Building the Case: How We Create Realistic Workplace Investigation Training
There is a point during many of our investigation training programmes when participants stop referring to the scenario as “the case study”. It becomes simply “the case”.
People start debating what the investigator should do next. Someone spots an inconsistency in an email. Another participant wants Finance involved. A colleague argues that a witness needs to be spoken to before anything else happens.
That level of engagement is exactly what we are trying to create.
For practical workplace investigations training to work, the scenario needs enough depth to sustain scrutiny.
A two-paragraph case study may be useful for illustrating a particular point. It is much less effective at recreating the uncertainty, judgement and competing information that investigators deal with in real life. That is why a significant amount of our course development goes into building the fictional investigation itself.
A fictional organisation, built from scratch
We start by creating an organisation in which the case can live. Its sector, structure and operating environment are designed around the client and the learning objectives of the programme. It needs enough detail to make investigation decisions meaningful.
Who reports to whom? Where does HR sit? Does the organisation have a Compliance function? Who owns the relevant process? What business units exist? Where are decisions made?
Participants may receive an organisational chart, internal policies and briefing information before the investigation even begins. Those details influence how the case works.
If an allegation concerns procurement, for example, participants need to understand the procurement process and who controls it. If a manager appears within the evidence, their position in the organisation may affect decisions about conflicts of interest, interviews or escalation. The fictional company becomes the operating environment for the investigation.
The case needs enough complexity to behave like a real investigation
Real workplace concerns rarely remain neatly within the category in which they first arrive. An employee relations issue may expose questions about expenses. A misconduct allegation may lead to a conflict-of-interest concern. A whistleblowing disclosure may raise compliance, financial and management issues at the same time. We deliberately design cases with this in mind.
The aim is not to create complexity for its own sake. Participants still need a case that can be managed within the course. But there should be enough texture for different functions and different professional perspectives to contribute. This is particularly useful when providing cross-functional investigations training for HR, Compliance, Ethics, Legal, Internal Audit and other teams. Each participant is likely to notice different things. That gives the group something worth discussing.
Creating evidence that feels like evidence
Once the scenario has been designed, we start building the investigation file. Depending on the programme, this can include fictional:
emails and correspondence
HR records
organisational charts
expense information
finance records
internal policies
meeting records
corporate documents
business registration information
websites
social media material
open-source information
witness accounts
Considerable care goes into making those records internally consistent and realistic. A document should not look as though it exists solely to provide participants with the next answer. Real evidence does not behave like that.
Some records may be immediately significant. Others only become relevant later. An email might appear innocuous until it is compared with an expense claim. A company record may connect two people who initially appeared unrelated. An employee's account might be broadly supported by one source and contradicted by another.
The investigators’ role is not to find the hidden clue placed there by the trainer. It is to identify lines of enquiry, assess evidence properly and remain open to more than one possible explanation.
Evidence should arrive over time
We normally avoid handing participants the entire investigation file at the start. Instead, material is released as the case develops.
An initial disclosure might be followed by background records. Later, participants receive emails. A witness provides new information. Open-source research identifies something unexpected. A subject interview changes the direction of an existing line of enquiry.
This staged approach creates decision points throughout the training. Before the next piece of evidence arrives, the group has to consider what it would actually do.
Would they request this record?
Would they interview this person now?
Has the Terms of Reference changed?
Does another function need to become involved?
What risks need managing before the investigation progresses?
Sometimes the group's proposed next step determines the discussion that follows. At other times the case deliberately introduces information they did not expect. Both are useful.
Teaching investigators to live with uncertainty
Investigation training becomes much more valuable once the answers stop being obvious. A good investigator rarely has complete information. They form working hypotheses, but they need to remain willing to test them. They may have to make procedural decisions before they know where the evidence will eventually lead.
A persuasive witness might be wrong. An apparently suspicious transaction may have a reasonable explanation. A subject's account may introduce new evidence that changes the investigator's understanding of events. Training should create room for those possibilities. That means resisting the temptation to build a case where every document points tidily towards the same conclusion.
The learning sits in the grey areas.
Case-based training creates a feedback loop
The evolving case also gives the instructor something extremely useful: visibility.
If participants have just completed a session on evidence assessment, the next stage of the investigation shows whether they can apply it. If they have discussed proportionality, their proposed investigation plan reveals how they interpret it. If the group has covered investigative objectivity, their reaction to evidence that challenges an early theory can become part of the learning. The trainer can respond in the moment.
Questions can be explored while they are still live rather than saved for a generic discussion at the end of the course. This makes practical investigation training much more responsive to the people in the room.
Investigation simulations for international organisations
Realistic case studies become even more valuable when training international teams. An investigation scenario for an organisation operating across the Middle East, Africa or Asia should make sense within that environment.
The types of corporate records available may differ. Organisational structures may differ. The stakeholders involved in a particular decision may differ. Rather than inserting local references into a generic scenario, we research the context and build the case accordingly.
The result should feel familiar enough that participants can concentrate on the investigation rather than mentally translating an obviously foreign scenario into their own working environment.
Practical workplace investigations training
EthicsVision International develops bespoke workplace and corporate investigations training for organisations internationally. Our programmes combine experienced instruction with practical casework designed around the client, its sector and its investigation needs.
The fictional organisation may disappear when the course finishes. The decisions participants have practised making should stay with them considerably longer.
