From Workplace Investigations to Workplace Assessments: Where Harassment Ends and Psychological Safety Begins.

William Goldbloom
WG Resolutions

We often hear about workplace investigations when a company responds to serious misconduct. If there is a complaint that an executive sexually harasses interns, the responsible response (and in some cases, legal obligation) is to conduct an investigation. Since the results of these investigations are usually confidential, we don’t often hear about what happens after the investigation is over. This leaves organizational leaders who are keen to maintain a harassment-free work environment with lingering questions. Did the executive actually sexually harass interns? And now that this investigation has concluded, are young interns still being sexually harassed?

The practice of workplace investigations is still in its infancy. Although there is little research on the impact of workplace investigations on organizations, anecdotes from workplace investigators (or let’s just say anecdotes from me) reveal that an investigation sometimes does not solve the “real” problem. Often the “real” problem is a lack of psychological safety among employees.

A typical workplace harassment investigation will tell you whether an incident occurred and, if so, whether that incident constitutes workplace harassment as defined in an organization’s policy. These investigations normally do not explore how systemic issues, rather than individual employees, contributed to what happened. If it turns out that there was no harassment, the investigation often does not examine why the person who raised the complaint felt harassed. This leaves the investigator and the workplace with a sense that the investigation is treating the symptom — not the cause — of an unhealthy workplace.

To prevent future complaints and incidents of workplace harassment, organizations should not only conduct investigations into incidents of harassment, but also inquire into employees’ concerns about interpersonal conflict and other systemic issues that may contribute to harassment. Processes designed to collect such information are typically referred to as “assessments” or “workplace culture audits.” What distinguishes an assessment from an investigation is that there is no final determination of whether something did or did not happen. Instead, the investigator or “assessor” asks employees how they are feeling about their workplace through surveys, interviews and focus groups. Like employee engagement surveys, this information is presented to the employer without identifying the source of the information, which means that employees are better able to communicate without fear of retaliation. The assessor then identifies key themes based on this information and recommends changes to the workplace to address the interpersonal and systemic issues that contribute to a sense of dissatisfaction and distress among employees who participate in the assessment.

“An investigation sometimes does not solve the “real” problem. Often the “real” problem is a lack of psychological safety among employees.”

An assessment sounds like a more robust tool than a typical workplace investigation for uncovering destructive workplace dynamics and preventing future incidents of workplace harassment. Nevertheless, employers more often hire workplace investigators to conduct investigations — not assessments.

Although there is an express legal obligation to investigate workplace harassment in several provinces in Canada, the legal obligation to do an assessment is not always clearly defined. For example, Ontario’s Occupational Health and Safety Act requires employers to regularly assess their workplace for risks of workplace violence, but it does not spell out the same requirement for workplace harassment. On the other hand, Alberta’s Occupational Health and Safety Act requires employers to identify potential risks and hazards for workplace harassment as part of its health and safety program. New amendments to the Canada Labour Code that will soon be in force require federally-regulated employers to “take prescribed measures to prevent” workplace harassment. Although these provisions in the federal and Alberta legislation convey that employers have an obligation to examine how they can prevent workplace harassment before it happens, they do not explain what these preventative “prescribed measures” should look like. There is no “code of practice” that contains instructions on how to conduct an assessment.

An investigation process is circumscribed by the complaint being investigated. The purpose of the investigation is to determine whether the complaint is substantiated. In order to fulfill this purpose, the people who were involved in the incidents described in the complaint are interviewed and asked questions that relate to these incidents. An assessment is a much more flexible tool, which means it can be a bit more daunting for the uninitiated. Who do you speak to? What questions do you ask? What recommendations should you make?

“To prevent future complaints and incidents of workplace harassment, organizations should not only conduct investigations into incidents of harassment, but also inquire into employees’ concerns about interpersonal conflict and other systemic issues that may contribute to harassment.”

A helpful resource for answering these questions is the National Standard of Canada for Psychological Health and Safety in the Workplace (the “Standard”). The Standard was developed by the Mental Health Commission of Canada and contains a voluntary set of guidelines to help employers enhance the psychological safety of workplaces. The Standard identifies 14 different factors to consider when assessing the psychological health of employees. The factors that specifically relate to how employees interact with each other include: organizational culture, civility and respect, and psychological protection from violence, bullying and harassment. There are also several factors that relate to issues that may enhance the risk of harassment, such as the psychological demands of job duties and the degree to which employees are recognized or rewarded for their work. An assessment process that includes questions and recommendations relating to these factors will help employers understand and address the issues that affect the overall psychological health of their employees, including workplace harassment.

“An assessment process that includes questions and recommendations relating to these factors will help employers understand and address the issues that affect the overall psychological health of their employees, including workplace harassment.”

A healthy workplace is one that is psychologically safe. A psychologically safe workplace is one that will significantly reduce not only harassment itself, but the feeling of harassment among employees. The next time an investigation hints at the existence of broader systemic issues in a workplace, or feelings of dissatisfaction and powerlessness due to interpersonal conflict, consider using the Standard as a guideline for conducting an assessment to root out the issues that undermine the psychological health of a workplace.

William Goldbloom, B.A., M.A., J.D.

Principal and founder, WG Resolutions

William Goldbloom, principal and founder of WG Resolutions, is an experienced workplace investigator, trainer, and mediator. He provides clients with effective and affordable resolutions to workplace conflict and misconduct. He balances his innate curiosity about how people work together with neutrality and humility.

William has conducted investigations for clients in various industries including tech, media, healthcare, non-profits, municipalities, manufacturing, shipping, and education.

He has provided training on preventing workplace harassment and conducting investigations across Canada. He is an engaging presenter for a range of learners. He has trained executives, high school students, farmers, and medical professionals.

William is a Qualified Mediator with the ADR Institute of Canada and received training in workplace restoration by the International Institute of Restorative Practices.

Prior to founding WG Resolutions, William was a workplace investigator and trainer at a renowned workplace investigation law firm. He started his law practice as an employment and labour lawyer at an international law firm.