Reference no: EM133244423

You sit in a meeting with a sister organization of your company with a team whose manager has a reputation of being a tyrannical boss. In the meeting, you hear a few employees make several statements openly agreeing and others openly disagreeing with their tyrannical boss. 

A. If you were to apply Bies and Trip framework to the exchange, you might say that you have:

1. Heard all possible responses to tyranny in action consistent with the framework's dimension of agreeing/disagreeing
2. Heard no responses to tyranny in action consistent with the framework's dimension of private/public face
3. Heard statements consistent with the framework dimension of agreeing/disagreeing, but now you would need to know if the statements made at the meeting were truthful or not and why the people who didn't speak at the meeting choose to do so
4. Not yet seen powerlessness in action as no one stated that they were powerless or that their boss was tyrannical

B. As you analyze the situation using Bies and Tripp's framework, you recall that the responses to tyranny in the workplace can be organized around the dimensions of:

1. Consent/dissent with your boss
2. Open/Closed protest about the abuse from your boss
3. Uncooperative/Cooperative face when dealing with the abuse
4. Respectful/Disrespectful disagreement