assess what happened

A– Analyse – apply objective, impartial, rational consideration to reflect and begin to structure what you have and begin to weigh it up against the allegations

I – bring Insight – consider the weight, type of evidence, levels of proof required, utilise external guidance, definitions, seek more information and clarification if required

R- Report – pull together evidence, conclusions, findings* in a detailed, structured report according to policy requirements and the terms of reference

E – Evaluate - explain and get feedback on the report and findings / recommendations with key parties, check in with commissioning person for feedback as appropriate

R - Reflect on learning emerging from the investigation and disseminate as appropriate.

John Crawley

*If Required 

Can a workplace investigation be a positive thing?

The circumstances surrounding most workplace investigations are serious and negative for all involved. While everyone focuses on fulfilling their personal or company objectives, many organisations lose sight of the positive aspects of conducting an investigation, as a form of business best practice.

Try looking at investigations in a different light:

They are mobilising. First and foremost, an investigation is doing something about the situation. After a conflict situation escalates to formal stages, it may be difficult to know what to do, or who is right. An investigation is designed to clarify a muddy situation by unscrambling the allegations.

They listen. Investigation interviews allow each party to state their case. On a more emotional level, they feel that their concerns are fully heard and have been able to say their piece to an unbiased listening ear. When handled professionally and independently, this can significantly help to diffuse the cloud of tension surrounding most investigations.

They are enabling. Once outcomes are determined, the HR or line manager is then able to take appropriate action. A well-written investigation report should shine a light on how the parties can move forward, whether it be a warning, or some training, or a mediation.

They are fair. Our investigation reports are always written in such a manner that doesn’t blame, criticise or criminalise the parties but treats all equitably and with respect, leaving room for everybody to move forward afterwards.

They are constructive. In many investigation cases, the parties will be required to work together afterwards. This is where investigation report can be of additional value, by including practical recommendations as to how the relationship can be brought back on track.

They provide learning. While some parties will be unhappy with an investigation outcome, even Respondents whose allegations against them have been upheld can take something positive from the experience. Having had their behaviour under the spotlight, they will no doubt be clearer on boundaries of conduct in the workplace and their own style. Depending on the visibility of the outcomes, the case may also provide learning for other colleagues about what is expected in terms of respectful co-worker interaction. For Complainants, even if their allegation hasn’t been upheld, it can be reassuring to know they weren’t being discriminated against, for example.

Finally, it is worth mentioning that you don’t have to wait for a formal grievance to be raised in order to conduct an investigation. If concerns have been raised, a line manager can action an investigation to get to the bottom of an informal conflict situation. This could prevent further escalation i.e. an eruption, a grievance, a departure, etc.  

People Resolutions provides independent conflict resolution services, including workplace investigations and mediation. If you’d like to talk through any situation, please don’t hesitate to give us a call on 01908 488 828, at no obligation.

Metropolitan Police accused of racism by white police officers

The officers, from the Territorial Support Group, are taking the Metropolitan Police to an employment tribunal - but accuse the force of delaying tactics.  One of the officers said he now had nothing but contempt for the force.  Scotland Yard says it rejects the claims and will contest them in court.

This has occurred after the 6 were tried and acquitted in a trial relating to alleged race-related assaults.  The officers accused Scotland Yard of charging them due to fear it would be accused of institutional racism if it did not act on the complaint made by a black officer.

One of the officers stated that "If it had been a white officer making that allegation, then the matter would have been dealt with in-house there and then. That would have been the end of it."