A whistleblower who comes forward with information that could get somebody, or many people, into trouble faces various risks. Although the company can and should try to protect the whistleblower from retaliation, there is always some risk. If the complaint is against a supervisor, the whistleblower runs an even bigger risk that the action could affect his or her job. So it's not surprising that many whistleblowers come forward on the condition of anonymity.

For this reason, companies must provide mechanisms (whistleblower anonymity) for employees to submit anonymous complaints and show that they take allegations seriously. Every allegation, whether reported anonymously or otherwise, should be investigated, at least to the extent that the company determines whether or not a full-fledged investigation should be conducted. And anyone who reports wrongdoing internally deserves to be updated on the status of their complaint to reassure them that allegations are taken seriously.

Sometimes communicating with a whistleblower can be challenging. How do you determine the identity of an anonymous whistleblower? And should you? But in many cases the person's identity needs to be revealed, at least to investigators so they may conduct a thorough investigation.

Need a handy reference? Download the free cheat sheet on Handling Anonymous Reports.

Promising Whistleblower Anonymity

Whistleblowers who do come forward, anonymously or otherwise, often request that their identities be concealed. There are just too many headaches involved in continuing to work in an environment in which they are known to have been a "snitch". But can a company agree to keep the person's identity a secret and still conduct a thorough and fair investigation? Unfortunately, the answer may be no.

"The company can’t promise that the whistleblower's identity won’t be revealed because there are certain instances in which it may need to be revealed," says Lisa Noller, litigation partner with Foley and Lardner LLP. "For example, if the company is cooperating with the government, then the whistleblower’s identity may need to be disclosed because the government requires it."

And then there's the chance that others in the company may be able to guess the whistleblower's identity. "You might need to disclose detail about the nature of the complaint, for example in an SEC filing, that somebody will be able to figure out who the whistleblower is," says Noller.

Stand Behind the Words and Maintain Confidentiality in Investigations

So investigators need to be careful when reassuring whistleblowers that they don't give them a false sense of security.

"I think that best advice to companies is to tell them that they should not over-promise and under-deliver," says Noller. "However, I think you may tell a whistleblower, consistent with the law and reporting requirements, that you will keep his or her identity confidential to the extent practicable and permitted by law," she says.

The company then needs to actually follow through on that reassurance and make it clear that retaliation is not tolerated. Show whistleblowers and the rest of the company that anonymous case reporting of wrongdoing is important and that whistleblowers will be treated fairly and given whatever protection is possible. It will go a long way towards ensuring that the next potential whistleblower comes forward instead of sweeping concerns under the rug.