The Challenge
A major government department received a whistleblower complaint regarding one of its senior executives. The allegation was potential favouritism, or more seriously, collusion with a major vendor partner. Juno Risk was contacted to conduct an independent investigation to determine the facts and whether the allegations were true.
This was a complex challenge. The allegations were serious and the risks to their reputations enormous. The facts depended upon a myriad of policies, project charter directions, and established practices. Given the seniority of the party involved and the seriousness of the allegations, there was little room for error.
Our Approach
As a trusted partner, Juno Risk was permitted to immerse itself into these details to understand context first before engaging with parties and witnesses.
The key to any insider investigation is to respect the privacy of those accused while protecting the organization and determining the facts. Before we spoke to anyone, we studied the context. We determined expected behaviors, established practices, and norms.
Outcome
While the well-intentioned whistleblower observed behaviours that they considered unethical, we were able to establish the full facts, align actions with policy, and exonerate the executive in question. Guided by Juno Risk, the organization took great care to maintain control of the investigation and protect the parties involved.
The result was that both the executive and the organization suffered no reputational damage, and the whistleblower was satisfied that their concerns were properly evaluated.