On this page
After a minor disagreement about a client. Nia assumes she and Marek will calmly work out a shared approach. Marek writes to Zofia immediately.
— I need a decision on Nia’s approach — Marek writes.
When Nia finds out, she asks:
— Why didn’t you speak to me first?
— Zofia owns the decision. I’d rather make it clear.
Marek sees orderly escalation. Nia sees being bypassed and a small disagreement being taken to the boss.
How does Empatyzer help establish escalation rules?
Empatyzer helps you see that going to your superior may clear up a ticket or look like a denunciation. It also helps you see how to set a threshold and how to escalate.
Features that can help:
- You vs. the team: Shows how your profile stacks up against the team in areas like escalation, trust, and mandate, helping to frame the “Why go straight to the boss?” in the broader context of the group.
- Talk to Em about a specific person: Allows you to describe to Em the situation "Why go straight to the boss?", take into account the profile of both parties and prepare a specific version of the conversation or message before reaching out.
- Tips: They suggest how to talk to this particular person in the situation of "Why go straight to the boss?" in order to maintain the sense of the message and reduce the risk of unnecessary defense or misunderstanding.
What really happened
Marek and Nia have a relatively small difference of opinion about the client. Marek wants a clear decision quickly, so he goes to Zofia, who formally owns the direction. For him, this is transparent and safe: he does not want the disagreement to drag on or to act outside his mandate. Nia sees something different. Marek skipped the direct conversation with her and immediately brought in someone higher in the hierarchy. What feels like neutral escalation to him feels like reduced trust and raised stakes to her. The same move can mean “let’s clarify accountability” to one person and “you went over my head instead of talking to me” to another.
What the research says
Hierarchy changes the meaning of a conversation. Once someone with greater formal power enters a dispute, the parties are no longer discussing only the solution; questions of evaluation, status, and who “won” may enter as well. Research on employee voice shows that the relative position of speaker and recipient affects how risky speaking up feels and how it is interpreted — part of what has been described as a hierarchy of voice (Pfrombeck et al., 2022). Conflict management also benefits from distinguishing problems the parties can resolve directly from decisions that genuinely require formal authority. Research does not provide one universal escalation sequence, but it does show that bringing hierarchy into the conversation changes its relational cost.
How to handle it
Agree on a simple escalation ladder in advance: first direct conversation, then a joint attempt to solve the issue, then the manager when there is client risk, a deadlock, or a decision outside both people’s mandate. If the issue genuinely needs the boss immediately, Marek can say: “I don’t want to go around you, but this decision is outside our authority. Let’s take it to Zofia together.” Formally, the issue is still escalated, but the relational signal is completely different. The general rule is: escalation is a necessary tool, but it needs a visible threshold or it can easily become a signal of distrust.
How Empatyzer and Em can help
Empatyzer can help Marek and Nia see that escalation to a manager is not a socially neutral move for everyone. Marek may experience it as orderly accountability and quick access to the person with decision authority; Nia sees the bypassed conversation first and reads it as a signal of low trust. Comparing profiles, roles, and preferences around hierarchy allows Em to anticipate the clash. Before a similar situation, Em can give Marek one sentence that changes the relationship signal: “This is outside our mandate — let’s take it to Zofia together.” Escalation still happens, but Nia is no longer positioned as the problem being escalated. At team level, Empatyzer can help establish a simple escalation ladder. Micro-lessons reinforce the principle: escalate the problem when necessary, but do not escalate the relationship more than the problem requires.
Sources
- Julian Pfrombeck; Chloe Levin; Derek D. Rucker; Adam D. Galinsky (2022). The hierarchy of voice framework: The dynamic relationship between employee voice and social hierarchy. Research in Organizational Behavior, 42(Supplement), 100179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2022.100179 10.1016/j.riob.2022.100179
Find an article
Enter at least 2 characters. Minor typos are OK.