Straight answers,
no runaround.

IEC does not sell one-off investigations: it operates as your company’s external investigations department, 365 days a year. The annual package includes 48-hour triage of every complaint, a defined number of investigations, jurisdiction-specific protocols kept current, and periodic committee reporting. The standalone case also exists, quoted per event, at project pricing.

Cases are measured in credits by complexity, under objective criteria set in the agreement: number of interviews, worksites and conducts alleged. A standard case consumes one credit; a complex one, two. Triage never consumes credits: it is unlimited under fair use.

That every referred complaint is classified, assessed and given a route signed by an investigator within 48 business hours: formal investigation, intervention, mediation or documented closure, always with reasoning. It does not mean the full investigation ends in 48 hours, it means your company is never without a response.

No: we work with them. IEC provides the independent investigative capacity those functions cannot offer in sensitive cases, because everyone in the organization reports to someone. Decisions remain the company’s; we deliver the facts that support them.

No. IEC is channel-agnostic: we operate on top of the ethics line, email or mailbox your company already has. If none exists, we help you select and implement one with a specialized provider, the channel is the door; the value is in what happens next.

Mexico, Chile, Colombia and Peru, under each jurisdiction’s legal framework, with a single methodology and deliverables in English and Spanish for headquarters and regional committees.

Whenever a credible complaint of harassment, violence, discrimination or other misconduct arises. In Chile (Karin Law), Colombia (Law 2365) and Mexico (LFT reform and ILO C190) that duty is now statutory, with defined deadlines and procedures. Today, not investigating is the most expensive liability.

Verifiable independence: in cases involving executives, or where HR is part of the problem, no internal actor can offer credible impartiality. A third party with method also reduces the perception of bias before courts, regulators and your own workforce.

It depends on complexity and the number of witnesses. Our median close time on standard cases is measured in weeks, not months, because IEC’s analysis infrastructure compresses the documentary work. What is never sacrificed for speed: due process and the standard of proof.

A serious investigation protects all parties. The person accused knows the facts attributed to them, has a real opportunity to respond, and the determination rests on evidence under an explicit standard, not on rumor. The presumption of good faith holds until the facts say otherwise.

Yes. Anonymity makes investigation harder, not impossible: the case file is built on verifiable facts, not on the reporter’s identity. What we never do is attempt to unmask the person who reported.

By architecture, not by promise: information access on a need-to-know basis, active protection of reporters and witnesses, data processing compliant with each jurisdiction’s law, and confidentiality obligations set in every agreement.

As analysis infrastructure, never as judge. IEC’s systems accelerate timelines, cross-testimony consistency analysis and first drafts of documents. No determination is ever made by a machine: every judgment (credibility, evidence weighing, conclusion) is human and signed. Data is processed under enterprise, no-retention architecture, with anonymization where appropriate.

The client. IEC delivers the complete, traceable case file, and the company keeps it as its documentary defense. IEC retains only what the law and the agreement require.

Yes. For clients who require it, the investigation can be conducted under the direction of the company’s in-house or outside counsel, preserving privilege where the law recognizes it. This is defined when the case opens, not at the end, when it is too late.

Because a termination or sanction without a case file is a lawsuit lost in advance. Investigating first turns the decision into a reasoned, defensible act, and sometimes prevents sanctioning the wrong person.

Yes. Leaked files, unprotocolized interviews or conclusions without evidence generate retaliation claims and voided sanctions. That is why method matters as much as the will to investigate.

Yes, as a service additional to the package: the investigator who signed can defend the methodology and findings before a court. Every case file is built from day one assuming that day may come.

No, and be wary of anyone who does. IEC guarantees method, response times and defensible case files. Determinations depend on the facts, and final decisions always belong to the company.

At three moments: when a complaint arrives against someone with power; when the internal handling of a case broke down; or (increasingly) before anything happens, as a standing function by subscription, because the law no longer waits.

No. Before accepting any matter we screen for conflicts of interest involving the parties, the company and its advisors; if impartiality cannot be guaranteed, the matter is declined and referred. We also do not take litigation or complex financial forensics: we refer it to trusted specialists.

With a no-cost 30-minute diagnostic: we review how your company receives and handles complaints, against what your country’s law already requires. You leave with a clear map of your gaps, whether you hire us or not.