Poor interview techniques can do more harm than good. Handled badly, interviews can re-traumatise participants, especially in cases involving bullying, harassment, or sexual harassment. They risk compromising evidence through biased questioning, inconsistent methods, and rushing to conclusions.
In workplace investigations, interviews help establish facts and clarify what happened. In complex or high-stress situations, they can quickly become difficult to control. The challenge is maintaining control, guiding the discussion with clarity and purpose while managing participants’ expectations, inconsistencies, and stress.
Why interview technique matters
There are legal and organisational consequences if an investigation interview isn’t conducted efficiently and with participants in mind. The risks extend beyond evidentiary challenges to include the critical need for compliance and safeguarding the emotional well-being of all participants.
Alongside compliance with work health and safety obligations, a trauma-informed approach has become standard practice for people who manage people and is a key factor in psychosocial risk management.
Procedural fairness must be upheld, ensuring all parties can respond properly and that findings are based on balanced, tested information.
Trauma-informed practice in practice. Uncertainty fuels stress; clarity supports engagement.
A trauma-informed approach starts with the participants feeling comfortable.
I make sure the interviewee understands the process by asking appropriate questions and, where possible, giving participants a sense of control. This helps establish a positive foundation for the interaction. Allowing them to take breaks, ask questions, and understand what to expect next can reduce concern and improve the quality of the information obtained.
As an interviewer, I build trust through transparency by clearly explaining how information will be used and what outcomes may follow. At the same time, I must remain neutral and avoid judgmental or accusatory language, focusing on facts and experiences rather than assumptions.
Preparation shapes everything. Start with a clear understanding of what is being alleged so the interview stays focused and relevant.
Before an interview, I assess potential risks, including psychological distress, and ensure appropriate supports are in place. I also consider power dynamics, as hierarchies such as manager–employee relationships can influence how comfortable someone feels speaking openly.
Cultural and language differences should be factored in as well. Communication styles, comprehension, and context all influence how information is shared and understood.
Getting the logistics right makes a real difference. A private, safe setting and ensuring participants know they can have a support person present all help improve engagement.
First impressions matter. A calm, respectful approach reduces anxiety and builds trust.
As an interviewer, I set clear expectations early by explaining the scope, what will be discussed and explaining how the information will be used.
When participants understand why they’re there and how the interview fits into the broader investigation, they’re more likely to engage meaningfully.
Don’t be afraid to be upfront.
Telling participants there will be difficult questions prepares them for what’s to come but explaining why helps minimise the chance they feel uncomfortable or defensive.
Strong interviews rely on asking the right questions. Use closed questions to confirm details and open questions to draw out more detailed responses
You may have heard of the questioning technique known as TED prompts (Tell me,’ ‘Explain,’ and ‘Describe’), which encourage participants to speak freely and provide more detailed responses. These prompts are particularly useful for building rapport and gaining deeper insight without leading the participant.
Similarly, the 5W+H framework (who, what, when, where, why, and how) helps structure the conversation and ensures nothing important is missed. Together, these techniques support effective questioning by balancing openness with structure.
Just as important is what to avoid. Leading questions can distort responses. Loaded language introduces bias. And “why” questions can feel accusatory, often better reframed as “what” or “how.”
Interviews can become emotional. Handling these emotions is what keeps you in control.
Pause and acknowledge the participant’s experience by slowing the pace and briefly recognising the difficulty of the topic, without validating every statement.
Keep a calm, professional tone throughout.
If emotions escalate:
- Offer short breaks, such as a pause or time to get water, to help participants regain composure and keep the interview productive.
- Avoid shutting down emotion too quickly, as it may increase tension; allow brief expression before gently guiding the conversation back on track.
- Maintain clear role boundaries. Be professional, respectful, and composed without being cold or dismissive.
- Avoid amplifying emotion by repeating highly charged statements; instead, summarise what was said and move forward
- Don’t change participants’ words, as it may alter meaning or lead them to agree with your interpretation instead of their own.
Effective interviewing isn’t just about following process; it’s also about how people are treated throughout. A fair approach means being structured and consistent, while still allowing participants to feel heard and respected. When this is done well, interviews are more productive and lead to clearer, more reliable information.
Building these skills takes practice, and Worklogic can support organisations by providing training that helps individuals and teams develop the capability to conduct interviews that are both procedurally fair and robust, with a focus on psychological safety for participants.
Don’t miss our upcoming webinar Managing Interviews in a Workplace Investigation on Tuesday 19th May, 12:30pm -1:15pm (AEST).