Workplace reviews are increasingly common as organisations strive to maintain healthy work environments and address concerns around behaviour, culture, or practices. However, the success of a review depends heavily on how well its purpose and scope are communicated to all participants. The recent workplace review conducted at Channel 9, which drew criticism from employees, offers a timely reminder of why setting clear expectations is crucial.
What Is a Workplace Review?
A workplace review is an exploratory process designed to assess aspects of the work environment—such as culture, leadership, communication practices, or behavioural trends. Reviews are often used to identify systemic issues, provide feedback, and recommend improvements. They typically involve gathering information through interviews with employees at all levels of the organisation.
Crucially, workplace reviews are distinct from investigations. While an investigation seeks to determine whether specific allegations of misconduct occurred and can lead to disciplinary action, a review generally focuses on broader themes and systemic patterns. The outcome of a review might involve recommendations for leadership changes, policy reforms, or training, but it does not directly result in individual sanctions.
What Happened at Channel 9?
Channel 9 recently faced backlash following the conclusion of its workplace review, which was conducted following concerns about a toxic work culture, including allegations of bullying, intimidation, and sexual harassment.
Some employees expressed frustration when the review’s findings were presented, as they expected it to trigger disciplinary action against specific individuals responsible for problematic behaviours.
However, this expectation was misplaced. Channel 9 clarified that the review was not designed to determine wrongdoing or impose discipline, but rather to provide recommendations for improving the workplace environment. This disconnect between employee expectations and the actual scope of the review created confusion and dissatisfaction, undermining trust in the process.
The Risks of Undefined or Poorly Communicated Scope
The Channel 9 case illustrates the need to clearly communicate the scope of a workplace review. While it is not suggested that Channel 9 failed to do so, if participants expect one outcome—such as disciplinary action—only to find that the review serves a different purpose, several negative consequences can arise:
- Eroded Trust and Engagement—Participants may feel deceived or that their concerns were dismissed, leading to disengagement and distrust in what comes next.
- Inaccurate Data Collection—If employees believe the review will determine individual accountability, they may frame their responses differently, focusing on personal grievances rather than broader workplace trends. They may not engage at all.
- Heightened Frustration and Backlash—When expectations are not managed, participants can react negatively to the outcome, even if the process was conducted effectively. This can amplify workplace dissatisfaction.
- Damage to Reputation—Publicised backlash, like what occurred at Channel 9, can harm an organisation’s reputation, making it appear unresponsive to staff concerns, even if the review achieved its original goals and actually set out what it was meant to achieve.
Why Defining the Scope Is Essential
Defining the scope of a workplace review is essential for setting clear expectations about what the review will and won’t achieve. This involves specifying:
- The Purpose. What is the review intended to assess (e.g., workplace culture, leadership practices)?
- The Process. What methods will be used to gather information (e.g., interviews, surveys, focus groups)?
- The Outcome. What deliverables will result from the review (e.g., a report with recommendations)?
- Limitations. Will the review recommend changes only, or can it trigger further actions, such as investigations or disciplinary measures?
Once the scope is defined, it must be communicated transparently to all participants. This ensures they understand that a review is not an investigation and helps align their expectations with the process’s intended outcomes.
Lessons
Here are some key lessons for any organisation conducting workplace reviews:
- Communicate the Review’s Purpose Clearly
Organisations must provide clear messaging to participants, explaining that the focus of a review is on systemic improvement rather than individual accountability. This helps avoid misplaced expectations about disciplinary action.
- Anticipate Employee Reactions and Questions
Employees are likely to ask how their input will be used and whether there will be follow-up actions. Addressing these questions early—through FAQs, written briefings, or town hall sessions—can help manage expectations.
- Consider Parallel Processes for Specific Complaints
In cases where serious allegations surface during a review, organisations should have a mechanism to refer these to formal investigations. This ensures that individual misconduct is addressed appropriately, even if it is outside the scope of the review.
- Deliver Recommendations Thoughtfully
When presenting findings, organisations must be sensitive to the emotions of participants. Acknowledge frustrations, explain the boundaries of the review, and provide a clear roadmap for how recommendations will be implemented.
