Terms of reference

You should neither preside over nor be the object of any review or inquiry where the terms of reference are important yet un or ill-considered. (Like a bird headed for plate glass: It's clear sailing until the sudden, unexpected halt.)

Terms of reference underpin every kind of inquiry, including 'committees of one.' Often, happily, some important terms are implicit by virtue of the issues raised. If, for example, a letter to staff asks, "does anyone know what happened to the staff-room coffee maker," it's clear what the inquiry is about.

But if a follow-up question is, "do you drink coffee or tea," then the inquiry has become a 'fishing expedition.' Such losses of focus are not merely unfortunate, they jeopardise natural justice and they undermine the likelihood of bringing any matter to a satisfactory and just close. Unfocused committees begin to look like Carroll's Mad Tea Party: "Why is a raven like a writing-desk?"

In 1992 the (now gone) Public Service Commission in Western Australia produced a useful document about setting terms of reference. It stayed on the WA website for "research purposes" for many years, but recently disappeared. (It has, happily, re-surfaced on a Trinidad and Tobago government site as a PDF.)

For want of a little preparation so much time and effort is wasted.▪

It pays to be obvious,

especially if you have a reputation for subtlety.
—Isaac Asimov (1920-1992)

Duty

In an episode of The West Wing, one character trying to recollect a Gilbert and Sullivan operetta refers to it as, "one of the ones about duty." The reply was, "They're all about duty." An apt allusion, as West Wing episodes and their characterisations are all about duty.

In my ad hoc taxonomy, every population divides into two flavours: Those driven by a sense of duty and those motivated by a sense of entitlement. (It's unfortunate that many see union members as entitlement driven. My experience is the opposite: Unionists are overwhelmingly duty driven — duty to their fellows and their fellows' welfare, their trade.)

To children we say, "with privileges come responsibilities" — a quid pro quo. For the philosophers, however, duty holds a more substantive place. In his Enchiridion (manual), for example, Epictetus's 'duties' are inextricably tied to relationships: "In this manner, therefore, you will find, from the idea of a neighbor, a citizen, a general, the corresponding duties...."

Commitment to duty is blind to political affiliation and deaf to any particular religious doctrine. "Someone you can count on," refers to a person motivated by duty. These are the colleagues (collaborators, subordinates, and bosses) to seek out. ▪

When the weak want to give an impression of strength
they hint menacingly at their capacity for evil.
—Eric Hoffer (1902-1983)

Squeaky wheel - Pt 4

[This post is the fourth of four on the topic of raising a
bullying or harassment complaint.
You can put all four essay together by clicking here.]

More than at any point, at the end you must keep your eye on the prize. And the 'prize' is that the improper conduct ends.

It's unlikely there'll be a satisfying apology. Any "apology" will be cloaked in qualification and weasel words: "I'm sorry if you took offense at my words...I certainly didn't intend to give offense...." If asked whether you're willing to accept such an apology say, "It's adequate only if it is tied to a commitment to end the improper conduct."

It's even less likely that there will be justice for past injuries. Respondents, in jeopardy of a disciplinary charge, rarely admit improper conduct. It will have to be enough for you to say to yourself, or to others, "the respondent and I know the truth of it."

When the appropriate commitment comes, grab it, even if wrapped in an unattractive package. It may look something like: "Without any admission of improper conduct, the respondent agrees that he/she shall not...."

Get it in writing, or confirm it in writing.

Finally, however, you must then accept that you have achieved what you set out to do — so it's done.

Call a friend, go out for a coffee. ▪

The problem isn't when the bean-counters
tell you what you can afford.
The problem is when they tell you what to want.
—Yllib Ybnad (b. 1948)