How To

How To Plan an Investigation

Attorney John Thompson provides a primer to help non-security personnel conduct effective investigations

By John Thompson

Form investigative team and divide duties. Interviews often will constitute a major part of the investigation, and it could be a serious mistake to conduct significant interviews one-on-one. If the investigation is legally challenged, the plaintiff inevitably will contest the accuracy of the interviewer’s recollection of the interview. If the organization has two witnesses to interview who have similar recollections, it will be more difficult for the plaintiff to attack the credibility of the investigation. Moreover, it is extremely difficult to ask intelligent questions, listen closely to the answers, formulate follow-up questions and take accurate notes all at the same time. A solution would be to have two interviewers, where one interviewer is responsible for the questioning and the other interviewer is responsible for note-taking. The note-taker also can ask follow-up questions that the primary questioner might miss. This division of responsibility should remain consistent throughout the interview process. Two interviewers will give you two different perspectives on the situation. Many difficult investigations require tough credibility judgments and it would be valuable to know, for example, that two interviewers have different perspectives on the credibility of a key witness.

Establish the time frame for the investigation. Many times, the organization can avoid liability for wrongs committed by its employees, even supervisory employees, if management takes quick and appropriate action to remedy the situation. Thus, it is always desirable to conduct the investigation promptly after becoming aware of the issue. Impress upon others the need to investigate and resolve the issue quickly and obtain the cooperation necessary to have interviewees available. Of course, if the investigation becomes more complicated than anticipated or unanticipated delays occur, extend the deadline if necessary to do a complete investigation.

Confirmatory memorandum. The investigator must determine whether to provide the complainant with a confirmatory memorandum. This frequently is desirable when the complainant raises a verbal complaint. The memorandum serves a variety of purposes. Most importantly, it provides the complainant with a clear understanding of the expectations that the organization has for him or her during the investigation. A letter to the complainant should include the following items: 1. A statement confirming the issues that the complainant has raised. 2. A list of all facts provided by the complainant. 3. A request that the complainant add, delete or correct the facts summarized and a confidential means to provide this information. 4. A statement identifying the investigator(s) and confirming that the complainant has agreed the investigator(s) will be fair and objective. If the identity of the investigator(s) was not previously known to the complainant, the letter should include a statement that the complainant finds the investigator(s) to be fair and objective unless the complainant indicates otherwise. 5. The anticipated time frame of the investigation and the method and timing of feedback from the investigator(s). 6. A statement that the complainant’s cooperation and participation in the investigation is required. 7. A statement that the complainant should not discuss this matter further—other than with the investigator(s)—while the investigation is being conducted, particularly within the organization. 8. A statement of the consequences of the complainant’s failure to follow these instructions. The consequences will depend upon whether the complainant is an employee or third party, of course.

• Email
• Print
• Comments
• Digg This
• SlashDot

• How to Spot a Liar: Identifying Deceptive Behavior
• Inside the Interview Room: Investigative Techniques
• 5 Things About Corporate Investigations That Won't Change...