In a message dated 9/10/2008 9:26:01 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >>1. Co-operate with the auditors. >>2. Answer their questions as briefly (and consisely) as possible. >>3.Don't volunteer any information. >>4. Report, in detail, everything said to your direct manager. >There is a conflict between 1. and 3. The only conflict is between the two choices of (1) answering each question truthfully but confining your answer to the narrowest possible context covered by the question and (2) answering each question truthfully while expanding your answer to include everything you know about the subject. To cooperate does not require volunteering. Not to cooperate could mean not to answer at all, to answer angrily or falsely, to change the subject with the answer, and a host of other ways one can avoid answering. I see no inherent conflict between 1 and 3. The conflict is created by putting more emphasis on 1 than on 3. A stretch of the imagination could even create a conflict between 1 and 4. E.g., what if something illegal and incriminating is discussed, and then the auditors tell you not to report to your manager? How can you cooperate with that? Another part of this equation is to remember that whistle-blowers are seldom (if ever) rewarded. Also you can hire a lawyer to sit in the conference room with you and the auditors if you think it's going to escalate to that level of a conundrum. Bill Fairchild Rocket Software
**************Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new fashion blog, plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com. (http://www.stylelist.com/trends?ncid=aolsty00050000000014) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
