THE NATURE OF INTERPERSONAL SKILLS

THE NATURE OF INTERPERSONAL SKILLS

A historical perspective

Learning objective To understand the nature of interpersonal skills from a historical perspective and to develop a critical appreciation of the different approaches that have been applied to the study of social interaction. After reading this chapter you will:

•         Be able to define interpersonal skill, and recognise that it involves the use of goal-directed behaviours to achieve desired outcomes.

•         Be able to compare and contrast the behavioural and cognitive approaches to studying social interaction.

•         Understand the difference between those behavioural approaches that restrict attention to observable behaviours and those behavioural approaches that pay attention to the intention that lies behind the behaviour.

•         Be aware of how cognitive processes influence behaviour and how social interaction may be viewed as a transaction in which each interactor is seeking a satisfactory outcome.

A.      A.The effect of behaviour on goal achievement We spend a considerable part of our working day relating to others. One of the findings of the early work activity studies, echoed more recently by Oshagbemi (1988), is that we consistently underestimate the amount of time we spend in face-to-face interaction. There are also indications that we underestimate seriously the effect our behaviour has on the way others behave, and therefore on the achievement of personal and organisational goals.

B.      The importance of interpersonal skills One of the most widely used definitions of management is getting things done through people. Mangham (1986) argues that a person’s success as a manager depends upon the ability to conduct oneself in the complexity of the organisation as a subtle, insightful, incisive performer. He goes on to suggest that successful managers appear to have a natural and/or highly developed ability to read the actual and potential behaviour of others around them and to construct their own conduct in accordance with this reading. This is an ability we all have but, according to Mangham, ‘the most successful among us appear to do social life with a higher degree of skill than the rest of us manage’.

C.      Interpersonal skills as goal-directed behaviours ‘Interpersonal skill’ is one of a number of broadly similar terms that are sometimes used interchangeably. Other such terms include interactive skills, people skills, face-to-face skills, social skills and social competence. Argyle (1984) defines socially competent people as those who possess the skills necessary to produce desired effects on other people in social situations. These desired effects may include persuading somebody to work harder, make a purchase, make a concession in a negotiation, be impressed by one’s expertise or support one in a crisis.

D.      Approaches to the study of interpersonal interaction The study of interpersonal skills and interpersonal relationships is multidisciplinary and, at one level, each discipline has tended to focus attention on different contexts and different kinds of relationship. In the management literature, relationships with bosses, subordinates, peers, customers and suppliers receive considerable attention whereas in the education literature, the focus is on the teacher–pupil relationship and in the social work literature, marital, family and similar relationships tend to be the focus of attention. Berscheid (1994) observes that this has led to a situation where the matrix of interpersonal relationship knowledge is fractured along the lines of relationship type. Even within the context of a particular relationship type, the study of interpersonal skills has been influenced by a rich array of conceptual approaches.

E.       Behavioural approaches

 One approach to the study of interpersonal interaction restricts attention to observable behaviour, but there are differences even within this broad approach.

This brief description not only draws attention to the interactive nature of social encounters but also to the possibility of conceptualising any interpersonal interaction as a performance which is influenced by the actors’ motives and goals.

F.       Cognitive approaches

All of the approaches presented so far fail to pay attention to what is going on in the actors’ heads, to what they are thinking. They restrict attention to what people do. An alternative approach is based on the assumption that if we are to better understand the conduct of people in organisations we need to address what they appear to think and feel about themselves and others. Symbolic interactionists such as Mangham focus attention on the way situations are defined and the actors’ ability to think through (rehearse) how the interaction might unfold before deciding what to do.

G.      A transactional approach to social interaction

Social interaction may be viewed as a transaction in which each interactor is seeking a satisfactory outcome. The performance appraisal interview offers an example of a complex but typical social encounter in which the behaviour of each party is influenced by the other. The person being appraised is aware that his boss/appraiser is observing what he is saying and doing and that on the basis of these observations she (the appraiser) is making inferences about him.

H.      Argyle’s social skill model

One of the most frequently cited models of social interaction is Argyle’s (1994) social skill model (Figure 1.1). Originally developed more than thirty years ago, it posits that in any social encounter individuals have plans or goals that they attempt to realise through the continuous correction of their social performance in the light of the reactions of others.

Context

The context is a financial services organisation.A is B’s supervisor.Part of B’s role involves interviewing clients when they apply for a mortgage. B has been in post for three months. The supervisor (A) has discovered B has failed to collect all the required information from a client.This is the second time that B has made the same mistake. It is important because it means that there will be a serious delay in the company’s ability to process the client’s mortgage application, and it could result in the loss of the client’s business. Place a copy of Figure 1.3 somewhere where both A and B can see it.

The exercise begins with A (the supervisor) standing in the doorway of an office that B shares with others, loudly declaring that this is the second time B has made the same mistake.

1.        The person who is assuming the role of A starts by filling out the cognition ‘bubble’ at A1 indicating A’s purpose in pointing out B’s second mistake.

A should not pass this information on to B.

2.       While A is completing the above task,the person who is assuming the role of B (who is aware of how A behaved at the start of this interaction – box A1) can also start the exercise.

·         B should fill in the cognition ‘bubble’at B1 on his or her own sheet, answering the questions listed in Figure 1.3.(What is A’s intention? How do I feel about this? What do I hope to achieve by responding?)

·         B should not share this information with A.

Bshould then decide how to respond to A’s behaviour at A1 and write this down in the behaviour box at B1.

3.       Areflects on B’s behaviour at B1.

•         Ashould fill in the cognition ‘bubble’ at A2, answering the questions listed in Figure 1.3.

Do not share this information with B.

•         •Ashould then decide how to respond to B’s behaviour at B1 and write this down in the behaviour box at A2.

4.       Breflects on A’s behaviour at A2.

•         Bshould fill in the cognition ‘bubble’ at B2, answering the questions listed in Figure 1.3.

Do not share this information with A.

•         •Bshould then decide how to respond to A’s behaviour at A2 and write this down in the behaviour box at B2.

5.       Areflects on B’s behaviour at B2.

•         Ashould fill in the cognition ‘bubble’ at A3, answering the questions listed in Figure 1.3.

Do not share this information with B.

•         Ashould then decide how to respond to B’s behaviour at B2 and write this down in the behaviour box at A3.

6.       Breflects on A’s behaviour at A3.

•         Bshould fill in the cognition ‘bubble’ at B3, answering the questions listed in Figure 1.3.

Do not share this information with A.

•         Bshould then decide how to respond to A’s behaviour at A3 and write this down in the behaviour box at B3.

7.       Continue this process through as many steps as possible in the permitted time.

The next step involves A and B sharing what each wrote down in the cognition ‘bubbles’. When you have shared the content of your cognition ‘bubbles’:

1)      Note how accurate B’s understanding of A’s intention was at each stage of the interaction.

2)      Repeat this process noting how accurate A’s understanding of B’s intention was at each stage.

Were you surprised by how the other person had interpreted your behaviour?

•         How did the way you interpreted the other’s intent influence what you did next?

•         Could the outcome of this interaction have been more rewarding/ satisfying if either of you had behaved differently?

•         Identify the behaviours which may have been more effective.