need a phrase to "ask" a difficult question in a meeting

[SpinningCat2]

Hi
In my work I am required to follow procedures for certain activities.

There are formal procedures (FP) for most activities and informal procedures (IP) for some others.

Management expects, quite rightly, that all aspects of FP are carried out.

The FP do change over time.

It is not part of my job to maintain the FPs

2 years ago I followed an IP for activity X , there wasn't a FP written.

At the time I kept a file of all FPs available , I did not include activity X as no FP existed. A colleague did the same.

It has now come to light that I missed part of the requirements for Activity X

Within hours of this coming to light the staff member ( SM) in charge of ensuring the FP are kept up to date, had

Created a new folder named "Activity X" in our online main FP Folder.
Created inside the folder 4 documents relating to various aspects of the FP for activity X.
All at a time SM was at home / after working hours.

We are due a meeting about this soon.

It may well be that SM created the documents so that , going forward, my mistake is avoided and I will have to take any consequences on the chin.

What I will not tolerate , though , is being criticized for not following the FP when , 2 years ago, it did not exist.

I don't want to accuse the SM of lying.

I thought something along the lines of

"I wasn't aware of a FP for activity X in 2019, was it in the main FP folder ?"

If SM responds "The FP didn't exist in 2019" then all good.

If SM responds "Yes it was in the FP folder in 2019" then they are saying the FP existed when it didn't.

Can you help with the phrasing of what I need to ask the SM ?

I'm not on a witch hunt , I just KNOW , as does my colleague, that the FP didn't exist.

thanks

Ask them for a version history of the document.

Surely the date the folder and the documents were created will be visible so they can't say it existed 2 years ago?

Why don’t you just say that it’s great that they’ve created a new FP recently, thank them for it, say it would have been really helpful back when you had no choice but to follow an IP so you really welcome it being available in the future?

I might say something like 'There was no FP in the main folder at that time. Was there somewhere else I should have looked for that information?'. If you go in with a statement, it will make it harder for them to accuse you of lying. If necessary you could follow up with something along the lines of 'can you confirm when the FP was moved into the folder?'.

the date is on the folder, and the documents, there doesn't seem to be a version history.

I don't want to go in calling in to question the SM straight away , there may be a good explanation.

Yup just ask for verifiable facts. Are there different seniorities involved?

bendingspoons,

that's a really good angle to take ,

e.g. it did exist but I was looking in the "wrong" place

I’d say something like ‘although I believe an FP has been produced since this incident, as far as I am aware in 2019 no such FP was in place. Can you confirm that SM?’

asking for verifiable facts makes it all a bit confrontational and it may not need that , I think it would irrevocably tarnish my relationship with SM , who is great to work with.

I wouldn't be 'asking' anything.

I'd wait to see how they play it, and if they say I should have followed the FP I would calmy point out that, as can be seen from the date the document was created, that the FP didn't exist in 2019.

It does sound like they've done an urgent damage limitation exercise to prevent the same thing happening in future. I don't think you should assume its an attempt to make you culpable for something. Unless they have form?

SM is senior to me and my colleague

“ I don't want to go in calling in to question the SM straight away , there may be a good explanation.”

If you get your statement in early enough then it’s the other way round. You aren’t questioning anyone.
Anyway, good luck!

You may need to be assertive to protect yourself here - if you keep it calm, polite, and factual you can't be criticised. If you know that it didn't exist and wasn't created until afterwards I wouldn't put it as you've suggested in your OP, as this would just muddy the waters. Hope it all goes well.

Yes, I'd say what @MojoJojo71 has posted, but only as a response if they say you should have followed the FP.

If you go straight in with something like that then it's accusatory, there's no way around it. If it's a response to being told you should have done something impossible then it's not accusatory.

I think @DressedUpAtAnIvy has it spot on

I agree that the approach here is to be straightforward. Don't ask questions. Listen and then just assert that the document was created after your actions.

I'm hoping its the " lets move forward with this, we have a new FP"
( which are not TBH fit for purpose, to open to interpretation )

and SM has already said " Aspect Y is in the FP for activity X" , well . yeah, it is NOW

Also agree with @WeatherwaxLives about not asking anything - again that could muddy the waters

What is the date on the folder - 2019 or now? That's should indicate whether they intend to try and cover their own arse.

Really good advice , thank you,

Can I ask how the meeting invite has been phrased? Does it seem likely it's about the procedure going forward? It seems like it's a long time ago to raise what happened (2 years)

folder and all contents , created date 2 weeks ago

What type of meeting? Informal? Investigation? Disciplinary?

as a consequence of what I missed 2 years ago it has caused an issue now that will take some time to resolve. Think , wrong sort of screw used on an underground pipe, whole road needs to be dug up type thing.

informal meeting