Canadian HR Reporter

It's not 'business as usual' after harassment investigations 'What can be challenging is dealing with the aftermath': Expert By Sarah Dobson There has been plenty of coverage around the importance of conducting an investigation when claims of any type of harassment arise in the workplace. But what happens after the investigation is done? The whole process can cause quite the disruption, and employers should be prepared, according to Laura Williams, founder and principal of Williams HR Law Professional and Williams HR Consulting in Markham, Ont. "What can be challenging these days is not so much conducting the investigation but dealing with the aftermath… it's not back to business as usual." The process itself For one, there are inherent issues when it comes to the investigation process, said Williams, speaking at the annual conference of the Human Resources Professionals Association in Toronto on Jan. 30. For example, the secrecy and confidentiality involved can cause problems for employees. "There's limited communication during that process and that can feel like… a lack of transparency on leadership's part. And, of course, that can create uncertainty and a number of negative impacts," she said. Employers may claim privilege over the findings report, which can exacerbate the feeling of poor transparency, said Williams. "Employers don't always take the steps they ought to, to bring closure to the process." Internal investigators may also have relationships with the individuals involved, which can make things uncomfortable. And the investigations can take a long time — months even, she said. "That is quite some time to live in the uncertainty of the result," she said. "Some prejudgment typically creeps in if not properly managed by the organization." Impact on employers, employees If the investigation isn't properly managed with as much transparency as possible, there can be a negative impact on the corporate culture, too. "When there are allegations internally against any individual, that can lead to factions and camps and dissension and disruption, and it can inevitably impact the employer brand which leads to difficulty in attracting and retaining talent," she said. And other issues arise, such as lost leader credibility. "If there is an allegation against somebody that is in a leadership capacity, and that person leaves the workplace (but) is ultimately vindicated and re-instated, it can be very difficult for that individual as a leader to take the reigns again," said Williams. If not properly contained, employers may face increased costs related to the process, such as escalations and liabilities. "When you have a culture that's been impacted by an investigation process… there's lost opportunities, lost innovation, and lost efficiencies," she said. "If the employer doesn't take proactive and pre-emptive steps from even a PR perspective, they can really have an uphill battle in restoring credibility with competitors and, most importantly, with their clients and customers." For employees, the impact of an investigation can include decreases in job satisfaction, morale, productivity, motivation, focus and self- esteem, along with a reduced sense of well- being, said Williams. There may also be feelings of powerlessness, a lack of control, vulnerability, diminished value, anxiety, shame, guilt, isolation, loss of credibility and attrition, she said. Strategies, best practices There are proactive steps employers can take to prepare, said Williams. "The fallout can be contemplated," she said. "Obviously, the worst time to plan for a crisis is when you're in a crisis — that's when you're in sheer reactive mode, and you oftentimes create additional liabilities and risk by mis-stepping — so you want to get ahead of this." Ideally, employers should assess the risks and impact and conduct a post-incident assessment, looking at who's involved, who's impacted and how significant the impact is. It's also important to assign management accountability, she said. "You want to make sure the roles and responsibilities are clear and the individuals who will be responding are trained." That's especially true when it comes to the communication strategy, both internally and externally, particularly if there are any risks of the situation causing a PR issue, said Williams. Employee wellness should also be addressed. "It's very important for employees to really feel that the employer has their wellness issues in mind, and that could be referring employees to an EAP or other vendors to ensure employees feel psychologically safe," she said. Restorative activities are also a must, such as holding town halls, conducting training, and realigning teams with organizational and team objectives, said Williams. Revisiting policies is another step to consider, such as introducing pre-emptive themes that can help after an investigation, she said. For example, reiterating that people are innocent until proven otherwise. "Socialize the workplace to the reality that, by virtue of the nature of certain allegations, you may have to separate parties or certain individuals who may have to be on a leave," said Williams. Employers can also let employees know that confidentiality obligations don't mean the organization is skirting transparency opportunities. "(Employers) can pre-socialize that by understanding the inherent nature of the investigation process, the leaders and those involved in the process have to maintain confidence. If they don't, that could compromise the process itself, and certainly the outcome," she said. Employers should also dictate what's appropriate and inappropriate behaviour, such as gossiping and rumour milling, she said. Leadership is also important through the whole process, said Williams. "Leaders should be trained to respond to subversive or disruptive behaviours… and detect engagement." That can mean monitoring productivity and team performance measures, and gathering feedback, she said. "It should be happening anyways, but there should be some hypervigilance after an investigation process or anything that could be culture shifting." Employers should also consider whether behaviours can be rehabilitated, said Williams. It's a chance for employers to gain some wins, in terms of creating efficiencies, making changes around credibility or boosting the employer brand, said Williams. "Out of tragedy comes opportunity, and that should not be overlooked. So, organizations should definitely debrief, deduce the lessons learned: 'What can we take away from this? What can we do differently to make sure we don't face this situation again?'"

• Cover