This product has already been purchased.
Speak up programs need a technology rethink if boards are to gain greater assurance that their whistleblowing model is working effectively.
Presented by Diligent
Boards often take comfort in the fact that a whistleblowing program exists. A hotline, a policy and a vendor are in place. Yet those markers alone say very little about whether the program is trusted, used or capable of standing up to scrutiny when a concern is raised.
An ASIC report on whistleblowing offers a useful benchmark for boards. More than 20 per cent of organisations surveyed had received no disclosures, and the regulator identified areas for systemic improvement.1
“The gap is rarely a lack of reporting channels,” says Andrew Amos, vice-president APAC at Diligent. “Rather, it’s the lack of assurance the model is trusted and truly defensible. Few boards can demonstrate that their speak up systems are independent, reliable and genuinely effective once a concern is raised.”
When reports sit across disconnected hotlines, shared inboxes, spreadsheets and legal trackers, it creates multiple points of failure. Directors may have a program in place, but little real-time visibility into whether it works in practice rather than in policy.
A trusted, defensible whistleblowing program
Strong organisations treat speak up as a governance system, not a compliance accessory. They embrace five hallmarks that define a trusted and truly defensible speak up program.
1. Safe, accessible intake
Employees and third parties need multiple ways to report concerns safely without feeling exposed or ignored. If reporting channels are hard to use, intimidating or limited, people are less inclined to come forward.
2. Defensible case management process
Many legacy models rely on manual judgement to decide who sees a case, how quickly it moves and whether it is escalated appropriately. Stronger programs use consistent routing rules, escalation paths and clear ownership from day one. Centralised, audit-ready case management with clear documentation of every step helps avoid unnecessary legal and reputation risks.
3. Board-level visibility and assurance
Boards do not need sensitive case details, but they do need timely visibility into reporting trends, case volumes, resolution times, escalation paths, repeat issues and emerging hotspots. Without that visibility, oversight becomes assumption.
4. Alignment with policy, conflict controls and regulatory frameworks
The most mature programs connect speak up data to adjacent controls, from policy attestations, conflict of interest disclosures, confidentiality controls to broader ethics and compliance signals that align with regulatory requirements.
5. Pattern detection before escalation
By the time an issue escalates into a crisis, it is usually because weak signals were missed or not connected. An effective system uses case data, category tagging and trend analysis to surface systemic themes earlier.
Technology matters because consistency matters
Ethics and culture are fundamentally human problems. Technology does not replace judgement, empathy or integrity. It helps organisations support those qualities consistently at scale.
Employees often stay silent out of fear of retaliation or because they doubt anything will happen after they report. The right technology can help reduce that fear by making it easier and safer to report an issue. It can also create space for people to raise an issue together, giving them the reassurance of a collective voice and helping concerns surface earlier.
“Anonymous reporting isn’t enough. An important question to ask is if your current system persistently protects identity with secure two-way anonymous messaging,” adds Amos. “This means reporters can engage in ongoing dialogue with investigators without being exposed.”
An AI-powered case management system like Diligent’s Speak Up Manager helps organisations intake reports quickly, route them intelligently, reduce manual triage, maintain proper documentation and spot patterns that fragmented manual processes often miss. By embedding controls at critical decision points, AI-enabled case management reduces the risk of cases falling through the cracks due to human error or bias.
Technology provides consistency, defensibility and visibility by reinforcing trust at every step. When the architecture is coherent, it reassures employees, “this is safe, real and will be handled properly”.
Measuring what matters
Low reporting volumes are often seen as a sign nothing is wrong. But it may indicate people don’t trust the system enough to use it. Boards should focus on metrics that reveal confidence and control: participation across reporting channels; time to triage and investigation; retaliation trends; and the financial value of issues resolved before escalation.
“Diligent customers using our Speak Up solutions have seen investigations accelerate by 50 per cent, 40 per cent higher speak up participation, and up to $1 million in regulatory penalties avoided. Measurable improvements like these signal whether a program is genuinely trusted,” says Amos.
A speak up program should help organisations identify concerns earlier, respond more consistently and prevent isolated issues becoming broader compliance or reputational failures. It’s the difference between a whistleblowing policy and genuine assurance.
References:
1. REP 827 Insights from ASIC Whistleblower Questionnaire: July 2024 to June 2025, ASIC, December 2025.
→ Discover how Diligent helps you modernise whistleblowing and case resolution at scale.
Latest news
Already a member?
Login to view this content