Five Things That Undermine an Otherwise Solid Report
- sasha18324
- Jul 17
- 2 min read
July 2025 When Good Investigations Go Bad (on Paper) | ||
I recently had the chance to take a well-taught course through the Association of Workplace Investigators on writing investigation reports that stand up through every stage right through to litigation. It got me thinking about a few common pitfalls that can creep into even the strongest reports.
Here are five things I try to keep in mind:
1. Blurring the Line Between Facts and Analysis
It’s easy to slip into blending what happened with what it means. But when that line gets blurry, it can be harder for readers to follow your logic, or to feel confident that the evidence was weighed fairly. What helps: Keeping factual findings and analysis in their own sections. If you're quoting or summarizing witness evidence, keep that in the findings. Save your credibility assessments and conclusions for the analysis section.
2. Skipping the “Why” Behind Credibility Assessments
Credibility assessments are often central, especially when the facts hinge on conflicting accounts. But just saying one person seemed more credible than another, without explaining why, doesn’t give the reader much to go on. What helps: Point to specific things, such as inconsistencies, corroboration, or the absence of supporting evidence. It’s less about gut instinct and more about the reasoning behind your conclusion.
3. Using Judgmental or Emotionally Charged Language
Even when the behavior at issue is troubling, emotionally charged language (think “clearly lying” or “toxic person”) tends to weaken the report’s neutrality. It can also distract from the real substance. What helps: Staying neutral and professional in tone. Focus on describing what happened, not labeling the people involved. Let your analysis do the heavy lifting.
4. Getting Lost in the Weeds Too much detail can obscure your key findings, especially when reports become bogged down in lengthy witness-by-witness summaries or irrelevant tangents. Try and focus on clarity over quantity.
What helps: Asking whether each detail actually helps the reader understand the issue or draw a conclusion. If not, it may belong in your notes rather than the report. Tools like timelines or tables can also help simplify things.
5. Overstepping the Mandate
It’s tempting to offer recommendations or observations beyond your assigned scope, especially when the organization could benefit from broader cultural changes. But doing so can raise questions about impartiality and create confusion about your role.
What helps: Being clear and disciplined about the scope. If your mandate includes recommendations, tie them directly to your findings. And where appropriate, spell out the limits of your role in the report itself.
Final Thoughts
A well-conducted investigation can still fall short if the report doesn’t reflect the same level of care, neutrality, and clarity. Avoiding these common missteps can go a long way toward making sure your report is clear, professional, and able to support the decisions that follow.
|
