Question Planning: How a small shift in perspective can make your planning more efficient—and your interviews more flexible.

In my experience, there are three points in any investigation where structure and analysis make all the difference: the end, the middle, and the beginning. Over time, the way I approach each of these has changed, and I talk about them often in our workshops. I thought I’d share a quick overview here.

The End: Organizing What We’ve Gathered

This was the first analysis stage I became familiar with. At the end of an investigation, all the material is collected, including verbal information formalized into signed statements, documentary evidence in the form of email and other communication, as well as evidence like audio and video recordings. At this point, we have to organize the evidence, test whether it’s in scope, and decide if it’s enough to support conclusions.

I feel like most of us are very familiar with this stage of analysis and also familiar with the feeling we get when we reach this stage and identify gaps of information. A very real choice comes with how to proceed and remedy the situation.

The Middle: Checking Completeness Midway

With experience, I learned to add another checkpoint halfway through. After interviewing and reviewing signed statements by the complainant and the respondent, I compile their information into the draft report. Seeing their accounts side by side helps me see what’s clear, what’s missing, and what I need from witnesses.

This midway analysis shapes the witness list and the questions I ask. In Level 1 of our training, we start participants on this step at level one and go deeper in level two. It’s now a routine part of every investigation I do.

The Beginning: Building the Essence Paragraph

The last checkpoint actually comes first. After reading the complainant’s signed statement, I create what I call an Essence Paragraph. It’s a short summary that captures the core elements of the complaint.

That paragraph becomes a quick reference throughout the process.I have used it in every investigation for the past few years and find myself relying on it in a number of ways that I believe increase the efficiency of the investigation and also have a side benefit of preventing scope creep. If you would like to see a sample essence paragraph, please get in touch and I can share an example from our training course.

I review it before meeting with the respondent, so I know exactly what they need to respond to. I remind myself that these are the elements that the complainant has said the respondent has done, and are in relation to them and the relevant policy under review. By focussing on the essential elements in my interview with the respondent, I can ensure that they have had a chance to respond to each essential element in their defense and I am therefore able to bring a more complete, focused product to the reporting stage of the investigation. As well, I refresh myself on the essence as I prepare for each witness interview as well as the re-direct interviews at the very end.

Added bonus: the essence paragraph also carries into the final report template. Decision-makers see the essence of the complaint right away, which helps them understand the case before diving into details.

Why It Matters

This multitiered analysis — beginning, middle, and end — keeps investigations on track. Starting early and progressing throughout keeps us on track, efficient and gets us to the finish line with the most complete information possible, enabling stronger conclusions, based on the evidence, the goal of any workplace investigation.

I’ve come to rely on this structure in every case, and I encourage you to give it a try. Please send me any questions you have about this or any other question that relates to workplace investigations, I could (and do) go on and on about it!

— Dylan

Let’s face it, being a part of an investigation is not on most people’s wishlists. Whether you are a complainant, a respondent, or a witness, chances are that you will experience anxiety, stress and discomfort related to being involved.

For the past 35 years at Hill Advisory, we have been focused on conducting formal investigations that are complete, reasonable and based on best practices.

I believe that two core practices of a well run investigation ought to be: 

1. Honest and transparent
2. A conversational approach

Over the years I have seen that a formal investigation in the workplace can be a new experience, for many, and with that comes a lot of uncertainty. We put a lot of effort into the concept of honesty and transparency, both in practice when we investigate and in training.

I am a firm believer that everyone involved in an investigation ought to know what the process is, where their information will go, and where their information could go – before answering the first question that I have. Additionally, I feel it is important that I be open to (and able to) answer any question that they may have about the process. It can be difficult to anticipate every question we may receive. 

Another commonality in investigations is the manner in which we speak to those we interview. An artificial, stiff approach to asking formal, verbatim questions, without regard for the flow of a conversation ultimately makes people feel less comfortable. Less comfortable people share less information. Less information in an investigation can cause some real problems when trying to reach the appropriate conclusion.

So, we teach (and practice) a conversational approach. It is the difference between a question like: “Please elaborate as to the actions of the respondent on May 25, 2022, in your own words” and “What happened?” One allows for a familiar, conversational pattern and one can build discomfort.

I believe that not only does an investigation seek to deliver the appropriate conclusion, based on the evidence, but also it should be done in a way that minimizes the negative impacts that are likely to occur to all those required to participate.

Managing the process with a calm, transparent, conversational approach can minimize negative impact for all.

Dylan