1. Confidentiality,
Professionalism and other
HR Anomalies…
“There are no facts, only interpretations.”
― Friedrich Nietzsche
1Hallie Moyse, HMM Consulting 9/9/2014

2. Introduction
In today’s business culture, specifically in North America, words
are often used with good intention. They are strategically placed
in policies and protocols to help define expected behaviors, vision
and mission statements, etc. However, words are regularly
misunderstood and misinterpreted because they are too vague,
over-used or misused.
Perception, observation and one’s own life experiences are key in
how one processes information, reacts to the information and
ultimately behaves.
The purpose of this presentation is to try to demystify some of
the commonly misused words used by management in the hopes
of clarifying their expectations to their staff and customers.
Hallie Moyse, HMM Consulting 9/9/2014 2

3. Some commonly used words and their definitions according to
Miriam Webster.com:
 Confidential: secret or private; showing that you are saying
something that is secret or private; trusted with secret or private
information;
 Ethical: involving questions of right and wrong behavior : relating
to ethics; following accepted rules of behavior : morally right and
good;
 Judgment: an opinion or decision that is based on careful
thought;
 Teamwork: work done by several associates with each doing a
part but all subordinating personal prominence to the efficiency of
the whole.
For the purposes of our conversation, these are a few words that
are misused, abused and misconstrued, and, as such do a lot of
harm. When using such key words, there should be little or no
room for misinterpretation. Clear guidelines must be provided so
that everyone has the same understanding of their meaning and
possible consequences. Is this a realistic goal?
Hallie Moyse, HMM Consulting 9/9/2014 3

4. Scenario I:
At the start of every school year, a principal sits down with their
staff as a whole, in teams and as individuals. The purpose is
multi-functional – to review anything and anyone new, to
establish lines of open communication , review schedules, etc.
During one of the first meetings the principal reminds the staff
that they need to be careful of what they say and how they act &
re-act in front of parents, family members, children, etc. The
purpose of the reminder is to be proactive in the hopes of
preventing any miscommunication between anyone.
Several days later, the principal receives a phone call / complaint
from an angry parent. She learns that an educator was
“innocently” speaking with a young child’s babysitter. Knowing
that the family is soon moving into a new neighborhood and
therefore a new school, the educator asks the babysitter if she is
“moving” with the family and if so, is she looking forward to it?
By the end of the conversation, the educator “has asked the
babysitter to consider not moving with the family and instead
staying nearby to help out a family friend!”
Hallie Moyse, HMM Consulting 9/9/2014 4

5.  Did the educator do or say anything wrong?
 Does the situation affect how the parent will listen and
communicate with the educator in the future?
 How does a seemingly “innocent” conversation blow up into
something much bigger?
 Is the parent justified in being irate?
 Did the educator cross any lines of unprofessionalism?
 Is there an ethical issue that needs to be addressed?
 How should the principal deal with the parent and the educator?
 How would you prevent such a situation from happening in the
future?
 Is this something that is to be dealt with principal vs. educator or
is this a symptom of a potentially larger problem?
 How to proceed….
(conversation / debate to follow)
Hallie Moyse, HMM Consulting 9/9/2014 5

6. Scenario II:
A child comes to a new school for the first time. He spends
approximately one hour in his new class. Everything & everyone
is new to him. Prior to placing the child in the class, all the
administration knew about him was his name and birth date.
Initially the child could’ve been placed in one of two classes: 1)
where he was one of the oldest, and 2) where he is one of the
youngest. Based on numbers, the principal went with option 2.
After spending an hour in the class, the experienced and trusted
educators in the class approach the principal and convince / insist
that she move the child into the class where he would be the
oldest and fit in better.
Although the principal clearly, easily and comprehensively
explains the change to the parent, the mother takes the news
badly and somewhat personally. The principal is standing by her
decision for now. The child can always be moved to the older
class in the new year.
Hallie Moyse, HMM Consulting 9/9/2014 6

7. During the one hour that the child was in the “wrong” class, the
educators learn that he may have sleep apnea, that he packed
some childish items in his backpack, and that his behavior is
immature in comparison to the other children in the class.
 Was the principal wrong and too trusting of the educators without
giving the child a fair chance?
 Were the educators too quick to judge the child?
 Should he have been given more time to settle in or would a
change later on (days or weeks) have been too difficult for the
child?
 How will this issue affect future communication between the
parent and principal?
 How to proceed…
(conversation / debate to follow)
Hallie Moyse, HMM Consulting 9/9/2014 7

8. Scenario III:
A young child is having difficulties transitioning from his old class
to his new one. His parent asks his teacher if he could please
spend a few minutes with one of his “best friends” in another
class. Together the educator and apprehensive child walk next
door to where his friend is. The educator asks her colleague if the
two boys can play together for a few minutes. The colleague says
“no.” The boys are four (4) years old.
In a pre-school organization where the staff are supposed to be
there “for the children” and what is in their best interest, what
does the “no” signify?
 Does the apprehensive child feel rejection?
 Does the child feel as if his feelings are not being valued?
 How does the educator feel about their “no” colleagues?
 What are the pros vs. cons of the 10 minutes of playing together?
 How does this scenario reflect the “teamwork” element in the
organization?
 How to proceed…
(conversation / debate to follow)
Hallie Moyse, HMM Consulting 9/9/2014 8

9. Perspective, POV & Position
Perspective, Perception & POV (point of view) are three (3)
distinct elements:
 Perspective: who is telling the story; the capacity to view things in their
true relations or relative importance ;
 Perception: the way you think about or understand someone or
something; the ability to understand or notice something easily; the way
that you notice or understand something using one of your senses;
 Point of View: how a story is told
All three of the above as well as one’s reaction/behavior in a
given situation is largely dependant upon one’s position (job
description, role & responsibilities) that one has in any group
(personal or professional).
One will react very differently in all three (3) of the
aforementioned scenarios based upon the role that they play.
Each scenario has different roles, some similar and some not.
◦ Scenario I: educator, babysitter, parents, principal
◦ Scenario II: child, educators from two (2) groups (old & new), parent,
principal
◦ Scenario III: child, educators from two (2) groups, parents (?),
principal
Hallie Moyse, HMM Consulting 9/9/2014 9

10. Scenario I: (principal’s reaction)
 The principal listens intently to the parent, acknowledging their
feelings of anger, deceit and frustration, and apologizes for any
lines that the educator may have crossed, although
unintentionally (she hopes). Blame will not be laid anywhere until
all sides are heard
 The principal reassures the parent that she will speak with the
educator and the rest of the staff, with the intention of letting
them know that no conversation is “innocent”
 Lessons to be learned:
1. NEVER ASSUME ANYTHING; NEVER ASSUME …
2. that what begins innocently will not end up with negative
consequences
3. that what you say will not be repeated or misconceived
4. that what you say will be properly understood
 Lessons to remember:
1. There are always 3-4 sides to a story; unless a part of it from the
onset, you will never know the truth
2. People filter and process information differently
3. All relationships are not equal
Hallie Moyse, HMM Consulting 9/9/2014 10

11. Scenario II: (administrator’s reaction)
 After listening to her trusted and very experienced educators, the
administrator separates the potential fear regarding the sleep
apnea from the educators’ observations regarding the child’s
immature and somewhat oppositional behavior.
 Without wanting to get the child or his family used to the same
class, upon the child’s arrival the following day, the child and
parent are escorted to their new class.
 A lengthy conversation takes place between the administrator and
the parent. The admin focuses on doing what is in the child’s best
interest and how his behavior seems more in line with the
younger children.
 The parent has some very valid arguments to fight the change,
the most glaring one is “that Sam wasn’t given enough of an
opportunity. How can he be judged after only an hour….”
Hallie Moyse, HMM Consulting 9/9/2014 11

12. Scenario III: (administrator’s reaction)
 The administrator speaks with the first educator and encourages
her to speak with her colleague to iron out her feelings of
disappointment and anger
 The administrator speaks with the second educator not regarding
her tone of voice or the hurt feelings of her colleague but rather
the negative consequences of her actions and tone of voice
◦ The educator should have said no in a more subtle way, explaining her
reasons and not in front of the child
◦ The child’s feelings were not validated by the educator in his presence
◦ The shunned educator, now looks upon her colleague as someone who
is rigid and not a team-player
◦ The “no” could have and should been delivered in a much more
understanding manner
◦ The administrator also pointed out that in no way is there a risk of
setting any precedent if a child once in a while stays for 10 minutes in
another class. The children are 4-5 years old and will not intentionally
take advantage of such a situation
Hallie Moyse, HMM Consulting 9/9/2014 12

13. 1. Is it realistic to pre-define all potential actions and words in the
case of the three scenarios so that such issues never arise?
2. When human beings are involved and people’s emotions are
involved is everything black & white?
3. If an organization and all of its members share a
vision/philosophy, is it ok to veer from it (scenario III) and at
what cost?
4. If your organization is service-based, is the customer always
right (scenario I)?
5. At what point should an administrator step in to a situation if not
directly spoken to initially (scenario III)? Will the administrator’s
involvement negatively strain any “team” relations or did the
actions of the “team” players already do so?
6. If an organization’s members seemingly share the same
philosophy, how and should the administration test seasoned
staff or trust their experienced judgment (scenario II)?
(conversation / debate to follow)
Thank you!
Hallie Moyse, HMM Consulting 9/9/2014 13