I just read a summary of a report. Not the actual report. Just the highlights as detailed by the report’s authors.
It was well done and articulately written. The committee who gathered the data and debated its meaning were all good people.
I missed the oral presentation of the report. I am also certain that the committee was affirmed by its audience following the presentation. I feel certain I would have affirmed them as well, had I been there.
But in the austerity of my little office at home, the report raised questions. Without inflection of voice and positive body language, I read some things that disturbed me. Like the acknowledgment of legitimate concerns that should be addressed in an unfolding process — but not allowed to alter the outcome of that process.
I’m probably out of step. But it seems to me that process should allow more than a mere acknowledgment of legitimate concerns. They should be scrutinized and weighed and tested. Did the report indicate that the committee had already scrutinized, weighed, and tested? And that the committee had decided that the concerns lack merit?
And what will be addressed about the concerns? Will solutions be offered that actually touch the concerns? Or will the concerns simply be targeted as irritating obstacles to someone’s intended outcome?
I’m probably out of step. I’ve been told that by several. It could be true. I just wonder, though, when that’s always the ultimate answer when I pursue a line of questioning. Maybe my questions have no merit.
I’m probably out of step. After I all, I tend to veer away from what people try to force on me. A likely result stemming from my belief in process.
Okay, I’m out of step. I have three possible ways to go with this: (1) get in step; (2) walk more loudly and attract people to my way of stepping; or (3) stop and let the parade go by.
What do you do when rumor has it that you’re out of step?