Many employers find themselves navigating a growing number of employee complaints and requests for formal investigations. As workplace investigations become more common, it raises the question of whether the traditional approach still serves the best interests of employers.

A traditional workplace investigation is one where a linear process is followed to establish the relevant facts and determine an appropriate course of action. It is one focused on a relatively narrow question: did the alleged conduct occur on the balance of probabilities?

While it remains important for any investigation to determine “what” occurred, many workplace investigations overlook the broader question of “why” the conduct occurred and what organisational factors contributed to the situation. When a workplace investigation adopts a broader focus, the investigation becomes more meaningful.

Context is everything

Workplace complaints do not arise in isolation. There are often broader issues of workplace dynamics, communication challenges, leadership shortcomings, cultural misalignment and competing work styles.

While identifying whether misconduct occurred remains important, employers can gain greater value from investigations by also examining the systemic or organisational issues that allowed the conflict to develop or escalate. This approach recognises that workplace disputes are often the product of multiple contributing factors rather than a single isolated incident.

Investigations as an institution

One of the mistakes employers can make is treating workplace investigations as the default response to every complaint. When every complaint automatically triggers a workplace investigation, it can create an expectation that all concerns will be managed through a formal process. It may also inadvertently reward complainants by subjecting respondents to the time, stress and disruption associated with an investigation, regardless of the merits of the complaint.

Employers are not required to respond to every complaint by conducting a formal investigation, and alternative responses may sometimes be more appropriate and effective. Employers should consider whether concerns can be resolved through leadership, constructive communication, coaching, mediation or other early intervention strategies. Avoiding an investigation does not mean taking no action. Rather, it recognises that a formal investigation is not always the most appropriate response.

The FWC’s position

Fair Work Commission (“FWC”) has demonstrated an awareness of the importance of looking beyond the allegations themselves. In a stop bullying application the FWC took the somewhat unusual step of making recommendations to the employer aimed at addressing the underlying issues that had contributed to the stop bullying application.

In particular, the FWC encouraged the employer to conduct a post-proceedings debrief with the (now former) employee to better understand how the matter could have been better handled. The FWC also observed that an investigation and mediation process may have prevented escalation of the dispute.

These recommendations reflected a broader focus on understanding what has gone wrong in the workplace, why a conflict has escalated, and what measures could be implemented to prevent similar issues from arising in the future. The FWC’s comments align with a broader trend towards preventative and proactive management of workplace risks through workplace investigations.

The real question: what has gone wrong here?

Even when an investigation finds a complaint unsubstantiated, there may still be learnings for the organisation. By asking the question “what has gone wrong here?” an employer can derive far greater value from a workplace investigation.

This does not mean that every investigation must become a culture review. Rather, investigators and decision-makers should remain alert to patterns, systemic concerns or workplace dynamics that may warrant further examination.

A holistic investigation will not just involve a finding regarding the allegations, but where appropriate, follow up actions will include:

• facilitated discussions or mediation;
• team-based interventions;
• leadership coaching;
• policy reviews;
• workplace culture assessments; and
• targeted training programs.

Ultimately, the most effective workplace investigations focus on both accountability and prevention. They help employers understand the conditions that contributed to the complaint and implement follow-up measures to address underlying issues, strengthen workplace culture and reduce the risk of future workplace conflict.