Investigation services
Independent workplace investigations
Independent enquiries into alleged misconduct, bullying, harassment and sensitive workplace concerns.
Accounts, relevant records and findings against the agreed issues.
Choose the form of engagement.
An organisation may need a complete commissioned investigation or a defined piece of factual support within a process it manages. A contained task could involve interviews, statements, records review, a chronology or an evidence-gap assessment. The appointment should make the investigator’s role and the organisation’s retained responsibilities clear.
A commissioned investigation has agreed terms of reference and reporting responsibilities. Reasoned findings against allegations or policy requirements are included only where expressly instructed and within the appointed investigator’s competence. A request for interviews alone does not imply responsibility for the entire workplace process.
Examine conduct at the relevant organisational level.
The scope can address employee, supervisor, management or employer conduct. It may include how a concern was handled as well as the events initially reported. The questions should describe the conduct to be examined without predetermining whether an allegation is established.
- Alleged bullying, sexual harassment and other inappropriate conduct.
- Alleged discrimination, victimisation or retaliation.
- Employee misconduct, workplace conflicts of interest or alleged policy breaches.
- Management actions, communications and responses to reported concerns.
- Disputed sequences of workplace decisions, interactions or events.
Establish authority, reporting and process responsibilities.
The appointment identifies who can instruct the work, supply records, approve variations and receive the report. Potential conflicts matter particularly when the concern involves a senior manager or a person who would ordinarily control the process. Relevant policies, reporting requirements and responsibility for procedural decisions should be settled at the outset.
The enquiry plan identifies relevant participants, documentary sources and response opportunities. Accessibility, interpreter or other particular requirements can be considered when arranging interviews. The organisation and its appropriate advisers should confirm any matter-specific legal or procedural requirements as part of the brief.
Choose the scope
The right appointment for the work required.
Compare two appointment options and the responsibilities your organisation retains. Agree the role, authority and reporting requirements before work begins.
A defined factual task
- The instruction
- Your organisation retains the wider process and commissions specified support.
- Possible work
- Interviews, statements, a records review, chronology or evidence-gap assessment.
- Agreed handover
- The requested account or analysis, with source references, status and limitations.
A commissioned investigation
- The instruction
- An appointment with agreed terms of reference, enquiry scope and reporting responsibilities.
- Possible work
- Examination of the specified allegations, relevant accounts, records and response opportunities.
- Agreed handover
- A report addressing the brief. Reasoned findings are included only where expressly instructed and within the investigator’s competence.
Applies to either appointment
Responsibilities your organisation retains
- Authority and process
- Confirm who can instruct the work, approve changes and receive the report, and which process responsibilities remain internal.
- Decisions and advice
- Employment and disciplinary decisions remain with the organisation. Legal advice remains with its advisers.
- Defined support
- Investigation planning or report review can be scoped separately when a complete appointment is not required.
A request for interviews alone does not appoint Everguard to manage the whole workplace process. Any change to the role or scope is agreed with the authorised instructing person.
The detail behind the enquiry.
Explore the scope, evidence requirements and practical considerations.
Keep accounts and supporting records distinct.
Interviews are planned around the material issues and the witness’s opportunity to know about them. Statements distinguish direct observation from information received from others. Relevant records are identified, and the prepared account is provided for review and correction. Review or signing status remains clear.
Complainant, respondent, employee and management accounts are considered neutrally. Material differences are examined against relevant documents and other accounts. A record that a complaint was made may establish the reporting event without establishing every underlying allegation. Unresolved questions are carried forward into the assessment.
Make the reasoning available to the commissioning team.
Agreed outputs can include a material-issues schedule, interview records or statements, the sources reviewed, a chronology and a factual report. Analysis explains the connection between the supporting material and the position reported. Missing records, competing explanations and scope limitations remain visible.
Employment decisions, disciplinary action and legal conclusions remain with the organisation and its advisers. Where the same events also concern a workers’ compensation claim, the two instructions may share evidence while serving different decisions. Their purposes and reporting requirements should remain distinct.
Manage developments against the brief.
An additional allegation, new witness or significant documentary conflict may change the work. Agree who can approve further enquiries and how timing, cost and reporting implications will be recorded. The final report should identify the scope actually completed and any material questions left outside it.
Before we begin
Practical questions.
Practical questions.
Can an enquiry address management or employer conduct?
Yes. The scope can examine conduct at different levels, including how concerns were handled. The instructing authority, potential conflicts and reporting arrangement must be appropriate to the people and issues involved.
Can we retain the investigation in-house?
Yes. Everguard can be commissioned for a defined task such as interview planning, statements, chronology work or report review. The organisation’s overall process responsibilities should remain explicit.
How are conflicting accounts addressed?
Accounts are compared with relevant records and other evidence. The report identifies material differences, the basis for any assessment and what remains unresolved. Uncertainty is not converted into a finding merely to complete the report.
What if a new allegation arises?
Its relationship to the agreed scope should be assessed. Any additional work and its implications are discussed with the authorised instructing person before the investigation is extended.
Who we support
Begin with a clear brief
Define the workplace enquiry.
Outline the reported concern, the decision to be supported and the form of assistance your organisation needs.