3 ms·
Interesting. The framework from the article mentions three independent axes (active/passive, internal/external, positive/negative) but doesn't explore all comb
by mwigdahl 3y ago
Interesting. The framework from the article mentions three independent axes (active/passive, internal/external, positive/negative) but doesn't explore all combinations of them. It seems like there are other clear actions that can be driven by those other combinations:
Active Positive External -- Leave (as per the article)
Passive Positive External -- (?)
Active Negative External -- Betray (trying to harm the organization by interacting with external entities or authorities)
Passive Negative External -- (?)
Active Positive Internal -- Voice (as per the article)
Passive Positive Internal -- Loyalty (as per the article)
Active Negative Internal -- Sabotage (trying to harm the organization via internal actions and interactions)
Passive Negative Internal -- Neglect (as per the article)
I'm not really sure how Passive Negative External or Passive Positive External would manifest. For negative, failure to protect against or warn about hostile external action? For Passive Positive External something like whistleblowing seems to mostly fit, but seems more active than passive.
- francisofascii 3y agoYeah, I think your approach could be applied. I simply read the 4 options as "leave" with three variations of "stay" based on how much additional effort is added. Once you leave, you are out of the system and cannot be active or passive. If you stay, you can complain/try to fix (more effort), stay the course (same effort), or do less or work against with neglect (less effort).
- mwigdahl 3y agoI like this way of looking at it also, thanks!
- pcstl 3y agoPassive Positive External -- Fanboy (speak warmly of the organization but without trying to take part in it) Passive Negative External -- Badmouth (try to warn other people about the organization, but don't act directly against the organization)