KEY TAKEAWAYS:
- Being trauma-informed is no longer ‘best practice’ in workplace investigations, it is fundamental practice.
- A trauma-informed approach in workplace investigations is a way of communicating that seeks to minimise harm to participants (including workplace investigators) and improve the reliability of information.
- Taking a trauma-informed approach is not complicated and does not require investigators to be psychologists – it requires patience, preparation and thoughtful communication.
Why is taking a trauma-informed approach important in investigations?
A trauma-informed approach creates an environment that allows participants to give better evidence and minimises the potential that the investigation itself will cause harm. When people feel safe, respected, and heard, they are more likely to give better evidence.
While trauma-informed approaches have been used in clinical settings for many years, more recently, there is greater awareness about applying these practices in workplace settings – including investigations.
There are two key drivers.
1. Clinical research
We now have a much better understanding of how trauma affects the brain and behaviour. Trauma affects memory, recall, emotional responses, and the capacity to participate in a workplace investigation. Investigators do not need to be neuroscientists or clinicians, nor do they need to diagnose someone’s trauma; rather, an understanding of the impact of trauma assists us in interpreting and assessing evidence.
Research tells us that around 75 per cent of adults in Australia will experience a traumatic event in their lifetime. The impacts of trauma can be longstanding and may already exist long before workplace concerns arise. An investigation process itself can be experienced as stressful or even traumatic.
2. Changing regulatory landscape
Trauma-informed and person-centred approaches are now embedded in frameworks and best practice guidance that apply to workplace investigations. Within this regulatory landscape, all employers have a duty of care to create and maintain mentally safe and healthy workplaces and to prevent psychological harm to employees by eliminating or minimising hazards. This includes ensuring workplace investigations are conducted in a way that minimises the risk of re-traumatising or harming participants.
Further, psychosocial safety laws, and national and state-based codes of practice, such as the new National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence, require those responsible for managing, investigating and deciding workplace complaints to be knowledgeable and skilled in trauma-informed and person-centred practices.
What is a trauma-informed approach?
For investigators, a trauma-informed approach means recognising the potential that trauma may impact a person’s ability to participate in a workplace investigation.  However, it does not mean an investigator forgoes their core responsibilities to afford procedural fairness and to remain objective and impartial.
A trauma-informed approach means:
- understanding that trauma or stress may exist
- designing the investigation process to minimise the risk of causing further harm
- applying the following guiding principles to allow all persons to participate as fully as possible: safety (physical and psychological); trustworthiness; choice; collaboration; and empowerment
Person-centred approaches are about making systems and processes meet the needs of individuals (as much as possible). It involves prioritising someone’s needs, values and preferences – listening to them and recognising and respecting their ability to make choices for themselves.
The approach has extended beyond investigations where a complainant was directly involved in the traumatic event in question. It also helps those involved in an investigation who have experienced historical trauma, as well as participants who simply find the investigation process itself difficult or confronting.
While person-centred and trauma-informed approaches should, as much as possible, prioritise someone’s needs and preferences and respect their wishes, it does not always mean doing what a person requests. There may be times when an employer choses to investigate a complaint despite a complainant not wanting an investigation to occur.
What does a trauma-informed investigation look like?
Pre-interview
Making sure everyone is safe: This is the first consideration when receiving a complaint. What steps need to be taken to make sure everyone is safe (both physically and psychologically). It can look like leave, working from home, and changes in reporting lines, all the way through to suspension.
Minimising the number of times a complainant (or any participant) has to tell their story: Where possible, a complainant (or any participant) should only be required to tell their story, with all the details, once. What this means is, the first person who speaks with a complainant (or the second or the third) only needs enough information to determine next steps, while obtaining full details of the incidents giving rise to the complaint should wait until an investigator has been appointed.
Giving as much information and control to a participant as is possible: Explaining the complaint resolution process (with all of its options) to participants seems an obvious requirement, but it doesn’t always happen and is a key step in obtaining full participation. Explaining why there is an investigation is also essential when a decision is made to conduct an investigation where a complainant is reluctant or otherwise unwilling to proceed. Further, where possible, participants should be offered choice, such as when and where an interview is held (within reason), or who they bring as a support person, or what other supports might be appropriate.
Interview
Be prepared: Clearly, preparation is important for any interview but, when adopting a trauma-informed approach, it is particularly important to be across the documents. This helps to avoid asking unnecessary questions or requiring the interviewee to repeat themselves.
Be curious and non-judgmental: Build some rapport with your interviewee, explain how the interview will proceed and answer any questions the interviewee may have before you start. Be curious. Ask the interviewee to help you understand their experience. Don’t express judgment (for example avoid questions like ‘why would you do that?’).
Don’t insist on chronological recall: The trauma experience can directly impact a person’s capacity to organise an experience into a logical sequence to recall those experiences and to put the event, and the feelings and perceptions experienced, into words. Accordingly, it’s helpful to avoid asking your interviewee to provide chronological recall (this happened, and then this, and then this). Ask where they would like to start, what they do recall about an incident, and use environmental cues (such as, ‘was it cold? Were people wearing coats?) to assist with recall.
Ask hard questions in a sensitive way: You need to maintain a balance of both empathy and objectivity when asking the hard questions (like ‘where did she put her hand?’ Or ‘what were you drinking?’). You’ll still need to press for answers to your questions (‘I don’t recall’, or ‘this is ridiculous’, are not helpful responses). It can help here if you foreshadow the need to ask the questions (explain that you’re now going to be asking some difficult questions) and your reasons for asking those questions.
Delivering outcomes
When considering findings and credibility, consider the impact of trauma on recollection: While not necessarily relevant to every witness in an investigation, it is important to consider the impact of trauma, particularly on complainants. Counterintuitive behaviour (like gaps in memory or delayed recall) may not be a positive or negative consideration in determining reliability and/or credibility. They may (as evidenced in Lehrmann v Network Ten Pty Ltd (Trial Judgment)) be at best a neutral consideration.
Be as clear and transparent as possible when communicating outcomes: Remember, when communicating outcomes, similar arrangements should be made as were adopted for interview. Give control of time and place as appropriate, be as clear and transparent as you can about the findings without breaching confidentiality and explain any subsequent requirements about confidentiality (what a party can and cannot say about the investigation).
Final reflection
One final reflection on being trauma-informed: It’s important that a trauma-informed investigator doesn’t forget to take steps to care for their own mental health and wellbeing, whatever those steps may look like.
Our Principal Paula Hoctor explains why safeguarding investigator wellbeing is so important and offers some practical strategies employed by our specialist workplace investigations firm to support our team, such as peer support, diversified work mix and de-briefing with an external counselling therapist, in this article, Supporting workplace investigator wellbeing.
Because, to steal from an airline safety briefing, you need to put on your own oxygen mask, before helping others with theirs.
AUTHORS: This article was written by Workplace Investigators Kristine Thomas and Caroline O’Connor.
More information
Q Workplace Solutions’ team of experienced and legally qualified investigators is trusted by public and private organisations, including ASX-listed companies and government agencies, to investigate complex and often highly sensitive allegations of employee wrongdoing. The team also undertakes reviews of organisations, divisions, or units, and provides training, coaching and external advisory support to internal investigators and teams.
Upcoming training | 13 May 2026
Learn what a trauma-informed investigation approach is and how to implement it with objectivity and empathy at this practical online training workshop, Trauma-informed Workplace Investigations and Interviewing. Group bookings are available.
