R6IRichards Six Investigations

Guidance ยท Reviewed 29 July 2026

What should a workplace investigation report contain?

A table of contents shows where the reasoning sits. It does not make the reasoning defensible.

A useful report lets a decision-maker trace each allegation from scope, through the evidence and response, to a reasoned finding. It also records the limits of what the investigation could establish.

See the defensibility elementsView the sample report skeleton

Beyond the headings

The report has to preserve the path to each finding.

An executive summary, background, methodology, evidence summary, analysis, findings, recommendations, and attachments are the familiar parts. These six elements make those parts reviewable.

  1. 01

    Standard of proof

    State that factual findings are made on the balance of probabilities. That is the civil standard, not proof beyond reasonable doubt and not a numerical 51 per cent test. The standard does not change for serious allegations, but the evidence should be strong enough to support the gravity of the finding and its consequences.

  2. 02

    Procedural fairness record

    Show what particularised allegations were put, what material response was received, and whether decisive adverse information was put for comment. Record the opportunity, timing, and method of response, along with any support-person offer or request and what occurred. The report should evidence fairness without turning process detail into advocacy.

  3. 03

    Findings taxonomy

    Make a finding for each allegation or particular using defined terms such as substantiated, not substantiated, or unable to be substantiated. Keep findings of fact separate from any policy characterisation. Keep both separate from discipline or another employment outcome, which remains the employer's decision.

  4. 04

    Credibility reasoning

    When accounts conflict, explain why one is preferred. Relevant reasons can include corroboration, internal consistency, consistency with contemporaneous records, opportunity to observe, and whether later conduct fits the account. Demeanour should be treated cautiously and should rarely carry the reasoning by itself.

  5. 05

    Scope and limitations

    Identify the terms of reference and any approved amendments. Say what was not investigated, which witnesses could not be interviewed, which records were unavailable, and how those constraints affected the findings. Distinguish an unresolved question from one the evidence answers against the allegation.

  6. 06

    Independence and handling

    Record conflict checks and any actual or apparent conflict that was managed. State the intended audience, confidentiality controls, and distribution limits. If a lawyer commissioned the work, follow the lawyer's directions about legal professional privilege and handling rather than asserting that privilege automatically applies.

Sample report skeleton

A working outline for a reviewable report.

The order can change with the terms of reference. The separation between evidence, reasoning, findings, and the employer's later decision should not.

Opening and process

  1. Executive summary: purpose, scope, process, findings, and material limitations, without replacing the reasons in the body.
  2. Background and terms of reference: commissioning authority, allegations or factual questions, relevant instruments, deliverable, and approved scope changes.
  3. Methodology: evidence-preservation steps, records reviewed, interviews conducted, fairness steps, witnesses unavailable, and departures from the planned method.
  4. Evidence map: witnesses and documents identified consistently and cross-referenced to an indexed attachment set.

Reasoning and outcome

  1. Analysis by allegation: each particular, relevant evidence, response, material conflicts, credibility reasoning, and standard of proof.
  2. Findings schedule: one defined finding per allegation or particular, with facts separated from policy characterisation.
  3. Recommendations: included only if the terms of reference ask for them, and confined to process or control matters rather than disciplinary outcome.
  4. Limitations and attachments: unresolved issues, excluded matters, unavailable evidence, report handling, and a complete index of relied-upon material.

A standalone reader should be able to identify the question asked, the material considered, the response received, the reasoning applied, and the limit of every conclusion. Plain language helps, but brevity should not erase the evidentiary path.

Before relying on the report

Test the join between process and conclusion.

Questions for the decision-maker
  • Scoped?Does every finding answer an authorised question?
  • Fair?Was the decisive adverse case put and answered?
  • Supported?Can each reason be traced to evidence?
  • Bounded?Are limits and employer decisions kept visible?

Related guidance: how the report fits within the workplace investigation process, what procedural fairness requires before a finding, and when an independent investigator may be appropriate.

Related service

General information only

Need an investigation with a reviewable report?

Use the first call to discuss the broad issue, authority, urgency, and required deliverable without sending allegations, witness names, evidence, or health information.

Request a confidential callMore guidance

This guide is general information, not legal or industrial-relations advice. Tasmanian inquiry-agent licence number: TBA.