I need a couple of replies to the discussion posts. Needs to have an in-text citation and should be approximately 2-3 paragraphs for each one with an open-ended question to my fellow student. This does not need a title page, and one reference is sufficient.
When conducting an internal investigation there are a few crucial steps that should be addressed to ensure a proper investigation. Hypothetically being a HR director of a large corporation to conduct it is important to decide who is going to conduct the investigation. Is it going to be internal or external? Both have their pros and cons. The benefits of internal investigators are they might have knowledge of the inner workings of business procedures and the rules and policies of the company. However, an internal investigator could be shown to have bias during the investigation. It could be difficult for a person to remain unbiased due to the fact they might know the individuals involved, have knowledge of the situation, or simply have a pre-determined an outcome prior to reviewing information. Having an external investigator has the benefits of appearing most un-biased and impartial. But with external investigators could bring extensive cost in both monetary and time to complete the investigation. (McKee, 2007) At my job, almost all investigations are internal due to the nature of my work. Reviewing documents, access to secured areas, and questioning personnel could requires a high level of security clearance that an external investigator or auditor will not have. We have personal brought in from other sites or locations, but they are still employed by the same company.
The gathering and review of information must be at the forefront of importance. Information could be in the form of documents, emails, financial statements, etc. The list could be very extensive depending on the size of the investigation. If the size of the investigation is large, as the one that is being aired on television for us now, phone records, text messages, and financial records will be investigated.
At the completion of the investigation, there must be some sort of conclusion that is documented. That conclusion may come in a couple of forms. Was there any wrongdoing? If not, will the company be able to operate with the personnel that were involved in the complaint, or do other arrangements need to be made? If there was wrongdoing, what disciplinary action needs to be addressed for the offender? More importantly, there should be a way to ensure the action does not happen again. There might need to be policy changes made or changes in management. (Chunias, J. & Braceras, R. 2015).
Chunias, J. & Braceras, R. (2015). Conducting internal investigations. Goodwin Procter. Retrieved September 19, 2016 from http://www.goodwinlaw.com/-/media/files/publications/attorney-articles/2015/mcle-internal-investigations-article.pdf (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.
McKee, J.. (2007, September). What Employers Should Know About Conducting Internal Investigations. Compensation and Benefits Review, 39(5), 60-66,5. Retrieved December 11, 2010, from ABI/INFORM Global. (Document ID: 1365250501).
After reviewing the five mistakes identified in the article, I think the most potentially detrimental mistake to a company is incorrect evidence procedures surrounding the collection and analysis of these records. During an investigation if allegations of wrongdoing have occurred, concrete evidence of such wrongdoing can propel a case forward and provide definitive proof around the facts presented. Without having this information available, there potentially is no case at all, to either prove or disprove the allegations presented. If the evidence is either corrupted or compromised in some way, this information cannot be recreated. “The documentary record can be one of the most important sources of information in an internal investigation. Documents are crucial to piecing together a coherent narrative, especially where witness recollections may not be fresh or may be biased. A system for collecting, organizing and reviewing both hard copy and electronic documents should be established from the beginning of the investigation” (Missal, Fishman, Ochs, & Kline Dubill, 2007, p. 301). In the case of proper evidence gathering, appropriate personnel trained for evidence management should be called in to coordinate this task. Time is of the essence to ensure documents are not destroyed or mishandled. “A crucial component of evidence gathering is ensuring that the chain of custody is documented. This documentation should include a description of how the information was obtained, when it was collected, who has handled it, where and how it was transported, where it is stored and maintained. Improper documentation may result in information becoming inadmissible in court” (Mohr & Rao, 2009, p. 70). By not performing all these key functions around evidence gathering, a case can be severely compromised and will put a company at risk.
Missal, M., Fishman, E., Ochs, B., & Kline Dubill, R. (2007). Conducting corporate internal investigations.International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, 4(4), 297-308.
Mohr, T., & Rao, N. (2009). The Five Most Common Mistakes in Internal Investigations. Directorship, 35(5), 69-71.