Chapter 33 Exercises: Power Imbalances — Confronting Up (and Down)

Section A: Conceptual Understanding

Exercise 33.1 [Conceptual] ★ French and Raven identified six types of power. In your own words, define each of the following and give one original example from everyday life (not from the chapter): - Legitimate power - Coercive power - Expert power - Referent power

Exercise 33.2 [Conceptual] ★ Explain the difference between structural power and interpersonal power. Why does this distinction matter when preparing for a confrontation? Give an example where structural power creates constraints that superior interpersonal skill cannot overcome.

Exercise 33.3 [Conceptual] ★★ The chapter describes "confronting down" as carrying obligations, not just options. Do you agree that people in authority have an obligation to confront problematic behavior by those they supervise? What are the limits of this obligation? Under what circumstances, if any, is it acceptable for a supervisor to choose not to confront directly?

Exercise 33.4 [Conceptual] ★ Define "compassionate directness" and explain how it differs from (a) harsh confrontation and (b) compassion without directness. Why do both failure modes ultimately harm the person being confronted?

Exercise 33.5 [Conceptual] ★★ The chapter claims that "skill alone cannot compensate for severe structural power imbalance." What does this claim mean? Do you agree? What are its implications for how we teach confrontation skills?

Exercise 33.6 [Conceptual] ★★★ The chapter addresses race and gender as "additional power vectors" in confrontation. Explain the specific interpretive risks that Black women in professional settings face when they raise concerns or challenge authority. How should a trainer or textbook address this reality without either (a) advising people from marginalized groups to stay silent or (b) minimizing the real risks they face?

Section B: Scenario Analysis

Exercise 33.7 [Scenario] ★★ Marcus Chen, a paralegal, discovers that Diane (his supervisor) has submitted a court document with a significant error — one that Marcus spotted but was told not to worry about. The filing date is tomorrow. Analyze this situation using the power mapping worksheet from Section 33.4. Then identify which confronting-up strategies from Section 33.3 apply and why.

Exercise 33.8 [Scenario] ★★ Jade Flores is a first-generation community college student. Her professor has given her a grade she believes is wrong — an 'F' on a paper that she is confident she submitted on time, and which she has a timestamped email confirming the submission. The professor says he never received it. Analyze the power dynamics. What strategies from this chapter apply? What are the risks?

Exercise 33.9 [Scenario] ★★ Sam is an operations manager who has a team member, Tyler, who has been arriving 20-30 minutes late consistently for three weeks. Tyler is a good performer in other respects and has never had this problem before. Sam hasn't said anything yet. Using the compassionate directness framework, write out how Sam should open this conversation (first 3-4 sentences), then write out what Sam should say if Tyler responds: "I didn't think it was a big deal."

Exercise 33.10 [Scenario] ★★★ Dr. Priya Okafor has documented that three of her patients were transferred to Dr. Harmon's service without her full involvement in the decision. When she raises this with the hospital administrator (not Harmon), the administrator says: "Priya, you're one of our strongest physicians. I think you might be reading too much into what is really just scheduling flexibility." Analyze what has just happened using the power concepts from this chapter. What should Priya say or do next?

Exercise 33.11 [Scenario] ★★ Consider a situation where someone you manage is not performing adequately, and you have had one informal conversation that did not change things. You are now preparing for a more formal conversation. Using the compassionate directness framework, write the full outline (not just opening) of how you would structure this conversation, including how you would handle the scenario where they begin crying.

Exercise 33.12 [Scenario] ★★★ A first-generation college student of color at a predominantly white university is in a seminar where the professor consistently calls on white students, cuts off students of color mid-sentence, and has twice credited ideas raised by students of color to white students who rephrased them moments later. The student wants to address this. Complete the safety assessment tool from Section 33.5. What are this student's real options, from least to most formal?

Section C: Applied Practice

Exercise 33.13 [Applied] ★★ Identify a real situation in your own life (current or recent) where you need or needed to confront upward — a boss, professor, landlord, parent, or other person with more power in that domain. Complete the full power mapping worksheet from the chapter. Then identify the two confronting-up strategies from the Strategy Ladder that are most applicable to your situation. Write out specifically how you would apply each.

Exercise 33.14 [Applied] ★★ Think of a time when you had more power than someone else in a situation (as a supervisor, senior student, team lead, older sibling, or other role) and chose not to address a problem directly. Using the chapter's analysis, what were your reasons? What were the costs of not confronting? What would compassionate directness have looked like in that situation?

Exercise 33.15 [Applied] ★★★ Prepare for a confrontation-up in your actual life (or a significant past situation if you prefer). Write: 1. Your power map for both parties 2. Your safety assessment 3. Your confrontation opening (first 60-90 words you would actually say) 4. Your prediction of the two most likely pushbacks and your prepared responses to each 5. Your escalation path if the direct conversation fails

Exercise 33.16 [Applied] ★★ Write a brief follow-up email after a confrontation-up meeting. The scenario: You are a paralegal (like Marcus) and you have just had a conversation with your supervisor about being assigned work outside your job description and outside your training. The conversation went reasonably well — your supervisor agreed to think about it. Now write the follow-up email that creates a professional record of the conversation without being aggressive or presumptuous.

Exercise 33.17 [Applied] ★★★ Practice the "brilliant friend frame." Identify a concern you have with someone in authority over you. Write the same concern twice: - Version A: From the "deferential subordinate" register — hedged, apologetic, minimized - Version B: From the "brilliant trusted friend who happens to have less formal power" register — clear, collegial, solution-oriented

Then write a brief analysis of how each version is likely to land differently and why.

Exercise 33.18 [Applied] ★★ You are a supervisor (Sam's role) and you need to give a difficult performance review to a team member who has been struggling. Write the full script for the conversation (at least 400 words of dialogue), incorporating the compassionate directness framework. Include at least one moment where the team member becomes defensive, and show how the supervisor navigates that defensiveness without either backing down or escalating.

Section D: Synthesis

Exercise 33.19 [Synthesis] ★★★ The chapter argues that the goal of confrontation in power-imbalanced contexts is "not to pretend power doesn't exist" but to "navigate it with clear eyes." Write a 500-word essay arguing for or against the following proposition: "The confrontation skills taught in this chapter primarily benefit people who already have enough power to use them safely. For truly marginalized people in severely imbalanced power situations, the advice amounts to 'be more skillful at asking powerful people to treat you better,' which is inadequate." Support your position with specific examples.

Exercise 33.20 [Synthesis] ★★★ Consider two managers: one who consistently avoids confronting their team members about performance problems, and one who confronts directly but without regard for the emotional experience of the person being confronted. Both produce bad outcomes. Write a case for why compassionate directness is not just a "nice" version of management but actually a more effective one — using specific, concrete examples of what each approach produces and why.

Exercise 33.21 [Synthesis] ★★★ Design a brief workshop (90 minutes) for employees in a large organization on "Navigating Power Imbalances in Workplace Conversations." Who is your audience? What are the three most important things you want them to leave with? How would you structure the session? What activities or role plays would you include? What would you deliberately NOT include, and why?

Exercise 33.22 [Synthesis] ★★★ Priya, Marcus, Jade, and Sam each face a different version of power imbalance in this chapter. Write a 600-word comparative analysis of their situations, identifying: (a) what types of power are most relevant in each case; (b) what structural constraints operate differently for each; (c) how their identity dimensions (race, gender, class, age) add additional layers to their power analysis; and (d) what you think the most important skill or strategy is for each person specifically.

Exercise 33.23 [Synthesis] ★★ The safety assessment tool asks about physical, economic, reputational, and emotional safety. Consider: are there other forms of safety that this tool misses? What would you add? Write a revised safety assessment tool that includes at least two dimensions not covered in the original, with explanation for why each matters.

Exercise 33.24 [Synthesis] ★★★ "Some confrontations are genuinely unsafe, and the right guidance in those situations is not 'here's how to do it anyway.'" This is a controversial position for a book about how to handle confrontation to take. Write a defense of this position, addressing the objection that it gives people permission to avoid hard conversations they actually could have safely.

Exercise 33.25 [Synthesis] ★★★ Systems-level reflection: If organizations wanted to create conditions where people at lower levels of the hierarchy could confront upward more safely and effectively, what would need to change? Write a policy brief (400-500 words) addressed to a fictional CEO, identifying three specific structural changes and the evidence for why each would make upward voice more feasible and effective. Draw on the research mentioned in this chapter and Chapter 34's Case Study 02.