Workplace Investigations: A Tactical HR Approach

Welcome to the Vantage HR Influencers Podcast. This podcast is sponsored by Vantage Circle, the simple and AI-powered rewards and recognition platform for employee engagement.

Workplace investigations are much like a game of chess. Each move can significantly impact trust, legal responsibilities, and the very fabric of a company's culture. So, fasten your seat belts as we delve into the depth of the course of a workplace investigation, shedding light on the profound impact it can have on workplaces, and most importantly, how tactical HR can help.

Susmita Sarma: Hello and welcome to another episode of the Vantage HR Influencers Podcast. I'm your host, Susmita. And today we have with us Jennifer Watson, the Vice President, Human Resources at LASSO. Welcome to the show, Jennifer.

Jennifer Watson: Thank you so much. I'm glad to be here.

Susmita Sarma: Happy to be welcoming you in this episode of the Vantage HR Influencers Podcast. We are committed to bringing our guests meaningful conversations with experts from across the corporate world. So, first of all, our audience would want to know a bit about you, Jennifer, and what you're known for.

Jennifer Watson: Well, I think "famous" is a very liberal term. Thank you for that. I would say I started as a teacher. I taught inner city Nashville after college and learned more about myself there than I can probably even go into on this episode. I was a seventh grade math teacher and then an administrator. I was speaking on a panel about teacher readiness, and the head of HR for a Fortune 500 retail company approached me and said, "Hey, we'd love if you could come be a recruiter for us." I kind of was like, yeah, whatever, I don't know who you are and I'm a teacher. Sure enough, five months later, I joined that company and was there for nine years. I call myself homegrown HR because I was a marketing major, I don't have any major certifications, but a lot of how I've learned and progressed in my career is being a student, running to what scares me. I held a variety of roles there, from recruiting to employee relations to a typical business partner supporting stores and distribution centers. Then most recently I went to a tech startup company, which has been so interesting, going from having 200 HR peers to myself. So that's kind of the whole gamut of my career.

Susmita Sarma: Brilliant. Would you like to tell us something about LASSO HR? I can see that you mentioned it's a people platform of the entertainment industry. What exactly is that?

Jennifer Watson: Yeah, I didn't know all of this until I joined the company, but every business meeting, every concert, every event you go to that has all of the people and things like that, they run them on Excel spreadsheets, which I just think is so interesting, from booking the people through the event, which seems kind of crazy because these events have so many moving pieces. Our founder decided, why are we still running this way? So we created a platform that streamlines everything. It does workforce management, it does payroll, it does travel and timekeeping, it does e-signature, all the way to managing a project end to end, managing the crew. There are just so many capabilities, and it creates such a great experience for these production companies. So that's kind of what we do, and it's really exciting to be at a company that's creating such a needed solution for the events and entertainment industry.

Susmita Sarma: Right, brilliant, Jennifer. So let's start off. Today's episode is about workplace investigations and the role of tactical HR. Starting off, let's set the stage for our listeners who may not be familiar with the term. Jennifer, can you describe what we mean by tactical HR, particularly in the context of managing workplace issues and conflicts and maintaining a harmonious environment?

Jennifer Watson: Yeah, so I think of tactical HR, to put it in the simplest terms, and I'm sure this isn't the most comprehensive definition, but I think of it as anything that you can put on a list and cross off. It's the day to day. It's the things you have to get done to run a business, but it's not necessarily strategy, vision, long-term solutions, and problem-solving the root cause. So when I think about tactical HR, it's things such as filling a position, doing an interview for an investigation, or processing payroll. Those are very tactical, as opposed to the forward strategic thinking of how do we train employees to make better decisions, or how do we increase our brand online so we get the top candidates. There's definitely a difference there.

Susmita Sarma: So is it like a blend of traditional HR responsibilities with more strategic, forward-thinking initiatives that you mentioned?

Jennifer Watson: Oh, absolutely. I think you hit the nail on the head, that's exactly what it is. Today HR is very different than it was even ten years ago when I started. With recruiting, we self-reported our openings, we said, oh, we think this person's going to be a fit, but we never looked at the ROI of that person. I think now there's so much more data, there's so much more visibility, that you have to be able to blend tactical HR with those forward-thinking initiatives. It's kind of a nonnegotiable at this point. But there are always tactical portions of every job.

Susmita Sarma: That's quite insightful. So moving on to a more specific aspect, I'm curious to hear about your experience in this field, Jennifer. How do you see the role of HR evolving over the years, especially in light of increasing workplace diversity and complexity? Can you share how these changes have impacted the handling of sensitive issues like workplace investigations?

Jennifer Watson: Yeah, it's so funny, because I distinctly remember growing up, my dad said to me, never go into HR, because when there are cuts in a business, they cut HR first. And back then, that was probably true. But now I think HR is such a critical part of the business. The events of the past few years have really shown a light on how critical that is, and how essential it is that everyone in the business understands HR functions, training, capabilities, and uses them as partners. I've seen a lot of articles recently about CEOs going through an HR rotation within their company, or coming from some type of HR function, because I think it's just sound business to understand the people side of the business as much as the metrics and the business side of the house. You can drive results, but if you don't have the people to do it, if you treat everyone poorly and you don't have engagement opportunities or promotions, your company isn't going to work. So I think it's definitely become much more of a forefront than my dad used to think.

Susmita Sarma: So talking about handling sensitive issues, and the workplace investigation topic that we have taken up today, that's definitely a very complex situation, and it's safe to assume several objectives are in play. Could you shed some light on what you consider to be the primary goals of an investigation?

Jennifer Watson: Yeah, I think thinking high level, the primary goal is to help people be better. I know that sounds a little weird for a workplace investigation, but I truly believe that people want to do the right thing, want to make the right decisions, and show up to work and perform the best that they can. If you have that at the core of every investigation, you can become a little jaded in that role, I understand that, but that is the point of it. You're trying to figure out a situation that might have gone awry, and how you can help everybody feel or understand the expectations, or what they need to do differently in the future. Now there's a lot that goes into that, but I think that's the end result. Sometimes that might end with someone losing their job because they made a really bad decision that cannot be accepted in your company. I do say, even with people like that, there's an opportunity to give them feedback on why it was unacceptable and how they can do things differently. We owe that to people. Unfortunately, I wish we could get ahead of it before an investigation, but that's not always the case. Using that as an opportunity to really help them understand, I think, is the goal for me, at least.

Susmita Sarma: So in the broader scenario, workplace investigations can lead to legal consequences, but a well-conducted investigation is also there to promote a positive, respectful, and inclusive organizational culture as a whole, isn't it?

Jennifer Watson: Absolutely. And I think that can come out in many formats, from the way that you ask questions during the investigation. Sometimes when we get an investigation, it can become a checklist: where were you on this day, who did you talk to, it can become very mundane. But really making sure that you check yourself before you go into those conversations, to say, okay, what does this person believe is true, how can I help them make sure they get all the details, did you have a text, was someone there, who did you talk to, why did you not feel you could talk to anybody. Coming from a place of understanding, all the way to when you're having those tough conversations, getting their side and saying, hey, I'd love to understand why you made this decision, let's figure out what we can do differently next time. I think all of that goes back to creating a respectful and inclusive environment during this very tough process. Let's be honest, nobody wants to get a call from HR, not even me, and I'm in HR. It's got such a negative connotation. So how do you create the most positive experience out of that very negative gut feeling?

Susmita Sarma: Also, when an issue is reported, throughout the interviewing process to the final determination, there must be some procedures and protocols to be followed, right? Could you guide us through the step-by-step process of a typical workplace investigation, Jennifer?

Jennifer Watson: Yeah, I think it depends on what you're talking about. If it's a wage and hour issue, something about theft, those are a little different, those can be more tactical because you're looking at data, you're looking at records, punch in and punch out, bank records, things like that. But if it's one strictly involving a "he said, she said" or somebody saw something, I think the first thing is making sure that however you get the information, you have all of it at that point, knowing that you're going to have to talk to people. I love the five P's: proper planning prevents poor performance. That's so important, because you have to plan your strategy going into this investigation. So you get a complaint, you need to write out, who do I need to talk to, what do I need to talk to them about, and what order am I going to talk to them in. Let's say you get a complaint from an employee directly, or they post on social media, you need to talk to that person first and get every single detail that you possibly can, and then reassure them that you'll loop back with them. Then from there, talk to everybody else in the middle to get as many details as you can. And then the person the allegations are against would be the very last person that you talk to. Also informing them, if you can, hey, I've got to re-evaluate this whole situation, I'll get back to you in 24 hours or whatever that looks like, so that they understand that too. But one of the things I would encourage people to do during workplace investigations, outside of just the process, is do not make a determination until you have all the facts at the very end. It's so hard, it's not human nature the whole time, you're like, oh, I think they did it, oh, I don't think they did it. But if you can truly just be curious throughout the investigation until the very end, then review all the facts and make your determination, you're always going to make a better decision.

Susmita Sarma: That's a comprehensive overview of the procedure, and I'm sure our listeners appreciate the clarity. But of course, such investigations are rarely this straightforward. So based on your experience, Jennifer, what potential hurdles or challenges have you encountered during these investigations?

Jennifer Watson: I think the hardest part is, one, you're dealing with somebody's career or somebody's life, and it's very emotionally triggering for everybody involved. Someone might say this person harassed me, and what I view as harassment, they might not. So acknowledging the emotion that's going to be involved, and understanding it's not personal, you're dealing with people, I think that's the first thing. Making sure that you can have a sound mind when you're having these conversations, because I'll tell you, there have been times during investigations where I've just wanted to cry my eyes out, because your heart breaks for people and how they felt. I think the second hurdle is, you're never going to be 100% on your decision. There's no way, you weren't there, you don't know what happened, there's always the potential that information could come out after that person leaves the conversation. But I got really great advice during my career: if a reporter showed up on your doorstep and asked you about this decision, would you be able to speak confidently that you made the right decision? So when I have those really tough cases where I just don't know, I feel like there's something else, you can "what if" forever. But knowing that if you feel like you have a solid case, that you're 90% there, you're never going to be 100%. Do the best you can and use that as your gut check. But I do think those are some challenges, because we are still dealing with people's lives, and that's hard.

Susmita Sarma: These challenges definitely need careful navigation. When you speak about fairness and careful handling, how does an HR professional ensure fair treatment and privacy for all parties involved during an investigation?

Jennifer Watson: Yeah, so I get this a lot, with regards to "you're not going to tell anybody that I said this, right." I tell them all the time, I will do everything to try to make sure that you can stay as anonymous as possible. However, I cannot guarantee that, there's just no way, because if I am asking about a situation involving two people at a very specific time, the other person's probably going to figure it out. What I can do though is, everybody I talk to, I talk about retaliation. To the person alleging, I say, if you feel like you're treated differently for any reason after this conversation, I need you to call me immediately. The same goes for the person the allegations might be against. I'll say, I know this is really tough, I know that anybody can say anything, that's why my job is to help figure out what the truth is, but please do not treat this person differently because of these concerns, you will be fired. So really making sure that everybody understands their lane and what the guardrails are, and that I'm doing everything I can to protect everybody, because that's the truth. For fair treatment, to me, fair treatment means that you give everybody a chance to tell their side and provide all the details that they can. I think that is what fair means in investigations.

Susmita Sarma: So these kinds of situations, Jennifer, influence the overall perceptions of justice and fairness in the organization, right? Because if you say that you cannot guarantee that someone won't know about the allegations against them, that is a matter of concern, right?

Jennifer Watson: Yeah, absolutely. But the way I phrase it to them is, I say, if someone said you were doing something that you didn't do, I think you would want a chance to tell your side. And they say yes, and I say, okay, again, everybody can say anything, but you still have to have the opportunity to give your truth, and that's what's fair. We will do everything in our power to make sure you're treated the same during this investigation. I do ask, I say, I would prefer you don't talk to anybody about this because that does muddy the investigation. If I can't do a clean investigation because you're talking to everybody, then that's your choice, and I can't come to a fair outcome. But again, not everybody is going to agree with you, they're just not.

Susmita Sarma: It's clear that these issues of confidentiality and fairness are very critical in these situations. So if we discuss the outcomes now, once an investigation concludes, how are the findings typically communicated to the relevant parties, and what is the importance of transparency in this process?

Jennifer Watson: Yeah, so the person the allegations are against, I prefer to communicate the outcome to them first, whether that's termination, final counseling, coaching, whatever, because that's the person who is most impacted. From there, I like to follow up with every single person I talk to and say that while I cannot disclose the outcome of the investigation, because they wouldn't want someone else to know if they were coached or fired or whatever the case is, what I can promise them is that it has been handled, it has been fully investigated, and if there are any further problems, I'm here to help. I think that's the best you can do, really provide a resource for them if they have other concerns, and assure them that you've done everything in your power to make sure they're protected, or whatever the outcome should be. A lot of people will push and say, well, I want to know what's going to happen. I say to them directly, would you want everyone knowing if you got a coaching for this allegation? And they say, no. That goes both ways, but it's tough, it takes some conversation. There, I think, comes the role of trusting your employees, as well as employees trusting the employer. It's a crucial thing after an investigation's result.

Susmita Sarma: So, thinking further, I'm sure that a supportive and respectful workplace culture helps prevent issues that might lead to investigations.

Jennifer Watson: Yeah, this was a big part of, when I was running a big employee relations department, this was a part I focused on with my team, because it's so easy to get caught up in the case work, this case is closed, I have to close cases within this many days, this is why I have this many cases. What I said is, I want you to take a step back, and if you have a large case load, how can you prevent it from getting there in the first place. So using data, which is kind of uncommon for this field, using data to say, okay, I've had five workplace investigations from this particular area, that's significant, so what training am I going to do to help this group of employees understand what needs to be done, what are the common areas they're struggling with. I think training and having direct conversations is always the best way to go, but using the data to inform what you need to address, because if you throw everything at everybody and see what sticks, that's not effective. Being very intentional about what you're talking to groups about is the most proactive that you can get. And then always creating an open door. A lot of times, when I was running the employee relations department, we were doing all of our investigations remotely, we were a voice on the phone, they had no idea who we were. So making sure that you create an open door with everybody you interact with. Hey, I'm Jennifer, I'm with HR, this is how I can add value to your life, this is what I can help you with, anytime you interact with someone, because those interactions stick with people. If you have those interactions, they're going to be more likely to trust you, even if they have no idea who you are, or they're going to call a friend and say, hey, who's this Jennifer, and they'll say, oh, she's great, I had a great interaction. So I think those are two things you can do to get ahead of it.

Susmita Sarma: So, Jennifer, to wrap up things today, given all we have discussed, could you please provide some practical advice or best practices for HR professionals to handle workplace investigations, ensuring that all parties feel respected, supported, and that justice is ultimately served?

Jennifer Watson: Yeah, I think in any investigations role, the biggest thing you can do is work on your own mindset. You're never going to be able to control what other people do, you're never going to be able to control what other people say. But what you can do is be a student of the business, listen to podcasts like this, go online and look up best practices for investigations. You can go plug in a bunch of information into an AI tool and get a framework if you're not sure. If you're unsure about an investigation, practice it with your peers. I think being humble, and understanding that no matter how many times you do this, it is hard, it's always hard. I've been doing it for ten years, specifically investigations for the past seven, it's tough, I don't know if it ever gets easier, you just get a little more comfortable with the structure. So working on yourself, being a student, and continuing to understand your own mind, what triggers you and causes you to jump to conclusions in investigations, that's the best thing you can do for your company.

Susmita Sarma: So what I've realized is this topic is something we could go on talking about. I've covered approximately 50% of what we can discuss, but I'm sure our audience is happy and content with what we just did in this conversation. There might be chances that they want to connect with you for any further discussion. Would you like to tell our listeners how they can reach out to you?

Jennifer Watson: Absolutely, you can reach out to me on LinkedIn, it's Jennifer Watson. I'm on there all the time looking for great talent, but if you need anything at all, I would love to shoot some messages back and forth about how I can add value to you all.

Susmita Sarma: I'll be linking to your LinkedIn profile in the show notes, Jennifer. Hoping that we connect again on this particular topic with some other exciting questions and interesting pointers. Thank you so much, Jennifer, for joining me today in this episode.

Jennifer Watson: Of course, have a great day.