When Politics Get in the Way of Accountability

Why Internal Employee Relations (ER) Roles Can’t Always Be Neutral

In a perfect world, every workplace investigation would be neutral, fair, and focused on the facts. But the reality is often more complicated. That is especially true when the accused holds influence, proximity to power, or a strong internal advocate.

We’ve seen firsthand how internal dynamics can interfere with accountability. Even when the facts are clear, decision-making can become tangled in relationships, influence, and internal pressures. In some cases, those in positions of authority hesitate to act, not because the situation lacks seriousness, but because the individuals involved are closely connected to leadership. When that happens, the integrity of the process can erode, and accountability may be deferred or diluted.

This challenge is not unique to any one industry. Across sectors, internal ER professionals face a difficult tension: upholding integrity while navigating power dynamics, reporting structures, and unspoken limits. Even with the best intentions, being embedded in the system can make it harder to act independently. They may share a chain of command with the accused. They may fear professional fallout. They may understand, implicitly, that some outcomes are off the table.

That is where outside support can make a difference. At Faro Point, we are not embedded in your internal politics. We have no competing loyalties. Our role is to run a fair, structured process that gets to the heart of the matter. That enables leaders to take informed action and uphold accountability.

When accountability is selective, trust erodes. But when it is consistent and principled, culture grows stronger.