I would treat this as information that warrants a formal preliminary assessment, even though the survey was anonymous and there is no identified complainant. The comment is more than a general statement that someone is difficult to work with: it alleges repeated bullying/aggressive conduct, yelling at staff, employees being afraid to speak up, and conduct personally experienced and witnessed by the respondent. An employer can become obligated to respond to potential harassment or workplace misconduct once it has reasonable knowledge of the concern; a named complainant is not always necessary before taking action. The fact that the allegation concerns a senior leader also supports handling it carefully and independently.

First, preserve the survey response exactly as received and review whether there are any other comments, exit interview notes, HR concerns, complaints, turnover patterns, or previous reports involving similar behaviour. This should not become an exercise in trying to identify the anonymous respondent. Rather, HR should determine whether the allegation is sufficiently specific and credible to justify further inquiry. Here, there are potentially identifiable settings — meetings and interactions with current and former Client Services staff — that could allow the organization to investigate the alleged behaviour without knowing who submitted the survey.

The next step could be a preliminary fact-finding process rather than immediately framing the matter as a substantiated harassment complaint. An appropriate HR representative or external investigator could confidentially interview a reasonable cross-section of current Client Services employees and others who regularly attend meetings with the senior leader. Questions should be neutral and open-ended, such as asking about the leader’s communication style, how disagreements are handled, whether employees have witnessed yelling, intimidation or aggressive behaviour, and whether employees feel comfortable raising concerns. Avoid telling witnesses that an anonymous employee has accused the leader of “bullying,” as that can unnecessarily influence their evidence.

If the preliminary inquiries produce corroborating information — particularly examples of yelling, intimidation, humiliation, repeated aggressive treatment or employees being afraid to raise concerns — I would move to a formal workplace investigation and provide the senior leader with sufficient particulars of the allegations and a fair opportunity to respond. Because the respondent is a senior leader, consider using an external investigator or someone sufficiently independent of that leader’s reporting structure. The organization should also be alert to reprisal: employees who participate in interviews should be reminded that retaliation or attempts to determine who made the survey comment will not be tolerated.

Finally, avoid concluding either that this is “just management style” or that bullying has occurred until the evidence is examined. A demanding, direct or unpopular manager is not automatically engaging in workplace harassment, but repeated yelling, humiliation, intimidation or conduct that causes employees to fear speaking up can cross that line. Even if the evidence ultimately does not meet the organization’s legal or policy definition of harassment, the investigation may reveal a leadership or psychological-safety issue requiring coaching, behavioural expectations, monitoring or other corrective action. Document why HR decided to investigate, the steps taken, the evidence considered and the outcome, particularly because the original concern arose anonymously.

I hope this helps!
-HRInsider Staff