Russell Brand and You: What Your Company Should Know About Workplace Investigations | A cross-post with LinkedIn

 

Jim Moore wrote a brilliant article published today about how the Russell Brand allegations highlight how workplace investigations aren't done well (or, in my experience, aren't done at all!) across the pond.

As many of you know, Russell Brand is a celebrity who has appeared on tv, in movies, and most recently as a podcaster. He has recently been accused of rape, sexual assault, and emotional abuse. Some of the allegations purportedly took place while he was appearing on tv in the UK. One tv executive stated in response that said "the allegations showed how 'terrible behavior towards women was tolerated' in the tv industry." Again, in my experience, that's not the only industry where that happens!

So What?

The organizations who have employed Russell Brand are not accused of rape, sexual assault, or emotional abuse, so why is it a problem for them? Simple: they failed to take effective action or provide appropriate workplace investigations. There are at least three (3) main issues that arise from this situation:

1. Are they liable for those failures? As they say, it depends - it depends on what happened, when it happened, what was done about it, the jurisdiction in which the allegations took place, and the specific laws that apply. The key point is that it's not a simple "no." That's problematic for businesses.

2. HR departments will not escape scrutiny. For example, when former McDonald’s CEO Steve Easterbrook was terminated for an inappropriate relationship with an employee, the company’s HR department found itself in hot water when employees accused them of ignoring complaints about the CEO’s conduct with other employees.

   Side note: I completely feel for those HR employees. What were they going to do? Report the CEO to the Board of Directors? Their jobs were likely on the line. I have some tips on how to handle situations like this below.

3. Finally, the goodwill of each business is now thrown into question with reputations now likely tarnished. Publicly traded corporations typically take a hit to their stock price, and private companies usually lose at least some business.

The question is: was the inaction or awful workplace investigations worth it? Who decides?

Takeaway

The easiest and best solution is typically to bring in a third-party firm to perform the workplace investigation. Why?

1. If they do a shoddy job? It's on them. You can always saw that you launched an independent investigation.

2. If the results indicate problems with a company leader, it wasn't HR who detailed the issues.

3. Independent firms typically have more experience investigating these types of allegations than HR does. They'll be able to ignore the office politics and follow the evidence to the heart of the matter. And if they are prevented from doing so, again, that's not on HR!

Once the workplace investigation is complete then the appropriate people can make informed decisions. A Board of Directors may take action against a CEO. It may also decide to disregard the recommendations from an independent investigator. In either case, the right people know the facts. It's much harder to blame a "fall guy" when the people at the top took ownership. The risks associated with their decisions will be borne by those upon whom the risk should rest.