· Features

An independent approach to resolving cover-ups in the work place

When cover-ups in an organisation make the national headlines, it is associated with high profile corporate scandals.

Due to the negative impact from public perception of the organisation and how it operates, investigations into the scandals tend to be played out in the media spotlight.

Two of this year's most 'famous' scandals include the Hillsborough disaster with the real story of what happened 23 years ago and the subsequent cover-up by the police and the government being exposed through a damning report and the News of the World phone hacking scandal which was investigated through the Leveson inquiry and led to the closure of the paper.

However, this is only the tip of the iceberg, cover-ups concerning malpractice and rule-breaking happen on a daily basis, in all types of organisations.

It is important for heads of organisations to educate employees that it is acceptable to raise any genuine concerns relating to corruption or illegality issues and provide clear internal reporting channels. The person concerned has three options; to stay quiet, to blow the whistle internally or to blow the whistle outside to the authorities or media.

Time and time again employees admit they were aware of issues but feared speaking up or were not confident that their organisation would handle the issue appropriately. The Public Interest Disclosure Act (PIDA) 1998 aims to protect individuals in these circumstances without the fear of victimisation. This is commonly referred to as 'whistleblowing'.

Whistleblowing is when employees raise a concern about a possible fraud, crime or danger that has a public interest aspect to it. The law that protect whistleblowers is for public interest, so people are encouraged to speak out if they find malpractice in an organisation. It is therefore important for an early warning system such as having a whistleblowing policy in place.

When issues of malpractice are identified, Assure acts independently from the organisation and offers a service that is efficient, fair and in accordance with the organisation's procedures, legislation and good practice. Being independent to the organisation, their service is seen as unbiased and credible by the employer, employee and any other parties associated with the matter.

When an organisation is subject to an external audit or regulation sometimes managers are tempted to conduct their own internal investigations and then gloss over internal concerns and issues so that they can minimise the problems and even obtain better reviews or scores. As the comedian once said "it is how you tell it". This is the weakness of internally based investigations.