Situation–Reaction Test — Missed an Important Official Meeting:\nYou were asked to explain why you missed an important official meeting. Your immediate boss actually failed to inform you about the meeting, but is now pressuring you not to mention that fact in your explanation. What should you do?

Introduction / Context:
This scenario tests your integrity, accountability, and ability to document reality under political pressure. In professional environments, attendance at key meetings often affects evaluation, access to information, and trust. If you were not informed, and your supervisor is attempting to conceal that failure, the question becomes: Do you protect a person or protect the record? The ethical and career-safe answer is to create an accurate, dated, written account for auditability.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• You genuinely did not receive the meeting intimation.
• Your boss is asking you to hide this omission.
• You have been formally asked to explain your absence.
• Future reviews, HR assessments, or disciplinary actions may refer back to whatever you submit now.

Concept / Approach:
The safest long-term position is honesty backed by documentation. Written communication creates an objective trail. It shows that (1) you respond to escalation promptly, (2) you are not negligent, and (3) any gap in communication was procedural, not willful absence. Silent loyalty to a boss at the cost of your credibility is risky, because later you alone may be blamed. Ethical reporting is not “blaming,” it is transparency.

Step-by-Step Solution:
1) Prepare a concise written explanation addressed to the authority that requested clarification.2) State the timeline: when the meeting happened, when you first learned of it, and that you had not been informed in advance.3) Express willingness to review outcomes and complete any pending action items from that meeting.4) Keep tone factual, not emotional or accusatory. Avoid personal attacks on your boss.

Verification / Alternative check:
A written factual reply protects you if this becomes an HR or disciplinary file later. It also reassures leadership that you are responsible and solution-focused, not evasive.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Option b (private verbal escalation) may help politically, but it lacks recorded evidence and can later be denied. Option c (accepting blame) damages your reliability record and encourages misuse of authority. Option d (blaming the coordinator) shifts liability without proof and can be seen as finger-pointing. Option e (refusing to reply) looks insubordinate and unprofessional.

Common Pitfalls:
Writing a long emotional complaint; accusing people by name in hostile language; sending informal messages (like chats) instead of an official written reply to the authority that asked.

Final Answer:
Submit a clear, written factual explanation stating you were not informed, and offer to make up any missed action items.