OK. Background: I am in a conversation with a small group. I bring up a legitimate question about a problem we have had in the past, bringing it forward to be sure we address it so it isn't a problem in the future, and I have others who feel as I do, but they are less outspoken as I am, waiting to see what can be done, not so willing to do anything themselves. (I should note that the error/problem in the past was a source of embarrassment when it came to light--akin to someone telling you you had spinach on your teeth. Some folks let you have spinach on your teeth, afraid to embarrass themselves by telling you. I'm more the personality-type to tell you so you don't continue embarrassing yourself.)

Now, here's the question: I asked the question I had and the person in charge immediately countered with "Time to move forward, things are becoming positive now so let's not dwell on the past." So my question now to AMHD is: How do I best redirect this--what words do I use?--so that the topic can be discussed without looking like the negative-nelly this person is trying to pin on me? In other words, I'm seeing this as a hide-their-head-in-the-sand mentality coupled with them trying to make me look bad for even asking about what they're busy ignoring. How do I deflect/counter this?

I assume the person that said "Time to move forward..." was a superior and not a co-work or equal standing.

And the Rules of conducting a meeting means that person is in charge and can steer it however he sees fit.

Sorry to say it... but sometimes you just have to suck it up and let it drop when you are instructed to. When you are in charge of the meeting then it will be up to you to set the rules.

That's not being rude... but that's how it works in the real world... from a lowly business meeting up through Sessions of Congress or Parliament.

The text would be "Roberts Rules of Order"

Introduction to Robert's Rules of Order (http://www.robertsrules.org/rulesintro.htm)

If you insist of redirecting or deflecting directions... then it makes you appear immature and unschooled in business practices. Which only hurts you for being credible.

Its not a situation where the person who shouts the loudest, or is the most pushy wins.

Yeah it will seem unfair at first... but when you understand what thses rules are and why they are used... they make perfect sense.

You said it yourself, they are afraid to embarrass themselves by letting you know that you had spinach on your teeth. If that's how they feel, then you can't change them. They have to change themselves.

You already voiced your opinion, but it's up to them to decide how they want to proceed. You can't force them to do anything that they don't want.

No, not a superior. This entire group is made up of equals. The boss isn't even present. We are tasked simply with forming group to get a project done (and hopefully done right).

appear immature and unschooled in business practices is our biggest worry, and you are right we aren't too 'schooled' I guess. But can I please ask you another question so I can get more 'schooled'?

The 'person in charge' was only the moderator of our group. We are actually 'grouped' across the city. Moderator was not exactly 'elected' or anything, just the first one who started 'speaking' (actually this is being done via on-line group) and thus took charge. I am sitting with a few people at the computer who agree with me and we don't want to come across as you have pointed out. Are sensitive to the fact that this person is trying to do exactly that, when in fact most of us don't want this error to happen again and need the problem addressed. We can guarantee it will occur again if we don't put something in place now to handle it. IS there any professional way of redirecting this to turn the tables on this one who wants only to look good for now and not actually do a good job that will last?

Ok... look at it from this perspective then. This is a GROUP project... persuing that will foster disunity, and hurt teamwork in the group.

In the interest of what's best for the group, and the project... you should let it drop... you raised the point... it was rejected... continuing to pursue it will only be counter productive at this point. Discussions SHOULD be limited to those directly relivent to the project at hand. And be limited to achieving the goals you are tasked with. Anything on a tangent only distracts the group from its goal.

I'm saying this as someone who has participated in many such meetings... and had received training on the topic. Yes there are training programs on that sort of thing.

There will always be certain issues certain people won't be happy about. Its all about coming together in the interest of the project. This time its you, next time it might be someone else. And there is nothing to indicate there isn't other issues others feel strongly about too.

Believe me, Smoothy, I understand and highly respect your answer. AND THANK YOU. This isn't 'me' to do so, but then I guess my follow-up Q is: how might I delicately extract myself from the process I was so gung-ho before about since now I can see it is only destined to fail? I'm not intending to be an "I told you so-er' later, I'd rather just walk away and never know what happens. But a group of us see our work will be for naught and just want to leave the project to those who are, as you say, directing it their way. What we don't want is to back out now and then later have them blame us when it fails since we didn't push the issue we know full well will come back and bite them in the arse. (We've known these folks before for behaving this way, and as such seek to take each of our steps very carefully... )

training programs on that sort of thing.

By the way: Any suggested reading? THANKS! (I am an admitted dummy on 'team' sports/politics)

Can you come at it from a positive perspective? Not, "You have spinach between your teeth," but, "I came across a new dental floss that's chocolate flavored. Here's a sample dispenser for each of you."

Can you tell us in 25 words or less what the problem process is?

Yes, perhaps that's what I'm looking for! Can you give me more words like that?

If you tell us the process, I could probably spin the negative you've had trouble with into a positive for you. (I had a boss who was always pushing weird and unworkable ideas on our department, so I learned quickly how to re-spin what I knew would fail. Of course, she always took credit for the successes that resulted.)

25 words or less, probably not if you are familiar w/ my other posts!

We now have a group of 60 people interested in a project that previously had only 10 of the same people always working on it, STP, they call it--same 10 people--because they have customarily been almost covert in their language and information-giving so no one knows enough to get involved. I've been part of this group since day one, but rather than complain all day about STP, I proactively try to figure out how to avoid it. (Make it more than the same 10 people) As it so happened, an embarrassing event took place which involved our group and that is what attracted all the people to become interested (kinda like any news is good news) Sure, they came because of the negative (human nature, I guess) and they want answers about that negative but they equally seem interested in being a part of the group now to ensure the negative doesn't happen again. Because I stop and explain stuff to people, break it down into manageable pieces of work, I think I can retain these 50 new people, but the other STP would rather ignore the Q's and go back to wallow soonafter in STP.

I feel like we all are shooting in the dark here without knowing what you brought up to the group.
You felt it needed further discussion and another person felt it didn't. So what was it?
And did no one else weigh in?

A company I worked for once: The top people were in a meeting but the CEO was late. They were talking about him in a negative way and clammed up when he walked in. He asked what they had been talking about, and everyone was mute. After several seconds one person said 'You.'
That person that it was important to discuss negativity for the good of the company, regardless of what personal feelings might come out in the open, and in fact deliberately wanting them in the open.

Believe me, Smoothy, I understand and highly respect your answer. AND THANK YOU. This isn't 'me' to do so, but then I guess my follow-up Q is: how might I delicately extract myself from the process I was so gung-ho before about since now I can see it is only destined to fail? I'm not intending to be an "I told you so-er' later, I'd rather just walk away and never know what happens. But a group of us see our work will be for naught and just want to leave the project to those who are, as you say, directing it their way. What we don't want is to back out now and then later have them blame us when it fails since we didn't push the issue we know full well will come back and bite them in the arse. (We've known these folks before for behaving this way, and as such seek to take each of our steps very carefully...)

You may not be able to extract yourself because I assume you were assigned to the group. You are right about not saying I-told-you-so, what would I do... simply not repeat what you initially got shot down on, but by all means contribute with your input to the end goal you are tasked with. Try to leave any personal issues you have with anyone out of it. Focus on the task alone. With time you will learn how to do this as a second nature.

I'm not so sure specifics would be useful because I or others might not be knowledgeable in your particular line of work. These answers are mostly geared at the clockwork of the team, and the interaction between them. There are several personality types... and its important to recognizing them and tailoring to them, and getting the most out of each person.

But is this conflict a personality conflict... or is this a finite methodology related to the project that is proven to be faulty?

If its personality... you ignore it. If it's a real issue that's known and proven that has problems and they intend to repeat it, then it is something you should get resolution on... or lacking that, if you have a better approach or different way to achieve the goal that meets the company standards and guidelines... then by all means present it.

If its one individual that's completely dominating things and completely unwilling to hear input of anyone else... (assuming others see it too).. then it may be an issue you can bring up to a Superior. Remember it's a lot of delicate negotiations... and not a bunch of High School jocks throwing their weight around to get their way.

As far as recommended reading... I have to look something up. The training I received was proprietary Corporate stuff you won't have access to.

Believe me, Smoothy, I understand and highly respect your answer. AND THANK YOU. This isn't 'me' to do so, but then I guess my follow-up Q is: how might I delicately extract myself from the process I was so gung-ho before about since now I can see it is only destined to fail? I'm not intending to be an "I told you so-er' later, I'd rather just walk away and never know what happens. But a group of us see our work will be for naught and just want to leave the project to those who are, as you say, directing it their way. What we don't want is to back out now and then later have them blame us when it fails since we didn't push the issue we know full well will come back and bite them in the arse. (We've known these folks before for behaving this way, and as such seek to take each of our steps very carefully...)

You may not be able to extract yourself because I assume you were assigned to the group. You are right about not saying I-told-you-so, what would I do?. simply not repeat what you initially got shot down on, but by all means contribute with your input to the end goal you are tasked with. Try to leave any personal issues you have with anyone out of it. Focus on the task alone. With time you will learn how to do this as a second nature.

I'm not so sure specifics would be useful because I or others might not be knowledgeable in your particular line of work. These answers are mostly geared at the clockwork of the team, and the interaction between them. There are several personality types... and its important to recognizing them and tailoring to them, and getting the most out of each person.

But is this conflict a personality conflict... or is this a finite methodology related to the project that is proven to be faulty?

If its personality... you ignore it. If it's a real issue that's known and proven that has problems and they intend to repeat it, then it is something you should get resolution on... or lacking that, if you have a better approach or different way to achieve the goal that meets the company standards and guidelines... then by all means present it.

If its one individual that's completely dominating things and completely unwilling to hear input of anyone else... (assuming others see it too).. then it may be an issue you can bring up to a Superior. Remember it's a lot of delicate negotiations... and not a bunch of High School jocks throwing their weight around to get their way.

As far as recommended reading... I have to look something up. The training I received was proprietary Corporate stuff you won't have access to. I work for a large enough company they have their own trainng dept that creates their own full fledged training programs of various types.

What is STP? It's a term I'm not familiar with. At least not as that acronym.

STP same ten people

So can, say, five new people from the 50 be added to the group of STP?

Sounds like our summer reading committee, was always STP, but the boss decided to "fire" all of them in favor of several new, young hires who had small children and "understood children" better than the STP whose children were adult now. None of the STP were allowed to be part of the new committee. Totally fresh ideas were what was needed, the boss thought. Well, she was wrong, The STP knew about pitfalls and what had failed in the past, but could give no input. The new committee failed miserably and summer reading numbers went down drastically.

My point is, retaining some of the STP would have worked fine, and the boss could have also added some new blood to the committee. Thus, the revamped committee would have had the program's history and caveats, but also new ideas injected.

Duh... I should have caught that. Saw it reading through it again.

He asked what they had been talking about, and everyone was mute. After several seconds one person said 'You.'

And that should have been followed with a positive -- "We really like the way you straighten up your desk at the end of the day. That should inspire all of us to do the same, so we're ready for the next workday."

I can see we might need a little more info... such as what general type of project is this, and what was the embarrassing event and how does it connect to the actual project goals? Leaving out names of course.

Let's say it's something like a fundraiser and an STP member was something like caught with hand in the till because she had no supervisions/check/balances. If we add the 50 new people, we are also keeping the original STP members, too, it just becomes less workload/more ability to have checks and balances as no one is as overworked/overlooked. The offending member is actually still here. Just apologized as claimed ignorance, and, member who answered me just wants to push past and moving forward blindly thinking that the new membership will solve everything whereas I can see that if the new 50 don't see consequences/check and balances put in we could either A. have someone join who is looking to get a hand in the till likewise or B. we will have the 50 people leave and go back to the original STP because no one in their right mind would want to be part of a group that ignores/condones theft. Much more complicated, this is a simplified version

Wondergirl, where are you?
could probably spin the negative you've had trouble with into a positive for you. Am looking for the positive spin here, pleaae help if you can

Wondergirl, where are you? Am looking for the positive spin here, pleaae help if you can
I was eating lunch.

What's the value of tossing in 50 more people? And I'm still not sure what happened after reading that two different times. You want to keep employees from sticking their hand in the till? Did the STP condone the theft? Sounds like you need a check for a thieving possibility, not a revised STP. The thief wasn't overworked and then stole. The thief was a thief. The STP forgave her because she was one of them, the "old gang."

When I was in a non-profit that did fundraisers, the same old people did not run every one. The particular fundraising committee always kept some former members (to prevent historical problems) but always added new ones (for fresh ideas).

Let's say it's something like a fundraiser and an STP member was something like caught with hand in the till because she had no supervisions/check/balances. If we add the 50 new people, we are also keeping the original STP members, too, it just becomes less workload/more ability to have checks and balances as no one is as overworked/overlooked. The offending member is actually still here. Just apologized as claimed ignorance, and, member who answered me just wants to push past and moving forward blindly thinking that the new membership will solve everything whereas I can see that if the new 50 don't see consequences/check and balances put in we could either A. have someone join who is looking to get a hand in the till likewise or B. we will have the 50 people leave and go back to the original STP because no one in their right mind would want to be part of a group that ignores/condones theft. Much more complicated, this is a simplified version

Ok... thats way beyond embarrassing... thats actually embezzlement. No problem... I fully understand the need to give a readers digest version with all the Identifying information omitted. That has completely changed the perspective on this... in my eyes anyway.

There would be very real legal ramnifications with that, for anyone with knowledge of the act that allowed it to happen / continue. With that information, I do see the urgency of the perspective you were pushing. And THAT is something I would not consider unimportant or self serving.

If for example it was political fundraising there are a whole different set of laws that come into play as well.

This is getting more complicated than it needs to be. Let's go back to, what did you have good for lunch, Wondergirl? :)

I know the problem needs addressing. One thing: the theft was not exactly that, it was just as close a comparison I was willing to make here in this forum. What took place was in fact ethically and morally even disgustingly wrong but I'm not sure it was illegal.

I was actually part of the original STP and because we were few numbers we were overtasked and things got overlooked until it was too late. I was the one who discovered it but not the one who brought it to light because first I tried to handle it directly with the guilty party, so now I'm seen as one of 2 negative nellies of the STP I guess, the ones of the 'old gang' who weren't about to condone wrongdoing. And I am constantly being painted as the bad guy here. One middle-of-the-road STP did say he was glad the wrongdoing came to light because the result was all these new interested members showing up at the next meeting. But the new members see what I see and are here at my elbow willing to come on board and prevent/help/move forward but the old STP vocal spokesperson is just wanting to shove it under a rug and sits happily tasking the new members with jobs they aren't willing to do until they get answers. She thinks they are happily on-board. I know they are tenous at best simply because I talk to them, not above them/around them.

So
How do I both get it out from under the rug and also do it in such a positive way that even the old STP thanks me and the one who's trying to rug it over (did I just coin that expression? ) can save face and allow the rug to be pulled back because the result will be so positive even she can't deny it?

If it was "in fact ethically and morally even disgustingly wrong," why are you -- heck, why SHOULD you -- "rug it over"?

I am being 'negative' if I pull the rug off or suggest ousting the guilty party--who by the way led (I kid you not) and did not recuse herself at the only face-to-face meeting we've had so far this year--on the basis that the meeting was about what she had done and so logically for her and other STP members it followed that she should be the one to do all the talking. I was taken off guard. So she led that meeting, but rather than it being an explain/apologize/quit speech, it turned into a praise-for-all-the-good-she-has-done party and a let's-excitedly-welcome-our-new-members party. The new members were reluctant to talk, as has always been the case as they didn't know what was going on. They thought they were coming for answers/explanation but instead saw this. So later now I have pressed the question again in an on-line group discussion and here we sit. Still rugging it over, no where positive to go as I see it. (But I admit I am a negative personality and admire Wondergirl's ability to turn even tooth-spinach into a positive gift-giving instance.)

I'm trying to see it from their perspective: I've done something wrong and I'm embarrassed being caught, I want to just hide it, forget it, and move on. I'm really glad there are a bunch of people now around me who might (possibly?) help keep me honest, and all I want to do is focus on the positive, remember I'm not all bad, and believe real hard that everything is going to be OK. But here's this dark horse who keeps bringing up what I want to forget about. I want that dark horse to just forget it, too.

Now, in fact, I'm the dark horse, not the one who did something wrong.

So how do I approach this and come off so that addressing it is a positive thing in their perspective?

And how do I do this and still be a team player?

What I've hearing is that an "in fact ethically and morally even disgustingly wrong" act was committed by one organization member. Why wasn't she properly disciplined, even ousted, and safeguards then put into place so it wouldn't happen again? It sounds like you are trying to whitewash it too, and by adding more employees to the STP, you think this won't happen again.

This doesn't sound like a situation that can be re-spun from negative to positive (to spare feelings? To save face?). Then, you too are "rugging it over."

Being a team player is not the issue!

OK. I 100% agree with you, but started this thread with the feelings that I wasn't being a team player, and I know that is often a fault of mine, so I was sensitive to that remark. I had just been told I was being negative and we needed simply to move on and 'stay positive' so when you suggested you had a way, I thought perhaps I could find a way, too.

No one 'added new members' it's just that more people took notice that the group needed help and came en masse to a meeting we thought would discuss the wrongdoing but which didn't, it just celebrated all the new interest in the group. (Yes, I'm aware these people are delusional--how do I defeat them? My Mom had Alzheimer's and I never could convince her her hallucinations weren't real.)

My entire goal (tho not voiced as I stand alone in the wind here until just now with you on my side and those here at my elbow) is that the guilty person needs to be removed.

The fact remains, though, that I don't have the power to remove her. And the more I stir things up/report things/ the badder it gets for me. Understand, that hardly stops me, I am just at a moment in time here where if I knew what to say to do it and also make people stop calling me the negative one, that's what I'd most like.

My choices are quit and take the 30 or so here by my elbow with me and see a good fundraiser go down the toilet with the STP bad guys still in charge (As I asked: how would I best extricate myself since I do NOT condone what happened/is happening when I know that later these types will still find way to blame me for why didn't I do something to stop the STP if they continue as they have and do even worse next?) I would like to just walk away and never look back, but it's a situation where I can bet I will be dragged back and blamed for what I did not do.

Or my choice is stay and keep pestering for changes and make it even worse for me.

Do I forget positive and just rip the band-aid off and say you're being delusional and state the facts I know point by point so it's all out there for all interested parties to digest? But I'm not privy to some of the facts. That's why I have questions.

Oh, I give up...

Oh, I give up......................
No, don't do that.

Is this a non-profit that you work for?

You've seen what can happen with one light-fingered member. Does this organization have rules and regs on paper? That's what we had to do with our local cat shelter. One person we discovered was using funds donated for the cats like they were her own pocket money. We didn't accuse her or scold her or oust her (she had value to the shelter and our mission), but we did spend time, not only meeting as a whole to concoct rules and regs, but also found an attorney (who turned out to be a volunteer and worked pro bono) to get us into true, official non-profit status. So from a bad situation of basic theft came a beautiful organization which is very lively and well-organized today.

Maybe you need to talk to the person separately, considering they are probabally embarrassed to talk about it in front of other people. If you get them alone, discuss it with them in privacy not embarrassing them by calling them out in front of the entire group.

That was where I started. The person now hiding it under the rug is not the person who did the wrong. Just, as I am starting to realize, an ignorant person who wants to paint the world all cotton candy and roses despite reality