You have received a workplace complaint. It is detailed, emotional, serious sounding, or perhaps all three. Someone wants an answer. A manager wants to know what happens next. The instinct is often to start an investigation immediately.
Sometimes that is the right call.
Sometimes it is not.
The first job is to understand what you have actually received before deciding what process should follow. A measured first response can make the rest of the matter much easier to manage.
Start by acknowledging the complaint
The person raising the complaint should know that you have received it and will consider it properly.
You do not need to promise an investigation before you understand the issues. You also do not need to give an immediate view about whether the complaint stands up, or amounts to serious misconduct, bullying or anything else.
A simple acknowledgement can confirm that you have received the complaint, explain who will be the contact person and let the employee know what will happen next in broad terms.
At this stage, avoid making promises about outcomes or timeframes you may not be able to keep.
Check whether anything needs attention right now
Before getting into the detail, consider whether there is an immediate issue that you need to manage.
Do the people involved need temporary changes to reporting arrangements, work location, contact or duties? Is there a wellbeing or safety concern? Could documents or other evidence be at risk of disappearing? Is somebody about to leave the organisation or go on extended leave?
Interim measures should be practical and proportionate. You should not treat them as punishment, and they should not signal that you have already reached a conclusion.
Often, the best interim step is simply to create enough space to assess the matter properly.
Work out what is actually being alleged
People rarely write complaints like investigation allegations.
They often include history, opinions, examples, assumptions, workplace frustrations and events involving several different people. That is understandable. The employee is telling you what the experience has been like from their perspective.
Your job is to identify the conduct that may require a factual finding.
What happened, according to the complaint? Who allegedly did it? When and where did it occur, if known? What specific words or actions does the complaint raise? Which parts involve disputed facts, and which parts raise concerns about management decisions, communication or workplace relationships?
You may need to speak with the complainant to clarify those points before deciding what happens next.
Do not assume every complaint needs an investigation
This is one of the most important decisions in the process.
A workplace complaint investigation is useful when material facts still need establishing. If the parties already agree on the important facts, another response may make more sense.
For example, a complaint may really be about poor communication, unclear expectations, a damaged working relationship or dissatisfaction with a management decision. Those issues can be real and important without necessarily requiring a formal fact finding process.
On the other hand, if there are serious allegations and competing versions of what happened, a formal investigation may be the cleanest way to establish the facts before anyone makes decisions.
Think about who should handle it
If you need an investigation, consider whether you can reasonably conduct it internally.
Does the proposed investigator have the experience and time to do it properly? Have they already been involved in the complaint? Do they report to somebody involved? Will the complainant and respondent reasonably see them as impartial?
There is no problem with using an internal investigator where the circumstances support it. Independence becomes more important where there are conflicts, senior employees, sensitive allegations, complicated evidence or low confidence in the internal process.
Preserve the evidence without turning the workplace upside down
You do not need to collect every email anybody has ever sent.
You do need to think early about evidence that may matter.
That could include emails, text messages, Teams or Slack messages, rosters, meeting invitations, CCTV, swipe records, policies, previous correspondence or documents specifically referred to in the complaint.
Start with what is relevant to the allegations. You can adjust the scope if new evidence genuinely requires it.
Keep communication simple
People become anxious when they do not know what is happening.
You may not be able to give everyone detailed information, particularly where confidentiality and privacy are important. But you can usually explain the process, who their contact person is and what they can expect next.
It is also sensible to remind the people involved not to discuss the matter widely while it is being assessed. That is different from imposing unrealistic secrecy. People may need to speak with a support person, representative or adviser.
Get the process right before it gets complicated
The early stage of a complaint is often where a little experienced advice saves a lot of difficulty later.
You might not need an external investigator. You may simply need help working out whether the complaint should be investigated, what the allegations actually are, how broad the scope should be, or who is best placed to handle it.
My Workplace Investigation Advisory service is designed for exactly that point in the process. If you have received a workplace complaint and are unsure what to do next, I can help you work through the options and choose a proportionate way forward.
[…] of the first questions after a complaint is raised is whether it needs a formal […]