The HR Investigations Podcast

Politics can be a deeply personal subject—and when political disagreements enter the workplace, conversations can quickly escalate into arguments, accusations of harassment, threats, intimidation, or even potential workplace-violence concerns.
For HR professionals and workplace investigators, the challenge isn't determining whose political beliefs are right or wrong.
The investigator's job is to determine what happened, what workplace policies and legal protections may apply, and whether the conduct crossed a line that the organization can or should address.
In this episode of The HR Investigations Podcast, we examine how to investigate politically charged workplace conflicts while maintaining neutrality, protecting employee rights, and reducing organizational risk.
What We'll Cover
Political arguments and workplace disruption
Threats, intimidation, and workplace-violence concerns
Offensive language and protected-class issues
Witness interviews and credibility
Evidence preservation
Protected concerted activity under the National Labor Relations Act
Applying workplace policies consistently
Avoiding investigator bias
Making defensible findings and disciplinary recommendations
Don't Investigate the Politics—Investigate the Conduct
One of the biggest challenges in politically charged investigations is separating the employee's viewpoint from the employee's conduct.
An employee's political beliefs, by themselves, may not be a workplace violation. But the way an employee expresses those beliefs can raise legitimate workplace concerns.
Investigators should focus on questions such as:
What was actually said?
What was actually done?
Who initiated the interaction?
Who escalated it?
Did anyone attempt to end the conversation?
Were threats or intimidating statements made?
Was there physical contact?
Was work disrupted?
Did the conduct involve a protected characteristic?
What workplace policy applies?
The fact that an investigator personally agrees or disagrees with an employee's political position should have no bearing on the investigative findings.
Investigate the behavior—not the belief.
When Politics Overlaps With Protected Activity
Another important consideration is whether the conversation involved protected concerted activity under the National Labor Relations Act.
The NLRB recognizes that employees may have legal protection when they act together—or seek to act together—to address workplace issues such as wages, benefits, safety, scheduling, and other terms and conditions of employment.
That means an investigator should not automatically assume that a heated workplace discussion is simply a "political argument."
Ask:
Were employees discussing a workplace issue?
Were they acting together?
Was an employee speaking on behalf of coworkers?
Were they bringing a group concern to management?
Were they attempting to initiate or prepare for group action?
At the same time, protected activity is not a blanket protection for all conduct occurring during a workplace dispute. Serious misconduct, threats, violence, or other circumstances may require separate analysis.
The context matters.
Threats and Workplace Violence
A political argument requires additional attention when an employee alleges threats or intimidation.
Investigators should determine exactly what occurred rather than relying on labels such as "threatened," "bullied," or "intimidated."
Ask:
What exact words were used?
Who heard them?
Was the statement directed at a specific person?
Was physical harm threatened?
Was a weapon mentioned or displayed?
Was there physical contact?
Did the employee attempt to leave or end the interaction?
Were there witnesses or electronic communications supporting the allegation?
If there is an immediate safety concern, employee safety takes priority over completing the investigation. Appropriate interim measures may need to be considered while the facts are being investigated.
Evidence Matters
Political disputes often generate electronic evidence, including:
Emails
Text messages
Teams or Slack messages
Social media posts
Screenshots
Photographs
Security footage
Written complaints
Witness statements
Investigators should preserve relevant evidence promptly and look at the entire communication or interaction, rather than relying on an isolated sentence or screenshot.
Context can make a significant difference in understanding what actually happened.
Interviewing the Parties and Witnesses
When interviewing the complainant, subject, and witnesses, investigators should use neutral, fact-based questions.
Instead of asking:
"Did Tom threaten Sarah?"
         ask: "Tell me what you observed."
Then follow up:
What did you hear?
What did you see?
What happened immediately before the interaction?
What happened afterward?
What exact words do you remember?
Who else was present?
Did you observe physical contact?
Did either person attempt to end the conversation?
The goal is to obtain firsthand facts, not conclusions or assumptions.
Consistent Discipline
If the investigation substantiates misconduct, the organization should also consider whether comparable employees have been treated consistently.
Ask:
Have other employees engaged in similar conduct?
What policies were applied?
What disciplinary action was taken?
Are there meaningful differences between the situations?
Is there evidence that the employee is being treated differently because of protected activity?
Consistency does not necessarily mean identical discipline in every case. The relevant question is whether the organization is applying its policies fairly based on the facts and circumstances of each situation.
The Investigator's Checklist
Before finalizing a politically charged investigation, ask:
☐ What actually happened?
☐ What evidence supports each version of events?
☐ Did I interview the appropriate witnesses?
☐ Did I preserve relevant evidence?
☐ Did I investigate the complete context?
☐ Could protected-class issues be involved?
☐ Could protected concerted activity be involved?
☐ Are there threats or workplace-violence concerns?
☐ What policy applies?
☐ Have comparable situations been handled consistently?
☐ Can I explain my findings based on the evidence rather than my personal opinion?
The Bottom Line
When politics turns into a workplace fight, don't investigate the politics. Investigate the conduct.
Focus on the facts, understand the context, identify the applicable policies and legal protections, preserve the evidence, interview witnesses objectively, and apply workplace standards consistently.
That's how investigators maintain neutrality—and produce findings that are more defensible for both the employee and the organization.
Continue Your Professional Development With RPC Human Resources
Want to become more confident conducting workplace investigations and handling difficult Employee Relations issues?
RPC Human Resources provides practical, real-world training designed to help HR professionals, investigators, managers, and Employee Relations professionals build the skills they need to navigate complex workplace situations.
From internal investigations and HR compliance to leadership and Employee Relations, RPC's continuing-education programs focus on what HR professionals need to know—and, more importantly, what they need to know how to do.
Ready to sharpen your HR skills?
Visit RPCHR.com to explore upcoming programs, dates, continuing-education credits, and registration information.
Don't just know HR. Know how to handle it.
Visit RPCHR.com and explore our upcoming events and continuing-education programs.
About The HR Investigations Podcast
The HR Investigations Podcast provides practical insights for HR professionals who conduct, manage, or support workplace investigations.
Because when a difficult employee-relations issue lands on your desk, you need more than a policy manual.
You need to know how to investigate it.
The best investigation is the one you don't have to do.
This podcast is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

Topics:
Political beliefs vs. protected characteristics
Supervisor bias
Comparator evidence
Investigating promotion decisions
Assignment and scheduling disparities
Public-sector considerations
Why HR should investigate conduct rather than political ideology
Investigation checklist:
What specific employment action is being challenged?
Who made the decision?
What reason was given?
Is the reason documented?
Was it consistently applied?
Were similarly situated employees treated differently?
Did political beliefs intersect with a protected characteristic?
Does state/local law provide additional protection?
Did retaliation occur?
Legal note for show notes:This episode provides general educational information, not legal advice. Political-affiliation protections vary by jurisdiction and employment sector. Federal EEO statutes enforced by the EEOC generally do not list political affiliation as a protected category. 
Resources 
Book:How to Conduct Internal Investigations: A Practical Guide for Human Resource ProfessionalsAvailable now on AmazonThis book provides step-by-step guidance, real-world examples, and best practices for conducting defensible workplace investigations.
Natalie’s Upcoming Virtual Workshop:September 29-30, 202611:00 am – 5:00 pm ETLive, 2-day virtual format
REGISTER HERE
This hands-on workshop is designed for HR professionals who want practical tools—not theory. We cover intake, planning, interviews, documentation, credibility assessments, and investigation findings, with real-world scenarios throughout.
If you’re responsible for handling internal investigations—or advising leaders on discipline and terminations—this is exactly the type of issue we work through in my upcoming two-day virtual investigations workshop, How to Conduct Internal Investigations: A Practical Workshop for HR Professionals, happening September 29-30, 2026, from 11:00 am to 5:00 am Eastern.
We focus on real situations and how to investigate them in a way that holds up under scrutiny.
Register now to take advantage of early bird bonuses 
REGISTER NOW
Subscribe & Connect
If you found this episode helpful, be sure to subscribe, rate, and share The HR Investigations Podcast with a colleague who handles employee relations or investigations.
New episodes drop regularly with practical guidance for HR professionals navigating complex workplace issues.

In this episode:
Why Natalie took a two-month break
Why investigations remain one of the most important HR risk-management tools
The difference between investigating facts and deciding punishment
Why conflicting stories require a structured investigation
What's coming in the next several episodes
Key takeaway:An investigation isn't about deciding who is right before you gather the evidence. It's about determining what happened and whether the evidence supports the allegations.
Resources 
Book:How to Conduct Internal Investigations: A Practical Guide for Human Resource ProfessionalsAvailable now on AmazonThis book provides step-by-step guidance, real-world examples, and best practices for conducting defensible workplace investigations.
Natalie’s Upcoming Virtual Workshop:September 29-30, 202611:00 am – 5:00 pm ETLive, 2-day virtual format
REGISTER HERE
This hands-on workshop is designed for HR professionals who want practical tools—not theory. We cover intake, planning, interviews, documentation, credibility assessments, and investigation findings, with real-world scenarios throughout.
If you’re responsible for handling internal investigations—or advising leaders on discipline and terminations—this is exactly the type of issue we work through in my upcoming two-day virtual investigations workshop, How to Conduct Internal Investigations: A Practical Workshop for HR Professionals, happening September 29-30, 2026, from 11:00 am to 5:00 am Eastern.
We focus on real situations and how to investigate them in a way that holds up under scrutiny.
Register now to take advantage of early bird bonuses 
REGISTER NOW
Subscribe & Connect
If you found this episode helpful, be sure to subscribe, rate, and share The HR Investigations Podcast with a colleague who handles employee relations or investigations.
New episodes drop regularly with practical guidance for HR professionals navigating complex workplace issues.
 
 

Episode Summary
Most workplace investigations don't begin with a complaint to HR.
They begin much earlier—with a manager's first conversation about attendance concerns, performance issues, behavioral challenges, or employee conflict.
Those early conversations often determine whether an issue is resolved quickly, escalates into a formal complaint, or eventually requires an HR investigation.
In this episode of The HR Investigations Podcast, Natalie Ivey sits down with Leshya Sukhu, Founder of NexusAlly, to discuss one of the most overlooked risk points in organizations: the moment a manager first recognizes a potential employee issue.
Together, they explore why managers frequently struggle in these situations, how inconsistent responses create organizational risk, and what organizations can do to better support frontline leaders before issues escalate.
The conversation also examines the growing role of artificial intelligence in HR and management support, including how AI can provide real-time guidance, conversation coaching, documentation assistance, and escalation support without replacing human judgment.
Whether you're an HR professional, employee relations leader, investigator, or people manager, this episode offers practical insights into preventing workplace issues before they become formal HR matters.
In This Episode, You'll Learn
Why Most Workplace Issues Start Before HR Gets Involved
The critical role managers play during the earliest stages of employee concerns
Why seemingly small conversations can significantly impact future outcomes
How manager confidence affects employee trust and organizational risk
Where Manager-HR Breakdowns Commonly Occur
Communication gaps between managers and HR
Why managers often hesitate to address concerns early
The impact of inconsistent leadership responses across teams
The Business Case for Early Intervention
How proactive conversations reduce investigations and employee relations issues
The connection between early intervention and risk mitigation
Why prevention is often more effective than remediation
Common Mistakes Managers Make During Difficult Conversations
Overreacting to employee concerns
Underreacting to potential problems
Delaying necessary discussions
Poor documentation practices
Avoiding uncomfortable conversations altogether
The Future of Manager Support
How AI can reinforce training in the moment of need
Real-time coaching and conversation prompts
Documentation guidance and escalation recommendations
Using trauma-informed and empathetic communication techniques
Building More Consistent Leadership Practices
Creating repeatable approaches to employee concerns
Supporting managers without increasing HR workload
Improving outcomes for employees, managers, and organizations
Key Takeaways
✔ HR risk often begins long before a formal complaint is filed.
✔ The quality of a manager's first conversation can significantly influence future employee relations outcomes.
✔ Organizations that support managers earlier often experience fewer escalations, more consistency, and stronger workplace cultures.
✔ Training alone is rarely enough; managers need support tools they can access when difficult situations arise.
✔ Responsible AI has the potential to enhance manager effectiveness by providing real-time guidance, documentation support, and escalation pathways.
✔ Better manager conversations today can prevent investigations tomorrow.
About Our Guest
Leshya Sukhu
Leshya Mehta-Sukhu is the founder of NexusAlly, an independent venture shaped by her more than 20 years of experience in Employee Relations, workplace investigations, ethics, compliance, and HR risk. Throughout her career, Leshya has worked closely with managers, HR teams, and leaders during some of the most sensitive moments in the workplace. What she saw again and again was that workplace concerns rarely begin as formal investigations. They usually start much earlier, with a manager unsure how to respond, an employee wondering whether they will be heard, or an HR team trying to guide leaders before an issue escalates. That early space became the focus for NexusAlly: the moment before trust breaks down, risk increases, or HR is forced into a reactive position. NexusAlly helps managers, HR teams, and workplace consultants respond to early employee concerns with more consistency, confidence, and care. The platform brings together practical conversation guidance, emotional intelligence support, state-by-state guidance, escalation pathways, team visibility, and documentation tools to help address concerns earlier and reduce risk without losing the human side of the work.
Natalie and Leshya first worked together when RPC Human Resources delivered customized workplace investigations training for Leshya's team during her tenure at Dycom, resulting in measurable improvements in investigation quality, consistency, and risk management practices.
Offer:For a limited time, NexusAlly is inviting workplace consultants, HR consultants, fractional HR leaders, and Employee Relations professionals to join Employee Relations IRL — a practitioner community for future-ready Employee Relations. Members will receive early access to the NexusAlly consultant model, a first look at the platform, and a 10% referral opportunity for qualified client introductions that become paid engagements.
Book an introductory conversation by July 31, 2026 to explore Employee Relations IRL and the NexusAlly 10% referral opportunity.
https://nexusally.co/consultant-partners
 
About The HR Investigations Podcast
Hosted by Natalie Ivey, The HR Investigations Podcast explores the realities of workplace investigations, employee relations challenges, compliance risks, and leadership practices that help organizations prevent issues before they require formal intervention.
Natalie's philosophy is simple:
"The best investigation is the one you don't have to do."
Each episode delivers practical insights for HR professionals, employee relations leaders, investigators, and organizational decision-makers seeking to create safer, more compliant, and more effective workplaces.
Connect
Learn More About NexusAlly
https://nexusally.co/
Learn More About RPC Human Resources
Visit RPC Human Resources at rpchr.com for workplace investigations training, investigator certificate programs, leadership development, and HR compliance education.
Subscribe
Be sure to subscribe to The HR Investigations Podcast so you never miss an episode focused on reducing workplace risk and strengthening organizational culture.
 

In this episode you'll learn:
Why the best response to a steward's request for a private consultation is often the simplest one.
How granting a short recess can actually strengthen the credibility of your investigation.
Why allowing consultation does not mean management loses control of the interview.
Practical ways to establish reasonable time limits and expectations before the interview resumes.
How to distinguish legitimate representation from repeated interruptions that begin to obstruct the investigation.
Professional language investigators can use when breaks become excessive.
Common employer mistakes that frequently lead to unnecessary labor-management conflict.
How experienced investigators maintain neutrality, professionalism, and momentum throughout difficult interviews.
Key Topics Covered
Respecting Weingarten Rights While Managing the Investigation
Employees represented by a union have important rights during investigatory interviews that may result in discipline. However, those rights exist alongside an employer's responsibility to conduct an effective workplace investigation. This episode explains how those responsibilities work together rather than compete with one another.
The Investigator's First Response Matters
The way management responds to a steward's first request for a private consultation often sets the tone for the remainder of the interview. Learn why calm, professional responses typically reduce conflict and encourage cooperation.
Maintaining Control Without Appearing Adversarial
Experienced investigators know they can:
Set reasonable break lengths.
Establish when the interview will resume.
Keep the investigation moving.
Prevent unnecessary delays while respecting employee rights.
Recognizing When Representation Becomes Obstruction
Most union representatives exercise their role professionally. Occasionally, however, repeated requests for lengthy consultations may begin to interfere with the employer's ability to complete the investigation. Learn how to address these situations without escalating tensions.
Avoiding Common Management Mistakes
The episode also discusses several errors that unnecessarily create labor-relations problems, including:
Automatically denying requests for private consultation.
Viewing the steward as an adversary rather than a participant in the process.
Responding emotionally when interviews become challenging.
Threatening discipline against union representatives for appropriate advocacy.
Practical Takeaways
After listening, you'll be better prepared to:
Respond confidently when a steward requests a private meeting.
Maintain professionalism during difficult interviews.
Balance employee representation rights with management's operational needs.
Keep investigations organized, efficient, and legally defensible.
Reduce unnecessary conflict while preserving the integrity of the investigative process.
Who Should Listen
This episode is designed for:
HR professionals
Employee Relations professionals
Labor Relations practitioners
Workplace investigators
Human Resources managers and directors
Supervisors and managers in unionized workplaces
Employment attorneys
Public sector investigators
Anyone responsible for conducting workplace investigations involving represented employees
Featured Quote
"Respecting representation rights doesn't require surrendering control of the investigation. The best investigators know how to do both."
Resources Mentioned
National Labor Relations Act (NLRA)
Weingarten Rights during investigatory interviews
Best practices for conducting workplace investigations in unionized environments
 

Episode Summary
During an investigatory interview, a single question can suddenly reveal the true focus of an investigation. A union steward who initially has little context may immediately recognize that the employee could be facing serious disciplinary consequences. Can the steward stop the interview and request a private consultation? Is that considered protected representation activity under Weingarten, or does it cross the line into impermissible coaching?
In this episode, we examine one of the most frequently debated issues in workplace investigations: the union steward's right to request a recess after hearing questions that reveal the direction of the investigation. We explore the distinction between legitimate representation and obstruction, discuss how investigators should respond, and provide practical guidance for HR professionals, labor relations practitioners, workplace investigators, managers, and union representatives.
What You'll Learn
Understanding the Purpose of Weingarten Representation
Why Weingarten rights exist and what they are intended to protect.
The difference between passive observation and active representation.
How effective representation can require private consultation during an interview.
Why fairness and due process are critical components of workplace investigations.
When a Recess Request May Arise
Situations where a steward may not fully understand the allegations until questioning begins.
How investigative questioning can reveal facts, allegations, or potential policy violations that were previously unknown.
Why an employee may become confused, anxious, or uncertain after hearing a key question.
Common triggers that prompt a request for a private consultation.
The Difference Between Advising and Coaching
Natalie discusses the critical distinction between:
Appropriate Representation
Helping the employee understand a question.
Clarifying facts and timelines.
Ensuring the employee understands the allegations.
Encouraging complete and truthful responses.
Protecting the employee's rights during questioning.
Improper Conduct
Telling the employee what story to tell.
Encouraging dishonesty or omission of facts.
Directing the employee to provide misleading information.
Deliberately obstructing the investigative process.
How Investigators Should Respond
Why a reasonable recess request should generally be granted.
Best practices for maintaining control of the interview while respecting representation rights.
Setting reasonable expectations regarding the duration of breaks.
Managing repeated requests for consultation.
Maintaining professionalism during potentially tense moments.
Who Should Listen:HR and Employee Relations professionals, investigators, and managers responsible for internal investigations or compliance.
Get Trained by Natalie on how to conduct investigations:Natalie’s next 2-day Certificate Program virtual workshop to gain the skills, tools, and confidence to handle any investigation effectively—before a costly mistake happens. 
The next virtual workshop will be on June 23-24, 2026 from 11:00-5:00 pm Eastern Time. Early bird registration closes at 5:00 pm on Monday, June 15 and includes special bonuses: $100 off registration; signed copy of Natalie's book How to Conduct Internal Investigations: A Practical Guide for Human Resource Professionals; the Supplemental Toolkit with quizzes, sample policies and documentation, and investigative interview question templates, and an RPC canvas tote "swag bag." Additionally, you will receive a Certificate of Training indicating you have attended a 10-contact hour SHRM and HRCI approved program, a spiral-bound training workbook, and Certified Workplace Investigator digital badge that you can use on your Linkedin and social media.   Note: this will be Natalie’s only virtual 2-day workshop this summer so register today to take advantage of these special bonuses! 
 

Episode Overview:In this first episode of the mini-series, host Natalie Ivey explains what Weingarten Rights are and the importance of internal investigators, especially HR and Employee Relations investigators, in understanding these rights. She further elaborates on common misconceptions, mistakes that are made, and how to handle a situation with a newly elected union steward who pushes the boundaries of the role so the investigatory interview can get back on track. 
Key Topics
Origins of Weingarten rights
When rights attach
Duties of management
Responsibilities of union representatives
Common misconceptions
Key Lessons from This Episode:
✓ Representation is active, not passive.
✓ Employees must request representation.
✓ Investigators maintain control of the interview.
Who Should Listen:HR and Employee Relations professionals, investigators, and managers responsible for internal investigations or compliance.
Get Trained by Natalie on how to conduct investigations:Natalie’s next 2-day Certificate Program virtual workshop to gain the skills, tools, and confidence to handle any investigation effectively—before a costly mistake happens. The next virtual program will be on June 23-24, 2026 from 11:00-5:00 Eastern Time. (Please note in today's episode Natalie mentioned it ended at 4:00, but the program concludes each day at 5:00 pm ET). Early Bird registration is still open until end of business day Monday, June 15 so take advantage of the early-bird bonuses! 
 

Episode Overview:In this first episode of the mini-series When HR Gets It Wrong: Risk, Reputation, and Recovery, we explore one of the most common—and costly—mistakes HR professionals make: mishandling investigations. Closing cases quickly may feel productive, but speed without accuracy can lead to serious legal and financial consequences.
Natalie shares a real-world scenario from a manufacturing company where HR tried to resolve a harassment complaint quickly but failed to interview witnesses or document properly. The result? A lawsuit six months later with $250,000 in settlements, legal fees, and reputational damage.
Key Lessons from This Episode:
Speed is not accuracy: Quick case closures do not replace thorough investigations. Investigators who follow their instincts may be penalized for not meeting internal metrics—but diligence is essential.
Documentation is your lifeline: Thorough, accurate notes protect both the organization and the investigator. AI tools can assist, but HR professionals must document interviews and investigative steps themselves.
Training prevents missteps: Structured investigation training equips HR professionals with the skills to handle complex complaints defensibly and effectively.
Case Highlight – SHRM Lawsuit:
A former SHRM employee, Rehab Mohamed, sued the organization for racial discrimination and retaliation after raising internal concerns.
Allegations focused on flaws in the HR investigation: limited investigator experience and pre-prepared termination paperwork before completing a proper investigation.
A federal judge allowed the lawsuit to proceed, noting potential bias and deviations from best-practice investigative procedures.
The case concluded with an $11.5 million verdict, underscoring the serious consequences of mishandled investigations.
Why This Matters:This episode illustrates that even experienced HR teams can face significant legal and financial risks when investigations are not conducted impartially, thoroughly, and by appropriately trained professionals.
Who Should Listen:HR and Employee Relations professionals, investigators, and managers responsible for internal investigations or compliance.
Ensure your investigations are thorough, defensible, and strategic. Attend Natalie’s 2-day virtual certification workshop to gain the skills, tools, and confidence to handle any investigation effectively—before a costly mistake happens.
 

Episode Overview
In this episode, Natalie is joined by Deb Muller, CEO of HR Acuity, to explore how HR leaders can shift from outdated “vanity metrics” to meaningful data that demonstrates true business impact.
Together, they unpack the concept of the Trust & Risk Statement™ and discuss how investigation teams can elevate their role from compliance-driven function to strategic risk advisors.
This episode is essential for HR professionals who want to bring stronger, more credible insights to executive leadership and the boardroom.
Key Topics Discussed
 
1. The Problem with Vanity Metrics
Why speed and case volume don’t reflect investigative effectiveness
How focusing on quick closures can damage workplace culture
What executives actually want to hear from HR
2. Issue-to-Case Ratios = Investigative Rigor
What issue-to-case ratios are and why they matter
How they reveal depth, thoroughness, and pattern recognition
Red flags that signal weak investigations
Simple ways to start tracking this metric now
3. Anonymous Reporting & Psychological Safety
Why low anonymous reporting is a warning sign — not a success metric
What healthy reporting behavior looks like
How to reframe reporting data to demonstrate employee trust
4. Aftercare Metrics & Protecting the Bottom Line
What “aftercare” means in workplace investigations
Why retaliation tracking is critical to organizational risk
How post-complaint attrition signals deeper issues
Connecting investigation outcomes to financial protection
5. The Trust & Risk Statement™
What it is and how it reframes investigation data
How it shifts conversations with the C-suite
Practical steps to begin crafting your own
 
Key Takeaway
Workplace investigations are not just about resolving complaints — they are a powerful source of enterprise risk intelligence. The right metrics don’t just track activity; they tell a story about trust, culture, and financial exposure.
Who Should Listen
HR leaders and business partners
Employee relations professionals
Workplace investigators
Compliance and risk leaders
Anyone looking to elevate HR’s strategic impact
Resources & Next Steps
If you’re ready to elevate your investigative skills and become a trusted risk advisor, register for Natalie’s HRCI & SHRM approved (10 credits) certification workshop: How to Conduct Internal Investigations: A Practical Workshop for HR Professionals. For more information and to register go to: 2-day virtual investigations workshop
 
If you found this episode valuable:
Subscribe to the podcast
Share it with a colleague
Leave a review to help more HR professionals elevate their impact
 
 

Episode Summary:In this episode, we break down the art and science of investigation interviews. Topics include:
Structuring interviews for complainants, witnesses, and the accused
Using open-ended questions and avoiding leading questions
Assessing credibility indicators
Documenting interviews accurately
Sample interview questions to guide your discussions
Key Takeaways:
Begin broad, then narrow to specifics.
Let silence work—it often prompts additional details.
Ask witnesses what they observed, not what they think.
Avoid leading questions to prevent bias.
Thorough, objective documentation is essential.Resources & Links:
2-Day How to Conduct Internal Investigations Workshop: June 23–24, 11 AM – 5 PM ETEarly-bird perks:
Author-signed book
Supplemental Toolkit
RPC Canvas Tote “Swag Bag"
$100 off Registration
Certified HR Investigator Badge
10% group discount for 3+ attendeesRegister Here
Natalie Ivey, MBA, SPHR, SHRM-SCPFounder & CEORPC Human Resources1616 Concierge Boulevard1st FloorDaytona Beach, FL 32117
Office: (800) 517-7129 Ext. 700
Natalie@rpchr.com
rpchr.com