Biggest Year-Over-Year Changes in Investigations: What the 2026 Benchmark Report Means for Leaders

Every annual benchmark uncovers incremental shifts, but every so often the data reveals something bigger: a change in how organizations approach investigations.

Case IQ's newly-released 2026 Investigative Case Management Benchmark Report shows exactly that. Organizations aren't simply refining existing processes, they're changing where they invest, how they assign work, what they expect from AI, and how they measure success. At the same time, several persistent challenges remain remarkably unchanged, reminding us that new technology alone won't solve longstanding, systemic problems.

Below are the biggest year-over-year changes we found in this year's data compared with our 2025 findings, plus what investigators, compliance leaders, HR professionals, and ethics teams should do about them.

1. Digital Intake Is Accelerating (But Report Quality Isn't)

Perhaps the most striking change in this year's report is how quickly organizations are modernizing the first step of investigations: receiving reports and complaints.

Live person chat adoption more than doubled from 15.8% to 32.9%, while AI-powered intake appeared in the benchmark for the first time with 7.9% current adoption. Even more telling, 41.2% of respondents identified AI-powered intake as their top planned investment over the next 18 months.

Organizations are clearly making it easier for employees to report concerns. Employees also appear more comfortable doing so, with fewer organizations reporting high levels of anonymous reporting than in previous years.

Yet one statistic barely moved: Nearly 70% of reports still require additional information before investigators can even begin triage.

Why This Matters

Many organizations have successfully removed barriers to reporting, but they haven't improved the quality of information entering the investigation process.

As a result, investigators continue spending valuable time gathering basic facts rather than assessing risk or moving cases forward.

Recommendation for Leaders

Rather than focusing only on increasing reporting volume, organizations should prioritize improving report completeness.

This means:

• Dynamic intake questionnaires
• Guided reporting experiences
• AI-assisted intake that asks intelligent follow-up questions
• Structured data collection before a case reaches investigators

Better intake quality reduces workload throughout the entire case lifecycle.

2. Organizations Are Changing Who Investigates Cases

One of the biggest operational shifts this year wasn't technology; it was people. Organizations are increasingly matching investigations to expertise instead of convenience.

Compared to last year:

• Case-type based assignments increased
• Subject matter expertise became more important
• Severity and complexity were used more frequently for assigning work
• Investigation teams combining dedicated investigators with cross-functional support jumped from 37.9% to 51.3%.

This signals a move away from simple workload balancing toward expertise-driven investigations.

Why This Matters

Modern investigations increasingly span HR, legal, compliance, fraud, cybersecurity, privacy, and workplace misconduct.

Few investigators possess deep expertise across every issue. Organizations appear to recognize that collaborative investigations produce stronger outcomes.

Recommendation for Leaders

Leaders should evaluate whether cases are currently assigned based primarily on investigator availability or investigator expertise.

The benchmark suggests organizations are increasingly building collaborative investigation models that combine specialist knowledge with centralized case management.

3. Manual Work—Not Evidence Gathering—Is Becoming the Biggest Bottleneck

Previously, investigators identified gathering evidence as one of their biggest challenges. That changed this year.

Evidence-gathering challenges declined from 39.8% to 31.3%, while organizations identifying manual processes as a major investigation bottleneck increased dramatically from 12.9% to 20.4%.

This represents a meaningful shift. Investigators aren't necessarily struggling to find evidence; they're struggling with everything surrounding it.

Why This Matters

Administrative work (e.g., routing cases, documenting findings, managing workflows, updating records, and preparing reports) is consuming increasing amounts of investigator time. This is exactly the type of work where automation and AI can have the greatest immediate impact.

Recommendation for Leaders

Instead of trying to automate investigative judgment, organizations should first eliminate administrative friction.

Examples include:

• Automated case routing
• AI-generated summaries
• Draft interview questions
• Timeline creation
• Workflow automation
• Report generation

Reducing manual effort allows investigators to spend more time analyzing evidence rather than managing paperwork.

4. Case Closures are Slowing, But That's Not Necessarily Bad

One of the report's more nuanced findings involves investigation timelines.

Compared with 2025:

• Cases resolved within 2–7 days declined sharply.
• Cases resolved within 15–28 days nearly tripled.
• Investigations lasting longer than four weeks actually became less common.

Rather than investigations becoming slower overall, organizations appear to be spending more time conducting thorough investigations while avoiding prolonged cases.

Why This Matters

Fast isn't always better. Very short investigations can indicate insufficient evidence gathering or inconsistent review.

This year's results suggest organizations may be striking a healthier balance between speed and thoroughness.

Recommendation for Leaders

Leaders should measure investigation quality alongside investigation speed.

Time-to-close remains important, but consistent, defensible investigations ultimately reduce organizational risk more effectively than simply closing cases quickly.

5. Substantiation Rates Fell Significantly

Perhaps the most concerning finding from this year's study is the decline in substantiation rates.

Nearly half of organizations now report substantiating 25% or fewer investigations, compared with just over one-third last year. Meanwhile, organizations substantiating more than half of reported cases dropped substantially.

Why This Matters

Lower substantiation rates do not necessarily indicate weaker investigations.

They may instead reflect:

• More reports being submitted through expanded intake channels
• Earlier reporting before sufficient evidence exists
• Increased willingness to report lower-confidence concerns

Regardless of the cause, the trend reinforces the importance of improving report quality at intake.

Recommendation for Leaders

Rather than focusing solely on substantiation percentages, organizations should analyze why cases remain unsubstantiated.

Patterns may reveal:

• Poor intake quality
• Missing evidence
• Inconsistent triage
• Training opportunities
• Policy ambiguity

6. AI Priorities Are Moving Earlier in the Investigation Lifecycle

AI adoption itself changed very little since last year. Organizations actively using AI increased only slightly year over year, while most organizations still report no active AI use.

What changed dramatically was where organizations expect AI to deliver value.

Interest in AI-powered triage rose from 13.0% to 20.9%, while enthusiasm for AI-generated final reports declined. Investment priorities also shifted toward building AI technology infrastructure rather than simply updating AI governance policies.

Why This Matters

Organizations increasingly see AI as a tool for improving decision-making early in investigations, not simply producing documentation at the end.

This reflects a more mature understanding of where AI creates meaningful value.

Recommendation for Leaders

Compliance leaders should evaluate AI opportunities across the entire investigation lifecycle rather than limiting AI initiatives to one task.

High-value use cases include:

• Intake guidance
• Case categorization
• Risk scoring
• Triage support
• Analytics
• Administrative workflow automation

What Didn't Change?

Despite meaningful progress across several areas, some longstanding challenges remain remarkably consistent.

Most notably:

• Report completeness remains stubbornly low, with more than 70% of organizations still reporting that initial reports contain enough information only "sometimes" or "about half the time."
• Most organizations still rely on manual triage, with 65.8% reporting no use of automation or AI during case assignment.
• AI maturity remains low. Even among organizations using AI, the overwhelming majority describe themselves as being in the early stages of adoption.

These findings reinforce an important lesson from this year's benchmark: technology adoption alone doesn't improve investigations. Organizations also need stronger processes, better data quality, clearer workflows, and thoughtful implementation.

The Bigger Picture

Viewed together, this year's results reveal a broader evolution in investigations.

Organizations are investing in better reporting experiences, assigning cases more strategically, embracing collaborative investigation models, and laying the foundation for AI-enabled workflows.

At the same time, persistent issues around report quality, manual processes, and limited analytics continue to slow investigations before they truly begin.

The organizations that will gain the greatest advantage over the next few years won't simply adopt more technology. They'll connect people, processes, data, and AI across the entire investigative lifecycle, improving not only operational efficiency but also the quality, consistency, and defensibility of every investigation.

These themes closely mirror the report's overarching conclusion that the strongest investigative outcomes come from strengthening the entire case lifecycle rather than optimizing individual stages in isolation.

Frequently Asked Questions

What makes an effective workplace investigation?

An effective workplace investigation is timely, impartial, well-documented, and consistent. It begins with collecting complete information, assigning the right investigator, gathering relevant evidence, and following established procedures. Organizations should also track corrective actions and identify root causes to reduce the likelihood of similar incidents occurring again.

Why do so many investigations get delayed?

One of the biggest reasons investigations slow down is incomplete information at intake. When investigators must spend time gathering basic facts before they can begin assessing a case, the entire process becomes less efficient. Manual workflows, inconsistent case assignment, and disconnected systems can also contribute to longer investigation timelines.

Why is a strong speak-up culture important?

Employees are often the first to recognize misconduct, policy violations, or emerging risks. A strong speak-up culture encourages employees to raise concerns early without fear of retaliation, allowing organizations to identify and address issues before they become larger compliance or legal problems.

Organizations can strengthen speak-up cultures by providing multiple confidential reporting channels, communicating how reports are handled, and demonstrating that concerns are investigated fairly and consistently.

How can AI improve workplace investigations?

AI is most effective when it supports investigators rather than replaces them.

Organizations are increasingly using AI to:

• Improve intake by gathering more complete information
• Help prioritize and triage incoming reports
• Summarize case information and evidence
• Draft interview questions
• Organize timelines and documentation
• Identify trends across investigations

These capabilities reduce administrative work while allowing investigators to focus on judgment, analysis, and decision-making.

Can AI replace human investigators?

No. While AI can automate repetitive tasks and provide useful insights, human investigators remain responsible for evaluating evidence, interviewing witnesses, assessing credibility, making findings, and determining appropriate corrective actions.

AI works best as a decision-support tool—not a decision-maker.

What are the biggest challenges facing investigation teams today?

Many organizations continue to face challenges including:

• Incomplete or inconsistent reports
• Manual investigation processes
• Limited investigative resources
• Increasing case complexity
• Difficulty measuring investigation performance
• Managing growing volumes of data and evidence

Technology, standardized processes, and better analytics can help investigation teams work more efficiently while improving consistency and defensibility.

How can organizations improve investigation outcomes?

Organizations can improve investigation quality by focusing on the entire case lifecycle rather than individual stages. Best practices include:

• Making reporting easier while improving report quality
• Standardizing triage and case assignment
• Automating administrative workflows
• Using analytics to identify trends and measure performance
• Continuously reviewing investigation data to identify opportunities for improvement

A connected approach helps organizations resolve cases more efficiently while strengthening compliance, ethics, and risk management programs.

How Case IQ Helps Organizations Modernize Investigations

The trends identified in our 2026 Investigative Case Management Benchmark Report reinforce the need for connected technology across the entire case lifecycle—not just individual investigation stages.

Case IQ's suite of solutions helps organizations strengthen investigations from intake through resolution by offering case management, whistleblower reporting, compliance monitoring, approvals & disclosures software, and third-party management from one trusted vendor.

With Case IQ, organizations can:

Improve Intake Quality

Capture higher-quality reports through secure web reporting, multilingual hotline services, and live chat capabilities that help gather more complete information before investigators begin their work. This directly addresses one of the benchmark's most persistent challenges: incomplete reports requiring follow-up before triage.

Streamline Triage and Investigations

Centralize investigations within Case IQ's case management platform to automate workflows, assign cases to the appropriate investigators, manage evidence, document corrective actions, and maintain a complete audit trail. Clairia, our AI assistant, can help investigators by summarizing case information, identifying missing details, suggesting interview questions, and accelerating documentation while keeping investigators in control of decisions.

Detect Risks Before Investigations Begin

Case IQ's compliance monitoring solution continuously analyzes 100% of eligible financial transactions using AI-driven analytics and configurable risk scoring to identify fraud, bribery, conflicts of interest, sanctions risks, and other compliance issues. Rather than waiting for reports or audits, organizations can proactively detect emerging risks and investigate them earlier.

Connect Prevention, Detection, and Resolution

Case IQ helps organizations with:

• Whistleblower hotline and ethics reporting
• Case management and investigations
• Compliance monitoring
• Approvals & Disclosures
• Third-Party Management

Our suite of solutions helps compliance, HR, fraud, audit, and investigations teams improve consistency, reduce manual effort, and gain greater visibility into risk across the enterprise.

Book a call with one of our experts today to see we can help your team reduce risk and improve efficiency.