What employers need to know:
By embedding the six core principles of trauma-informed practice to workplace investigations, employers can create respectful, effective processes that lead to more reliable outcomes and foster a culture of trust. We recommend that employers review and align their policies with psychological safety obligations, and ensure that their investigators are trained and familiar with how trauma-informed principles can apply to workplace investigations and the role they play in minimising the risk of harm to investigation participants.
Adopting a trauma-informed approach to workplace investigations requires investigators to consciously incorporate the six core principles of trauma-informed practice into their processes. This transforms the investigation from a potentially harmful ordeal into a structured, respectful, and effective fact-finding process.
In this article, we discuss how each principle moves from theory into practice.
1. Safety: Constructing a Secure Physical and Psychological Environment
Safety is a foundational principle that involves creating an environment where all participants feel physically and emotionally safe.
| Applications | |
| Physical safety | An environment that feels physically safe may have some of the following features: – a neutral room, so that the venue itself is not a source of intimidation – good lighting, which promotes the feeling of safety and facilitates non-verbal communication – low noise levels, which minimises stress (eg from loud noises startling the investigation participant) and facilitates better communication – private, which allows the investigation participant to freely express themselves or emote – an obvious exit, which assists to relieve anxiety from the fear of being trapped – “collaborative” seating, whereby the seating is arranged to avoid the investigation participant feeling vulnerable or that the process is adversarial. For virtual interviews, the investigator must take extra care, for example, starting the call by asking, “Before we begin, I just want to check that you are in a space where you feel comfortable and private to speak freely?” |
| Psychological safety | Psychological safety is built through the investigator’s demeanour. It begins with a calm, professional tone of voice. It involves using non-threatening body language: maintaining open posture, nodding to show you are listening, and being mindful of how note taking can break connection. It also means explicitly stating the commitment to safety upfront, for example, by saying, “My priority is to ensure this process feels as safe as possible for you. If at any point you need to take a break, just let me know. We can pause for as long as you need.” |
2. Trustworthiness and Transparency
This principle requires that all steps in the workplace investigation are conducted with clarity, consistency, and honesty. The goal is to build and maintain trust with all parties involved.
| Applications | |
| Transparency of process | The investigation should begin with a comprehensive and transparent explanation of the process, which covers: – the investigator’s impartial role – the specific scope of the inquiry – who will have access to the final report and any evidence provided to the investigator – each investigation participant’s obligations of confidentiality (including for the investigator) and its limits (e.g. that they can disclose information for the purpose of seeking medical treatment or supports) – the potential next steps (there should be no surprises) For example, an investigator might begin an interview by explaining, ” My role is to be objective and to gather information from all relevant parties to understand what has occurred.” and also say, “The information you share will be compiled into a confidential report for [decision-maker] and may be provided to [the respondent or other persons within organisation who may access the report].” |
| Consistency and reliability | Trust is built by doing what you say you will do. If the investigator promises to provide a copy of the interview summary by a specific day, they should meet that deadline (or at least communicate authentically that the deadline will not be met and why). This consistency demonstrates respect and dependability, which is crucial for anyone feeling anxious or powerless. |
3. Peer Support
The investigative process can feel intensely isolating. Acknowledging an investigation participant’s ability to access a support network is important in adopting trauma-informed practices.
| Applications | |
| The ability to have a support person | Every investigation participant, including the complainant, the respondent, and witnesses, should be explicitly and proactively informed of their right to have a support person present during any interview. The support person (who could be a colleague, friend, union representative or lawyer) should also be briefed on their role: they are there for emotional and moral support, not to answer questions on the interviewee’s behalf or to obstruct the process. The investigator can manage this by saying, “I acknowledge that you have a support person here with you today. Their role is to support you, and not to speak on your behalf. My role is to hear the information directly from you.” This sets clear, respectful boundaries. |
| Accessing other supports | The investigator should remind investigation participants of the other supports that are available to them, including for example, Employee Assistance Programs. Additionally, the investigator should ensure that the participant understands that they are permitted to disclose information about the investigation or allegations for the purposes of obtaining health and wellbeing support. Additionally, where the investigation process is outsourced, the organisation continues to retain an important role as a source of familiar contact with the investigation participant. Organisations should ensure that an appropriate point of contact regularly checks in on the person and enquires about their welfare. |
4. Collaboration and Mutuality
This principle actively works to level the inherent power imbalance between the investigator and participant, by reframing the interaction as a collaborative effort.
| Application | |
| Collaboration in relation to process | Organisations should speak to complainants to understand how they would like their complaint to be dealt with. While the complainant’s views are not determinative, it is important to understand them so that any decisions made about how the process is to proceed can be addressed (even if it is to help explain why the complainant’s expectations cannot be met). |
| Shared ownership of fact finding | An investigator can foster a sense of collaboration through inclusive language (“Let’s work through this together”) and by offering collaborative opportunities. For instance, at the end of an interview, asking: – “Is there anything you feel is important for me to know that I haven’t asked about?” – “Is there anyone else you think I should speak to in order to get a full picture?” This communicates that the participant’s perspective on the process itself is valued. |
5. Empowerment, Voice, and Choice: Restoring a Sense of Agency
A core goal of a trauma-informed investigation is to restore a sense of agency to the participants wherever and whenever possible.
| Application | |
| Voice | An investigator should use broad, open-ended prompts to allow the individual to control their own narrative. Allowing for silence is also important. An investigator’s comfort with silence gives the interviewee the space they need to process their thoughts and emotions without feeling rushed. |
| Choice | Offering choices throughout the process counteracts feelings of powerlessness. This can include: – the choice of interview time or format (in-person vs. video conference) – the option to provide a written account before speaking – the choice of where to sit – choice to take a break during the interview (which may be prompted regularly by the interviewer) |
6. Cultural, Historical, and Gender Issues: Applying a Lens of Equity
An effective investigation cannot be one-size-fits-all. It must be attuned to the diverse lived experiences that shape how individuals interact with authority and recount traumatic events.
| Application | |
| Acknowledging Intersectionality | An investigator should recognise that a person’s experience is shaped by the intersection of their various identities, including their race, gender, sexuality, disability and / or cultural background. Historical distrust of authority figures within certain communities is a real and valid factor that may influence how a person engages with the investigator. |
| Sensitivity | Investigators should make an active effort to eliminate barriers and biases that may impact the investigation process. This may involve using a person’s preferred pronouns, being aware that a lack of direct eye contact can be a sign of respect in some cultures (and not a sign of dishonesty) or arranging for professional interpreters rather than relying on colleagues or family members. Investigators should engage in ongoing self-reflection to identify and challenge their own unconscious biases, such as myths associated with behaviour of sexual assault victims that may prejudice a balanced assessment of the evidence or credibility. |
By embedding these six principles into their methodology, investigators can move beyond a simple fact-finding mission. These principles create a process that is respectful, just and, ultimately, may be more adept at uncovering a comprehensive and reliable truth.
Action items for employers
We recommend that employers ensure that their investigators familiar with how trauma-informed principles can apply to workplace investigations and the role they play in minimising the risk of harm to investigation participants.
We can assist your organisation to embed trauma-informed principles in your processes for conducting workplace investigations. We can also provide quality training for your human resources team and investigators.
In the next article, we explore how compliance with procedural fairness obligations support a trauma-informed approach to workplace investigations.