Firo b Presentation

The Road-map for understanding the essence of

conflicts

The Conflict

• The condition in which the concerns of interacting people appear to be incompatible.

Fighting is merely one way of dealing with conflicts.

Conflicts in organizations

• Disagreement over Task-related matters, with people bringing in different perspectives, information and expertise to bear on an issue.

Where some key input is often suppressed or ignored.

Conflict under microscope

• In organizations; people’s concerns might center around:

Allocating resources.

Determining the factors to bear on an issue.

Supporting different strategies.

Conflict under microscope

• American managers spend 18% to 26% of their time dealing with conflicts “ depending on their managerial level”

Huge investment in time.

Poorly managed task-related conflicts can be a major cause of absenteeism & voluntary turn over.

Time = Money

Conflict under microscope

• Poorly managed Task- related conflicts: Can easily turn into personal-generating

resentment, antagonism and hostility. This type of emotional conflicts interfere with work

relationships causing loss in time and effort.

A lot of time + A lot of effort= A lot of money

Hence; comes the importance of handling conflicts

• Conflict management should be a strategic priority.

Especially for big (growing) organizations.

And even for daily basis human interaction; which is likely to be charged with different concerns , perspectives and behavioral orientations.

Objective / Constructive conflict handling

While the objective of handling conflicts simply is to settle them quickly & effectively to maintain pursuing maximum productivity.

Remains, Constructive handling of Conflicts bear the meaning of appreciating all perspectives, considering every point of view and putting them to their merits.

Road map to improve the conflict management competencies

1. Identifying & Measuring Conflict styles (modes) & Interpersonal behavioral orientations.

2. Building Conflict management Skills: Choosing the right conflict mode. Implementing the mode effectively. Reducing the cost of the used mode.

Importance of Identifying conflict Modes

“Know thyself” “Treat Others the way you like them to treat you”

Or is it?

“Treat others the way they want you to treat them”

Measuring & Identifying Conflict Styles

1. Conflict handling modes:

• When people find themselves in conflict their behavior can be described in terms of where it lies along two independent dimensions:

Assertiveness: the degree of which you try to satisfy your own concerns.

Cooperativeness: the degree to which you try to satisfy the concerns of others.

Competing

Avoiding

Collaborating

Accommodating

Compromising

Ass

erti

vene

ss

Cooperativeness CooperativeUn-Cooperative

Asse

rtive

Un-

Asse

rtive

Competing

Avoiding

Collaborating

Accommodating

Compromising

Ass

erti

vene

ss

Cooperativeness CooperativeUn-Cooperative

Asse

rtive

Un-

Asse

rtive

Assertive / UncooperativeTrying to satisfy your own concerns at

The Other person’s expense----- win

Competing

Avoiding

Collaborating

Accommodating

Compromising

Ass

erti

vene

ss

Cooperativeness CooperativeUn-Cooperative

Asse

rtive

Un-

Asse

rtive

Unassertive / UncooperativeTrying to sidestep or postpone the conflict

“Satisfying neither one’s needs”

Competing

Avoiding

Collaborating

Accommodating

Compromising

Ass

erti

vene

ss

Cooperativeness CooperativeUn-Cooperative

Asse

rtive

Un-

Asse

rtiveUnassertive / Cooperative

Sacrificing your own concerns to satisfyThe other person’s

(the opposite of Competing)

Competing

Avoiding

Collaborating

Accommodating

Compromising

Ass

erti

vene

ss

Cooperativeness CooperativeUn-Cooperative

Asse

rtive

Un-

Asse

rtive

Assertive / CooperativeTrying genuinely to problem-solve and to

Find a solution that completely-satisfyBoth the concerns

Competing

Avoiding

Collaborating

Accommodating

Compromising

Ass

erti

vene

ss

Cooperativeness CooperativeUn-Cooperative

Asse

rtive

Un-

Asse

rtive

Partially Assertive / Partially Cooperative

Looking for an acceptable settlementThat only satisfy both the concerns

partially

In your opinion which mode is better used & why?

Vs.

Competing CompetingCollaboratingCollaboratingAvoiding AvoidingCompromising CompromisingAccommodating Accommodating

Most of politiciansSolving Problem is the mainconcern

Conflict handling modes

• What is distinctive about collaboration is that people are listening to each other’s views & trying to incorporate them into sound decisions.

• Collaborating is always possible & people doesn’t need to compete to always get their needs met.

• They can be cooperative without being labeled soft.

Thomas–Kilmann Conflict mode instrument (TKI)

• A psychological instrument provided by CPP Organization.

• Aims to determine the individual’s conflict mode.

• Consists of 30 pairs of statements among each pair you chose either A or B.

Thomas–Kilmann Conflict mode instrument (TKI)

• The results describes the 5 different modes & scale the assessed by a score from 1 to 12 in each of the different modes.

• Then it compares you with a norm group of 400 middle and senior managers in different business & government organizations.

Measuring & Identifying Conflict Styles

2. Interpersonal Relationships Orientation behaviors:

• They are the behaviors that are most likely to be exhibited through out the interaction between humans.

• Here we will discuss another very useful psychological instrument that describes these orientations elaborately.

FIRO-BFundamental Interpersonal Relations

Orientation Behavior

Theory

• Created by William Schutz, 1958 (psychologist)

• Commissioned by the US Navy.

• Designed to measure team compatibility , especially under stressful conditions.

Why FIRO-B

• Increase your self understanding to your own social needs & orientations.

• FIRO-B Identifies: How you tend to behave towards others. How you want them to behave around you. How others perceive you & how you see them

3 Dimensions

Inclusion Control Affection

Inclusion

About recognition, belonging, participation, contact with others & how you relate to groups.

Control

Concerned with influence, leadership, responsibility & decision making.

Affection

About closeness, warmth, sensitivity, openness & how you relate to others.

• How much do you prefer to initiate this behavior?

• How do you actually behave in accordance to the three dimensions?

• How comfortable you are engaging activities associated to the 3 interpersonal needs?

• How much do you prefer others to take this initiative?

• How much are you at the receiving end of the 3 behaviors?

• How comfortable you are having others directing those behaviors to your, in accordance to 3 needs?

Expressed Wanted

2 Areas

3 Dimensions in terms of 2 AreasInclusion Control Affection

Expressed

Wanted

Inclusion Control Affection

Expressed

I make an effort to include others in my activities, I try to join social groups- in order to be with people as much as possible

I try to exert control & influence over things. I enjoy organizing things and directing others.

I make an effort to get close to people.I am comfortable expressing personal feelings & I try to be supportive to others.

Wanted

I want other people to invite me to belong, I enjoy it when others notice me.

I feel most comfortable working in a well defined situations.I try to get clear expectations & instructions

I want others to act warmly towards me. I enjoy it when people share their feelings with me & when they encourage my efforts.

For each area of interpersonal need the following three types of behavior will be evident:

• Deficient : individual is not directly trying to satisfy the need.

• Excessive : individual is trying constantly to satisfy the need.

• Ideal : satisfying the need in a moderate way.

Survey

• Schutz had both the Expressed & Wanted behaviors graded by a scale from 0 to 9

• This scale describes the degree to which an individual express or want this behavior.

01

23

456

87

9

L

M

H

Dimensions in terms of Areas

Inclusion (I)

Control (C)

Affection (A)

Expressed (e’)

Low Moderate

High

Wanted (w’)

Low Moderate High

Sample Firo-B measures result

Shutz identified the following types:

1- Inclusion types:

• The Undersocial (low e’I, low w’I).

• The Oversocial (high e’I, high w’I) .

• The Social (moderate e’I, moderate w’I).

2- Control types:

• The Abdicrat (low e’C, high w’C)

• The Autocrat (high e’C, low w’C)

• The Democrat (moderate e’C, moderate w’C)

Shutz identified the following types:

3- Affection types:

• The Underpersonal (low e’A, low w’A)

• The Overpersonal (high e’A, high w’A)

• The Personal (moderate e’A , moderate w’A)

Shutz identified the following types:

FIRO-B Locator charts• By member of FIRO-B team; psychologist Leo

Ryan, 1977.

• Produced maps of the scores of each area “Locator Charts”

• Assigned names for all the score ranges using his clinical interpretation of FIRO-B

Firo-B locator Charts

Affection

Low e’Low w’

ControlInclusion

Loner Rebel Pessimist

Affection

Moderate e’Low w’

ControlInclusion

Now you see Me, now you Don’t (tendencies)

Self confident Image ofIntimacy(tendencies)

Affection

High e’Low w’

ControlInclusion

Now you see Me, now you

Don’t

Mission Impossible

Image ofIntimacy

Affection

High e’Moderate w’

ControlInclusion

The Conversationalist

MissionImpossible

(Narcissistic tendencies)

Living up to expectations

Affection

High e’High w’

ControlInclusion

The People Gatherer

Dependant-Independent

Conflict The Optimistic

Affection

Moderate e’High w’

ControlInclusion

hidden inhibitions

Let’s take a break

DisguisedCautious Lover

Affection

Low e’High w’

ControlInclusion

Inhibited Individual

Loyal lieutenant(Openly dependant person)

Cautious Lover

Affection

Low e’Moderate w’

ControlInclusion

Cautious Expectations

The Checker

Careful Moderation

Affection

Moderate e’Moderate w’

ControlInclusion

Social Flexibility

The Matcher

Warm individual(the golden mean)

FIRO-B

• Firo-B do not encourage inborn typology.

• Believes that those scores in themselves are due to learned behavior & are not terminal.

• Scutz believes that those scores can and do change.

FIRO-B

• Those “clinical interpretation names” is not generally used ; again not to encourage typology ( scores are used ).

Firo-B considered these scores a reflection of learned behavior

• At (high wanted) control area: Men considered as……………….. (dependant) Women considered as…………….. (tolerant)

• emphasis on the reflection of the learned behavior on the score.

Women used to be dependant; now they simply are tolerant to control. (acquired behavior)

Exercise

(A) Control:Imagine a business review where the manager is

High e’ , Low w’ (( mission impossible)).

& a subordinate/subordinates: Low e’ , High w’ ((Loyal lieutenant)). Low e’ , Low w’ (( The rebel)). Moderate e’ , High w’ ((Self confident)).

In each situation, which of the conflict modes is most likely to be exerted by both parties?

Exercise

• (B) Inclusion:How would a relation of friendship be like

between:Low e’, High w’ ((inhibited individual))

&High e’, Low w’ ((now you see me , now you don’t)).Low e’, High w’ ((inhibited individual))

Now repeat The same with Affection as the dimension

Exercise

• (B) Inclusion:How would the social work environment

between 2 co-workers be when they both exert the following behavior:

Low e’, Low w’ ((The loner)). High e’, moderate w’ ((The conversationalist))

Further development

• In the 1970’s Schutz revised the Firo-B and made some adjustments:

Added some new instrument to measure new aspects:

Element B: Behavior Element F: Feelings Element S: Self Element W: Work relations. Element C: Close relations Element P: Parental relations Element O: Organizational climate.

Further development

• Element B: expanded the definition of all the 3 dimensions into new 6 scores. and the dimension of “Affection” has evolved into “Openness”

• All those new elements have been known collectively as the “Element of awareness”

• Firo-B Sold to CPP, consulting psychologists press Incorporation.

In your opinion, what is the correlation between

Firo-B & Mbti ?

Correlation with Mbti

• In 1976 Firo-B was found to be the most used instrument in training.

• It’s popularity began to fade with the introduction of Mbti.

• Now with the introduction of Firo-Element B both are being used together as they both tackle two different perspectives of the same issue.

In conclusion

• Interpersonal Conflict refers to the manifestation of incompatibility, disagreement, or difference between two or more interacting individuals.

• Understanding our most used conflict mode, and our interpersonal orientations behaviors makes all the difference in handling people.

In conclusion

• Collaborating as a conflict handling mode is always attainable and insures total focus on solving the problem in hand.

• Interpersonal orientations behaviors can and do change.

• Both TKI and Firo-B, are very useful instruments to help you understand yourself and other’s behaviors towards you.

Thank You