« How Not to Get Your Investigation Taken Seriously: Part 3 | How Not to Get Your Investigation Taken Seriously » |
How Not to Get Your Investigation Taken Seriously: Part 2
Suppose that you find yourself in the difficult position of needing an investigation of your organization's activities or personnel. Suppose further that you want that investigation to be taken seriously and be effective. In that case you need to avoid some pitfalls. First, do not talk in terms of "risk management" or otherwise imply that a primary concern is your own liability.
Second, do not begin by indicating that you already know the answer.
In seminary I learned that three of the most important words in theology are "I don't know" and that we should not be afraid to use them. That advice is good here, too. A corresponding answer in this context might be, "We understand the desire for answers; we want answers, too. But at this time, we do not know. That is the purpose of the investigation, and we need to let that investigation run its course." Serious-minded listeners will understand.
Yet in these challenging situations, many persons are clamoring for answers. There is an understandable desire to reach the end of the process, to be done, to answer the questions, and to be able to move onward. The intervening wait is uncomfortable, and the longer the wait, the more uncomfortable it can get. Together, these factors feed the impulse to begin giving answers prematurely. Avoid it!
Specifically, avoid the temptation to talk about conclusions at the same time that you are introducing the investigation. If you are dealing with matters that are potentially criminal, do not make statements such as that you expect no charges to be filed in the matter. You especially do not want to make such statements at the same time that the state and federal authorities are stating that their investigations are continuing.
If you do not yet know the facts, then how can you make that judgment? Recall the words of Proverbs, "He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, It is folly and shame unto him" (Prov. 18:13). On the other hand, if you already know the facts, then what is the purpose of the investigation? It sounds superfluous. One tends to wonder, "Are their minds made up? Is the investigation merely a charade?"
So avoid the pitfall. You cannot have it both ways.
"I don't know."
Up next: Choosing an investigator.
1 comment

Along the way I would appreciate your commenting on the way the leadership addressed Schaap's vacancy from the pulpit the Sunday before the news broke. It was announced that he was out on medical leave.