S-RM recently convened three leading voices from the corporate investigations community to consider how the discipline is changing, and with it the demands on those charged with safeguarding organisational integrity.
Together, Pav Gill, Ashu Sharma and Danny Mayhew reflect on the rapid integration of technology into investigative work, acknowledging the gains in speed, scale and analytical power while emphasising the enduring necessity of sound judgement, proportionality and defensible process.
They also return to a constant at the heart of effective investigations: trust. From whistleblower confidence and protection to the independence and credibility of investigative functions, the panellists underscore that a speak-up culture is sustained not by policy alone, but by visible follow-through and fair outcomes. Finally, our panellists chart the growing professionalisation of investigations and look ahead to the next 12 to 18 months to the trends they expect to impact the world of corporate investigations. The result is a forward-looking conversation offering practical insights for practitioners navigating an increasingly complex and highly scrutinised landscape.
This discussion is part of the Corporate Investigations in 2026 report which is available to download.
Panellists
Pav Gill, Founder of the Confide Platform and Wirecard whistleblower
Pav Gill blew the whistle on Wirecard as its Head of Legal for the Asia-Pacific region. €24 billion in market value was erased, executives were jailed, and the COO is now one of Europe's most wanted fugitives. The fallout triggered regulatory reform across Europe, from whistleblower protections to payments oversight.
Pav is the recipient of the ACFE Cliff Robertson Sentinel Award 2022 (inscribed "For Choosing Truth Over Self") and the Blueprint for Free Speech Award 2021. His story is told in the critically acclaimed Sky Studios documentary Wirecard: A Billion Euro Lie.
Ashu Sharma, Group Investigations Manager, Anglo American
Ashu is a Corporate Investigator with 25 years of experience in Mining, Banking, Law Enforcement, and the UK Regulatory sector, in leadership and subject matter expert roles. He is a Certified Corporate Investigator, Certified Fraud Examiner, a Certified Compliance and Ethics Practitioner, and is a category A liaison advisor for the International Organization for Standardization. In addition to leading special investigations for a global mining company, he is also Chief Strategy Officer for the Association of Corporate Investigators.
Danny Mayhew, Global Head of Organisational Justice and Smart Assurance, Sanofi
Danny brings over 30 years of global compliance and investigative leadership across life sciences, energy, and law enforcement. As Sanofi's Global Head of Organisational Justice & Smart Assurance since 2022, he leads enterprise-wide ethics and compliance programs across 100+ countries, including the Global Speak-up & Ombuds Office, global investigations, AI-powered monitoring, and disciplinary frameworks. Danny has been a member of the Guide House Pharma Forum since 2017.
How have you seen the landscape of corporate investigations evolve over the past three years?
Ashu Sharma “Corporate investigations have become more professionalised and collective. Bodies such as the Association of Corporate Investigators (ACi) and standards like ISO 37008 Internal Investigations of Organisations have helped shift investigations from reactive and disjointed activities to a recognised, globally aligned discipline with shared principles, ethics, and competencies.”
Danny Mayhew “There has been a significant professionalisation of the investigations function itself. Investigators are no longer drawn exclusively from legal or audit backgrounds — we now see multidisciplinary teams combining forensic accountants, data scientists, HR specialists, and former regulators. But the most striking shift has been the move from reactive to proactive investigation models. Three years ago, most organisations — including many in pharma — were largely waiting for a complaint to land before mobilising investigative resources. Today, the best-in-class programmes are using continuous monitoring, data signals, and behavioural analytics to identify potential misconduct before it escalates.”
Pav Gill “Corporate investigations have become faster[….] The time available to protect the reporter, preserve evidence and decide whether the issue has wider implications has compressed dramatically. The type of issue has also shifted. Bribery, accounting concerns and conflicts of interest are still there, but they increasingly sit alongside cyber-enabled fraud, sanctions exposure, supply-chain failures, and ESG-related allegations and misconduct driven by pressure to meet targets that were never realistic to begin with. The investigation often ends up revealing as much about governance, incentives and culture as it does about the underlying allegation.”
How has the role of technology impacted your approach to investigations?
Pav Gill “Technology has changed investigations in two directions at once. Analytics, forensic review, communications mapping and anomaly detection have made it possible to spot patterns faster than any team of investigators could on their own. At the same time, the discipline expected from investigators has gone up. Every data pull, AI-assisted summary and forensic step needs to be explainable, proportionate and properly recorded, because anything less gives the other side something to attack.”
Ashu Sharma “Technology has shifted investigations from reactive to insight-led, allowing earlier detection, better scoping, and more proportionate responses. For example, AI enabled document review and triage, when properly governed, has had an impact in reducing investigative burden while improving consistency and focus. However, it has also raised expectations around speed, consistency, and auditability.”
Danny Mayhew “Technology has fundamentally changed what is possible in terms of scale and speed. Digital forensics capabilities that once required weeks of manual review can now be completed in hours. At Sanofi, we use analytics to monitor transactional patterns, third-party interactions, and process deviations in near real-time, which means our investigations often begin with a much richer evidentiary picture than was previously possible. However, technology is an enabler, not a replacement for judgement. The most sophisticated data model still needs an experienced investigator to interpret context, assess credibility, and make sound decisions about proportionality and fairness — technology informs and accelerates, but humans decide. This is particularly important in a regulated industry where the integrity of our processes is itself subject to scrutiny.”
How is collaboration between compliance, legal, and investigations evolving?
Ashu Sharma: “We are seeing a move away from siloed functions toward risk-based, multidisciplinary models, with investigations acting as a coordinating function rather than a downstream recipient of issues.”
Danny Mayhew “What I see evolving, and what we are actively building at Sanofi, is a more integrated operating model where legal, compliance and investigations share intelligence, align on risk appetite, and coordinate responses in real time [...] Externally, I also see a growing maturity in how organisations engage specialist external counsel and forensic firms. The best relationships are genuine partnerships, where external expertise is brought in strategically to supplement internal capability rather than replace it.”
Pav Gill “I expect closer collaboration between legal, compliance, HR, audit, cyber and external advisers as risks converge. A sanctions issue can pull in payments, third parties, trade controls and employee conduct in the same morning. A cyber incident can involve fraud, privacy, disclosure obligations and a cultural problem all at once.”
What role do whistleblowers play in shaping the future of investigations?
Danny Mayhew “Whistleblowers are, frankly, one of the most important sources of intelligence available to any investigations function. The data consistently shows that internal reports — whether through formal hotlines or informal channels — surface misconduct that would otherwise remain hidden for years. The single greatest driver of whistleblower confidence is evidence that previous reports were taken seriously. Organisations that close the loop — even partially — see significantly higher reporting rates over time, which is ultimately what a healthy speak-up culture looks like.”
Ashu Sharma “Whistleblowers are a primary source of intelligence, not just reporters of misconduct. Their contribution must be recognised through better feedback loops, stronger protections, and visible organisational accountability. They already have a role but there is still much work to do to recognise their importance and protect them. That said, not all speak-up is whistleblowing, and this is why competent investigators are essential.”
Pav Gill “Whistleblowers are often the earliest reliable signal that something is wrong. People usually see the problem before the data does: the pressure, the workaround, the fear, the fake explanation and the decision that does not make sense to anyone in the room…. The hardest challenge is trust. A company can have a policy, a hotline and a case number, but if employees believe the process protects the institution before the truth, the investigation is weakened before it begins.”
What’s next for Corporate Investigations? What are the trends to watch in the next 12–18 months?
Pav Gill “In the next 12 to 18 months, speed and triage will matter even more. Companies will have to decide quickly whether a report is credible, who should own it, what evidence has to be preserved and whether there is a regulatory disclosure issue. Slow or defensive handling now carries its own risk.”
Ashu Sharma “Greater regulatory scrutiny of internal investigations. The SFO and other law enforcement as well as regulatory bodies are now paying attention. Increased use of AI and data analytics in triage and during evidence review. More expectation of investigator independence and defensible decision-making by employees and the community.”
Danny Mayhew “AI-assisted investigations will move from pilot to mainstream. We’re already seeing early adopters use large language models to process vast volumes of communications data, identify anomalous patterns, and prioritise case queues. Over the next 18 months, I expect this to become a baseline expectation rather than a differentiator.”
Key takeaways: advice for organisations to strengthen their investigative procedures
- Build the investigation framework before a crisis arises, with clear intake, triage, evidence preservation, escalation, and remediation processes.
- Invest in skilled, independent investigators and professional standards, with strong training, clear principles, and credible oversight.
- Use technology and AI to support triage, review, and pattern detection, but keep human judgement, fairness, and accountability at the centre.
- Strengthen whistleblowing arrangements through trusted reporting channels, anti-retaliation protections, timely updates, and visible follow-through on substantiated concerns.
- Create integrated ways of working across legal, compliance, HR, audit, cyber, and specialist advisers so responsibilities are clear and investigations are coordinated.
- Prepare for cross-border and regulatory complexity in advance through jurisdiction-specific protocols, local legal input, and disciplined documentation.
- Treat investigations as a source of organisational learning by measuring quality, identifying root causes, and using case insights to improve governance, culture, and controls.
