When to Go Solo vs Team Investigation: Matthew Bovee's Guide to Investigative Resource Allocation

After three decades of investigative journalism, one of the hardest decisions I face isn’t which story to pursue—it’s deciding whether to pursue it alone or with a team. Every investigation presents this fork in the road, and choosing incorrectly can mean the difference between a breakthrough story and a missed opportunity. Here’s how I think about resource allocation in investigative journalism, and when solo work makes sense versus when building a team is essential.

Understanding the Solo vs Team Dynamic in Investigative Journalism

The choice between solo investigation and team-based reporting isn’t simply a matter of story size. Smaller stories can require teams when they involve multiple jurisdictions or complex document requests. Larger stories can sometimes be pursued solo when they’re extensions of beat coverage I’ve been developing for years.

In my experience, the decision comes down to four primary factors: time sensitivity, resource requirements, legal complexity, and risk tolerance. Each investigation presents a different combination of these elements, and learning to assess them quickly is what separates successful investigative journalists from those who burn out or miss stories.

When I started in journalism, I believed that solo investigation was the purest form of the craft. There’s something romantic about a single reporter chasing a story against all odds, uncovering corruption through sheer persistence and wit. But after thirty years, I’ve learned that ego has no place in this decision. The goal isn’t to prove yourself—it’s to serve the public by uncovering the truth as efficiently and safely as possible.

Matthew Bovee’s investigation team approach has evolved significantly over the years. What I once viewed as a mark of individual prowess, I now see as a practical matter of resources and outcomes.

When Solo Investigation Works Best

There are specific circumstances where pursuing a story alone not only works but produces better results than assembling a team. Understanding these scenarios helps you make better decisions about where to invest your limited time and energy.

Beat-Extension Stories

The best candidates for solo investigation are stories that extend naturally from your existing beat knowledge. When I’ve been covering a specific topic for years—local government, education, healthcare—I often know the landscape well enough to pursue a related investigation without additional support.

Last year, I pursued a story about irregularities in Lincoln city purchasing contracts entirely alone. Because I’d been covering city hall for five years, I knew which documents to request, which officials to interview, and which patterns to look for. A team would have added coordination overhead without improving the outcome.

Solo work also excels when speed is essential. If a story is breaking and you need to move quickly, assembling a team takes time you may not have. When the Norfolk water story broke in 2023, I worked alone for the first 48 hours simply because there wasn’t time to coordinate with others. Once the initial story published, then I brought in colleagues to expand coverage.

Lower-Risk Investigations

Some investigations carry minimal legal or physical risk—simple public records requests, interviews with willing sources, analysis of published documents. These are ideal for solo work because the overhead of team coordination exceeds the benefits.

Solo investigative journalism in Nebraska works well when you’re pursuing stories that won’t trigger pushback from powerful interests. A series examining trends in county budgets might require only my time and persistence, with no legal exposure worth worrying about.

I also find solo work valuable for “mood” stories—pieces that explore patterns or trends rather than expose specific wrongdoing. These investigations often involve dozens of small interviews and document reviews, work that doesn’t benefit from specialization but does require consistent attention over time.

Resource Constraints

Let’s be practical: sometimes you don’t have a team available. A newsroom may be understaffed, or your publication may not have the budget for multi-reporter investigations. In these cases, solo work isn’t a preference—it’s a necessity.

Rather than viewing this as a limitation, I’ve learned to see it as an opportunity to develop skills that serve me throughout my career. Solo investigation builds self-reliance, quick decision-making, and the ability to see a story through from start to finish without coordination challenges.

When Building a Team Is Essential

Some investigations are simply too large, too complex, or too risky to pursue alone. Recognizing these situations before you’re in too deep is critical for both story success and personal safety.

Complex Multi-Front Investigations

The most obvious candidates for team investigation involve multiple targets, jurisdictions, or document types. When I broke the Lincoln TIF scandal, the investigation involved seven different tax increment financing districts, three city agencies, multiple private developers, and records spanning a decade. No single reporter could have mastered all these fronts while maintaining the attention to detail required.

Matthew Bovee’s team investigation approach typically involves three to five reporters, depending on scope. Each team member becomes an expert in their specific area while maintaining communication about how their findings connect to the larger story.

Team investigations also excel when the story involves multiple geographic areas. The Aquifer War investigation required reporters in three states, coordinating with each other as they uncovered different aspects of the water rights dispute. This distributed approach would have been impossible for a single reporter to manage.

High-Risk Situations

Some investigations attract significant pushback—from powerful interests, from subjects who threaten legal action, or from situations where reporter safety becomes a concern. In these cases, team coverage provides both practical protection and psychological support.

When I investigated organized crime connections in Nebraska several years ago, working alone would have been dangerous. A team allowed us to conduct interviews in pairs, maintain awareness of our surroundings, and provide mutual support if any of us faced intimidation.

Legal exposure is another form of risk that argues for team investigation. When you’re pursuing stories that might result in defamation claims, having colleagues review your work provides protection that solo reporters don’t enjoy. This isn’t about censorship—it’s about having multiple eyes catch errors before they become expensive problems.

Specialized Skills Requirements

Modern investigative journalism often requires specialized skills that no single reporter possesses. Data analysis, document forensics, visual storytelling, and audience engagement each require expertise that can complement traditional reporting abilities.

For the Settlement Machine investigation, I assembled a team that included a data journalist who could identify patterns in settlement records that would have been invisible to manual review. This specialized skill was essential to the story’s impact—and it represented a capability I didn’t possess personally.

Team investigative journalism in Nebraska has evolved to include photographers, videographers, interactive developers, and audience strategists. Each adds capabilities that improve the final product, even if the core reporting could theoretically be done by one person.

My Framework for Making the Decision

After thirty years, I’ve developed a personal framework for deciding between solo and team investigation. This isn’t formal or scientific—it’s a mental checklist I run through when faced with a new investigation opportunity.

First, I ask: how many distinct document sources and interview subjects are involved? If the answer exceeds what one person can reasonably manage while maintaining quality, I lean toward a team.

Second, I consider: what’s the time horizon? Investigations that need to move quickly often favor solo work because coordination takes time. Longer-term investigations can benefit from team approaches that allow parallel work streams.

Third, I evaluate: what’s the risk level? Legal threats, physical danger, or significant reputational stakes all argue for team support. Stories that might result in pushback from powerful interests benefit from having multiple reporters who can testify to the accuracy of shared observations.

Fourth, I think about: what specialized skills does this require? If the investigation needs capabilities I don’t have and can’t easily develop, team assembly makes sense.

Finally, I reflect on: what’s my gut telling me? After three decades, I’ve learned to trust my instincts about which investigations want to be pursued in which way. Sometimes a story simply feels like it needs more hands—or more privacy—and I listen to that intuition.

Hybrid Approaches That Work

In practice, many investigations don’t fit neatly into solo or team categories. I’ve found success with hybrid approaches that combine elements of both.

Some of my best work has started solo—developing initial sources, establishing the basic facts—before bringing in team members to expand coverage. This approach gives you the flexibility and speed of solo work while adding capacity when the story warrants it.

Other investigations begin as team projects but contract as initial reporting narrows the focus. What started as a broad investigation into state contracting might narrow to a single company, at which point one reporter can manage the remainder more efficiently than a team.

Matthew Bovee’s investigation strategy often involves initial team assembly followed by focused solo work as stories develop. This flexibility allows me to scale resources up or down based on how the investigation evolves.

The Bottom Line

There’s no single right answer to the solo vs team question. What matters is making the decision deliberately, based on the specific circumstances of each investigation, rather than defaulting to habit or ego.

Solo investigation offers speed, flexibility, and the satisfaction of independent work. Team investigation provides capacity, safety, and specialized capabilities. Both approaches have produced my most impactful stories.

The best investigative journalists master both modes—and know when to use each.

To learn more about investigative journalism strategies, visit matthew-bovee.com for additional resources and guides.