Email: belinda@belindacoghlan.com.au | Phone: 0414 642 921
Perth-based Workplace Investigations
WHAT
is a Workplace Investigation?
A workplace investigation is a structured, impartial process for establishing the facts behind a complaint or concern - bullying, harassment, discrimination, misconduct or a breach of policy - so an organisation can make a fair, defensible decision about what happened and what needs to change.
Done badly, it's a rushed, one-sided process that protects the organisation's paperwork more than its people. Done well, it follows the established principles of procedural fairness (natural justice), is grounded in current WHS psychosocial risk obligations, and treats the investigation itself as something that can cause harm if it isn't handled carefully.
I run investigations in line with AHRI's best-practice principles of procedural fairness, consistency and confidentiality, and WorkSafe WA's trauma-informed approach to investigations - because the goal isn't just a defensible finding. It's a safer workplace, for everyone involved.
WHO
needs a Workplace Investigation?
Almost every organisation eventually receives a complaint or concern that can't be resolved informally.
Why? Because the organisations I work with are usually facing one or more of the same triggers.
-
A bullying, harassment or discrimination complaint that needs an impartial process, not an internal shortcut
-
Allegations of misconduct that could lead to disciplinary action or termination
-
A complaint involving a senior leader, where genuine internal impartiality is difficult
-
A psychosocial hazard report that needs investigating as a WHS matter, not just an HR one
-
A need for a process that will hold up if challenged at the Fair Work Commission or elsewhere
Whatever's brought you here, if you need a process that's fair, defensible and genuinely safe for everyone involved, I'm here when you need me.
HOW
does a Workplace Investigation work?
I run investigations against the established principles of procedural fairness, informed by AHRI best practice and WorkSafe WA's trauma-informed guidance, moving through seven stages:
Principles of natural justice
Natural justice — also called procedural fairness — isn't a legal nicety. It's what makes a finding defensible. It rests on two rules:
-
The hearing rule - everyone affected has the right to know the allegations against them in enough detail to respond, and a genuine opportunity to put their side of the story before any decision is made
-
The bias rule - the decision-maker must be impartial, free of any personal interest in the outcome, and must not have already decided the outcome before the evidence is heard
A process that skips either rule doesn't just risk being unfair - it risks being overturned.
Key legal principles
Workplace investigations sit inside a wider legal framework, not outside it:
-
The Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) — a fair process is one of the factors the Fair Work Commission weighs in an unfair dismissal claim, and general protections apply throughout
-
The Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth) — the positive duty under s.47C now requires proactive, reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment, not just a response after the fact
-
WHS legislation — psychosocial hazard reports, including bullying and harassment, fall under the same duty of care as physical hazards, and the investigation process itself is subject to WHS risk-management obligations
-
Principles in the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) and preservation of evidence
-
Privacy and confidentiality obligations - for all parties, throughout and after the process.
Challenges to consider
Every investigation carries a few recurring risks worth planning for upfront:
-
Confidentiality is genuinely difficult to maintain in a small team or close-knit workplace
-
Delay causes harm - a drawn-out process leaves everyone in limbo, which is itself a psychosocial hazard
-
Actual or perceived bias, especially where the investigator has an existing relationship with a party
-
The risk of re-traumatising a complainant, witness or respondent through the interview process itself
-
Balancing the rights of the individual against the organisation's duty to provide a safe workplace for everyone else
Preparation
Before a single interview happens, I clarify the scope - what's actually being investigated, and what isn't - identify all parties and witnesses, assess whether interim measures are needed to keep people safe while the process runs, and set out a plain-language explanation of the process, timeframes and confidentiality limits for everyone involved. Lack of role clarity here is one of the most common causes of a process feeling unfair, even when the outcome is right.
Conducting investigation interviews
Interviews are run using trauma-informed interviewing techniques - open, non-leading questions, breaks when needed, and support person access because how evidence is gathered affects both its reliability and the wellbeing of the person giving it. Each party gets a genuine opportunity to respond to the allegations and the evidence against them, not just to give their own account in isolation.
Making a finding (balance of probabilities)
Findings are made on the balance of probabilities, the civil standard of proof, not the criminal standard of "beyond reasonable doubt." This means a fact is proven if its existence is more probable than not sometimes put crudely as "50% plus 1".
It must be established or proven that it is more likely than not that the conduct occurred - based on the evidence gathered, not assumption, character, or how someone presents under pressure. Where evidence is contested and can't be resolved, that's stated as an honest finding, not glossed over.
The investigation report
The report sets out the allegations, the evidence, the reasoning behind each finding, and - critically - the systemic factors that contributed to the situation arising in the first place. A report that identifies individual conduct without asking what in the system allowed it to happen is only half the job.
Where
to apply a Workplace Investigation?
Wherever a complaint or concern needs an impartial, defensible process, that's where a structured investigation earns its place — an informal, ad hoc response to a serious complaint is one of the fastest ways to compound the original harm.
A properly run investigation gives you: a finding that can withstand scrutiny at the Fair Work Commission or elsewhere; a process that treats every party fairly, not just the one the organisation is most worried about; a genuine reduction in psychosocial risk, rather than an investigation that becomes a hazard in itself; and system-level insight the organisation can actually act on, not just a closed file.
Workplace investigations connect naturally to my other work. They often surface exactly the hazards my WHS Psychosocial Risk Audit is built to identify, the findings frequently point to gaps my Human Skills Training or Leader and Manager Coaching can close, and where an investigation reveals a wider cultural pattern, that connects to Culture Change Consulting.
WHY
choose me?
I bring over 25 years of HR and organisational development experience to workplace investigations, grounded in AHRI's best-practice principles of procedural fairness, consistency and confidentiality, and WorkSafe WA's trauma-informed approach to investigations and incident response. As the founder of the Psychological Safety System Blueprint™, I bring the same systems-first lens to every investigation — because a fair finding and a genuinely safer workplace aren't two different outcomes. They're the same one.
Frequently Asked Questions
Will you always find someone at fault?
No - some allegations aren't substantiated, and an honest investigation says so. Findings are based on the evidence, on the balance of probabilities, not on delivering the outcome someone wants.
What's the difference between a formal investigation and an informal resolution?
Not every concern needs a formal investigation - some are genuinely better resolved through mediation or a facilitated conversation. Part of my process is helping you work out which is the right fit before committing to either.
How do you keep the process confidential?
As far as the law and a fair process allow. Confidentiality is genuinely hard to guarantee completely, especially in a small team, so I'm upfront about its limits from the start rather than making a promise I can't keep. You can ask parties to sign a confidentiality agreement.
How long does an investigation take?
It can take 2-8 weeks depending on the complexity and the number of parties involved. Delay itself causes harm - leaving people in limbo is a psychosocial hazard, so I work to keep the process as timely as the evidence allows.
Can you investigate a complaint against a senior leader?
Yes - and this is often exactly when an external, impartial investigator matters most, since internal impartiality becomes genuinely difficult when the person involved has organisational power.
What happens after the report?
The report includes recommendations, but implementation is yours to own. Where useful, I can support the next step - whether that's a disciplinary process, coaching, or addressing the systemic factors the investigation surfaced.