Transcript No Slide Title

FIRO-B
Maryland School of Public Policy
Office of Executive Programs
FIRO-B:
Theory, Interpretation and Linkages
Eugene R. (Geno) Schnell, Ph.D.
faculty member with the Center for Leadership Education at the Johns
Hopkins University
2336 Bright Leaf Way
Baltimore, MD 21209
410.585.1363
410.585.1367
[email protected]
FIRO (rhymes with Cairo) =
Fundamental Interpersonal Relations Orientation
by William C. (Will) Schutz, Ph.D.
(Harvard, Berkeley, Albert Einstein Medical School, Antioch, Esalen)
draws primarily upon the ideas of
T.W. Adorno, Erich Fromm, and Wilfred Bion
Original Well-Known Measures
FIRO-B
Behaviors
FIRO-F
Feelings
LIPHE
Life InterPersonal History Enquiry
MATE
Marital Attitudes Evaluation
COPE
Coping Operations Preference Enquiry
Major Works
The Interpersonal Underworld, also FIRO: A Three
Dimensional Theory of Interpersonal Relations
(Science & Behavior Books, 1958/1966)
Joy – Grove Press, 1967
Here Comes Everybody – Harper & Row, 1971
The Human Element – Jossey-Bass, 1994
Recent Work (1982/1992)
Element B
Behaviors
Element S
Self-Concept
Levels of Truth
Team Concordance
Popular Uses of the FIRO-B
• Self-Awareness
• Stress Management
• Personal Coaching/Counseling
• Career Counseling/Development
• Team Building
• Leadership Development
• Culture Change
• Conflict Management (team, interpersonal, marital)
What is the FIRO-B?
the FIRO-B is focused on interpersonal relations
the FIRO-B is based on the idea the humans have interpersonal needs
that underpin our interactions and, like other biological needs, nonsatisfaction can lead to undesirable biological consequences
interpersonal needs are a product of both genetic predisposition and
early imprinting in our family of origin, therefore are unlikely to change
dramatically without significant intervention
interpersonal needs are deeply connected in a system of inter-relationship
people are likely to attach to behaviors and situations that satiate their
needs
TYPE PREFERENCES
INCLUSION NEEDS
GENORA
DOROTHY
ISFP
likes to work alone
ISFP
likes to work alone
(affiliation)
AFFECTION NEEDS
likes to make a personal connection likes to make a personal connection
(intimacy)
PREFERS JOB DUTIES clear and specific
SEEN BY THE OTHER bossy and full of herself
wants to direct and influence
CONTROL NEEDS
clear and specific
childish and lazy
wants to rebel and resist authority
A Few Differences to Note
FIRO-B
MBTI
 focuses on social and interpersonal
aspects of the personality
 strength of needs
 also examines cognitive aspects such as
information processing and decisionmaking
 clarity of preferences
 two unipolar dimensions (both can be
high or low)
 two dichotomous polarities, mutually
exclusive
 agreement scales
 forced choice questions
 designed to highlight issues of
complementarity in social relations
 designed to highlight contributions
 evokes strong judgements, some sense of
being “abnormal” – want to keep results
private
 language is intentionally value-neutral
with few clinical overtones – willing to
share results
 questions are weighted differently and
uses Guttman ordering of questions, so
that they go from high ease of agreement
to low ease of agreements
 not weighted (except to correct for
gender differences) but contains
experimental items, no Guttman ordering
of questions
FIRO-B Terms
INCLUSION
CONTROL
AFFECTION
belonging
power
warmth
recognize
authority
close
attention
influence
open
participate
responsibility
supportive
involvement
contact
consistent
structure
personal
intimacy
distinction
directive
empathic
associate
regulate
affirming
acceptance
decisive
encouragement
join
organize
commitment
status
dominance
caring
identity
competitive
faithful/loyal
interest
goal-attainment
reassuring
visibility
achievement
sharing
Inclusion, Control or Affection?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
Organize
Warm contacts
Dominance
Associate
Include
Friendly
Closeness
Join
Direct
Popularity
Exclude
Encouragement
Follow directions
Attentive
Faithful
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
Assume responsibility
Power
Caring
Belong
Regulate
Make decisions
Invite
Personal interest
Cool/distant
Authority
Competitive
Carefully listen
Recognition
Supportive
Manage
Source: Judith Waterman
Expressed Versus Wanted Needs
Two forms of the basic need:
EXPRESSED toward others
• how much I want to demonstrate the behavior
• active, easily seen and mutually agreed upon
• something I initiate toward others by my words or actions
WANTED from others
• how much I desire to receive the behavior
(want others to behave toward me)
• usually more passive, elicited, or arranged to happen
• something I rely on others to do, say, or convey to me
note: willing to accept or tolerate may not be the same as wanted
The FIRO-B Model
Inclusion (I)
Control (C)
Affection (A)
Expressed
Behavior
(e)
The extent to which an
individual makes an effort
to include others in
activities, to try to belong,
to join groups.
The extent to which an
individual tries to exert control
and influence over people, to
organize and direct others.
The extent of which an
individual makes an effort to
have close relationships, to be
intimate with and supportive
of others.
Wanted
Behavior
(w)
The extent to which an
individual desires others to
include him or her in
activities, to invite and
notice him or her.
The extent to which an
individual is comfortable
allowing others to provide
direction and expectations, and
to influence him or her.
The extent to which an
individual desires others to act
warmly, express personal
sentiments, and provide
personal support.
Source: Schnell, E. (2000) Participating in Teams. CPP: Palo Alto
Six-Cell Model
for any of the six cells, results range from 0 to 9
for purposes of interpretation, scores of
0, 1, and 2 are considered in the LOW range
3, 4, 5, and 6 are considered in the MEDIUM range
7, 8, and 9 are considered in the HIGH range
Looking at Heather, what would be the range for each of her 6 cells?
I
C
A
6
0
4
3
9
5
Factors That Can Influence Scores
• Scoring errors
• Language/vocabulary problems
• Cultural issues affecting the expression of needs
• Environmental pressure to behave in defined ways
• Faking
• Important life events
What Do the Ranges Mean?
Medium
•
the associated descriptions are noticeably characteristic of your
interpersonal relations
•
the associated behaviors or desires would be displayed by you
in particular situations (depends exactly on who and where and
why you are interacting with them)
•
you remain highly flexible in figuring out how you will behave
or what you can expect
•
you avoid situations that require that you constantly behave or
rely on others in a particular way
Another Way to Represent FIRO-B Results
scores of 9, 8, 7 represent
90, 80 or 70% of the time, you express/want these behaviors
(this is turns out to be most of the time, no matter where you are or who you are with)
scores of 6, 5, 4, 3 represent
60, 50, 40 or 30% of the time, you express/want these behaviors
(this turns out to be like a light switch – sometimes you are “on” when the people and
situation is right and other times your are “off ” when the people or situation doesn’t match)
scores of 2 and 1 represent
20 or 10% of the time, you express/want these behaviors
(this is not very much of the time, no matter where you are or who you are with)
scores of 0 represent
1-5% of the time, you express/want these behaviors
(this is pretty rarely, even if the people or situation changes)
Exercise
Imagine being in a group where everyone had the same result on one of
the FIRO-B dimensions. Focusing just on that dimension, what would it
be like to be in this group?
(1)
Describe the climate of the team – what would it feel like to
work with these people?
(2)
List specific behaviors that you would see that would typify the
group.
(3)
In what ways would the group likely be highly effective (e.g.,
types of tasks, aspects of a project, or phase(s) of a decision
process)?
(4)
In what ways would the group likely be less effective (e.g.,
what types of tasks, aspects of a project, or phase(s) of a
decision process)?
What You Want From Other Leaders?
(Strongest Wanted Need)
wI
to be included in their
work
to be formally recognized
for your contribution
wC
predictable
clear assignments and
expectations
wA
demonstrate loyalty to
staff
follow through on
commitments
clarify procedures
equal treatment
to be asked your pinion
considerate
clear who is accountable
for what and when
supportive
respect traditions
The Team of FIRO-Bs
Guess the most likely FIRO-B scores (only one dimension) of people who are related to a
baseball team:
Coaches
High eC
Cheers on their teammates
Steals bases
Wants to play left field
Most enjoys the after-game drinks
Pitches
Would rather sit out
Keeps score
Umpires
Becomes the mascot
Gets the team together
Doesn’t talk much, just plays their position
Only shows up when they want to
Proposes a team uniform and cheer
Prefers to practice alone
Thinks the coach should have more practices
Wears the team hat all weekend long
Doesn’t tell anyone that they played well
High eA or High eI
High eC
Low eC
High eA
High eI or High eC
Low eC
High eC
High eC or Low wA
High wA
High eI
Low eI
Low wI
High eI
Low eI
High wC
High wI
Low eA
Correlations Between the FIRO-B Scales and Selected Adjectives
Selected Adjectives
Adventurous
Aggressive
Aloof
Assertive
Cold
Confident
Energetic
Enthusiastic
Wide range of interests
Opinionated
Outgoing
Outspoken
Patient
Pleasure seeking
Quiet
Self-centered
Sociable
Submissive
Talkative
Weak-willed
Withdrawn
eI
.23
wI
.21
eC wC eA
wA
.24
-.17 -.19
.22
-.20
-.22
.21
.23
.26
.22
.27
.23
.18
.22
-.20
.23
-.21 -.21
.21
.33
.24
.23
.22
.22
.25
.25
.24
.22
-.21
Note: n = 1,632; all correlations significant at p = .05
Source: Oxford Psychologists Press
Country Comparisons
Highest Expressed Inclusion:
Malaysia (5.3), Japan (5.2), Spain (5.0)
Lowest Expressed Inclusion:
Canada (3.8), Australia (4.0), U.K. (4.1)
Highest Wanted Inclusion:
Spain (4.8), China (4.1), Brazil (3.9)
Lowest Wanted Inclusion:
Venezuela (2.1) Germany (2.3), Belgium (2.3)
Highest Expressed Control:
France (6.4), Belgium (6.2), Italy/U.K. (5.8)
Lowest Expressed Control:
Canada (4.4), Australia (4.7), U.S. (4.8)
Highest Wanted Control:
Japan (5.1), China (4.6), Germany (3.8)
Lowest Wanted Control:
U.K./Mexico (2.5), France/Malaysia (2.9)
Highest Expressed Affection:
Spain (5.2), Saudi Arabia (5.1), Germany/China (4.7)
Lowest Expressed Affection:
Venezuela (1.0), Canada (3.1), U.K. (3.3)
Highest Wanted Affection:
Spain (5.9), China (5.4), Saudi Arabia/Italy (5.2)
Lowest Wanted Affection:
Germany/France (4.2), Belgium (4.3), U.K. (4.4)
Summative FIRO-B Scores
INCLUSION
Expressed
_____
eI
CONTROL
+
+
Wanted
_____
wI
+
+
+
=
_____
Total Need for
Inclusion
_____
eC
AFFECTION
_____
wC
_____
Total Need for
Control
=
+
+
=
+
_____
eA
_____
wA
+
=
=
+
_____
Total Need for
Affection
_____
Total Expressed
Behavior
_____
Total Wanted
Behavior
=
=
_____
Overall Need
Score
Research on the FIRO-B and Leadership
•
Higher scores on eC are associated with higher self-ratings of
leadership effectivenesss
•
Higher scores on wC are associated with lower self-ratings of
leadership effectiveness
•
Higher scores on eC are associated with higher ratings of
Initiating Structure; Higher scores on all other FIRO-B scales
are associated with Consideration
From Benchmarks Research (Self-Ratings)
Expressed Inclusion: leading subordinates, setting a developmental climate,
building and mending relationships, compassion and sensitivity, putting people at
ease, acting with flexibility’
Expressed Control: decisiveness
Wanted Control: difficulty molding a staff, difficulty making strategic transitions
Expressed Affection: resourcefulness, leading subordinates, setting a
developmental climate, building and mending relationships, compassion and
sensitivity, self-awareness, putting people at ease, acting with flexibility, (and a
negative relationship with confronting problems with interpersonal relationships
and difficulty molding a staff)
Wanted Affection: compassion and sensitivity, putting people at ease (and
negatively related to confronting problems with interpersonal relationships and
difficulty molding a staff)
MBTI/FIRO-B Research Hypotheses
Expected Relationships:
Extraversion -
Expressed & Wanted Inclusion
Feeling -
Expressed & Wanted Affection
Sensing -
Wanted Control
Judging -
Expressed Control
Correlation of FIRO-B Scores with MBTI Form G Continuous
Scores in Two Samples of Managers and Leaders
FIRO-B Scale/
MBTI Scale
EI
WI
EC
WC
eA
wA
E-I
S-N
T-F
J-P
Summary
-.59
-.49
-.28
-.29
-.23
-.16
.04
.02
-.52
-.42
-.31
-.27
.04
.04
.11
.07
.03
.08
-.09
-.03
.06
.07
.02
.02
.11
.14
.12
.12
-.23
-.21
.16
.16
.22
.25
.17
.23
.00
-.01
.12
.04
-.01
-.01
-.05
.00
.07
.03
.07
.02
E-E-E-E-E-T--T------E-FE-FE-E-F-
Source: Hammer and Schnell (1997)
Ranking of Psychological Type with Highest Means Scores
within FIRO-B Dimensions
Expressed
Wanted
INCLUSION
ENFJ
ENFP
ESFJ
ESFP
ENFP
ESFJ
ENFJ
ESFP
CONTROL
ENTJ
ENTP
ESTP
ESTJ
ISFJ
ISFP
AFFECTION
ENFJ
ENFP
ESFJ
ESFJ
ENFP
ESFP
ENFJ
Ranking of Psychological Type with Lowest Means Scores
within FIRO-B Dimensions
INCLUSION CONTROL
ISTP
ISFP
ISFJ
Expressed INTP
Wanted
ISTP
ISTJ
ISFP
INTJ
INTP
ENTP
INTP
INTJ
ESTP
ISTP
ENTJ
ESTJ
AFFECTION
ISTP
INTP
ISTJ
INTJ
ISTP
INTP
INTJ
ISTJ
Organization of Leadership Report
Overall Leadership Orientation
Facets of Your Leadership Style (type-based)
Your Leadership Approach (preferences x strongest needs)
Basic Interpretation of FIRO-B & MBTI Results, including role preferences
Interpersonal Relations
How Interaction Affect Your Leadership (total need score x E-I preference)
What You Show First in Leadership (highest expressed, dominant extraverted
function)
Working With Groups and Other Leaders
How You Work in a Team (FIRO-B based)
What You Expect from Other Leaders (highest/lowest wanted need, temperament)
Power and Organizational Culture
Your Bases of Power and Influence (strongest interpersonal need)
Your Influence on Organizational Culture (function pair, strongest/weakest total need)
Dealing With Change and Stress (type and FIRO-B based)
Action Plan (based on type and FIRO-B)