http://www.nierenberg.com/articles/2005/10/do-you-need-an-outside-investigator/19/ Ideas and Methods to Improve Your Workplace Mon, 19 Nov 2007 17:56:49 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 http://www.nierenberg.com/articles/2005/10/do-you-need-an-outside-investigator/19/comment-page-1/#comment-13 Joe Nierenberg Thu, 17 Nov 2005 18:16:08 +0000 http://www.nierenberg.com/articles/?p=19#comment-13 It depends on what management already knows about that situation and what the history has been with regard to the supervisor, the subordinate, and other employees. For example, if management has compelling reasons to believe that (i) the relationship was not unwelcome on the part of anyone, (ii) no one else's job assignment or working conditions were affected, (iii) no workplace policies were violated, and (iv) there has not been a pattern of such relationships, then the employer might not need to undertake any further investigation if the situation essentially has resolved itself through the supervisor's resignation. If you are not sure that all of those criteria are true, then a prompt investigation might be necessary in order to determine what really went on and to assess the best way to move forward. There may be a need to change something in the way the workplace operates, or there may be a need to support or remedy an employee who has been adversely affected by the situation. If further investigation seems necessary, it would probably have a different focus and scope than the type of investigation the employer might have conducted if the supervisor had not already submitted his or her resignation. An additional factor, if further investigation seems prudent, is that it might be easier to obtain information from the supervisor if the questions are asked before his or her resignation becomes effective. (This response is not a legal opinion. Please see <a href="http://www.nierenberg.com/articles/notices-and-disclaimers-please-read/" rel="nofollow">terms of use</a>.) It depends on what management already knows about that situation and what the history has been with regard to the supervisor, the subordinate, and other employees. For example, if management has compelling reasons to believe that (i) the relationship was not unwelcome on the part of anyone, (ii) no one else’s job assignment or working conditions were affected, (iii) no workplace policies were violated, and (iv) there has not been a pattern of such relationships, then the employer might not need to undertake any further investigation if the situation essentially has resolved itself through the supervisor’s resignation. If you are not sure that all of those criteria are true, then a prompt investigation might be necessary in order to determine what really went on and to assess the best way to move forward. There may be a need to change something in the way the workplace operates, or there may be a need to support or remedy an employee who has been adversely affected by the situation. If further investigation seems necessary, it would probably have a different focus and scope than the type of investigation the employer might have conducted if the supervisor had not already submitted his or her resignation. An additional factor, if further investigation seems prudent, is that it might be easier to obtain information from the supervisor if the questions are asked before his or her resignation becomes effective. (This response is not a legal opinion. Please see terms of use.)

]]> http://www.nierenberg.com/articles/2005/10/do-you-need-an-outside-investigator/19/comment-page-1/#comment-12 Anne Hajek Thu, 17 Nov 2005 16:23:58 +0000 http://www.nierenberg.com/articles/?p=19#comment-12 If a supervisor admits to a relationship with the subordinate, and resigns should an investigation be done prior to accepting the resignation? If a supervisor admits to a relationship with the subordinate, and resigns should an investigation be done prior to accepting the resignation?

]]>