Identifying needs, audiences and risks

1. Regulatory Concept & Core Standards

In this video we will work through a concrete decision: produce a list of requirements for a whistleblowing channel. The aim is to explain the criterion used and apply it to a workplace situation. We will start with the concept, move to the procedure and finish with a case to solve. A reporting channel requires suitable people, a procedure and accessible technology. The platform supports receipt and communication, while organisational responsibility covers authorisation, impartiality and deadlines. Before launch, compare user promises with the form’s actual operation and test the procedure in practice.

The assessment starts with the legal framework and intended users. An organisation with several sites, shifts and service providers may need different access and communication arrangements from an entity operating in a single office. The channel must support secure reporting and follow-up. Practical accessibility depends on language, the available means and the ability to report without approaching a directly implicated manager.

Apply the following rule: Article 23 generally requires an internal procedure where at least 50 people perform paid work, assessed on 1 January or 1 July. Count employees as full-time equivalents and qualifying paid non-employees who do not employ others for that work. Specified regulated activities are exempt from the threshold; local public units have separate rules. Consult unions or worker representatives for 5–10 days; the procedure takes effect seven days after announcement under article 24.

2. Practical Implementation & Procedure

List employees, service providers and other relevant audiences. Identify people without work email, language needs and accessibility requirements. Distinguish legal requirements from service choices. Check whether the regime requires written reporting, oral reporting, meetings or a combination. For oral reports, confirm rules on recording, consent and approval of transcripts. Document the functions actually available. Before moving on, turn this procedure into a sequence you could explain to a colleague. Identify the first check, the action that depends on its outcome and the record that allows the decision to be reconstructed. Follow the sequence on screen and identify the point where an error would change the result.

3. Case Study & Compliance Action

A factory advertises its channel only on office computers. Production workers and suppliers cannot see the information. The team improves communication and checks safe access for those groups. Now read the case carefully. Separate established facts from information you would still need to confirm. Do not add motives or events that have not been described. This distinction matters when choosing a response proportionate to the information available.

The exercise is as follows: What is missing despite the website address working? Choose an answer and write one sentence explaining it. During the pause, compare your choice with the criteria we have just considered. Also think about the material you would retain to explain the decision later.

Practical access and understandable information for the actual eligible users. Check their circumstances rather than only the administrator’s access.

One mistake to avoid is: copying another organisation's requirements without considering the actual audiences and processes.

Now apply the national rule to a second decision. A subsidiary copies its foreign parent’s procedure without assessing its own activities and size. What should it check?

Identify the Polish entity, sector and number of people under Article 23, using the correct reference date and counting method. Check sectoral and public-sector exceptions. Consultation and commencement under Article 24 also matter. A group template does not replace assessment of responsibility or the lawfulness of shared access.