Chapter 28 Exercises: Workplace Conflicts — Peers, Subordinates, and Bosses

These exercises develop skills in navigating workplace conflict across all three axes: peer, downward, and upward. Progress from conceptual foundations to full-scenario application.

Difficulty Key: - ★ Foundational — reflection or single-concept analysis - ★★ Intermediate — scenario application or multi-step analysis - ★★★ Advanced — synthesis, role-play, or strategic planning

Section 1: The Unique Complexity of Workplace Conflict

Exercise 1 — Conceptual ★

The chapter identifies five features that make the workplace a uniquely complex confrontation environment. List and briefly define each feature. Then rank them from most to least significant in your own experience (or, if you have limited workplace experience, in the workplace contexts you're most familiar with from observation or reading). Justify your ranking.

Exercise 2 — Conceptual ★

The chapter distinguishes between formal hierarchy and informal power in the workplace. Give two examples from real life, literature, or film — one per type — where these two forms of power diverge. Explain what the divergence means for anyone trying to navigate conflict with the people involved.

Exercise 3 — Scenario ★★

Read the following situation and answer the questions:

Marcus is a paralegal. His supervisor Diane assigns cases to him on short notice regularly. His coworker Jorge has the same job title and also receives assignments from Diane, but has been at the firm five years longer than Marcus. Jorge often informally advises Diane on which assignments to route where, and Diane appears to value his judgment. Jorge has recently started taking on some of the client-facing assignments Marcus had expected to receive as he developed in his role.

a. Where is the formal hierarchy here, and where is the informal power? b. If Marcus wants to address the situation with both Diane and Jorge, what is the appropriate sequence and framing for each conversation? c. What would be the likely consequences of Marcus going to Diane about Jorge before speaking directly to Jorge?

Exercise 4 — Applied ★★

Amy Edmondson's research on psychological safety finds that teams with high psychological safety significantly outperform those without it. In your experience (or from contexts you've observed):

a. Describe a workplace environment that had high psychological safety. What specific behaviors or norms created it? b. Describe a workplace environment that had low psychological safety. What specific behaviors or norms created or maintained it? c. In a low-psychological-safety environment, what happens to confrontation? Does it disappear, or does it transform? Into what?

Section 2: Peer Confrontations

Exercise 5 — Conceptual ★

The chapter says that peer confrontations at work are "often the most interpersonally complex," despite the absence of formal power asymmetry. Explain why. Identify at least two specific features of the peer relationship in workplace contexts that make confrontation more difficult than it might appear.

Exercise 6 — Scenario ★★

Sam and Elena work as operations managers at the same level. Elena has been in the organization four years longer and has established informal influence with the VP of Operations. In three consecutive cross-functional presentations, Elena has presented analysis that was primarily developed by Sam's team without attributing it to Sam's team or including Sam in the delivery.

Sam wants to address this. Draft:

a. His opening statement for the conversation — using collaborative framing and centering the shared goal. b. The specific behavioral request — what he actually wants to change going forward. c. The agreement he'd propose — what a durable solution would look like. d. The follow-up email he'd send after the conversation.

Exercise 7 — Applied ★★

Think of a real or recent peer conflict you've experienced or witnessed in a professional or academic setting. (If you have limited professional experience, use a team or group project context.)

a. Describe the conflict in one paragraph. b. Identify where formal and informal power played a role. c. Was the conflict addressed directly, escalated to authority, or avoided? What was the outcome? d. Based on the chapter's peer confrontation protocol, what would the ideal approach have been?

Exercise 8 — Synthesis ★★★

The chapter gives Sam two pieces of advice about the peer axis: build around the shared goal, and don't go to the boss first.

Design a situation where these two pieces of advice are in tension — where the shared goal is genuinely ambiguous and direct resolution seems unlikely to work without management involvement. Then:

a. Explain why this situation is genuinely difficult. b. Describe the conditions under which direct confrontation first would still be the right call. c. Describe the conditions under which early escalation might be justified.

Section 3: Downward Confrontations — Managing Performance

Exercise 9 — Conceptual ★

The chapter distinguishes between feedback and confrontation in the management context. Define each, and explain what factors determine which category a given situation falls into. Give one clear example of each from a managerial context.

Exercise 10 — Scenario ★★

You are a manager. One of your direct reports, Keisha, has been late to team meetings six times in the last two months. She is otherwise a strong performer. You've mentioned it casually twice ("hey, try to make it by 9"), but nothing has changed.

Write the performance conversation you would have with Keisha. It should: - Distinguish this as a confrontation (pattern), not routine feedback - Include the cause inquiry - Name the specific expectation clearly and without equivocation - Propose a specific agreement - End with an appropriate accountability structure

Write this as dialogue.

Exercise 11 — Conceptual ★★

Kim Scott's concept of "ruinous empathy" describes the impulse to avoid hard feedback out of kindness.

a. In your own words, explain how ruinous empathy leads to worse outcomes for the employee, not just for the manager or organization. b. What is the psychological mechanism that makes ruinous empathy feel kind in the moment even when it's harmful in effect? c. Describe a situation where you (or someone you've observed) practiced ruinous empathy. What were the consequences?

Exercise 12 — Applied ★★★

You are a first-time manager. Your direct report, Daniel, is technically capable but interpersonally difficult — he interrupts colleagues in meetings, dismisses their ideas publicly, and has received complaints from two peers. You have documented three specific incidents.

Design the complete performance conversation:

a. Prepare your opening (framing this as a pattern conversation) b. Draft the specific behavioral observations (three incidents, with behavioral detail) c. Formulate the cause inquiry question d. State the expectation clearly e. Propose an agreement with implementation intentions on both sides f. Name the follow-up plan and what accountability looks like g. Write the email summary you'd send afterward

Exercise 13 — Conceptual ★

The chapter notes: "Documentation is good management practice, not preparation for termination." Explain what this means. Why is documentation important for the employee's benefit, not just the organization's?

Section 4: Upward Confrontations — Managing Up

Exercise 14 — Conceptual ★

The chapter describes four questions to ask before deciding to confront your boss. List them. Then add one question of your own — one you think is essential before undertaking an upward confrontation that the chapter didn't include.

Exercise 15 — Scenario ★★

Compare the following two versions of Sam's confrontation with Marcus over the executive presentation attribution issue:

Version A (Complaint frame): "I need to talk to you about the executive presentation. I worked forty hours on that analysis, and you presented it as your own work. I felt undermined. I think you owe me credit."

Version B (Solution-presenting frame): "I've been thinking about how we could handle executive presentations going forward. When you're presenting analysis I've built, I think I could add real value in the room — I can answer technical questions in real time, and it would be good development for me. Can we discuss what that would look like?"

a. Analyze each version against the chapter's framework for upward confrontations. b. What are the specific risks of Version A, even if Sam's concern is entirely legitimate? c. Does the solution-presenting frame in Version B require Sam to pretend nothing wrong happened? Or is it genuinely honest? Defend your answer.

Exercise 16 — Applied ★★

Think of a time you wanted to raise a concern with a boss, supervisor, professor, or other authority figure but didn't.

a. What held you back? b. Which of the chapter's risk factors did you perceive (formal power asymmetry, career stakes, the risk of being right at the wrong time)? c. If you were to have that conversation now, using the solution-presenting frame and the "I need your guidance" framing, what would you say? Write your opening statement.

Exercise 17 — Scenario ★★★

Dr. Priya Okafor has raised the nursing staffing issue with Dr. Harmon four times. Each time, Harmon has responded with "I'll see what I can do" — and done nothing. There has now been a near-miss incident documented in the record. Priya has requested a specific meeting to discuss the staffing issue.

Design Priya's complete approach to this meeting:

a. Her opening statement — naming the purpose of the meeting directly without accusation b. How she uses the near-miss documentation without weaponizing it c. The specific ask — what she wants to leave the meeting with (not a general commitment but a specific decision) d. How she handles Harmon's likely deferral ("I'll look into this further") e. How she closes the meeting with a named follow-up mechanism even if full agreement isn't reached

Section 5: The Bystander Problem and HR

Exercise 18 — Conceptual ★★

The chapter describes four levels of bystander intervention when witnessing workplace misconduct: 1. Direct intervention 2. Post-hoc check-in with the affected party 3. Private documentation 4. Formal escalation

For each level, explain: a. When it is most appropriate b. What the costs are to the bystander c. What prevents people from using it

Exercise 19 — Scenario ★★

You are a junior employee at a company. You witness a senior colleague making a comment to a coworker that, while stopping short of overtly discriminatory language, is clearly derogatory about her ethnic background. The comment is made in a meeting of six people. Two people laugh nervously. The affected coworker goes quiet.

a. Which level(s) of bystander intervention are available to you in the moment? b. What would you do immediately after the meeting? c. If this is a pattern you've observed over several months, what changes about your analysis? d. Under what circumstances would HR involvement be appropriate?

Exercise 20 — Conceptual ★

Explain, in your own words, why "HR protects the organization, not you." This is sometimes described as cynical. Is it? What are the implications for how you should approach HR when you have a workplace concern?

Exercise 21 — Scenario ★★

Jade Flores has taken a part-time job at a retail chain during college. Her shift manager makes comments about her appearance regularly — not sexually explicit, but consistently focused on how she looks rather than how she works. Jade is uncomfortable and the comments affect her focus. She hasn't said anything.

a. Does Jade's situation meet the legal threshold for a hostile work environment? What additional information would you need to answer this confidently? b. What are Jade's options for addressing this situation directly before involving HR? c. If she does involve HR, what should she expect — and what should she bring with her to that conversation? d. What protections does she have against retaliation if she reports?

Section 6: Character Arc Application

Exercise 22 — Applied ★★

Sam Nguyen's three confrontations in this chapter — with Tyler (Ch. 26 revisited), with Elena, and with Marcus — represent the culmination of a pattern he's been working on throughout the textbook.

a. Trace Sam's avoidance pattern as it appeared in earlier chapters. b. What specifically changed in his approach in this chapter? Point to at least two concrete behavioral changes. c. The chapter ends with Sam being considered for a regional director role. The text notes Sam's uncertainty: "was it because of the conversations, or despite them, or something else entirely?" What do you think? Does it matter?

Exercise 23 — Applied ★★★

Marcus Chen's confrontation with Diane over preparation time is brief and productive. Diane's response — "Why didn't you say so?" — suggests she was not aware of the problem.

a. What does Diane's response tell us about what was preventing the confrontation from happening? b. Marcus used the solution-presenting frame ("I'd find it valuable... Is there a way?") rather than a complaint frame. Rewrite his opening as a complaint frame and analyze what would likely have been different. c. The chapter notes that Diane said: "This is the first time you've pushed back on a process rather than just absorbing it. That's the right move." What does this suggest about what Diane actually wanted from Marcus — and why he'd been misreading the situation?

Exercise 24 — Synthesis ★★★

Design a comprehensive "workplace confrontation playbook" for a specific professional context you know well (your current or most recent job, internship, or academic department). Your playbook should include:

a. A description of the formal and informal power structure b. One identified peer conflict — real or hypothetical — and how you would address it using the chapter's protocol c. One identified downward challenge — a performance or accountability issue — and how you would address it d. One identified upward concern — something you've wanted to raise with a supervisor — and how you would frame it using the solution-presenting approach e. Your organization's HR process — or, if unknown, what you would need to learn about it before relying on it

Section 7: Advanced Analysis

Exercise 25 — Synthesis ★★★

The chapter quotes the chapter's own intuition: "The most survivable upward confrontation is the one that makes the boss look good for responding to it, rather than making the boss feel challenged for having created it."

a. Is this advice ethical? Does it require you to be dishonest about the situation you're raising? b. What is the difference between strategic framing and dishonesty in the upward confrontation context? c. Design a scenario where strategic framing is both ethical and effective. Design a second scenario where the same level of strategic framing would become a form of complicity in something harmful. d. Where is the line between managing the politics of a situation and abandoning integrity to survive in it?

This exercise asks you to reason carefully about professional ethics. There is no single correct answer, but there are better and worse reasoned answers.