Mick Symons

Why should I use an external investigator rather than an internal investigator for workplace matters? 

In today’s workplace, addressing issues such as misconduct, bullying, harassment, fraud, and compliance violations is essential for maintaining a healthy organizational culture. Whether a company deals with minor infractions or major disputes, investigations play an important role in resolving workplace matters. One of the most important decisions an organization must make is whether to use an external investigator or rely on an internal investigator for these inquiries.

In this blog post, we will explore the pros and cons of using an external investigator compared to an internal investigator. By the end, you will have a better understanding of how to choose the right approach for your organization’s specific needs, and how each option could affect workplace investigations related to employee misconduct, harassment complaints, fraud, and policy violations.

What is a Workplace Investigation?

Before we dive into the pros and cons, it’s important to define what a workplace investigation entails. A workplace investigation is a formal process used to examine issues such as allegations of misconduct, fraud, harassment, bullying, policy breaches, or any other actions that violate company policies or legal standards. The goal is to determine the facts of the situation, provide fair treatment to all parties, and make sure the organization follows relevant employment laws and regulations.

Usually, workplace investigations are triggered by formal complaints from employees, whistleblower reports, or concerns raised by management. The person investigating must remain impartial and objective to ensure the integrity of the findings.

Why the Choice of Investigator Matters?

Whether you choose an external investigator, or an internal investigator, can significantly affect the outcome of the investigation and how it is perceived by employees, stakeholders, and even legal bodies. Each option comes with its own advantages and disadvantages, which must be weighed carefully.

Advantages of Using an External Investigator

1. Impartiality and Objectivity
   

One of the most compelling reasons for using an external investigator is the assurance of objectivity. External investigators operate as independent third parties with no connections to the organization. This independence is especially important in sensitive matters involving senior management or high-profile employees, where internal bias could be suspected.

An impartial investigator can bring credibility to the investigation, as employees are more likely to trust the process when it is clear the investigator has no interest in the outcome. This increased trust can improve cooperation from the involved parties, ensuring a more thorough and reliable investigation.

2. Specialized Expertise
   

Many external investigators specialize in workplace matters and have advanced skills in investigative techniques, interviewing, and employment law. Their specialized knowledge lets them handle complex or sensitive cases more effectively than internal investigators who may lack experience in specific areas, such as fraud investigations, compliance violations, or workplace harassment.

Hiring an external investigator also grants access to a broader network of specialists, including legal consultants, forensic experts, and financial auditors, which can be invaluable when dealing with intricate cases like financial misconduct or regulatory breaches.

3. Credibility in Legal and Regulatory Scrutiny
   

If an investigation leads to legal proceedings or regulatory scrutiny, having an external investigator lends more credibility to the investigation. Courts and regulatory bodies often view externally investigated matters as more trustworthy because they are less likely to be influenced by internal politics or conflicts of interest.

For example, in cases of workplace harassment or discrimination claims, the findings of an external investigation may carry more weight in legal settings than those of an internal one. This could prove beneficial in protecting the organization from litigation or regulatory penalties.

4. Confidentiality
   

External investigators are bound by professional standards to maintain strict confidentiality throughout the investigation process. This can be important where sensitive information or high-ranking employees are involved. Employees may feel more comfortable sharing critical details with someone outside the organization, which can lead to a more thorough investigation.

External investigators are also skilled at handling whistleblower complaints, where maintaining confidentiality and protecting the identity of the complainant is paramount to avoiding retaliation.

5. Focus and Timeliness
   

Since external investigators are brought in specifically for the investigation, they can dedicate their full attention and resources to completing it quickly and efficiently. Internal investigators, who may have other responsibilities within the organization, could be stretched thin, resulting in delays. Having an external investigator focused only on the investigation makes sure it progresses without unnecessary interruptions.

Disadvantages of Using an External Investigator

1. Cost
   

One of the most significant downsides to hiring an external investigator is the cost. External investigations, especially those conducted by specialists, can be expensive, particularly if the case is complex or involves multiple parties. For small to medium-sized businesses, this cost may be prohibitive, especially when there are budget constraints.

The expenses associated with external investigators can quickly add up if the investigation drags on for a long time. Organizations must weigh the benefits of external knowledge against the impact on their bottom line.

2. Limited Knowledge of the Organization
   

While external investigators bring specialized knowledge to the table, they often lack familiarity with the organization’s culture, policies, and operational structure. This could result in a steep learning curve as the investigator familiarises themselves with how the organization operates, potentially slowing down the investigation.

Internal investigators often know a lot about the organization’s inner workings and culture, which can streamline the investigation process. The external investigator’s lack of context could also lead to recommendations that may not align with the organization’s values or needs.

3. Employee Resistance
   

Some employees may resist participating in investigations led by an external investigator. This resistance may come from a sense of unfamiliarity or discomfort with sharing sensitive information with someone outside the organization. Employees used to working with internal HR teams or internal compliance officers may feel apprehensive about involving an outsider, especially if they fear legal or reputational consequences.

This lack of rapport with employees can hinder the external investigator’s ability to gather essential information, affecting the thoroughness and accuracy of the investigation.

4. Short-Term Involvement
   

Once the external investigator completes their investigation and delivers the final report, their involvement typically ends. They may not have a personal stake in the long-term success of the organization or in making sure their recommendations are followed through. This could result in a disconnect between the findings of investigating and making necessary changes.

Internal investigators are part of the organization long-term and are often responsible for overseeing the follow-up process, making sure corrective actions are taken and that issues do not recur.

Advantages of Using an Internal Investigator

1. Cost-Effectiveness
   

The most obvious advantage of using an internal investigator is cost savings. Since internal investigators are already part of the organization, there are no additional fees associated with their involvement in an investigation. This can be beneficial for organizations with limited budgets that cannot justify the expense of hiring an external consultant.

Internal investigators may come from HR, compliance, or legal departments, depending on the workplace matter. Their familiarity with the organization can help streamline the process, letting the investigation go forward efficiently without added costs.

2. Deep Knowledge of the Organization
   

Internal investigators have a distinct advantage because they are already familiar with the organization’s policies, practices, culture, and operational structure. This knowledge lets them navigate the complexities of the organization more easily than an outsider.

For example, internal investigators can quickly identify key stakeholders, access relevant documents, and understand the company’s dynamics, making it easier to gather information. They are also likely to have a good understanding of past incidents or earlier investigations that could provide context for current matters.

3. Employee Trust and Cooperation
   

Sometimes, employees may feel more comfortable working with an internal investigator they know and trust, particularly if the investigator comes from the HR or compliance department. This familiarity can encourage greater cooperation, leading to more open and honest interviews.

Internal investigators may also be better positioned to address issues related to organizational culture or systemic problems, as they are already part of the workplace environment and have a personal stake in improving it.

4. Greater Long-Term Accountability
   

Since internal investigators remain part of the organization after the investigation concludes, they have greater accountability for making sure the findings and recommendations are put into practice. Internal investigators can play a key role in overseeing corrective actions, such as revising policies, providing training, or disciplining employees involved in misconduct.

Their ongoing involvement ensures continuity and helps maintain the organization’s commitment to addressing the issues uncovered during the investigation.

Disadvantages of Using an Internal Investigator

1. Potential Bias
   

One of the most significant drawbacks of using an internal investigator is the potential for bias, or at least the perception of bias. Internal investigators may have personal relationships with the parties involved, or they may be influenced by internal power dynamics. Even if the internal investigator strives to remain impartial, employees may still perceive the process as unfair, especially if the investigator reports to the same management structure as the accused.

This can erode trust in the investigation and reduce cooperation from the parties involved.

2. Conflict of Interest
   

Internal investigators may face conflicts of interest, particularly in cases involving senior management or executives. If the investigator reports directly to the same individuals under investigation, there is a risk that the process will be compromised, either intentionally or unintentionally.

This is where an external investigator’s independence proves useful, as they have no direct ties to the organization’s hierarchy or employees.

3. Lack of Expertise
   

Unless the internal investigator specializes in workplace investigations, they may lack the skills and knowledge necessary to handle complex cases, such as fraud investigations, financial misconduct, or discrimination claims.

Internal investigators often juggle multiple responsibilities, such as compliance or HR duties, which could affect the depth and quality of the investigation.

Conclusion
When deciding between using an external investigator and an internal investigator, organizations must weigh the advantages and disadvantages of each option. External investigators offer impartiality, specialized knowledge, and credibility in legal settings, but they come with higher costs and potential knowledge gaps about the organization. Internal investigators offer cost-effectiveness, organizational knowledge, and long-term accountability, but they may be prone to bias and conflicts of interest.

The right choice depends on the workplace issue, the size, and structure of the organization, and the resources available. By considering these factors, organizations can make an informed decision that ensures fairness, compliance, and a positive workplace environment.