Have A Concern To Report? I'm Listening.

Our firm sometimes acts as a third-party service provider to do the intake of complaints or whistleblower reports on behalf of clients. Clients retain our intake services for a variety of reasons – for example, if there are insufficient resources internally to handle the volume of complaints, or as a good governance measure to encourage those in the organization to come forward.

While these services can take on various forms based on the needs of the client, the idea is generally the same: gather information from a person with concerns and summarize it so that a decision can be made about how to address the situation.

Intake interviews can be difficult. Often, the interview is the first time that the person has told anyone about what they are experiencing or what they have witnessed. It may have taken them months to work up the courage to come forward. In the case of an employee, they may also feel that, by coming forward, their job may be on the line – this is often a concern that whistleblowers have, for example.

This means that intake interviews need to be approached carefully. I've assembled below some tips to conduct a successful intake interview.

1. Showing respect and kindness. First and foremost, what matters most is to be respectful and kind when doing an intake interview (or "warmly neutral" as we like to say here, at Rubin Thomlinson). It's important for the person to feel that they are being heard, and treated with dignity. When I do an intake interview, I give the person room to tell their "story" uninterrupted, and as much as possible, I try to wait until there is a natural pause in the conversation to ask questions. I give the person space to let out their emotions, reassure them that being emotional in these interviews is normal, and that they can take the time they need. I show interest in what they have to say by asking questions, refraining from making comments that trivialize their concerns, and repeating back what they have told me to show that I am listening (and to confirm that I have correctly understood).
2. Knowing what to ask. The person doing the intake interview needs to be well-versed in the subject matter of what is being disclosed so that they can draw out relevant information. When I do an intake interview, I think about what information the decision-maker will require to decide whether the matter should be investigated. For example, if a person is alleging that the treatment they have experienced is discriminatory, I would ask them about the grounds on which they are claiming discrimination, how the conduct affected them, and why they believe the conduct was discriminatory.
3. Obtaining enough information, but not too much. One of the most difficult aspects of doing intake interviews is knowing how much information to gather. Curious by nature, my instinct is to ask a lot of questions. However, I also know that, if the matter is investigated, the investigator will want to interview the person again. I want to avoid putting the person through two full interviews, so the goal of the intake is to try to understand what the allegations are, without going too much into the evidence. I also try to manage expectations by explaining what the purpose of the intake interview is, and that if there is an investigation, the investigator will likely want to meet with them.
4. Managing expectations. Depending on the scope of the mandate, it can also be appropriate to discuss with the person the strength of their complaint. For example, if the person has only very vague allegations (e.g., my manager is a racist, without any details), I may gently try to explain to them what is typically required to support a finding of discrimination (I say "gently" because I want to avoid sounding dismissive of the person's concerns). This may help to manage their expectations about the likelihood of the matter being investigated, or if it is investigated, that the outcome will be favourable to them.
5. Documenting. Part of the intake process is to document what information the person has shared. I always take copious notes, and depending on the scope of the mandate, I often prepare a short summary describing who the complainant is and what is being alleged. In preparing such a document, I try to summarize succinctly what the concerns are, rather than to provide a transcript of what the person has said. I find that such a summary is more helpful to the decision-maker, than a set of notes. The intake interview often meanders, and I see it as part of my intake role to describe the complaint cohesively.

A successful intake interview is one where the person who has come forward feels that they have been heard, and the interviewer has gathered the information that the decision-maker requires to decide on next steps. Following the practical tips above will help to ensure these objectives are met.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.