We read about leaks in government and business all the time. Someone expresses his or her disapproval by leaking a memo or embarrassing story, and most of the time the leaker isn't caught and it's not worth pursuing. While many of the big stories of secret information that leaks end up on the evening news, everyone has private thoughts or personal information they don't want shared with others at work. When that happens—when a leak is very up-close and personal— it can feel really devastating to the victim. It can also undermine trust and sharing within a group, because no one knows who the leaker is and whether he or she will leak again.

That's what happened when Sylvia joined an online support group for research and editorial employees who worked at different companies. The idea was to have a private network for employees who were doing a similar job at different companies around the country to share their experiences, both good and bad. They could even talk about their reactions to different managers and supervisors and give each other advice on how best to get ahead in the field. Everyone got a password, and out of about 400 interested employees around the United States, about 40–50 members became part of a regular core group, while another 100 or so network members checked in from time to time with questions or opinions.

For awhile, everything seemed fine, and many employees viewed this as even more than a group for sharing work experiences and tips. They came to see many members of the group as friends, even if they didn't meet personally, much like they did others in the field they met in their own location. Then one of the participants, Joyce, commented on how Teresa, one of several supervisors who gave her assignments, had been unreasonable and unsympathetic. Though Joyce once had a great relationship with Teresa, she felt Teresa was now very insistent about her meeting a deadline sooner than was necessary, meaning that Joyce would have to work over a weekend and give up an event she was hoping to attend. Why? Joyce surmised it was because Teresa was herself under pressure and so wanted the project extra early to be sure she got it on time and give it an extra review. "But she doesn't need it," Joyce complained. "I've always turned in my work on time and complete, so she doesn't need to do any extra work. Why now?"

The group in turn was very sympathetic with suggestions on what to do, from looking for help on the project to research resources to make it go more quickly, so maybe Joyce could take her trip after all. Thus, Joyce went to work the following day thinking the matter was all resolved only to find that Teresa was furious. Apparently, Teresa had heard about Joyce's online complaint and was angry about what Joyce had said about her—though she wouldn't say how she found out. Potentially, it might have been someone who also worked in the company, though it could have been someone who met Teresa at a networking meeting or even someone who knew someone Teresa knew who passed on the information to Teresa. Whatever the source of the news, the upshot was that Teresa pulled the project from Joyce, told Joyce to take a few days unpaid vacation time, and wouldn't tell her who had told her what Joyce allegedly said. Now, not only was her private communication rendered public, but Joyce felt her relationship with Teresa was irretrievably damaged, too.

Besides being disturbed by the encounter with Teresa, Joyce was devastated by what she felt was a betrayal by a group member. Who was it, and what did others in the group think about what happened? That night Joyce sent an e-mail message describing what happened, and within hours, the response was electric. Others in the group not only sympathized with her but were outraged by what happened. They described the leaker as a "mole," a "Judas," a "spy," and many called for that person to come forward and apologize or for the group as a whole to sniff out the leaker. Then, e-mails went back and forth speculating about who the leaker might be and complaining about how they, too, felt betrayed by someone who undermined what they thought was a private, confidential place. They would no longer feel safe to share their thoughts freely.

Meanwhile, while this sharing of hurt, angry feelings went on, others posted suggestions on different ways to smoke out the culprit—from going to Teresa and demanding she reveal the leaker to analyzing who was most likely to know and tell Teresa. Sylvia even proposed her theory that the leaker might be jealous of Joyce's close relationship with Teresa or feared that Joyce might be promoted for her good work, thus depriving the leaker of a desired spot by a promotion or a transfer into the company. Still another woman suggested finding the leaker by looking at those who didn't post their outrage, whereupon another participant said: "No, that's not the way, since the leaker could well be among us and could be using this outrage to conceal the truth."

In short, the online debate turned very ugly because most of the participants felt deeply betrayed by what had happened, and some even felt more upset than Sylvia, because this place that had been so important to them no longer felt secure and safe. Though one group member suggested that this leak to Teresa might have been an inadvertent slip of the tongue or maybe the leaker mentioned what Joyce said to a friend who told Teresa or someone else did, no one cared about exactly how the information had gotten to Teresa. Regardless of what happened, the group's privacy had been violated, and many worried that the group might never feel safe again. If the leaker were online, it was unlikely that he or she would dare to come forward, since the group's anger was so great. The group was at a kind of crossroads, as Joyce, Sylvia, and many other core members debated what to do in response to the leak.

What Should Joyce Do?

Here are some possibilities. In Joyce's place, what would you do and why? What do you think the outcomes of these different options would be?

• Drop out of the group. Not only is it no longer secure because of the betrayal, but there has been too much anger for it to become supportive again.

• Invite the leaker to come forward, if not to the group as a whole, then to you personally, since you now want to forgive and let go.

• Explain to Teresa that you were only sharing some general opinions in a private group, and the report about your comments was misunderstood and told to her out of context. Then try to patch up the relationship from there.

• Stay in the group, but be more careful about what you share in the future. Should you want to disclose personal or negative information, share it with a few selected others privately, but not with the whole group.

• Other?

Was there anything the group could do at this point? Or was the value of the support group irretrievably lost? I only heard about what happened several weeks after the incident, and gradually the fury about it did die down. Most people felt that since Teresa wasn't talking and the leaker wasn't coming forward to admit any guilt, they would probably never be able to identify the leaker in their midst. There was not much to do about it, and the group turned to sharing information on other issues. Still, the betrayal had long, deep roots that people remembered, such as when occasionally someone held back and was more cautious in what she said. She felt reluctant to talk about anything very personal, since she was afraid it might go beyond the group.

Unfortunately, in a situation where the betrayer could be almost anyone and the likelihood of finding out who it is is low, there might be little you or anyone else can do to resolve the situation. But you could still work out arrangements for the future to help group members feel more protected and thereby preserve the group, which is what some group members did. For example, the group members now continue to share openly about nonsensitive matters, and when someone wants advice or support for a personal issue, they can invite people to respond privately off the list. Another possibility for protecting privacy is setting up a smaller subgroup to share on personal issues, and posting or distributing by e-mail the names of all members of the subgroup. so everyone knows who is participating. Then, too, after an extended debate about this issue, that conversation might serve as a fair warning to whoever has leaked or might contemplate leaking in the future not to do it again, so the problem won't recur. Here in this group, the issue made everyone much more sensitive about keeping confidences, and people generally became more private about what they shared openly, and did more sharing off the list. The leaker was never discovered, but the problem never happened again.

Conclusion

• Be careful about what you share in a large and sometimesanonymous group, even if it is supposed to be a confidential support group. It may be less confidential and private than you think.

• Feel free to share about general topics in a large support group. But if the topic is personal or there could be a negative impact on your job, find a way to share it more privately and securely to be sure it stays that way.

• Don't expect perfect confidentiality and privacy if you are in a nonprivate situation; despite the best of intentions and promises, things might still leak.

• And if something does leak that puts you in a negative light or harms a valuable relationship, think about what you can do to repair the damage.

• Regard the betrayal and the leak as two separate issues; treat the results of the leak as you would any other problem and figure out the best way to resolve it, leak or not.