When a workplace investigation becomes necessary, organizations face an important decision: Should they engage a licensed private investigator or an attorney? Both professionals bring valuable expertise to the table, and the choice often depends on your specific circumstances and needs.
First, it’s worth noting that these aren’t always mutually exclusive options. Many attorneys work alongside investigators, and some professionals hold both credentials. The question isn’t necessarily which is “better,” but rather which approach best serves your particular situation.
Attorneys bring critical advantages in certain scenarios:
Legal Privilege Considerations: When attorney-client privilege is paramount, particularly in investigations that may lead to litigation, engaging an attorney can protect the confidentiality of your investigation findings. This is especially valuable when you’re navigating potentially litigious situations.
Complex Legal Analysis: If your investigation requires nuanced interpretation of employment law, discrimination statutes, or regulatory compliance, an attorney’s legal expertise becomes invaluable. They can simultaneously investigate and provide legal guidance on potential exposure and remediation strategies.
Integrated Legal Strategy: When the investigation is part of a broader legal strategy or defense, having an attorney lead the process ensures seamless coordination between fact-finding and legal positioning.
Deposition-Style Rigor: Litigators bring experience in taking depositions and conducting examinations under oath. This adversarial training can be valuable for extracting detailed testimony and challenging inconsistent statements, particularly when dealing with potentially dishonest respondents or when the investigation may lead directly to litigation.
Licensed private investigators offer distinct benefits that make them excellent choices in many workplace investigation scenarios:
Specialized Investigative Training: PIs are trained specifically in investigation methodology, evidence gathering, interviewing techniques, and surveillance. This is their core competency, honed through dedicated training and field experience.
Cost Effectiveness: For straightforward workplace investigations, such as theft, policy violations, or harassment claims, a licensed PI often provides thorough, professional investigation services at a lower hourly rate than attorney fees.
Focused Objectivity: A PI’s sole focus is uncovering facts. Without the dual role of legal advisor, they can often be perceived as more neutral by all parties involved, which can be valuable for employee relations and credibility.
Tactical Expertise: For investigations requiring surveillance, background checks, digital forensics, or other specialized investigative techniques, PIs bring technical skills that may not be within an attorney’s typical practice area.
Trauma-Informed Interviewing: Many licensed PIs receive specialized training in trauma-informed interviewing techniques, particularly for sensitive cases involving harassment, discrimination, or workplace violence. This approach is designed to gather accurate information while minimizing re-traumatization of complainants and witnesses. The interview style tends to be more conversational and rapport-building, which can encourage fuller disclosure and cooperation from participants who may be experiencing stress or trauma.
Many organizations find success with a collaborative model: a licensed PI conducts the investigation under the direction or oversight of counsel. This approach can preserve attorney-client privilege while leveraging the PI’s investigative expertise and often more favorable billing rates for the hands-on investigative work.
One often-overlooked consideration is the interviewing style each professional brings to the table, and how that aligns with your investigation’s needs.
Attorneys, particularly litigators, are trained in a more adversarial model. Their deposition experience teaches them to pin down testimony, identify inconsistencies, and challenge statements. These are invaluable skills when you’re dealing with a potentially dishonest respondent or when witness credibility will be crucial in litigation. This approach can be highly effective for extracting precise, detailed accounts.
However, there’s an important psychological dynamic to consider: many employees find being interviewed by an attorney inherently intimidating. The presence of a lawyer can signal to participants that the situation is more serious, adversarial, or legally consequential than they may have anticipated. While this gravitas can be appropriate in some cases, it can also cause otherwise cooperative witnesses to become guarded, anxious, or less forthcoming. Some employees may even feel they need to hire their own attorney before participating, which can delay and complicate the investigation.
Workplace investigations often involve vulnerable complainants and witnesses who are experiencing stress, fear of retaliation, or even trauma. In these situations, a trauma-informed interviewing approach, which many PIs are specifically trained in, can be more effective. Licensed PIs may also be perceived as less threatening or adversarial by interview subjects. This methodology focuses on building rapport, creating psychological safety, and using techniques that help traumatized individuals provide fuller, more accurate accounts without re-traumatization. The conversational, empathetic style can lead to better cooperation and more complete information from participants who might shut down under a more confrontational approach or in the presence of legal counsel.
Neither style is inherently superior as they serve different purposes. The question is which approach best serves your specific investigation. Are you primarily trying to get to the truth in a sensitive harassment claim? Or are you building a defensible record for anticipated litigation where every statement needs to withstand legal scrutiny?
Consider these factors when choosing your approach:
• Litigation likelihood: High risk of litigation may favor attorney involvement
• Complexity of legal issues: Straightforward policy violations vs. nuanced discrimination claims
• Budget constraints: What resources are available for the investigation?
• Need for privilege: How critical is protecting the investigation under attorney-client privilege?
• Type of investigation: Technical investigations may benefit from PI expertise
• Nature of allegations: Sensitive trauma cases may benefit from trauma-informed approaches
• Interview subject cooperation: Will witnesses respond better to rapport-building or rigorous examination?
• Organizational culture: Which approach will employees perceive as most fair and credible?
For more insights on conducting effective workplace investigations, explore these articles:
Both licensed private investigators and attorneys can conduct thorough, professional workplace investigations. The key is matching the right professional to your specific needs. In my experience, organizations that take time to assess their unique situation—rather than defaulting to one approach—tend to achieve the most effective outcomes.
The goal, ultimately, isn’t about credentials on a business card. It’s about conducting a fair, thorough, and legally sound investigation that gets to the truth while protecting your organization and treating all parties with dignity.
Learn more about our workplace investigation services.
Kathie Allen is a licensed California Private Investigator (PI 27033) with over 20 years of experience conducting workplace investigations throughout Orange County and California. She is an Association of Workplace Investigators (AWI) trained investigator and Certified Title IX Investigator specializing in harassment, discrimination, employee misconduct, and Title IX compliance investigations for businesses, schools, and organizations.
Contact Allen Morris Investigations:
📞 Phone: 949-573-4624
✉️ Email: Kathie@allenmorrispi.com
🌐 Website: https://allenmorrispi.com
Schedule a consultation or learn more at Allen Morris Investigations.
