Did the problems disappear?

There has been a lot written this week about the Bolt CEO saying the company’s problems disappeared after he removed his HR team.

As somebody who specialises in workplace investigations, I think the more interesting question is whether the problems disappeared, or whether the reporting of them disappeared. They are not necessarily the same thing.

One thing I see quite regularly in investigations is that, over time, the people raising concerns can start to be viewed as the problem themselves: the grievance is seen as “drama”; the safeguarding escalation is “making a fuss”; the HR process is “too bureaucratic”; the person asking difficult questions is “negative”.

The value of awkward questions

To be fair, HR processes can easily become over-engineered or disconnected from reality. Most experienced practitioners have seen processes that create more confusion than clarity.

But organisations still need people who are prepared to ask awkward questions, challenge decisions, or say: “Hang on a minute, have we actually looked at the risk here?”

The difficulty is that those conversations rarely feel helpful in the moment, especially in fast-moving environments where leaders are under pressure to move quickly, cut costs, keep people happy, or avoid conflict.

Different cultures, different risks

Some of the commentary around this also feels quite heavily influenced by US tech and start-up culture, where there can be a much stronger focus on speed, disruption and “moving fast”, sometimes with less tolerance for internal challenge or people slowing things down.

In the UK, however, employers are operating in an increasingly scrutinised environment when it comes to culture, safeguarding, whistleblowing, harassment prevention and procedural fairness. That inevitably means that governance, documentation and internal challenge really matter.

When records suddenly matter

Employment Tribunals, for example, require records, timelines, documented concerns, evidence that issues were raised, evidence that somebody challenged decisions, and evidence that concerns were not ignored.

I think there is a balance in all of this. Nobody benefits from unnecessary process for its own sake.

But equally, an organisation becoming less noisy does not automatically mean it has become healthier. Sometimes it just means fewer people feel safe raising concerns.