I’d start with the first question (was it actually disclosed internally, and did the investigator recuse themselves), and THEN the bridge question (did policy have any role in the disclosure/recusement, or was it “just” honorable actors), and only afterward the question about whether there is a policy, was it honored, and (if effective) do other places have similar policies.
Honestly, this thread has gone on too long, and it makes it seem like I’m more opposed than I actually am. I do look forward to your findings on the topic, and if you can make changes based on the investigation, you absolutely deserve credit. I’m skeptical of policy-first approaches to things, as opposed to behavior-evaluation-first, but that shouldn’t deter you very much. I apologize if my argumentative nature has caused any problems.
I’d start with the first question (was it actually disclosed internally, and did the investigator recuse themselves), and THEN the bridge question (did policy have any role in the disclosure/recusement, or was it “just” honorable actors), and only afterward the question about whether there is a policy, was it honored, and (if effective) do other places have similar policies.
Honestly, this thread has gone on too long, and it makes it seem like I’m more opposed than I actually am. I do look forward to your findings on the topic, and if you can make changes based on the investigation, you absolutely deserve credit. I’m skeptical of policy-first approaches to things, as opposed to behavior-evaluation-first, but that shouldn’t deter you very much. I apologize if my argumentative nature has caused any problems.