5 reasons for using anonymous reporting channels in the company
So What Are the Arguments in Favor of Anonymous Reporting Channels?
It’s Better for the Whistleblower
Anonymity helps to lower the inhibition threshold for whistleblowers. As a rule, it is the first and only time that an employee will need to make a report and there is of course a lot of uncertainty. They might fear reprisals, so speaking out is a really brave step to take.
Research suggests that whistleblowers prefer an anonymous channel. According to the Whistleblowing Report 2019, for companies that provide the option of reporting anonymously, 58 percent of initial reports were submitted anonymously.
Giving people the option to remain anonymous when raising their concerns will help build trust in your whistleblowing process. It tells people that addressing an issue is more important than identifying someone.
Whistleblowers Often Identify Themselves Later On
According to the Whistleblowing Report 2019, one third of people who chose to submit their report anonymously also chose to disclose their identity during the subsequent investigation, demonstrating that people become more comfortable once trust is established.
It’s Better for the Company
If a whistleblower fears retaliation and reprisals, it stands to reason that they are less likely to report. The company then loses out on potentially crucial information and any damage can be significantly greater for the company. Allowing anonymous reporting breaks down barriers, encourages the widest number of people to come forward, and therefore offers companies the greatest degree of protection from risk.
It Doesn’t Lead to Abusive Reports
A frequently voiced reservation about anonymous whistleblowing systems is the fear that they may be misused by whistleblowers, for example to make false or defamatory reports that are intended to harm individual employees or the company. Statistical evaluation detailed in the Whistleblowing Report 2019, however, indicates that the ability to submit reports anonymously has no influence on the proportion of abusive reports.
A System Which Guarantees 2-Way Communication While Protecting Anonymity Is Now Available
When establishing a whistleblowing channel, companies have a wide choice of reporting channels to consider. Postbox, email inbox or telephone channels are certainly the quickest and cheapest channels to set up, but – while anonymity for the whistleblower using these channels is not impossible – it cannot be guaranteed. In the case of a postbox, whistleblowers might need to think overly carefully about when during the day they post their letter so that they remain unseen. Emails can be tracked and voices can be recognized on the phone.
However there are now new digital tools on the market which protect whistleblower identities and allow for 2-way follow-up communications. These systems also make it possible for whistleblowers to send supporting files and documents securely, should the persona handling the report require additional supporting information.
Should I Implement Anonymous Reporting Channels Although the New EU Whistleblower Directive Will Provide a Better Protection for Whistleblowers?
While the new EU Whistleblowing Directive does not specify how companies should treat anonymous reporting, it makes clear that companies must keep the identity of the whistleblower confidential (and will face sanctions if this is breached).
My clear recommendation is to opt-in for a anonymous reporting channel. Although the EU Whistleblower Directive protects whistleblowers from disadvantages, such as dismissal or degradation, there is no safeguard against “soft” negative consequences – the looks in the office corridor or not being invited to have a beer after work anymore. No directive or law can protect a whistleblower from that – but anonymity can. Until we experience a comprehensive cultural change, where whistleblowers are no longer seen as traitors but as “heroes”, anonymity will remain extremely important as additional protection.