White paper
A case file may be complete, well documented and traceable without proving what its conclusion asserts. The challenge is to determine the true significance of each item of evidence, test competing explanations and reach decisions despite uncertainty—without turning a hypothesis into a certainty or using doubt as a reason for inaction.
Paper podcasts
Free access. No registration.
Distinguish the event, attribution, explanation, classification and decision so that an answer reached at one level is not improperly extended to the others.
State what each investigative step is intended to establish and allow for three outcomes: support, weakening or an indeterminate result. This helps interpret unsuccessful enquiries and revise priorities.
Set out the established facts, explanations considered, decisive sources and remaining uncertainties. Keep factual reasoning separate from classification, recommendations and the final decision.
This white paper distinguishes five levels of analysis: event, attribution, explanation, classification and decision. It examines the value of evidence in relation to the assertion it is intended to support, source independence, timelines, absences and the scope observed. It explains how to test competing hypotheses, interpret contradictions and negative findings, and select the checks most likely to change the analysis. It also addresses the conditions required for impartiality, the drafting of conclusions, case closure and the communication of verifiable reasoning.
Heads of internal investigations; compliance and ethics teams; internal audit and internal control functions; legal and human resources departments; anti-corruption officers; investigation sponsors; and committee members responsible for assessing sensitive cases or deciding what action to take.
