interpersonal communication problem solving

Ace the Presentation

The 7 Key Steps of Effective Interpersonal Problem-Solving

Any interpersonal relationship involving two or more distinct people is susceptible to having misunderstandings, in which one does not agree, and the other has divergent opinions and views. These misunderstandings can lead to conflicts that, if properly solved, can generate significant progress in the relationship, strengthening it.

If you are wondering what are the 7 Key Steps of Effective Interpersonal Problem-Solving , then please find the list below:

• Don’t be afraid to admit the problem exists.
• Remain positive
• Find the ROOT of the problem.
• Choose the RIGHT MOMENT
• Make Good-Points
• Be communicative
• Know how to listen

Before we go to each step, let’s talk about how interpersonal problems can come up. Conflict is a natural exchange of energies, however often seen as unfavorable because most people can’t manage stress, can’t be honest with themselves and others, and go with the mindset of being right.

Highly Recommended Article:

9 Great Ways to Improve Interpersonal Skills

What are the Major causes of Interpersonal Conflicts?

That being so, and knowing that we cannot avoid conflicts, it is essential to understand them to resolve them in the best way. Then there will be clues as to how best to resolve disputes.

How to Resolve Interpersonal Conflicts?

Denial does nothing to improve the situation, quite the contrary because it allows the issue to increase over time. There is no point in delaying their afflictions, as they will continue where they are and as a snowball until they reach an insoluble plateau. Admitting you have a problem allows you to think about a solution.

Where should we start now that we are not afraid to admit there is a problem?

• Identify the problem (try to understand what bothers us, how does it make you feel?);
•  Prepare the essential points you want to expose to each other;
• What can you do to change the situation?
• Brainstorm ideas on how you could talk and solve this situation.
• Remain Positive

We must not regard misunderstanding as persecution or an attempt to strike at us. By being positive, we assumed that the other person had good intentions and that a supposed lack of communication between us created a problem.

Moreover, by seeking to act positively in solving the problem, it is clear that we are not seeking intrigue, only the most sensible solution.

Thoughts motivate our actions, so it is of paramount importance that we always have good views.

Positive thinking gives us a vision of hope that things can improve and that nothing is eternal, not problems and difficulties. In addition to the personal benefits that this positive-thinking brings, you end up influencing the people around you with such thoughts.

• Find the ROOT of the Problem

Some of the main concerns we have stem from internalized issues, and unresolved feelings. Thus, it becomes essential to avoid hiding your feelings from others and ourselves.

By not admitting that we care about a particular question, we can go into denial and accumulate the problem, so we stop looking for a suitable solution.

It is all right that we feel shaken, sad, and a little bewildered to some degree with situations that seem to evade its possibilities of resolution. What can’t happen is that we let those feelings get in the way of the day-to-day interactions with the people around us.

It is often not advisable to resolve a conflict immediately when it occurs, but rather to allow a short interval so that the strong emotions that appear at the time of its occurrence do not make you say things you will regret. 

Besides, this break also gives you time for preparation (thinking well about what you want and how you want to say things). It is also essential to choose a time when there is time to speak calmly.

HOW TO CHOOSE THE RIGHT MOMENT TO SOLVE A CONFLICT:

• Don’t try to talk about it right away; go home, relax and then reflect on it;
• It is not a good idea to try problem-solving with other people around us, and the person may feel attacked or exposed.

Yelling was never an excellent option to solve anything; take your pride out of the spotlight. We need to stay focused on what’s best for everyone and not our ego. Know precisely where we’re going with that discussion. Have clear, convincing arguments and look for the best way to use them.

HOW TO MAKE GOOD-POINTS DURING PROBLEM-SOLVING:

• We need to have listed everything that affected us and how;
• We conduct the conversation to bring understanding, for that we should critique constructively;
• To critique constructively, we should compliment his or their qualities and then explain how it affected us;
• After that, we should propose help by having a suggestion of how the change would look like.
• Be Communicative 

The lack of clear information about specific processes or each one’s function within the organization leads to misinterpreted information. In this sense, clear, concise, and timely communication reduces the number and severity of conflicts.

TIPS ON HOW TO BECOME MORE COMMUNICATIVE:

• It uses first-person phrases “I feel like…” “I think…”, “It made me understand “;
• Keep to the critical/essential things (stick to the key points)
• Explain what this conflict means to you;
• Don’t blame or worry about reacting to each other;

• Know how to Listen 

Knowing how to listen to means being attentive to what is being said, understanding how the person behaves when positioning their arguments, and understanding their reasons. If we are always trying to answer to justify our actions, there is no possible understanding.

To listen, we need to consider first dialogue or a conversation that involves two or more people.

TIPS TO KNOW HOW TO LISTEN:

• Don’t interrupt someone else. Let them make their point;
• Focus your attention on what the other person is saying at that moment, and don’t think about the possible answers you can give them.

If there is a problem that needs to be solved, there is a behavioral pattern to be overcome or an action to be taken in the face of an individual circumstance. Problem-solving involves taking a proactive attitude.

References and Further Reading

KRASNER, Linda. Interpersonal Problem-Solving. Research Gate.

FLYNN, Katie. Steps to Interpersonal Problem Solving. Prezi.

Similar Posts

3 Must-Have Interpersonal Skills for Managers

In the professional environment, productivity is measured by the results that each employee generates for their organization. Positive results mean that there was attention focused on activities. However, the adverse effects require that priorities be reviewed for the employee to be productive again. In this article, we are going to talk about Interpersonal Skills for Managers…

Understanding Others: A Critical People Skill to Master

In our lifetime, we will meet all kinds of people, and it is unpredictable to guess which type of personality or moral we will get as collaborators at work and as partners of life; Most times, if we don’t have the tools, it can be hard to deal with people we just met or build…

Examples of Bad Social Skills

Are you looking for help to identify and understand the common examples of bad social skills? If so, then this article is perfect for you! Here, we will discuss different types of bad social skills that can have an impact on your career and life in general. The main examples of bad social skills include…

7 Indicators of Good and Bad Social Skills

Every one of us knows that friend or colleague who easily makes friends or convinces people, or even helps others because they empathize with their situation. Sometimes it feels like they have some super magic power to easily deal with others. Guess what? We call that Social Skills. Social Skills are the aptness we can have by…

Interpersonal Skills: 20 Tips on How to Give and Receive Feedback

In communication terms, feedback is the response of an individual or a group to a message or an action.  In a world where good communication is the ability to deliver and receive clear messages, giving and receiving feedback are essential skills. Learning about these tips on how to give and receive feedback is critical. 10 TIPS…

Benefits of Taking Interpersonal Communication Classes

Even though interpersonal skills can be defined by birth, they are also polished during conscious social interactions where we know the power of each thing we do to deliver a message. It has to do with our willpower, the activities and groups we choose to embrace. In this article, we will let you know some…

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

14.3 Problem Solving and Decision Making in Groups

Learning objectives.

• Discuss the common components and characteristics of problems.
• Explain the five steps of the group problem-solving process.
• Describe the brainstorming and discussion that should take place before the group makes a decision.
• Compare and contrast the different decision-making techniques.
• Discuss the various influences on decision making.

Although the steps of problem solving and decision making that we will discuss next may seem obvious, we often don’t think to or choose not to use them. Instead, we start working on a problem and later realize we are lost and have to backtrack. I’m sure we’ve all reached a point in a project or task and had the “OK, now what?” moment. I’ve recently taken up some carpentry projects as a functional hobby, and I have developed a great respect for the importance of advanced planning. It’s frustrating to get to a crucial point in building or fixing something only to realize that you have to unscrew a support board that you already screwed in, have to drive back to the hardware store to get something that you didn’t think to get earlier, or have to completely start over. In this section, we will discuss the group problem-solving process, methods of decision making, and influences on these processes.

Group Problem Solving

The problem-solving process involves thoughts, discussions, actions, and decisions that occur from the first consideration of a problematic situation to the goal. The problems that groups face are varied, but some common problems include budgeting funds, raising funds, planning events, addressing customer or citizen complaints, creating or adapting products or services to fit needs, supporting members, and raising awareness about issues or causes.

Problems of all sorts have three common components (Adams & Galanes, 2009):

• An undesirable situation. When conditions are desirable, there isn’t a problem.
• A desired situation. Even though it may only be a vague idea, there is a drive to better the undesirable situation. The vague idea may develop into a more precise goal that can be achieved, although solutions are not yet generated.
• Obstacles between undesirable and desirable situation. These are things that stand in the way between the current situation and the group’s goal of addressing it. This component of a problem requires the most work, and it is the part where decision making occurs. Some examples of obstacles include limited funding, resources, personnel, time, or information. Obstacles can also take the form of people who are working against the group, including people resistant to change or people who disagree.

Discussion of these three elements of a problem helps the group tailor its problem-solving process, as each problem will vary. While these three general elements are present in each problem, the group should also address specific characteristics of the problem. Five common and important characteristics to consider are task difficulty, number of possible solutions, group member interest in problem, group member familiarity with problem, and the need for solution acceptance (Adams & Galanes, 2009).

• Task difficulty. Difficult tasks are also typically more complex. Groups should be prepared to spend time researching and discussing a difficult and complex task in order to develop a shared foundational knowledge. This typically requires individual work outside of the group and frequent group meetings to share information.
• Number of possible solutions. There are usually multiple ways to solve a problem or complete a task, but some problems have more potential solutions than others. Figuring out how to prepare a beach house for an approaching hurricane is fairly complex and difficult, but there are still a limited number of things to do—for example, taping and boarding up windows; turning off water, electricity, and gas; trimming trees; and securing loose outside objects. Other problems may be more creatively based. For example, designing a new restaurant may entail using some standard solutions but could also entail many different types of innovation with layout and design.
• Group member interest in problem. When group members are interested in the problem, they will be more engaged with the problem-solving process and invested in finding a quality solution. Groups with high interest in and knowledge about the problem may want more freedom to develop and implement solutions, while groups with low interest may prefer a leader who provides structure and direction.
• Group familiarity with problem. Some groups encounter a problem regularly, while other problems are more unique or unexpected. A family who has lived in hurricane alley for decades probably has a better idea of how to prepare its house for a hurricane than does a family that just recently moved from the Midwest. Many groups that rely on funding have to revisit a budget every year, and in recent years, groups have had to get more creative with budgets as funding has been cut in nearly every sector. When group members aren’t familiar with a problem, they will need to do background research on what similar groups have done and may also need to bring in outside experts.
• Need for solution acceptance. In this step, groups must consider how many people the decision will affect and how much “buy-in” from others the group needs in order for their solution to be successfully implemented. Some small groups have many stakeholders on whom the success of a solution depends. Other groups are answerable only to themselves. When a small group is planning on building a new park in a crowded neighborhood or implementing a new policy in a large business, it can be very difficult to develop solutions that will be accepted by all. In such cases, groups will want to poll those who will be affected by the solution and may want to do a pilot implementation to see how people react. Imposing an excellent solution that doesn’t have buy-in from stakeholders can still lead to failure.

Group problem solving can be a confusing puzzle unless it is approached systematically.

Muness Castle – Problem Solving – CC BY-SA 2.0.

Group Problem-Solving Process

There are several variations of similar problem-solving models based on US American scholar John Dewey’s reflective thinking process (Bormann & Bormann, 1988). As you read through the steps in the process, think about how you can apply what we learned regarding the general and specific elements of problems. Some of the following steps are straightforward, and they are things we would logically do when faced with a problem. However, taking a deliberate and systematic approach to problem solving has been shown to benefit group functioning and performance. A deliberate approach is especially beneficial for groups that do not have an established history of working together and will only be able to meet occasionally. Although a group should attend to each step of the process, group leaders or other group members who facilitate problem solving should be cautious not to dogmatically follow each element of the process or force a group along. Such a lack of flexibility could limit group member input and negatively affect the group’s cohesion and climate.

Step 1: Define the Problem

Define the problem by considering the three elements shared by every problem: the current undesirable situation, the goal or more desirable situation, and obstacles in the way (Adams & Galanes, 2009). At this stage, group members share what they know about the current situation, without proposing solutions or evaluating the information. Here are some good questions to ask during this stage: What is the current difficulty? How did we come to know that the difficulty exists? Who/what is involved? Why is it meaningful/urgent/important? What have the effects been so far? What, if any, elements of the difficulty require clarification? At the end of this stage, the group should be able to compose a single sentence that summarizes the problem called a problem statement . Avoid wording in the problem statement or question that hints at potential solutions. A small group formed to investigate ethical violations of city officials could use the following problem statement: “Our state does not currently have a mechanism for citizens to report suspected ethical violations by city officials.”

Step 2: Analyze the Problem

During this step a group should analyze the problem and the group’s relationship to the problem. Whereas the first step involved exploring the “what” related to the problem, this step focuses on the “why.” At this stage, group members can discuss the potential causes of the difficulty. Group members may also want to begin setting out an agenda or timeline for the group’s problem-solving process, looking forward to the other steps. To fully analyze the problem, the group can discuss the five common problem variables discussed before. Here are two examples of questions that the group formed to address ethics violations might ask: Why doesn’t our city have an ethics reporting mechanism? Do cities of similar size have such a mechanism? Once the problem has been analyzed, the group can pose a problem question that will guide the group as it generates possible solutions. “How can citizens report suspected ethical violations of city officials and how will such reports be processed and addressed?” As you can see, the problem question is more complex than the problem statement, since the group has moved on to more in-depth discussion of the problem during step 2.

Step 3: Generate Possible Solutions

During this step, group members generate possible solutions to the problem. Again, solutions should not be evaluated at this point, only proposed and clarified. The question should be what could we do to address this problem, not what should we do to address it. It is perfectly OK for a group member to question another person’s idea by asking something like “What do you mean?” or “Could you explain your reasoning more?” Discussions at this stage may reveal a need to return to previous steps to better define or more fully analyze a problem. Since many problems are multifaceted, it is necessary for group members to generate solutions for each part of the problem separately, making sure to have multiple solutions for each part. Stopping the solution-generating process prematurely can lead to groupthink. For the problem question previously posed, the group would need to generate solutions for all three parts of the problem included in the question. Possible solutions for the first part of the problem (How can citizens report ethical violations?) may include “online reporting system, e-mail, in-person, anonymously, on-the-record,” and so on. Possible solutions for the second part of the problem (How will reports be processed?) may include “daily by a newly appointed ethics officer, weekly by a nonpartisan nongovernment employee,” and so on. Possible solutions for the third part of the problem (How will reports be addressed?) may include “by a newly appointed ethics commission, by the accused’s supervisor, by the city manager,” and so on.

Step 4: Evaluate Solutions

During this step, solutions can be critically evaluated based on their credibility, completeness, and worth. Once the potential solutions have been narrowed based on more obvious differences in relevance and/or merit, the group should analyze each solution based on its potential effects—especially negative effects. Groups that are required to report the rationale for their decision or whose decisions may be subject to public scrutiny would be wise to make a set list of criteria for evaluating each solution. Additionally, solutions can be evaluated based on how well they fit with the group’s charge and the abilities of the group. To do this, group members may ask, “Does this solution live up to the original purpose or mission of the group?” and “Can the solution actually be implemented with our current resources and connections?” and “How will this solution be supported, funded, enforced, and assessed?” Secondary tensions and substantive conflict, two concepts discussed earlier, emerge during this step of problem solving, and group members will need to employ effective critical thinking and listening skills.

Decision making is part of the larger process of problem solving and it plays a prominent role in this step. While there are several fairly similar models for problem solving, there are many varied decision-making techniques that groups can use. For example, to narrow the list of proposed solutions, group members may decide by majority vote, by weighing the pros and cons, or by discussing them until a consensus is reached. There are also more complex decision-making models like the “six hats method,” which we will discuss later. Once the final decision is reached, the group leader or facilitator should confirm that the group is in agreement. It may be beneficial to let the group break for a while or even to delay the final decision until a later meeting to allow people time to evaluate it outside of the group context.

Step 5: Implement and Assess the Solution

Implementing the solution requires some advanced planning, and it should not be rushed unless the group is operating under strict time restraints or delay may lead to some kind of harm. Although some solutions can be implemented immediately, others may take days, months, or years. As was noted earlier, it may be beneficial for groups to poll those who will be affected by the solution as to their opinion of it or even to do a pilot test to observe the effectiveness of the solution and how people react to it. Before implementation, groups should also determine how and when they would assess the effectiveness of the solution by asking, “How will we know if the solution is working or not?” Since solution assessment will vary based on whether or not the group is disbanded, groups should also consider the following questions: If the group disbands after implementation, who will be responsible for assessing the solution? If the solution fails, will the same group reconvene or will a new group be formed?

Once a solution has been reached and the group has the “green light” to implement it, it should proceed deliberately and cautiously, making sure to consider possible consequences and address them as needed.

Jocko Benoit – Prodigal Light – CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.

Certain elements of the solution may need to be delegated out to various people inside and outside the group. Group members may also be assigned to implement a particular part of the solution based on their role in the decision making or because it connects to their area of expertise. Likewise, group members may be tasked with publicizing the solution or “selling” it to a particular group of stakeholders. Last, the group should consider its future. In some cases, the group will get to decide if it will stay together and continue working on other tasks or if it will disband. In other cases, outside forces determine the group’s fate.

“Getting Competent”

Problem Solving and Group Presentations

Giving a group presentation requires that individual group members and the group as a whole solve many problems and make many decisions. Although having more people involved in a presentation increases logistical difficulties and has the potential to create more conflict, a well-prepared and well-delivered group presentation can be more engaging and effective than a typical presentation. The main problems facing a group giving a presentation are (1) dividing responsibilities, (2) coordinating schedules and time management, and (3) working out the logistics of the presentation delivery.

In terms of dividing responsibilities, assigning individual work at the first meeting and then trying to fit it all together before the presentation (which is what many college students do when faced with a group project) is not the recommended method. Integrating content and visual aids created by several different people into a seamless final product takes time and effort, and the person “stuck” with this job at the end usually ends up developing some resentment toward his or her group members. While it’s OK for group members to do work independently outside of group meetings, spend time working together to help set up some standards for content and formatting expectations that will help make later integration of work easier. Taking the time to complete one part of the presentation together can help set those standards for later individual work. Discuss the roles that various group members will play openly so there isn’t role confusion. There could be one point person for keeping track of the group’s progress and schedule, one point person for communication, one point person for content integration, one point person for visual aids, and so on. Each person shouldn’t do all that work on his or her own but help focus the group’s attention on his or her specific area during group meetings (Stanton, 2009).

Scheduling group meetings is one of the most challenging problems groups face, given people’s busy lives. From the beginning, it should be clearly communicated that the group needs to spend considerable time in face-to-face meetings, and group members should know that they may have to make an occasional sacrifice to attend. Especially important is the commitment to scheduling time to rehearse the presentation. Consider creating a contract of group guidelines that includes expectations for meeting attendance to increase group members’ commitment.

Group presentations require members to navigate many logistics of their presentation. While it may be easier for a group to assign each member to create a five-minute segment and then transition from one person to the next, this is definitely not the most engaging method. Creating a master presentation and then assigning individual speakers creates a more fluid and dynamic presentation and allows everyone to become familiar with the content, which can help if a person doesn’t show up to present and during the question-and-answer section. Once the content of the presentation is complete, figure out introductions, transitions, visual aids, and the use of time and space (Stanton, 2012). In terms of introductions, figure out if one person will introduce all the speakers at the beginning, if speakers will introduce themselves at the beginning, or if introductions will occur as the presentation progresses. In terms of transitions, make sure each person has included in his or her speaking notes when presentation duties switch from one person to the next. Visual aids have the potential to cause hiccups in a group presentation if they aren’t fluidly integrated. Practicing with visual aids and having one person control them may help prevent this. Know how long your presentation is and know how you’re going to use the space. Presenters should know how long the whole presentation should be and how long each of their segments should be so that everyone can share the responsibility of keeping time. Also consider the size and layout of the presentation space. You don’t want presenters huddled in a corner until it’s their turn to speak or trapped behind furniture when their turn comes around.

• Of the three main problems facing group presenters, which do you think is the most challenging and why?
• Why do you think people tasked with a group presentation (especially students) prefer to divide the parts up and have members work on them independently before coming back together and integrating each part? What problems emerge from this method? In what ways might developing a master presentation and then assigning parts to different speakers be better than the more divided method? What are the drawbacks to the master presentation method?

Decision Making in Groups

We all engage in personal decision making daily, and we all know that some decisions are more difficult than others. When we make decisions in groups, we face some challenges that we do not face in our personal decision making, but we also stand to benefit from some advantages of group decision making (Napier & Gershenfeld, 2004). Group decision making can appear fair and democratic but really only be a gesture that covers up the fact that certain group members or the group leader have already decided. Group decision making also takes more time than individual decisions and can be burdensome if some group members do not do their assigned work, divert the group with self-centered or unproductive role behaviors, or miss meetings. Conversely, though, group decisions are often more informed, since all group members develop a shared understanding of a problem through discussion and debate. The shared understanding may also be more complex and deep than what an individual would develop, because the group members are exposed to a variety of viewpoints that can broaden their own perspectives. Group decisions also benefit from synergy, one of the key advantages of group communication that we discussed earlier. Most groups do not use a specific method of decision making, perhaps thinking that they’ll work things out as they go. This can lead to unequal participation, social loafing, premature decisions, prolonged discussion, and a host of other negative consequences. So in this section we will learn some practices that will prepare us for good decision making and some specific techniques we can use to help us reach a final decision.

Brainstorming before Decision Making

Before groups can make a decision, they need to generate possible solutions to their problem. The most commonly used method is brainstorming, although most people don’t follow the recommended steps of brainstorming. As you’ll recall, brainstorming refers to the quick generation of ideas free of evaluation. The originator of the term brainstorming said the following four rules must be followed for the technique to be effective (Osborn, 1959):

• Evaluation of ideas is forbidden.
• Wild and crazy ideas are encouraged.
• Quantity of ideas, not quality, is the goal.
• New combinations of ideas presented are encouraged.

To make brainstorming more of a decision-making method rather than an idea-generating method, group communication scholars have suggested additional steps that precede and follow brainstorming (Cragan & Wright, 1991).

• Do a warm-up brainstorming session. Some people are more apprehensive about publicly communicating their ideas than others are, and a warm-up session can help ease apprehension and prime group members for task-related idea generation. The warm-up can be initiated by anyone in the group and should only go on for a few minutes. To get things started, a person could ask, “If our group formed a band, what would we be called?” or “What other purposes could a mailbox serve?” In the previous examples, the first warm up gets the group’s more abstract creative juices flowing, while the second focuses more on practical and concrete ideas.
• Do the actual brainstorming session. This session shouldn’t last more than thirty minutes and should follow the four rules of brainstorming mentioned previously. To ensure that the fourth rule is realized, the facilitator could encourage people to piggyback off each other’s ideas.
• Eliminate duplicate ideas. After the brainstorming session is over, group members can eliminate (without evaluating) ideas that are the same or very similar.
• Clarify, organize, and evaluate ideas. Before evaluation, see if any ideas need clarification. Then try to theme or group ideas together in some orderly fashion. Since “wild and crazy” ideas are encouraged, some suggestions may need clarification. If it becomes clear that there isn’t really a foundation to an idea and that it is too vague or abstract and can’t be clarified, it may be eliminated. As a caution though, it may be wise to not throw out off-the-wall ideas that are hard to categorize and to instead put them in a miscellaneous or “wild and crazy” category.

Discussion before Decision Making

The nominal group technique guides decision making through a four-step process that includes idea generation and evaluation and seeks to elicit equal contributions from all group members (Delbecq & Ven de Ven, 1971). This method is useful because the procedure involves all group members systematically, which fixes the problem of uneven participation during discussions. Since everyone contributes to the discussion, this method can also help reduce instances of social loafing. To use the nominal group technique, do the following:

• Silently and individually list ideas.
• Create a master list of ideas.
• Clarify ideas as needed.
• Take a secret vote to rank group members’ acceptance of ideas.

During the first step, have group members work quietly, in the same space, to write down every idea they have to address the task or problem they face. This shouldn’t take more than twenty minutes. Whoever is facilitating the discussion should remind group members to use brainstorming techniques, which means they shouldn’t evaluate ideas as they are generated. Ask group members to remain silent once they’ve finished their list so they do not distract others.

During the second step, the facilitator goes around the group in a consistent order asking each person to share one idea at a time. As the idea is shared, the facilitator records it on a master list that everyone can see. Keep track of how many times each idea comes up, as that could be an idea that warrants more discussion. Continue this process until all the ideas have been shared. As a note to facilitators, some group members may begin to edit their list or self-censor when asked to provide one of their ideas. To limit a person’s apprehension with sharing his or her ideas and to ensure that each idea is shared, I have asked group members to exchange lists with someone else so they can share ideas from the list they receive without fear of being personally judged.

During step three, the facilitator should note that group members can now ask for clarification on ideas on the master list. Do not let this discussion stray into evaluation of ideas. To help avoid an unnecessarily long discussion, it may be useful to go from one person to the next to ask which ideas need clarifying and then go to the originator(s) of the idea in question for clarification.

During the fourth step, members use a voting ballot to rank the acceptability of the ideas on the master list. If the list is long, you may ask group members to rank only their top five or so choices. The facilitator then takes up the secret ballots and reviews them in a random order, noting the rankings of each idea. Ideally, the highest ranked idea can then be discussed and decided on. The nominal group technique does not carry a group all the way through to the point of decision; rather, it sets the group up for a roundtable discussion or use of some other method to evaluate the merits of the top ideas.

Specific Decision-Making Techniques

Some decision-making techniques involve determining a course of action based on the level of agreement among the group members. These methods include majority, expert, authority, and consensus rule. Table 14.1 “Pros and Cons of Agreement-Based Decision-Making Techniques” reviews the pros and cons of each of these methods.

Majority rule is a simple method of decision making based on voting. In most cases a majority is considered half plus one.

Becky McCray – Voting – CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.

Majority rule is a commonly used decision-making technique in which a majority (one-half plus one) must agree before a decision is made. A show-of-hands vote, a paper ballot, or an electronic voting system can determine the majority choice. Many decision-making bodies, including the US House of Representatives, Senate, and Supreme Court, use majority rule to make decisions, which shows that it is often associated with democratic decision making, since each person gets one vote and each vote counts equally. Of course, other individuals and mediated messages can influence a person’s vote, but since the voting power is spread out over all group members, it is not easy for one person or party to take control of the decision-making process. In some cases—for example, to override a presidential veto or to amend the constitution—a super majority of two-thirds may be required to make a decision.

Minority rule is a decision-making technique in which a designated authority or expert has final say over a decision and may or may not consider the input of other group members. When a designated expert makes a decision by minority rule, there may be buy-in from others in the group, especially if the members of the group didn’t have relevant knowledge or expertise. When a designated authority makes decisions, buy-in will vary based on group members’ level of respect for the authority. For example, decisions made by an elected authority may be more accepted by those who elected him or her than by those who didn’t. As with majority rule, this technique can be time saving. Unlike majority rule, one person or party can have control over the decision-making process. This type of decision making is more similar to that used by monarchs and dictators. An obvious negative consequence of this method is that the needs or wants of one person can override the needs and wants of the majority. A minority deciding for the majority has led to negative consequences throughout history. The white Afrikaner minority that ruled South Africa for decades instituted apartheid, which was a system of racial segregation that disenfranchised and oppressed the majority population. The quality of the decision and its fairness really depends on the designated expert or authority.

Consensus rule is a decision-making technique in which all members of the group must agree on the same decision. On rare occasions, a decision may be ideal for all group members, which can lead to unanimous agreement without further debate and discussion. Although this can be positive, be cautious that this isn’t a sign of groupthink. More typically, consensus is reached only after lengthy discussion. On the plus side, consensus often leads to high-quality decisions due to the time and effort it takes to get everyone in agreement. Group members are also more likely to be committed to the decision because of their investment in reaching it. On the negative side, the ultimate decision is often one that all group members can live with but not one that’s ideal for all members. Additionally, the process of arriving at consensus also includes conflict, as people debate ideas and negotiate the interpersonal tensions that may result.

Table 14.1 Pros and Cons of Agreement-Based Decision-Making Techniques

“Getting Critical”

Six Hats Method of Decision Making

Edward de Bono developed the Six Hats method of thinking in the late 1980s, and it has since become a regular feature in decision-making training in business and professional contexts (de Bono, 1985). The method’s popularity lies in its ability to help people get out of habitual ways of thinking and to allow group members to play different roles and see a problem or decision from multiple points of view. The basic idea is that each of the six hats represents a different way of thinking, and when we figuratively switch hats, we switch the way we think. The hats and their style of thinking are as follows:

• White hat. Objective—focuses on seeking information such as data and facts and then processes that information in a neutral way.
• Red hat. Emotional—uses intuition, gut reactions, and feelings to judge information and suggestions.
• Black hat. Negative—focuses on potential risks, points out possibilities for failure, and evaluates information cautiously and defensively.
• Yellow hat. Positive—is optimistic about suggestions and future outcomes, gives constructive and positive feedback, points out benefits and advantages.
• Green hat. Creative—tries to generate new ideas and solutions, thinks “outside the box.”
• Blue hat. Philosophical—uses metacommunication to organize and reflect on the thinking and communication taking place in the group, facilitates who wears what hat and when group members change hats.

Specific sequences or combinations of hats can be used to encourage strategic thinking. For example, the group leader may start off wearing the Blue Hat and suggest that the group start their decision-making process with some “White Hat thinking” in order to process through facts and other available information. During this stage, the group could also process through what other groups have done when faced with a similar problem. Then the leader could begin an evaluation sequence starting with two minutes of “Yellow Hat thinking” to identify potential positive outcomes, then “Black Hat thinking” to allow group members to express reservations about ideas and point out potential problems, then “Red Hat thinking” to get people’s gut reactions to the previous discussion, then “Green Hat thinking” to identify other possible solutions that are more tailored to the group’s situation or completely new approaches. At the end of a sequence, the Blue Hat would want to summarize what was said and begin a new sequence. To successfully use this method, the person wearing the Blue Hat should be familiar with different sequences and plan some of the thinking patterns ahead of time based on the problem and the group members. Each round of thinking should be limited to a certain time frame (two to five minutes) to keep the discussion moving.

• This decision-making method has been praised because it allows group members to “switch gears” in their thinking and allows for role playing, which lets people express ideas more freely. How can this help enhance critical thinking? Which combination of hats do you think would be best for a critical thinking sequence?
• What combinations of hats might be useful if the leader wanted to break the larger group up into pairs and why? For example, what kind of thinking would result from putting Yellow and Red together, Black and White together, or Red and White together, and so on?
• Based on your preferred ways of thinking and your personality, which hat would be the best fit for you? Which would be the most challenging? Why?

Influences on Decision Making

Many factors influence the decision-making process. For example, how might a group’s independence or access to resources affect the decisions they make? What potential advantages and disadvantages come with decisions made by groups that are more or less similar in terms of personality and cultural identities? In this section, we will explore how situational, personality, and cultural influences affect decision making in groups.

Situational Influences on Decision Making

A group’s situational context affects decision making. One key situational element is the degree of freedom that the group has to make its own decisions, secure its own resources, and initiate its own actions. Some groups have to go through multiple approval processes before they can do anything, while others are self-directed, self-governing, and self-sustaining. Another situational influence is uncertainty. In general, groups deal with more uncertainty in decision making than do individuals because of the increased number of variables that comes with adding more people to a situation. Individual group members can’t know what other group members are thinking, whether or not they are doing their work, and how committed they are to the group. So the size of a group is a powerful situational influence, as it adds to uncertainty and complicates communication.

Access to information also influences a group. First, the nature of the group’s task or problem affects its ability to get information. Group members can more easily make decisions about a problem when other groups have similarly experienced it. Even if the problem is complex and serious, the group can learn from other situations and apply what it learns. Second, the group must have access to flows of information. Access to archives, electronic databases, and individuals with relevant experience is necessary to obtain any relevant information about similar problems or to do research on a new or unique problem. In this regard, group members’ formal and information network connections also become important situational influences.

The urgency of a decision can have a major influence on the decision-making process. As a situation becomes more urgent, it requires more specific decision-making methods and types of communication.

Judith E. Bell – Urgent – CC BY-SA 2.0.

The origin and urgency of a problem are also situational factors that influence decision making. In terms of origin, problems usually occur in one of four ways:

• Something goes wrong. Group members must decide how to fix or stop something. Example—a firehouse crew finds out that half of the building is contaminated with mold and must be closed down.
• Expectations change or increase. Group members must innovate more efficient or effective ways of doing something. Example—a firehouse crew finds out that the district they are responsible for is being expanded.
• Something goes wrong and expectations change or increase. Group members must fix/stop and become more efficient/effective. Example—the firehouse crew has to close half the building and must start responding to more calls due to the expanding district.
• The problem existed from the beginning. Group members must go back to the origins of the situation and walk through and analyze the steps again to decide what can be done differently. Example—a firehouse crew has consistently had to work with minimal resources in terms of building space and firefighting tools.

In each of the cases, the need for a decision may be more or less urgent depending on how badly something is going wrong, how high the expectations have been raised, or the degree to which people are fed up with a broken system. Decisions must be made in situations ranging from crisis level to mundane.

Personality Influences on Decision Making

A long-studied typology of value orientations that affect decision making consists of the following types of decision maker: the economic, the aesthetic, the theoretical, the social, the political, and the religious (Spranger, 1928).

• The economic decision maker makes decisions based on what is practical and useful.
• The aesthetic decision maker makes decisions based on form and harmony, desiring a solution that is elegant and in sync with the surroundings.
• The theoretical decision maker wants to discover the truth through rationality.
• The social decision maker emphasizes the personal impact of a decision and sympathizes with those who may be affected by it.
• The political decision maker is interested in power and influence and views people and/or property as divided into groups that have different value.
• The religious decision maker seeks to identify with a larger purpose, works to unify others under that goal, and commits to a viewpoint, often denying one side and being dedicated to the other.

In the United States, economic, political, and theoretical decision making tend to be more prevalent decision-making orientations, which likely corresponds to the individualistic cultural orientation with its emphasis on competition and efficiency. But situational context, as we discussed before, can also influence our decision making.

Personality affects decision making. For example, “economic” decision makers decide based on what is practical and useful.

One Way Stock – Tough Decisions Ahead – CC BY-ND 2.0.

The personalities of group members, especially leaders and other active members, affect the climate of the group. Group member personalities can be categorized based on where they fall on a continuum anchored by the following descriptors: dominant/submissive, friendly/unfriendly, and instrumental/emotional (Cragan & Wright, 1999). The more group members there are in any extreme of these categories, the more likely that the group climate will also shift to resemble those characteristics.

• Dominant versus submissive. Group members that are more dominant act more independently and directly, initiate conversations, take up more space, make more direct eye contact, seek leadership positions, and take control over decision-making processes. More submissive members are reserved, contribute to the group only when asked to, avoid eye contact, and leave their personal needs and thoughts unvoiced or give into the suggestions of others.
• Friendly versus unfriendly. Group members on the friendly side of the continuum find a balance between talking and listening, don’t try to win at the expense of other group members, are flexible but not weak, and value democratic decision making. Unfriendly group members are disagreeable, indifferent, withdrawn, and selfish, which leads them to either not invest in decision making or direct it in their own interest rather than in the interest of the group.
• Instrumental versus emotional. Instrumental group members are emotionally neutral, objective, analytical, task-oriented, and committed followers, which leads them to work hard and contribute to the group’s decision making as long as it is orderly and follows agreed-on rules. Emotional group members are creative, playful, independent, unpredictable, and expressive, which leads them to make rash decisions, resist group norms or decision-making structures, and switch often from relational to task focus.

Cultural Context and Decision Making

Just like neighborhoods, schools, and countries, small groups vary in terms of their degree of similarity and difference. Demographic changes in the United States and increases in technology that can bring different people together make it more likely that we will be interacting in more and more heterogeneous groups (Allen, 2011). Some small groups are more homogenous, meaning the members are more similar, and some are more heterogeneous, meaning the members are more different. Diversity and difference within groups has advantages and disadvantages. In terms of advantages, research finds that, in general, groups that are culturally heterogeneous have better overall performance than more homogenous groups (Haslett & Ruebush, 1999). Additionally, when group members have time to get to know each other and competently communicate across their differences, the advantages of diversity include better decision making due to different perspectives (Thomas, 1999). Unfortunately, groups often operate under time constraints and other pressures that make the possibility for intercultural dialogue and understanding difficult. The main disadvantage of heterogeneous groups is the possibility for conflict, but given that all groups experience conflict, this isn’t solely due to the presence of diversity. We will now look more specifically at how some of the cultural value orientations we’ve learned about already in this book can play out in groups with international diversity and how domestic diversity in terms of demographics can also influence group decision making.

International Diversity in Group Interactions

Cultural value orientations such as individualism/collectivism, power distance, and high-/low-context communication styles all manifest on a continuum of communication behaviors and can influence group decision making. Group members from individualistic cultures are more likely to value task-oriented, efficient, and direct communication. This could manifest in behaviors such as dividing up tasks into individual projects before collaboration begins and then openly debating ideas during discussion and decision making. Additionally, people from cultures that value individualism are more likely to openly express dissent from a decision, essentially expressing their disagreement with the group. Group members from collectivistic cultures are more likely to value relationships over the task at hand. Because of this, they also tend to value conformity and face-saving (often indirect) communication. This could manifest in behaviors such as establishing norms that include periods of socializing to build relationships before task-oriented communication like negotiations begin or norms that limit public disagreement in favor of more indirect communication that doesn’t challenge the face of other group members or the group’s leader. In a group composed of people from a collectivistic culture, each member would likely play harmonizing roles, looking for signs of conflict and resolving them before they become public.

Power distance can also affect group interactions. Some cultures rank higher on power-distance scales, meaning they value hierarchy, make decisions based on status, and believe that people have a set place in society that is fairly unchangeable. Group members from high-power-distance cultures would likely appreciate a strong designated leader who exhibits a more directive leadership style and prefer groups in which members have clear and assigned roles. In a group that is homogenous in terms of having a high-power-distance orientation, members with higher status would be able to openly provide information, and those with lower status may not provide information unless a higher status member explicitly seeks it from them. Low-power-distance cultures do not place as much value and meaning on status and believe that all group members can participate in decision making. Group members from low-power-distance cultures would likely freely speak their mind during a group meeting and prefer a participative leadership style.

How much meaning is conveyed through the context surrounding verbal communication can also affect group communication. Some cultures have a high-context communication style in which much of the meaning in an interaction is conveyed through context such as nonverbal cues and silence. Group members from high-context cultures may avoid saying something directly, assuming that other group members will understand the intended meaning even if the message is indirect. So if someone disagrees with a proposed course of action, he or she may say, “Let’s discuss this tomorrow,” and mean, “I don’t think we should do this.” Such indirect communication is also a face-saving strategy that is common in collectivistic cultures. Other cultures have a low-context communication style that places more importance on the meaning conveyed through words than through context or nonverbal cues. Group members from low-context cultures often say what they mean and mean what they say. For example, if someone doesn’t like an idea, they might say, “I think we should consider more options. This one doesn’t seem like the best we can do.”

In any of these cases, an individual from one culture operating in a group with people of a different cultural orientation could adapt to the expectations of the host culture, especially if that person possesses a high degree of intercultural communication competence (ICC). Additionally, people with high ICC can also adapt to a group member with a different cultural orientation than the host culture. Even though these cultural orientations connect to values that affect our communication in fairly consistent ways, individuals may exhibit different communication behaviors depending on their own individual communication style and the situation.

Domestic Diversity and Group Communication

While it is becoming more likely that we will interact in small groups with international diversity, we are guaranteed to interact in groups that are diverse in terms of the cultural identities found within a single country or the subcultures found within a larger cultural group.

Gender stereotypes sometimes influence the roles that people play within a group. For example, the stereotype that women are more nurturing than men may lead group members (both male and female) to expect that women will play the role of supporters or harmonizers within the group. Since women have primarily performed secretarial work since the 1900s, it may also be expected that women will play the role of recorder. In both of these cases, stereotypical notions of gender place women in roles that are typically not as valued in group communication. The opposite is true for men. In terms of leadership, despite notable exceptions, research shows that men fill an overwhelmingly disproportionate amount of leadership positions. We are socialized to see certain behaviors by men as indicative of leadership abilities, even though they may not be. For example, men are often perceived to contribute more to a group because they tend to speak first when asked a question or to fill a silence and are perceived to talk more about task-related matters than relationally oriented matters. Both of these tendencies create a perception that men are more engaged with the task. Men are also socialized to be more competitive and self-congratulatory, meaning that their communication may be seen as dedicated and their behaviors seen as powerful, and that when their work isn’t noticed they will be more likely to make it known to the group rather than take silent credit. Even though we know that the relational elements of a group are crucial for success, even in high-performance teams, that work is not as valued in our society as the task-related work.

Despite the fact that some communication patterns and behaviors related to our typical (and stereotypical) gender socialization affect how we interact in and form perceptions of others in groups, the differences in group communication that used to be attributed to gender in early group communication research seem to be diminishing. This is likely due to the changing organizational cultures from which much group work emerges, which have now had more than sixty years to adjust to women in the workplace. It is also due to a more nuanced understanding of gender-based research, which doesn’t take a stereotypical view from the beginning as many of the early male researchers did. Now, instead of biological sex being assumed as a factor that creates inherent communication differences, group communication scholars see that men and women both exhibit a range of behaviors that are more or less feminine or masculine. It is these gendered behaviors, and not a person’s gender, that seem to have more of an influence on perceptions of group communication. Interestingly, group interactions are still masculinist in that male and female group members prefer a more masculine communication style for task leaders and that both males and females in this role are more likely to adapt to a more masculine communication style. Conversely, men who take on social-emotional leadership behaviors adopt a more feminine communication style. In short, it seems that although masculine communication traits are more often associated with high status positions in groups, both men and women adapt to this expectation and are evaluated similarly (Haslett & Ruebush, 1999).

Other demographic categories are also influential in group communication and decision making. In general, group members have an easier time communicating when they are more similar than different in terms of race and age. This ease of communication can make group work more efficient, but the homogeneity may sacrifice some creativity. As we learned earlier, groups that are diverse (e.g., they have members of different races and generations) benefit from the diversity of perspectives in terms of the quality of decision making and creativity of output.

In terms of age, for the first time since industrialization began, it is common to have three generations of people (and sometimes four) working side by side in an organizational setting. Although four generations often worked together in early factories, they were segregated based on their age group, and a hierarchy existed with older workers at the top and younger workers at the bottom. Today, however, generations interact regularly, and it is not uncommon for an older person to have a leader or supervisor who is younger than him or her (Allen, 2011). The current generations in the US workplace and consequently in work-based groups include the following:

• The Silent Generation. Born between 1925 and 1942, currently in their midsixties to mideighties, this is the smallest generation in the workforce right now, as many have retired or left for other reasons. This generation includes people who were born during the Great Depression or the early part of World War II, many of whom later fought in the Korean War (Clarke, 1970).
• The Baby Boomers. Born between 1946 and 1964, currently in their late forties to midsixties, this is the largest generation in the workforce right now. Baby boomers are the most populous generation born in US history, and they are working longer than previous generations, which means they will remain the predominant force in organizations for ten to twenty more years.
• Generation X. Born between 1965 and 1981, currently in their early thirties to midforties, this generation was the first to see technology like cell phones and the Internet make its way into classrooms and our daily lives. Compared to previous generations, “Gen-Xers” are more diverse in terms of race, religious beliefs, and sexual orientation and also have a greater appreciation for and understanding of diversity.
• Generation Y. Born between 1982 and 2000, “Millennials” as they are also called are currently in their late teens up to about thirty years old. This generation is not as likely to remember a time without technology such as computers and cell phones. They are just starting to enter into the workforce and have been greatly affected by the economic crisis of the late 2000s, experiencing significantly high unemployment rates.

The benefits and challenges that come with diversity of group members are important to consider. Since we will all work in diverse groups, we should be prepared to address potential challenges in order to reap the benefits. Diverse groups may be wise to coordinate social interactions outside of group time in order to find common ground that can help facilitate interaction and increase group cohesion. We should be sensitive but not let sensitivity create fear of “doing something wrong” that then prevents us from having meaningful interactions. Reviewing Chapter 8 “Culture and Communication” will give you useful knowledge to help you navigate both international and domestic diversity and increase your communication competence in small groups and elsewhere.

Key Takeaways

• Every problem has common components: an undesirable situation, a desired situation, and obstacles between the undesirable and desirable situations. Every problem also has a set of characteristics that vary among problems, including task difficulty, number of possible solutions, group member interest in the problem, group familiarity with the problem, and the need for solution acceptance.

The group problem-solving process has five steps:

• Define the problem by creating a problem statement that summarizes it.
• Analyze the problem and create a problem question that can guide solution generation.
• Generate possible solutions. Possible solutions should be offered and listed without stopping to evaluate each one.
• Evaluate the solutions based on their credibility, completeness, and worth. Groups should also assess the potential effects of the narrowed list of solutions.
• Implement and assess the solution. Aside from enacting the solution, groups should determine how they will know the solution is working or not.
• Before a group makes a decision, it should brainstorm possible solutions. Group communication scholars suggest that groups (1) do a warm-up brainstorming session; (2) do an actual brainstorming session in which ideas are not evaluated, wild ideas are encouraged, quantity not quality of ideas is the goal, and new combinations of ideas are encouraged; (3) eliminate duplicate ideas; and (4) clarify, organize, and evaluate ideas. In order to guide the idea-generation process and invite equal participation from group members, the group may also elect to use the nominal group technique.
• Common decision-making techniques include majority rule, minority rule, and consensus rule. With majority rule, only a majority, usually one-half plus one, must agree before a decision is made. With minority rule, a designated authority or expert has final say over a decision, and the input of group members may or may not be invited or considered. With consensus rule, all members of the group must agree on the same decision.

Several factors influence the decision-making process:

• Situational factors include the degree of freedom a group has to make its own decisions, the level of uncertainty facing the group and its task, the size of the group, the group’s access to information, and the origin and urgency of the problem.
• Personality influences on decision making include a person’s value orientation (economic, aesthetic, theoretical, political, or religious), and personality traits (dominant/submissive, friendly/unfriendly, and instrumental/emotional).
• Cultural influences on decision making include the heterogeneity or homogeneity of the group makeup; cultural values and characteristics such as individualism/collectivism, power distance, and high-/low-context communication styles; and gender and age differences.
• Scenario 1. Task difficulty is high, number of possible solutions is high, group interest in problem is high, group familiarity with problem is low, and need for solution acceptance is high.
• Scenario 2. Task difficulty is low, number of possible solutions is low, group interest in problem is low, group familiarity with problem is high, and need for solution acceptance is low.
• Scenario 1: Academic. A professor asks his or her class to decide whether the final exam should be an in-class or take-home exam.
• Scenario 2: Professional. A group of coworkers must decide which person from their department to nominate for a company-wide award.
• Scenario 3: Personal. A family needs to decide how to divide the belongings and estate of a deceased family member who did not leave a will.
• Scenario 4: Civic. A local branch of a political party needs to decide what five key issues it wants to include in the national party’s platform.
• Group communication researchers have found that heterogeneous groups (composed of diverse members) have advantages over homogenous (more similar) groups. Discuss a group situation you have been in where diversity enhanced your and/or the group’s experience.

Adams, K., and Gloria G. Galanes, Communicating in Groups: Applications and Skills , 7th ed. (Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill, 2009), 220–21.

Allen, B. J., Difference Matters: Communicating Social Identity , 2nd ed. (Long Grove, IL: Waveland, 2011), 5.

Bormann, E. G., and Nancy C. Bormann, Effective Small Group Communication , 4th ed. (Santa Rosa, CA: Burgess CA, 1988), 112–13.

Clarke, G., “The Silent Generation Revisited,” Time, June 29, 1970, 46.

Cragan, J. F., and David W. Wright, Communication in Small Group Discussions: An Integrated Approach , 3rd ed. (St. Paul, MN: West Publishing, 1991), 77–78.

de Bono, E., Six Thinking Hats (Boston, MA: Little, Brown, 1985).

Delbecq, A. L., and Andrew H. Ven de Ven, “A Group Process Model for Problem Identification and Program Planning,” The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 7, no. 4 (1971): 466–92.

Haslett, B. B., and Jenn Ruebush, “What Differences Do Individual Differences in Groups Make?: The Effects of Individuals, Culture, and Group Composition,” in The Handbook of Group Communication Theory and Research , ed. Lawrence R. Frey (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1999), 133.

Napier, R. W., and Matti K. Gershenfeld, Groups: Theory and Experience , 7th ed. (Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin, 2004), 292.

Osborn, A. F., Applied Imagination (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1959).

Spranger, E., Types of Men (New York: Steckert, 1928).

Stanton, C., “How to Deliver Group Presentations: The Unified Team Approach,” Six Minutes Speaking and Presentation Skills , November 3, 2009, accessed August 28, 2012, http://sixminutes.dlugan.com/group-presentations-unified-team-approach .

Thomas, D. C., “Cultural Diversity and Work Group Effectiveness: An Experimental Study,” Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 30, no. 2 (1999): 242–63.

Communication in the Real World Copyright © 2016 by University of Minnesota is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Search Utah State University:

Effective communication skills: resolving conflicts .

Even the happiest of relationships experience conflicts and problems (Markman, Stanley, Blumberg, Jenkins & Whiteley, 2004). If handled well, issues provide opportunities for personal and relationship growth. There are many skills that can help individuals seeking to resolve conflicts in a healthy way. One of the greatest skills that aids in conflict resolution is effective communication.

Common Conflicts

Issues, or conflicts, in relationships consist of any situation, event or experience that is of concern or importance to those involved. A variety of factors lead to conflict, some of which include topics such as money, children, and in-laws, personal issues such as selfesteem, values, expectations, or goals, or relational issues such as the amount of together time versus alone time, support versus control, affection, and communication (Miller & Miller, 1997). While there are seemingly endless reasons for conflicts, they generally surround the underlying needs of all humans including physical, intellectual, emotional, social, and spiritual (Miller & Miller, 1997; Townsend, 2010). Most importantly, how we approach and communicate about these issues often determines the outcome.

Conflicts in Communication

Most people know that in order to resolve conflicts, we need to communicate about the issue; but negative patterns of communication can often lead to greater frustration and escalation of conflict. Consider the following communication challenges:

Body Language/Tone of Voice

Communication is more than the words we choose to use. In fact, our body language and tone of voice often speak louder than our words. For example, shouting “I’m not angry” is not a very convincing message! When we give an incongruent message where our tone of voice and body language does not match our message, confusion and frustration often follow (Gottman & DeClaire, 2001). In order to overcome this communication challenge, we need to be aware of what messages our body language and tone of voice may be sending others. Speak calmly, give eye contact, smile when appropriate, and maintain an open and relaxed posture (Paterson, 2000).

Differences in Style

Each of us has a unique way of communicating, often based on our family experiences, culture, gender and many other factors (Markman et al., 2004; Miller & Miller, 1997). For example, we may tend to be more loud, outgoing, or emotional when compared to our partner. While there is no right or wrong style, our past experiences often lead to expectations that are not usually verbally communicated with others, which can cause tension and misunderstandings in relationships. For example, if we came from a large family that tended to shout in order to be heard, we may think that speaking loudly is normal. But if our partner came from a calmer family environment, he/she may be uncomfortable or even frightened by a raised voice (Markman et al., 2004).

Discussing our backgrounds and perceptions can help to clarify expectations to ourselves and others and can also help our partner to understand our point of view. Knowing this information can often help in the problem solving process.

Communication Roadblocks

Communication roadblocks occur when two people talk in such a way that neither one feels understood. Research has found four particularly negative styles of communication, often referred to as the “four horsemen of the apocalypse,” (Gottman, 1999, p.27) because if left unchecked, these styles of interaction can eventually become lethal to relationships. These styles are criticism, contempt, defensiveness, and stonewalling (Gottman, 1999).

• Criticism attacks the character or personality of another. While it is normal to have complaints about another’s specific actions, it is very different to put them down as a person because of those actions. For example, a complaint might be, “I felt worried when you did not call to tell me that you were going to be home late.” A criticism in the same situation would be expressed as “You are so inconsiderate, you never call me when you are going to be late.” Critiques focus on certain behaviors; criticism negatively focuses on the person’s intentions and character.
• Contempt portrays disgust and a lack of respect for the other person through body language, such as eye rolling or sneering, or by name calling, sarcasm and cutting remarks.
• Defensiveness is a seemingly understandable reaction that individuals take to criticism and contempt; however, it often escalates the conflict. When we are defensive, we tend to stop listening to the other’s viewpoint and communication is shut down.
• Stonewalling is withdrawing from communication and refusing to engage in discussion. In other words, it is the adult version of the “silent treatment” that young children utilize when they are upset. Conflict resolution is impossible without communication!

Some additional examples of communication roadblocks include (Miller & Miller, 1997):

• Ordering (“Stop complaining!”)
• Warning (“If you do that, you’ll be sorry.”)
• Preaching (“You shouldn’t act like that.”)
• Advising (“Just wait a couple of years before deciding.”)
• Lecturing (“If you do this now, you won’t grow up to be a responsible adult.”)
• Agreeing, just to keep the peace (“I think you’re right.”)
• Ridiculing (“OK, little baby.”)
• Interpreting (“You don’t really believe that.”)
• Sympathizing (“Don’t worry, it’ll all work out.”)
• Questioning (“Who put that idea into your head?”)
• Diverting (“Let’s talk about something more pleasant.”)

Communication roadblocks are very common; however, they do not promote healthy conflict resolution and often lead to escalation of the conflict. Recognizing these roadblocks and making efforts to effectively communicate can help individuals overcome roadblocks.

Tips to Resolve Conflict

Soften the startup.

One of the skills to overcome communication roadblocks includes a soft startup to the conversation by starting with something positive, expressing appreciation, focusing on problems one at a time and taking responsibility for thoughts and feelings (Gottman, 1999; Gottman & Declaire, 2001; Patterson, 2000). In addition, when expressing the problem, starting the message with “I” instead of “You” can decrease defensiveness and promote positive interactions with others (Darrington & Brower, 2012). For example, “I want to stay more involved in making decisions about money” rather than “You never include me in financial decisions.”

Make and Receive Repair Attempts.

Another important skill in overcoming communication roadblocks is learning to make and receive repair attempts (Gottman, 1999). Repair attempts are efforts to keep an increasingly negative interaction from going any further by taking a break or making efforts to calm the situation. This is important because when conflicts arise, we often experience intense emotional and physical stress that can impact our ability to think and reason, which can lead to communication roadblocks (Gottman & DeClaire, 2001). Taking time away from the conflict (at least 20 minutes) to calm down can help us be more prepared to discuss the issue (Gottman, 1999; Gottman & DeClaire, 2001; Markman et al, 2004).

Effective Speaking and Listening Skills

Overcoming communication roadblocks requires effective speaking and listening skills. Markman, Stanley and Blumberg (2010) share what they call the “speaker-listener” technique to help individuals more effectively communicate. Each partner takes turns being the speaker and the listener.    

The rules for the speaker include (Markman et al., 2004; Markman, Stanley & Blumberg, 2010):

• The speaker should share his/her own thoughts, feelings and concerns—not what he/she thinks the listener’s concerns are.
• Use “I” statements when speaking to accurately express thoughts and feelings.
• Keep statements short, to ensure the listener does not get overwhelmed with information.
• Stop after each short statement so that the listener can paraphrase, or repeat back in his/her own words, what was said to ensure he/she understands. If the paraphrase is not quite right, gently rephrase the statement again to help the listener understand.

The rules for the listener include:

• Paraphrase what the speaker is saying. If unclear, ask for clarification. Continue until the speaker indicates the message was received correctly.
• Don’t argue or give opinion about what the speaker says—wait to do this until you are the speaker, and then do so in a respectful manner.
• While the speaker is talking, the listener should not talk or interrupt except to paraphrase after the speaker.

The speaker and listener should take turns in each role so that each has a chance to express his/her thoughts and feelings. Either can call for a time out at any time. The goal of this activity is not to solve a particular problem, but rather to have a safe and meaningful discussion and to understand each other’s point of view. While we may not always agree with the other’s point of view, understanding and validating other’s thoughts and feelings can improve relationships and help us build on common ground, which may lead to more effective negotiation and problem resolution (Gottman, 1999).

Dealing with conflict can take varying amounts of mental, emotional, and physical energy (Miller & Miller, 1997). It can be work! However, learning and implementing a few simple communication skills can increase positive interactions with others. The opportunities for personal and relationship growth are well worth the effort.

For more information or for classes and workshops:

• Go to http://strongermarriage.org for tips, articles, and to find relationship education classes near you.
• Check out your local Extension office for relationship education classes and events. 
• Darrington, J., & Brower, N. (2012). Effective communication skills: “I” messages and beyond. Utah State University Extension. https://extension.usu.edu/htm/publications/publi cation=14541
• Gottman, J. M., & DeClaire, J. (2001). The relationship cure: A 5 step guide to strengthening your marriage, family, and friendships. New York, NY: Three Rivers Press.
• Gottman, J. M., & Silver, N. (1999). The seven principles for making marriage work. New York, NY: Three Rivers Press.
• Markman, H. J., Stanley, S. M., & Blumberg, S. L. (2010). Fighting for your marriage. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
• Markman, H. J, Stanley, S. M., Blumberg, S. L., Jenkins, N. H., & Whiteley, C. (2004). 12 hours to a great marriage: A step-by-step guide for making love last. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
• Miller, S., & Miller, P. A. (1997). Core communication: Skills and processes. Evergreen, Co: Interpersonal Communication Programs, Inc.
• Paterson, R. J. (2000). The assertiveness workbook: How to express your ideas and stand up for yourself at work and in relationships. Oakland, CA: New Harbinger, Inc.
• Townsend, M. (2010). Starved stuff: Feeding the 7 basic needs of healthy relationships. Townsend Relationship Center.

Naomi Brower,  MFHD, CFLE, Extension Assistant Professor; Jana Darrington,  MS, Extension Assistant Professor

Naomi Brower

Extension Professor | Couple and Family Relationships | Weber County Director

Home and Community Department

Related Research

Building a Better Marriage

If you have been struggling with your marital relationship, or if you would like to improve the quality of your relationship, you are not alone. Just as Jenny and Michael want to strengthen their marria

Effective Communication Skills: Resolving Conflicts

Even the happiest of relationships experience conflicts and problems (Markman, Stanley, Blumberg, Jenkins & Whiteley, 2004). If handled well, issues provide opportunities for personal and relationship growth.

Effective Communication Skills: “I” Messages and Beyond

Communication is something we do on a regular basis. As young children we initially learn ways to communicate as we observe our parent, sibling, and family interactions. Throughout our lives our communication patterns evolve and are reinforced by our expe

Effects of Pornography on Relationships

Pornography is not a new issue in relationships; however, the expansion of the Internet appears to have increased pornography viewing and exacerbated pre-existing tendencies (Cooper, Boies, Maheu & Greenfield, 1999; Young, 2008). One key factor in this in

From Time to Quality Time: Making Every Moment Count

Couples and families often look for ways to find more time together and to make better use of that time. Most people struggle to find enough time in their day for everything. In fact, according to Dr. William Doherty (2001), those that care about each oth

Have Fun! The Importance of Play in Couple Relationships

Boring, drab, lifeless, stale, dull, tedious. These are probably not the words you hope to use to describe your relationships. How about well planned, frugal, precise, productive, serious, busy? Though these can be characteristics of a strong, healthy rel

Healthy Conflict Management

Conflicts are a natural part of human interaction. Whenever two or more people are in the same environment for a long enough period of time, it is inevitable that conflict will occur. However, the conflict itself is not the problem, but rather how they ch

Honey, I’m Home: Strengthening Your Marriage Ten Minutes at a Time

Strengthen your marriage relationship by making the first ten minutes of your interactions together a positive experience. Learn how to have stress-reducing conversation, emotionally support each other, and sooth self and partner in positive communication

Keys for Strong Commitment in Marriage

Having commitment means being dedicated to a cause. Commitment comes in all different shapes and sizes, but the most important type of commitment, for many, is a commitment to your marriage. Often couples start their marriage with commitment, but they don

Making Media Work for Your Marriage

Increased options for instant connection can have positive and negative impacts on relationships. While online resources can help us stay connected to those we love and increase relationship satisfaction Pettigrew, 2009; Sidelinger, Avash, Godorhazy, & T

Making the Most of Marriage Therapy

All relationships experience change over time (Larson, 2003). Even the strongest relationships can often benefit from a skilled a marriage counselor to help to smooth over the rough patches in their relationship. While the needs of relationships vary, som

Marriage Principles from a National Extension Model

Through this fact sheet, you will learn about these seven principles—Choose, Care for Self, Know, Care, Share, Manage, and Connect—and how to apply them in your life.

Supporting Others Coping with Infertility

It is likely that you know an individual or couple who is impacted by infertility. The natural human response is to want to comfort them, but it can be difficult to know what to say or do, especially if you have not experienced infertility yourself.

Technology Tips and Traps in Your Relationship

This fact sheet will help you be aware of some of the positive and negative effects of technology and how to protect your marriage from being swamped by it.

Tips to Strengthen Relationships Today

Research conducted by Dr. Sonja Lyubomirsky shows that happier people tend to have larger circles of friends, experience strong social support, and are more likely to be a support for others. But this research also shows that the connection between happin

• INTERPERSONAL SKILLS

Search SkillsYouNeed:

Interpersonal Skills:

• A - Z List of Interpersonal Skills

Interpersonal Skills Self-Assessment

The SkillsYouNeed Guide to Interpersonal Skills

• Communication Skills
• Listening Skills
• Non-Verbal Communication
• Verbal Communication
• Emotional Intelligence
• Self-Awareness
• Self-Regulation | Self-Management
• Self-Motivation
• Customer Service Skills
• Conflict Resolution and Mediation Skills
• Communication in Difficult Situations
• Dealing with Criticism
• Mediation Skills
• Team-Working, Groups and Meetings
• Effective Team-Working
• Difficult Group Behaviour
• Planning and Structuring Effecting Meetings
• Decision-Making and Problem-Solving
• Effective Decision Making
• Problem Solving
• Negotiation and Persuasion Skills
• What is Negotiation?
• Peer Negotiation
• Persuasion and Influencing Skills
• Personal and Romantic Relationship Skills

Subscribe to our FREE newsletter and start improving your life in just 5 minutes a day.

You'll get our 5 free 'One Minute Life Skills' and our weekly newsletter.

We'll never share your email address and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Interpersonal Skills

Interpersonal skills are the skills we use every day when we communicate and interact with other people, both individually and in groups. They include a wide range of skills, but particularly communication skills such as listening and effective speaking. They also include the ability to control and manage your emotions.

It is no exaggeration to say that interpersonal skills are the foundation for success in life. People with strong interpersonal skills tend to be able to work well with other people, including in teams or groups, formally and informally. They communicate effectively with others, whether family, friends, colleagues, customers or clients. They also have better relationships at home and at work.

You can improve your interpersonal skills by developing your awareness of how you interact with others and practising your skills.

This page provides an overview of interpersonal skills and how they are developed and used. It explains where these skills are important, including particular jobs that may require very good interpersonal skills. Finally, it discusses how you can start to develop your interpersonal skills further.

What are Interpersonal Skills?

Interpersonal skills are sometimes referred to as social skills, people skills, soft skills, or life skills.

However, these terms can be used both more narrowly and more broadly than ‘ interpersonal skills ’. On this website, we define interpersonal skills as:

“The skills you need and use to communicate and interact with other people.”

This definition means that interpersonal skills therefore include:

• Communication skills , which in turn covers:
• Verbal Communication – what we say and how we say it;
• Non-Verbal Communication – what we communicate without words, for example through body language, or tone of voice; and
• Listening Skills – how we interpret both the verbal and non-verbal messages sent by others.
• Emotional intelligence – being able to understand and manage your own and others’ emotions.
• Team-working – being able to work with others in groups and teams, both formal and informal.
• Negotiation, persuasion and influencing skills – working with others to find a mutually agreeable (Win/Win) outcome. This may be considered a subset of communication, but it is often treated separately.
• Conflict resolution and mediation – working with others to resolve interpersonal conflict and disagreements in a positive way, which again may be considered a subset of communication.
• Problem solving and decision-making – working with others to identify, define and solve problems, which includes making decisions about the best course of action.

The Importance of Interpersonal Skills

Interpersonal skills matter because none of us lives in a bubble.

In the course of our lives, we have to communicate with and interact with other people on a daily if not hourly basis, and sometimes more often. Good interpersonal skills ‘oil the wheels’ of these interactions, making them smoother and pleasanter for all those involved. They allow us to build better and longer-lasting relationships, both at home and at work.

Interpersonal skills at home

Good interpersonal skills help you to communicate more effectively with family and friends.

This is likely to be particularly important with your partner. For example, being able to give and receive feedback effectively with your partner can help to resolve small problems between you before they become big issues.

There is more about this, and other aspects of using interpersonal skills at home, in our pages on Personal and Romantic Relationship Skills and Parenting Skills .

Interpersonal skills at work

You may not like to think about it in these terms, but you almost certainly spend more time with your colleagues than your partner.

At work, you are required to communicate with and interact with a wide range of people, from suppliers and customers through to your immediate colleagues, colleagues further afield, your team and your manager. Your ability to do so effectively can make the difference between a successful working life, and one spent wondering what went wrong.

There are, of course, some jobs in which interpersonal skills are particularly important.

Customer-facing roles, such as sales and customer relations management, are likely to specify good interpersonal skills as a prerequisite. However, there are a number of other less obvious jobs and careers where interpersonal skills are also vitally important. These include:

Healthcare provision, including doctors, nurses and other healthcare professionals . Being able to listen to, and talk to, patients and their families is an essential skill, as is being able to give bad news in a sensitive way. We almost take these skills for granted in healthcare professionals—but we also know how devastating the situation can be when these professionals have poor skills and fail to communicate effectively.

Financial advice and brokerage . Financial advisers and brokers need to be able to listen carefully to their customers, and understand both what they are saying, and what they are not articulating. This enables them to provide recommendations that match their clients’ needs. Poor interpersonal skills mean that they will find it harder to build good customer relationships, and to understand customer needs.

Computer programming and development . This area is often thought of as the ultimate territory for ‘geeks’, with the assumption that interpersonal skills are not essential. However, technical developers increasingly need good interpersonal skills to understand their customers, and to be able to ‘translate’ between the technical and the practical.

Interpersonal Skills for Job Seekers

Good interpersonal skills are essential at work, but many people find them hard to demonstrate during a job application process. Some ideas to help include:

‘Naming and claiming’ in your CV or resume. Give a clear statement of a particular skill or skills that you possess, and then give examples to show how you have demonstrated them in practice. For example:

“I have excellent written communication skills, and my colleagues often ask me to check their written work for them before onward transmission.”

• Carefully name-checking any specific skills that are mentioned in the job description or person specification. Make life easy for the recruiter. In your personal statement or covering letter, use the same terms as the job description or person specification, and again, give examples.

For more ideas about how to improve your chances of getting a job, see our pages on Writing a CV or Resume , Writing a Covering Letter and Applying for a Job .

Developing Your Interpersonal Skills

Good interpersonal skills are the foundation for good working and social relationships, and also for developing many other areas of skill.

It is therefore worth spending time developing good interpersonal skills.

You Already Have Interpersonal Skills

We've all been developing our interpersonal skills since childhood, usually subconsciously.

Interpersonal skills often become so natural that we take them for granted, never thinking about how we communicate with other people. If you have developed good habits, this is fine. However, it is of course also possible to develop bad habits, and then fail to understand why your communications or relationships are suffering.

Improving and developing your interpersonal skills is best done in steps, starting with the most basic, but vital:

1. Identify areas for improvement

The first step towards improving is to develop your knowledge of yourself and your weaknesses.

You may already have a good idea of areas that you need to develop. However, it is worth seeking feedback from other people, because it is easy to develop ‘blind spots’ about yourself. You might also find it useful to do our Interpersonal Skills Self-Assessment.

Discover your interpersonal skills strengths and weaknesses.

Our free self-assessment covers listening skills, verbal communication, emotional intelligence and working in groups.

The self-assessment may give you an idea of which areas to develop first. It may, however, also be worth starting with the basics, and moving on from there.

2. Focus on your basic communication skills

Communication is far more than the words that come out of your mouth.

Some would even go so far as to suggest that there is a reason why you have two ears and one mouth, and that you should therefore listen twice as much as you talk!

Listening is very definitely not the same as hearing. Perhaps one of the most important things you can do for anyone else is to take the time to listen carefully to what they are saying, considering both their verbal and non-verbal communication. Using techniques like questioning and reflection demonstrates that you are both listening and interested.

Visit our Listening Skills pages to learn more.

When you are talking, be aware of the words you use. Could you be misunderstood or confuse the issue? Practise clarity and learn to seek feedback or clarification to ensure your message has been understood. By using questions effectively, you can both check others’ understanding, and also learn more from them.

Our page on Verbal Communication introduces this subject. You may also find our pages on Questioning and Clarification useful.

You may think that selecting your words is the most important part of getting a message across, but non-verbal communication actually plays a much bigger part than many of us are aware. Some experts suggest that around three-quarters of the ‘message’ is communicated by non-verbal signals such as body language, tone of voice, and the speed at which you speak.

These non-verbal signals reinforce or contradict the message of our words, and are much harder to fake than words. They are therefore a much more reliable signal. Learning to read body language is a vital part of communication.

For more about this, see our page on Non-Verbal Communication . If you are really interested, you may want to explore more, either about Body Language , or the importance of Face and Voice in non-verbal communication.

3. Improve your more advanced communication skills

Once you are confident in your basic listening and verbal and non-verbal communication, you can move on to more advanced areas around communication, such as becoming more effective in how you speak, and understanding why you may be having communication problems.

Our page on Effective Speaking includes tips on how to use your voice to full effect.

Communication is rarely perfect and can fail for a number of reasons. Understanding more about the possible barriers to good communication means that you can be aware of—and reduce the likelihood of—ineffective interpersonal communication and misunderstandings. Problems with communication can arise for a number of reasons, such as:

• Physical barriers , for example, being unable to see or hear the speaker properly, or language difficulties;
• Emotional barriers , such as not wanting to hear what is being said, or engage with that topic; and
• Expectations and prejudices that affect what people see and hear.

See our page Barriers to Communication for more information.

There are also circumstances in which communication is more difficult: for example, when you have to have an unpleasant conversation with someone, perhaps about their standard of work. These conversations may be either planned or unplanned.

There tend to be two issues that make conversations more difficult: emotion, and change.

• Various emotions can get in the way of communicating , including anger and aggression, or stress. Few of us are able to communicate effectively when we are struggling to manage our emotions, and sometimes the best thing that can be done is to postpone the conversation until everyone is calmer.
• Difficult conversations are often about the need for change . Many of us find change hard to manage, especially if it is associated with an implied criticism of existing ways of working.

Our page Communicating in Difficult Situations offers further ideas to help you to get your message across when stress levels or other emotions are running high.

4. Look inwards

Interpersonal skills may be about how you relate to others, but they start with you . Many will be improved dramatically if you work on your personal skills.

For example, people are much more likely to be drawn to you if you can maintain a positive attitude. A positive attitude also translates into improved self-confidence.

You are also less likely to be able to communicate effectively if you are very stressed about something. It is therefore important to learn to recognise, manage and reduce stress in yourself and others (and see our section on Stress and Stress Management for more). Being able to remain assertive, without becoming either passive or aggressive, is also key to effective communication. There is more about this in our pages on Assertiveness .

Perhaps the most important overarching personal skill is developing emotional intelligence.

Emotional intelligence is the ability to understand your own and others’ emotions, and their effect on behaviour and attitudes. It is therefore perhaps best considered as both personal and interpersonal in its nature, but there is no doubt that improving your emotional intelligence will help in all areas of interpersonal skills. Daniel Goleman, the author of a number of books on emotional intelligence, identified five key areas, three of which are personal, and two interpersonal.

The personal skills , or ‘how we manage ourselves’, are self-awareness , self-regulation , and motivation . In other words, the first steps towards understanding and managing the emotions of others is to be able to understand and manage our own emotions, including understanding what motivates us.

The social skills , or ‘how we handle relationships with others’, are empathy and social skills . These mean understanding and feeling for others, and then being able to interact effectively with them.

Improving your emotional intelligence therefore improves your understanding that other people have different points of view. It helps you to try to see things from their perspective. In doing so, you may learn something whilst gaining the respect and trust of others.

5. Use and practise your interpersonal skills in particular situations

There are a number of situations in which you need to use interpersonal skills. Consciously putting yourself in those positions, and practising your skills, then reflecting on the outcomes, will help you to improve.

For example:

Interpersonal skills are essential when working in groups.

Group-work is also a common situation, both at home and at work, giving you plenty of opportunity to work on your skills. It may be helpful to understand more about group dynamics and ways of working, as these can affect how both you and others behave.

For more about the different types of teams and groups, see our page An introduction to Teams and Groups , and for more about how people behave in groups, see Group and Team Roles . You can find more about the skills essential to team working in our page on Effective Team-Working .

Interpersonal skills may also be particularly helpful if you have to negotiate, persuade and influence others.

Effective negotiations—that is, where you are seeking a win–win outcome, rather than win–lose—will pave the way to mutual respect, trust and lasting interpersonal relations. Only by looking for a solution that works for both parties, rather than seeking to win at all costs, can you establish a good relationship that will enable you to work together over and over again.

Being able to persuade and influence others—again, for mutual benefit—is also a key building block towards strong interpersonal relations.

There is more about all of these in our pages on Negotiation and Persuasion . These pages explain negotiation , and discuss how it works , and explore the art of persuasion and influence in more detail.

Resolving and mediating in conflict scenarios can be a real test of interpersonal skills

Sometimes negotiation and persuasion are not enough to avoid conflict. When this happens, you need strong conflict resolution and potentially even mediation skills. Conflict can arise from poorly-handled interpersonal communications, and may be addressed simply by listening carefully to both sides, and demonstrating that you have done so. Finding a win–win situation is similarly important here, because it shows that you respect both sides.

These skills may be thought of as advanced communication skills. However, if you are often required to manage such situations, some specialist training may be helpful.

See our pages on Conflict Resolution and Mediation Skills for more.

Finally, problem-solving and decision-making are usually better when they involve more than one person

Problem-solving and decision-making are key life skills. While both can be done alone, they are often better for the involvement of more people. This means that they also frequently involve interpersonal elements, and there is no doubt that better interpersonal skills will help with both.

See our pages on Problem-Solving and Decision-Making for more.

6. Reflect on your experience and improve

The final element in developing and improving your interpersonal skills is to develop the habit of self-reflection. Taking time to think about conversations and interpersonal interactions will enable you to learn from your mistakes and successes, and continue to develop. You might, for example, find it helpful to keep a diary or learning journal and write in it each week.

For more about this, see our pages on Reflective Practice and Improving Communication Skills .

Further Reading from Skills You Need

The Skills You Need Guide to Interpersonal Skills eBooks.

Develop your interpersonal skills with our series of eBooks. Learn about and improve your communication skills, tackle conflict resolution, mediate in difficult situations, and develop your emotional intelligence.

Continue to: Developing Interpersonal Skills in Children Interpersonal Communication Skills Principles of Interpersonal Communication

What Are Interpersonal Skills?

Interpersonal skills are the behaviors people demonstrate when effectively interacting with others . Commonly referred to as “people skills,” these communication tactics can be signaled verbally and non-verbally in both one-on-one and group dynamics. Highly transferable across industries, interpersonal skills are a part of a professional’s soft skill arsenal that builds and determines the nature of professional relationships.

Interpersonal skills come in handy when handling conflict, collaborating within a team or just generally relating to your coworkers throughout your career . While some are innate traits, others are learned over time and can be further developed to strategically navigate social settings.

Interpersonal skills are the traits people use to communicate and interact with others. They are also known as “people skills” or “soft skills.”

“Being a genius coder or a killer salesperson doesn’t mean much if you can’t get along with others,” Melani Gordon, a partner at executive coaching and culture development firm Evolution , told Built In. “Interpersonal skills help you build that trust, turning you into not just someone people have to work with, but someone they want to work with.”

Sometimes referred to as ‘people skills’ or ‘social skills,’ interpersonal skills don’t just involve effectively communicating with others, but also reading others’ social cues and responding accordingly. 

Although interpersonal skills depend on one’s personality traits and communication style , they can also be developed through past experiences and repetition. As a result, employees can participate in more interactions to improve their interpersonal skills, which range from effective communication to active listening. 

13 Examples of Interpersonal Skills

While there is no official list of interpersonal skills to turn to, below are some office-friendly attributes that are sure to enhance anyone’s employability.  

1. Communication

Nearly every aspect of business relies on communication — whether spoken or written. It should be clear, concise and consistent. Even nonverbal cues count as communication, especially in the age of remote work and video meetings.

2. Active Listening

Active listening is when someone reflects upon and responds to — rather than reacts to — what another person says. As opposed to passive listening, active listening requires concentration, critical thinking, comprehension and a bit of demonstration. Without this interpersonal skill, it’s entirely possible to have two separate conversations at once, without arriving upon a mutual understanding.

Being in tune with what other people are thinking — and interpreting why they may be behaving a certain way — is the internal personal skill of empathy. It takes time to acquire. Achieving this level of insight involves listening, asking questions, recognizing feelings, avoiding judgment and sharing perspectives to authentically “walk in someone else’s shoes.”

4. Emotional Intelligence

Whether as an employee or leader of a company, having a clear understanding of your own emotions , motivations, triggers and behaviors is the first step in determining how to respond in any given scenario. The ability to recognize and regulate one’s own standings of emotional and social intelligence better informs where their strengths or weaknesses lay, and therefore what to embrace and where the work begins.

5. Positive Attitude

If an employee is capable of seeing the good in any situation, they are more equipped to stick it out when expectations fall short. Rather than complain or tally all that went wrong, these solution-oriented individuals are often the first in the room to switch on, ready to pivot. They have a certain energizing quality that rubs off, where just a greeting or brief catch-up conversation can leave coworkers feeling more capable of tackling the day.

6. Negotiation And Persuasion

Whether negotiating a deal or trying to persuade an audience, these processes involve articulating your thoughts in alignment with their needs while “selling it” altogether. Luckily, Aristotle determined the three pillars of persuasive speaking 2,300 years ago — ethos, pathos and logos — which suggests building a logical argument that appeals to an audience’s character and emotions.

7. Conflict Mediation And Resolution

Having a knack for designing win-win solutions and finding common ground translates well in a work environment. Listening to all of the facts, remaining calm and making sure people feel heard play a key role in resolving conflict . The pathway to peaceful resolution is to land on a compromise without either party feeling like they’re giving up anything.

8. Problem Solving

Problem solving begins with being able to identify a problem, then brainstorming a solution. From there, it’s a matter of analyzing the possibilities and implementing which works best, whether it’s project-specific or a company-wide matter. Strong problem solving can inspire better strategy and time management, but also instill confidence and build motivation.

9. Leadership

An employee with leadership qualities knows how to leverage the best out of their team. They listen to all sides before making a decision while motivating and inspiring others to work toward a shared goal — especially when the going gets tough.

10. Resilience

Having the ability to cope with adversity and pivot as the plot changes will serve someone well, especially in the workplace. When someone can maintain their own psychological well-being amid a high degree of stress, it communicates that they do not need things to go as planned in order to excel in their job. These individuals are dependable, and can roll with the punches.

11. Creativity

Problem solving, writing, analytical or critical thinking , communication and open-mindedness are all creative attributes fit for the workplace. Creative thinkers approach tired tasks in imaginative new ways, generating original ideas that can lead to innovative solutions.

Cracking a (well-timed, work-appropriate) joke can create a positive atmosphere even when handling difficult tasks, like high-stakes negotiations, presenting a sales pitch or delivering a down-market report. Humor diffuses tension, boosts creativity and increases one’s likeability.

Leaders with a sense of humor are seen as 27 percent more motivating and admired than those who don’t joke around. Their teams are 15 percent more engaged, and twice as likely to solve a creativity challenge — translating into higher productivity.

13. Small Talk 

The ability to have informal, polite discourse about light, non-work-related topics helps establish rapport with colleagues . Small talk eliminates the need for stale, overdone conversation starters.

“Have you ever been in one of those company mixers where it feels more like a middle-school dance? Nobody’s mingling,” Gordon said. “Now, a person with killer interpersonal skills walks in and suddenly, the energy shifts — conversations spark, people laugh and ideas start flowing. That’s interpersonal skills in action.”

Related Reading How Interpersonal Skills Help You Be a Stronger Tech Player

Benefits of Interpersonal Skills

A solid set of interpersonal skills makes for a more harmonious — and more efficient — workplace. As employees become better colleagues and leaders become more effective at the helm, a positive and productive team culture is often a byproduct.

“Technical skills are important, but they aren’t the only skill type we should be focused on,” Koma Gandy, vice president of leadership and business at corporate-education platform Skillsoft , told Built In. “Success depends on a workforce that can understand, practice and apply both [technical and soft] sets of skills.”

Below are some of the benefits of interpersonal skills.  

1. Stronger Relationships

By definition, interpersonal skills are how we relate to others. It’s how we build trust , collect understanding and learn how people prefer to communicate. Great interpersonal skills are the bread and butter to effortlessly building deeper connections with your coworkers , resulting in a tighter team and pleasant work environment.

2. Higher Morale

Flexing your interpersonal skills to create a sense of understanding, belonging and recognition — as well as a space capable of facilitating change — boosts office morale and contributes to a culture of camaraderie.

3. Better Business

For every customer won, there’s a master of interpersonal skills at work. Anticipating the needs of a client is impossible without actively listening , exercising empathy, solid communication, patience and perhaps a sprinkle of witty banter.

4. Increased Productivity And Collaboration 

Interpersonal skills are the lubricant of a well-oiled organizational machine — with good communication, there are fewer misunderstandings and mistakes. According to research conducted by team messaging app Pumble, 86 percent of employees and executives cite insufficient collaboration and communication as the main causes of workplace failures. But when communicating effectively , a team’s productivity may increase by as much as 25 percent.

5. More Problem Solving

When a team takes the time to understand one another, they are better equipped to find a solution that works for most everyone involved. This leads to more compassionate office dynamics where “problems” become team-building opportunities.

6. Supportive Work Environment

When employees walk into a work environment that is more concerned with empowering them rather than putting them in their place, it’s immediately felt. Interpersonal skills can help leaders lighten their team’s workload and alleviate work-related stress by just setting the right tone. Keep the doors open, check in, pay credit where credit is due and listen before you lead.

7. Opportunities For Promotions

Office politics are a factor whether we want to admit it or not. When vying for a position, promotion or project, interpersonal skills can get you the job — even if you’re not as technically qualified as other candidates.

“[Office politics] is a game everyone says they don’t want to play, but guess what, you’re already a player,” Gordon said. “Interpersonal skills are your cheat code to navigate this tricky terrain without selling your soul to the corporate devil.”

Related Reading Upskilling: What It Is and Why It’s Important

Why Are Interpersonal Skills Important?

According to the World Economic Forum’s Future of Jobs report , eight of the top 10 core skills required of workers today are interpersonal skills. Surveyed companies identified soft skills like analytical thinking, creativity, empathy, motivation and leadership as integral qualities to a workforce that works.

“To be effective in your workplace and career, it’s critically important to manage yourself, manage your network and manage your team — in that precise order,” Gandy said. “Interpersonal skills help us identify and navigate our emotions as we become more self-aware. When we are equipped with these skills, we make better leaders and colleagues to one another and help drive real business success.”

How to Improve Interpersonal Skills

1. get to know yourself.

To start, it’s important to understand your own natural behaviors when interacting with others. Are you more chatty and extroverted? Or do you struggle with attention, deflecting the conversation while mentally mapping out an escape plan?

Psychologist Leslie Dobson, who specializes in mental health in both individual and group therapy settings, said that this can be done with a simple self-assessment . By asking yourself how assertive you feel you are at work, and the manner in which you assert yourself — aggressively, passively, or passive-aggressively — can be a great exercise in self-awareness.

To put it to the test, try videotaping yourself. This can be in pretend conversations or more naturally, while out with friends, Dobson recommended. Despite an inevitable aspect of ‘cringe’ that comes with this tried-and-true exercise, it offers instant, indisputable feedback from a third-person perspective that provides a better understanding of your own habits.

“In the tech world people tend to be a little more introverted,” Dobson said, noting that, when learning new techniques and trying out different approaches to communication, these individuals may feel like they’re being aggressive.

As you reflect, you may notice that you have a tendency to overshare and could probably pull back on personal anecdotes, or you may find yourself blurring into the background a bit, and could use it as a green flag to increase your level of participation in a group setting. 

2. Pay Attention to Your Body Language

Small things, such as walking tall, shaking hands, holding eye contact and keeping an even, steady tone, can add up, and ultimately contribute to creating a more relatable presence in the workplace. Start by taking a proper posture and relaxing your shoulders. Keep your arms uncrossed and slightly lean in when others are talking to you. Study what others are doing, and try out what feels most natural to you.

“If we can name our interpersonal skills — both what we have and what we’re lacking — then we can externalize them and operationalize them,” Dobson said.

3. Enroll in Career Development Programs

For those seeking a more formal course correction, enrolling in career development classes may be the way to go. Any workshops that specifically focus on public speaking, leadership or networking in their curriculum are worth looking into, Dobson said, as well as supportive therapy groups such as social skills training .

4. Stay Curious

And it doesn’t stop there — as Gandy noted, developing professional-grade interpersonal skills is not a “set it and forget it” type of endeavor. Sharpening relational techniques is a life-long practice that can help build your career and enrich your life.

At Skillsoft, Gandy assists business leaders in identifying skill gaps in their teams via objective assessments. The results are then used to inform curated programs , with transferable credentials, that are in alignment with the needs of the organization.

“[Building interpersonal skills] is a consistent and constant journey of … continuous learning and growth,” Gandy said.

Related Reading Tech Hiring Madness! The ‘Elite 8’ Skills to Look for in Recruiting.

How to Use Interpersonal Skills at Work

It’s one thing to know about interpersonal techniques and their benefits. It’s another to actually apply them to your daily routine. The following includes a few hacks to work in during your next series of workplace interactions.  

1. Stay Positive

Try to cultivate a positive mental attitude at work. This will allow you to become both a part of and a contributor to a more harmonious work culture. While it may be a matter of ‘fake it until you make it,’ looking for the good in any given scenario — especially stressful ones — reflects positively on you as an employee and coworker.

2. Control Your Emotions

Conduct yourself professionally at work, even when others aren’t. Communicating in a calm, patient manner is key to maintaining an appropriate workplace persona conducive to trust, respect and integrity. If personal matters are too big to be compartmentalized, it may be worth taking a personal day or seeking help .

3. Give Praise to Colleagues

People love to hear about themselves. The next time an opportunity arises, when a coworker provides illuminating insight during a presentation, makes a great save or when receiving help on an issue, paying a compliment can be a simple way to vocalize appreciation and build trust . While it’s best to deliver kudos from a place of authenticity, celebrating someone’s expertise — even when competing in office politics — is still a nice gesture.

4. Take Interest in Others

There is no need to climb the workplace social ladder as if it were the same one in high school; however, there’s no harm in inquiring about the personal lives of the people you work side-by-side with on a regular basis. Typically, what they talk about is what they care about most. With this information, you get a better understanding of who they are and the people you work with at large. Bonus points for committing a few notes to memory and then following up later.

5. Practice Active Listening

Nod along, hold eye contact, repeat back what the speakers said in your own words, ask questions to learn more about their perspective and respond thoughtfully to let them know that they’ve been heard.

6. Be Assertive

Voice your needs, thoughts or boundaries with confidence. Letting others know where you stand eliminates confusion, if there is any, and is a strong demonstration of self-respect that may inspire others to follow your lead. 

7. Practice Empathy 

Simple exercises like giving others the benefit of the doubt, putting yourself in other peoples’ shoes and drawing parallels out of other peoples’ circumstances to your own are a few ways to practice empathy . In the context of work, these practices may also aid in problem solving and conflict resolution, when applicable.

8. Maintain Relationships

Whether in or out of work, having a supportive network of healthy relationships is an enriching way to demonstrate that you value and prioritize others. Prioritize connecting with friends and colleagues on a semi-regular basis. This reflects well on you in a professional setting, as it demonstrates qualities like dependability, honesty, respect and that you understand mutual give-and-take.

Common Jobs That Require Interpersonal Skills

Interpersonal skills are crucial for jobs that require high levels of human interaction, including the following positions: 

• Social worker 
• Salesperson or customer support representative
• Human resources manager

How to Highlight Interpersonal Skills on Your Resume

Interpersonal skills might seem more subtle than technical or hard skills, but there are ways to ensure they get plenty of attention on your resume.  

Showcase Interpersonal Skills in Past Projects

Include projects or roles where you spearheaded an initiative, worked with members of other teams or cultivated client relationships. Focus on skills like leadership and collaboration. 

Emphasize Interpersonal Skills Through Volunteer Work and Extracurriculars 

Volunteer work and extracurriculars can also reveal soft skills. Helping plan a community event, volunteering at a library and running a fundraiser for a senior care facility are all scenarios that require emotional intelligence, problem solving and other interpersonal skills. 

Add Interpersonal Skills in a Skills Section

If there’s room on your resume, include a skills section that provides a bullet list of specific skills. In addition to hard skills, you can include interpersonal skills like empathy, teamwork, creativity and conflict resolution. 

Choose Interpersonal Skills That Match Keywords

Keywords in job descriptions often hint at what skills to include in your resume . For example, if a job calls for someone who can collaborate across departments and is comfortable handling complex challenges, drive home your communication and problem-solving skills. 

Make Sure References Can Back Up Interpersonal Skills

Select interpersonal skills that you’ve been complimented on and can be confirmed by colleagues, mentors, teachers and other important figures in your career. Having an extra vote of approval can add more weight to any interpersonal skills you mention in your resume.

Frequently Asked Questions

What are some examples of interpersonal skills.

Communication, active listening, conflict resolution, creativity and problem-solving are a few examples of interpersonal skills. 

Why are interpersonal skills important?

Interpersonal skills enable professionals to become better coworkers and leaders in the workplace. As a result, many jobs require skills like empathy and leadership, making interpersonal skills essential for a successful career.

Great Companies Need Great People. That's Where We Come In.

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

11.1 Group Problem-Solving

Learning objective.

• Identify and describe how to implement seven steps for group problem-solving.

No matter who you are or where you live, problems are an inevitable part of life. This is true for groups as well as for individuals. Some groups—especially work teams—are formed specifically to solve problems. Other groups encounter problems for a wide variety of reasons. Within a family group, a problem might be that a daughter or son wants to get married and the parents do not approve of the marriage partner. In a work group, a problem might be that some workers are putting in more effort than others, yet achieving poorer results. Regardless of the problem, having the resources of a group can be an advantage, as different people can contribute different ideas for how to reach a satisfactory solution.

Once a group encounters a problem, the questions that come up range from “Where do we start?” to “How do we solve it?” While there are many ways to approach a problem, the American educational philosopher John Dewey’s reflective thinking sequence has stood the test of time. This seven step process Adler, R. (1996). Communicating at work: principles and practices for business and the professions. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill. has produced positive results and serves as a handy organizational structure. If you are member of a group that needs to solve a problem and don’t know where to start, consider these seven simple steps McLean, S. (2005). The basics of interpersonal communication. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. :

• Define the problem.
• Analyze the problem.
• Establish criteria.
• Consider possible solutions.
• Decide on a solution.
• Implement the solution.
• Follow up on the solution.

Let’s discuss each step in detail.

Define the Problem

If you don’t know what the problem is, how can you know you’ve solved it? Defining the problem allows the group to set boundaries of what the problem is and what it is not; and begin to formalize a description or definition of the scope, size, or extent of the challenge the group will address. A problem that is too broadly defined can overwhelm the group. If the problem is too narrowly defined, important information will be missed or ignored.

In the following example, we have a web-based company called Favorites which needs to increase its customer base and ultimately sales. A problem-solving group has been formed, and they start by formulating a working definition of the problem.

• Too Broad: “Sales are off, our numbers are down, and we need more customers.”
• More Precise: “Sales have been slipping incrementally for 6 of the past 9 months and are significantly lower than a seasonally adjusted comparison to last year. Overall this loss represents a 4.5% reduction in sales from the same time last year. However, when we break it down by product category, sales of our non-edible products have seen a modest but steady increase, while sales of edibles account for the drop off and we need to halt the decline.”

Analyze the Problem

Now the group analyzes the problem, trying to gather information and learn more. The problem is complex and requires more than one area of expertise. Why do non-edible products continue selling well? What is it about the edibles that is turning customers off? Let’s meet our problem-solvers at Favorites.

Kevin is responsible for customer resource management. He is involved with the customer from the point of initial contact through purchase and delivery. Most of the interface is automated in the form of an online “basket model,” where photographs and product descriptions are accompanied by “Buy It” buttons. He is available during normal working business hours for live chat and voice interface if needed, and customers are invited to request additional information. Most Favorites customers do not access this service, but Kevin is kept quite busy, as he also handles returns and complaints. Because Kevin believes that superior service retains customers while attracting new ones, he is always interested in better ways to serve the customer. Looking at edibles and non-edibles, he will study the cycle of customer service and see if there are any common points, from the main webpage through the catalog to the purchase process to returns, at which customers abandon the sale. He has existing customer feedback loops with end-of-sale surveys, but most customers decline to take the survey and there is currently no incentive to participate.

Mariah is responsible for products and purchasing. She wants to offer the best products at the lowest price, and to offer new products that are unusual, rare, or exotic. She regularly adds new products to the Favorites catalog and culls underperformers. Right now she has the data on every product and its sales history, but it is a challenge to represent it. She will analyze current sales data and produce a report that specifically identifies how each product, edible and non-edible, is performing. She wants to highlight “winners” and “losers” but also recognizes that today’s “losers” may be the hit of tomorrow. It is hard to predict constantly changing tastes and preferences, but that is part of her job. It’s not all science, and it’s not all art. She has to have an eye for what will catch on tomorrow while continuing to provide what is hot today.

Suri is responsible for data management at Favorites. She gathers, analyzes, and presents information gathered from the supply chain, sales, and marketing. She works with vendors to make sure products are available when needed, makes sales predictions based on past sales history, and assesses the effectiveness of marketing campaigns.

The problem-solving group members already have certain information on hand. They know that customer retention is one contributing factor. Attracting new customers is a constant goal, but they are aware of the well-known principle that it takes more effort to attract new customers than to keep existing ones. Thus, it is important to ensure a quality customer service experience for existing customers and encourage them to refer friends. The group needs to determine how to promote this favorable customer behavior.

Another contributing factor seems to be that customers often abandon the shopping cart before completing a purchase, especially when purchasing edibles. The group members need to learn more about why this is happening.

Establish Criteria

Establishing the criteria for a solution is the next step. At this point, information is coming in from diverse perspectives, and each group member has contributed information from their perspective, even though there may be several points of overlap.

Kevin: Customers who complete the post-sale survey indicate that they want to know 1) what is the estimated time of delivery, 2) why a specific item was not in stock and when it will be, and 3) why their order sometimes arrives with less than a complete order, with some items back-ordered, without prior notification.

He notes that a very small percentage of customers complete the post-sale survey, and the results are far from scientific. He also notes that it appears the interface is not capable of cross-checking inventory to provide immediate information concerning back orders, so that the customer “buys it” only to learn several days later that it was not in stock. This seems to be especially problematic for edible products, because people may tend to order them for special occasions like birthdays and anniversaries. But we don’t really know this for sure because of the low participation in the post-sale survey.

Mariah: There are four edible products that frequently sell out. So far, we haven’t been able to boost the appeal of other edibles so that people would order them as a second choice when these sales leaders aren’t available. We also have several rare, exotic products that are slow movers. They have potential, but currently are underperformers.

Suri: We know from a zip code analysis that most of our customers are from a few specific geographic areas associated with above-average incomes. We have very few credit cards declined, and the average sale is over $100. Shipping costs represent on average 8% of the total sales cost. We do not have sufficient information to produce a customer profile. There is no specific point in the purchase process where basket abandonment tends to happen; it happens fairly uniformly at all steps.

Consider Possible Solutions to the Problem

The group has listened to each other and now starts to brainstorm ways to address the challenges they have identified while focusing resources on those solutions that are more likely to produce results.

Kevin: Is it possible for our programmers to create a cross-index feature, linking the product desired with a report of how many are in stock? I’d like the customer to know right away whether it is in stock, or how long they may have to wait. As another idea, is it possible to add incentives to the purchase cycle that won’t negatively impact our overall profit? I’m thinking a small volume discount on multiple items, or perhaps free shipping over a specific dollar amount.

Mariah: I recommend we hold a focus group where customers can sample our edible products and tell us what they like best and why. When the best sellers are sold out, could we offer a discount on related products to provide an instant alternative? We might also cull the underperforming products with a liquidation sale to generate interest.

Suri: If we want to know more about our customers, we need to give them an incentive to complete the post-sale survey. How about a five percent off coupon code for the next purchase, to get them to return and to help us better identify our customer base? We may also want to build in a customer referral rewards program, but it all takes better data in to get results out. We should also explore the supply side of the business and see if we can get a more reliable supply of the leading products, and try to get more advantageous discounts from our suppliers, especially in the edible category.

Decide on a Solution

Kevin, Mariah, and Suri may want to implement all of the solution strategies, but they do not have the resources to do them all. They’ll complete a cost/benefit analysis , which ranks each solution according to its probable impact. The analysis is shown in Table 11.1 “Cost/Benefit Analysis”.

Table 11.1 Cost/Benefit Analysis

Now that the options have been presented with their costs and benefits, it is easier for the group to decide which courses of action are likely to yield the best outcomes. The analysis helps the group members to see beyond the immediate cost of implementing a given solution. For example, Kevin’s suggestion of offering free shipping won’t cost Favorites much money, but it also may not pay off in customer goodwill. And even though Mariah’s suggestion of having a focus group might sound like a good idea, it will be expensive and its benefits are questionable.

A careful reading of the analysis indicates that Kevin’s best suggestion is to integrate the cross-index feature in the ordering process so that customers can know immediately whether an item is in stock or on back order. Of Mariah’s suggestions, searching for alternative products is probably the most likely to benefit Favorites. And Suri’s two supply-side suggestions are likely to result in positive outcomes.

Implement the Solution

Kevin is faced with the challenge of designing the computer interface without incurring unacceptable costs. He strongly believes that the interface will pay for itself within the first year—or, to put if more bluntly, that Favorites’ declining sales will get worse if the website does not soon have this feature. He asks to meet with top management to get budget approval and secures their agreement, on one condition: He must negotiate a compensation schedule with the Information Technology consultants that includes delayed compensation in the form of bonuses after the feature has been up and running successfully for six months.

Mariah knows that searching for alternative products is a never-ending process, but it takes time and the company needs results. She decides to invest time evaluating products that competing companies currently offer, especially in the edible category, on the theory that customers who find their desired items sold out on the Favorites website may have been buying alternative products elsewhere instead of choosing an alternative from Favorites’ product lines.

Suri decides to approach the vendors of the four frequently sold-out products and ask point blank: “What would it take to get you to produce these items more reliably in greater quantities?” By opening the channel of communication with these vendors, she is able to motivate them to make modifications that will improve the reliability and quantity. She also approaches the vendors of the less popular products with a request for better discounts in return for cooperation in developing and test-marketing new products.

Follow up on the Solution

Kevin: After several beta tests, the cross-index feature was implemented and has been in place for 30 days. Now customers see either “In stock” or “Available [mo/da/yr]” in the shopping basket. As expected, Kevin notes a decrease in the number of chat and phone inquiries to the effect of, “Will this item arrive before my wife’s birthday?” However, he notes an increase in inquiries asking “Why isn’t this item in stock?” It is difficult to tell whether customer satisfaction is higher overall.

Mariah: In exploring the merchandise available from competing merchants, she got several ideas for modifying Favorites’ product line to offer more flavors and other variations on popular edibles. Working with vendors, she found that these modifications cost very little. Within the first 30 days of adding these items to the product line, sales are up. Mariah believes these additions also serve to enhance the Favorites brand identity, but she has no data to back this up.

Suri: So far, the vendors supplying the four top-selling edibles have fulfilled their promise of increasing quantity and reliability. However, three of the four items have still sold out, raising the question of whether Favorites needs to bring in one or more additional vendors to produce these items. Of the vendors with which Favorites asked to negotiate better discounts, some refused, and two of these were “stolen” by a competing merchant so that they no longer sell to Favorites. In addition, one of the vendors that agreed to give a better discount was unexpectedly forced to cease operations for several weeks because of a fire.

This scenario allows us to see the problem may have many dimensions, and may have several solutions, but resources can be limited and not every solution is successful. Even though the problem is not immediately resolved, the group problem-solving pattern serves as a useful guide through the problem-solving process.

Key Takeaway

• Group problem-solving can be an orderly process when it is broken down into seven specific stages.
• Think of a problem encountered in the past by a group of which you are a member. How did the group solve the problem? How satisfactory was the solution? Discuss your results with your classmates.
• Consider again the problem you described in Exercise #1. In view of the seven-step framework, which steps did the group utilize? Would following the full seven-step framework have been helpful? Discuss your opinion with a classmate.
• Research one business that you would like to know more about and see if you can learn about how they communicate in groups and teams Compare your results with those of classmates.
• Think of a decision you will be making some time in the near future. Apply the cost/benefit analysis framework to your decision. Do you find this method helpful? Discuss your results with classmates.

11.2 Group Decision-Making

Learning objectives.

• Define decision-making and distinguish between decision-making and problem-solving.
• Describe five methods of group decision-making.
• Identify six guidelines for consensus decision-making.
• Define autocratic, democratic, and participative decision-making styles and place them within the Tannenbaum-Schmidt continuum.

Life is the sum of all your choices.

Albert Camus

Simply put, decision-making is the process of choosing among options and arriving at a position, judgment, or action. It usually answers a “wh-” question—i.e., what, who, where, or when?—or perhaps a “how” question.

A group may, of course, make a decision in order to solve a problem. For instance, a group of students might discover halfway through a project that some of its members are failing to contribute to the required work. They might then decide to develop a written timeline and a set of deadlines for itself if it believes that action will lead them out of their difficulty.

Not every group decision, however, will be in response to a problem. Many decisions relate to routine logistical matters such as when and where to schedule an event or how to reach someone who wasn’t able to make it to a meeting. Thus, decision-making differs from problem-solving.

Any decision-making in a group, even about routine topics, is significant. Why? Because decision-making, like problem-solving, results in a change in a group’s status, posture, or stature. Such change, in turn, requires energy and attention on the part of a group in order for the group to progress easily into a new reality. Things will be different in the group once a problem has been solved or a decision has been reached, and group members will need to adjust.

Methods of Reaching Decisions

Research does indicate that groups generate more ideas and make more accurate decisions on matters for which a known preferred solution exists, but they also operate more slowly than individuals. Hoy, W.K., & Miskel, C.G. (1982). Educational administration: Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.). New York: Random House. Under time pressure and other constraints, some group leaders exercise their power to make a decision unilaterally —alone—because they’re willing to sacrifice a degree of accuracy for the sake of speed. Sometimes this behavior turns out to be wise; sometimes it doesn’t.

Assuming that a group determines that it must reach a decision together on some matter, rather than deferring to the will of a single person, it can proceed according to several methods. Parker and Hoffman Parker, G., & Hoffman, R. (2006). Meeting excellence: 33 tools to lead meetings that get results. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. , along with Hartley and Dawson Hartley, P., & Dawson, M. (2010). Success in groupwork. New York: St. Martin’s Press. , place decision-making procedures in several categories. Here is a synthesis of their views of how decision-making can take place:

A group may conduct a discussion in which members express views and identify alternatives but then reach no decision and take no action. When people go their own ways after such a “ plop ,” things sometimes take care of themselves, and the lack of a decision causes no difficulties. On the other hand, if a group ignores or postpones a decision which really needs attention, its members may confront tougher decisions later—some of which may deal with problems brought about by not addressing a topic when it was at an early stage.

Delegation to an expert.

A group may not be ready to make a decision at a given time, either because it lacks sufficient information or is experiencing unresolved conflict among members with differing views. In such a situation, the group may not want to simply drop the matter and move on. Instead, it may turn to one of its members who everyone feels has the expertise to choose wisely among the alternatives that the group is considering. The group can either ask the expert to come back later with a final proposal or simply allow the person to make the decision alone after having gathered whatever further information he or she feels is necessary.

Group members may shift their individual stances regarding a question by “splitting the difference” to reach a “middle ground.” This technique tends to work most easily if numbers are involved. For instance, a group trying to decide how much money to spend on a gift for a departing member might ask everyone for a preferred amount and agree to spend whatever is computed by averaging those amounts.

If you need to be quick and definitive in making a decision, voting is probably the best method. Everyone in mainstream American society is familiar with the process, for one thing, and its outcome is inherently clear and obvious. A majority vote requires that more than half of a group’s members vote for a proposal, whereas a proposal subject to a two-thirds vote will not pass unless twice as many members show support as those who oppose it.

Voting is essentially a win/lose activity. You can probably remember a time when you or someone else in a group composed part of a strong and passionate minority whose desires were thwarted because of the results of a vote. How much commitment did you feel to support the results of that vote?

Voting does offer a quick and simple way to reach decisions, but it works better in some situations than in others. If the members of a group see no other way to overcome a deadlock, for instance, voting may make sense. Likewise, very large groups and those facing serious time constraints may see advantages to voting. Finally, the efficiency of voting is appealing when it comes to making routine or noncontroversial decisions that need only to be officially approved.

In consensus decision-making, group members reach a resolution which all of the members can support as being acceptable as a means of accomplishing some mutual goal even though it may not be the preferred choice for everyone. In common use, “consensus” can range in meaning from unanimity to a simple majority vote. In public policy facilitation and multilateral international negotiations, however, the term refers to a general agreement reached after discussions and consultations, usually without voting. “consensus”. (2002). In Dictionary of Conflict Resolution, Wiley . Retrieved from http://www.credoreference.com/

Consensus should not be confused with unanimity , which means only that no one has explicitly stated objections to a proposal or decision. Although unanimity can certainly convey an accurate perspective of a group’s views at times, groupthink also often leads to unanimous decisions. Therefore, it’s probably wise to be cautious when a group of diverse people seems to have formed a totally unified block with respect to choices among controversial alternatives.

When a consensus decision is reached through full interchange of views and is then adopted in good faith by all parties to a discussion, it can energize and motivate a group. Besides avoiding the win/lose elements intrinsic to voting, it converts each member’s investment in a decision into a stake in preserving and promoting the decision after it has been agreed upon.

Guidelines for Seeking Consensus

How can a group actually go about working toward consensus? Here are some guidelines for the process:

First, be sure everyone knows the definition of consensus and is comfortable with observing them. For many group members, this may mean suspending judgment and trying something they’ve never done before. Remind people that consensus requires a joint dedication to moving forward toward improvement in and by the group.

Second, endeavor to solicit participation by every member of the group. Even the naturally quietest person should be actively “polled” from time to time for his or her perspectives. In fact, it’s a good idea to take special pains to ask for varied viewpoints when discussion seems to be stalled or contentious.

Third, listen honestly and openly to each group member’s viewpoints. Attempt to seek and gather information from others. Do your best to subdue your emotions and your tendency to judge and evaluate.

Fourth, be patient. To reach consensus often takes much more time than voting would. A premature “agreement” reached because people give in to speed things up or avoid conflict is likely later to weaken or fall apart.

Fifth, always look for mutually acceptable ways to make it through challenging circumstances. Don’t resort to chance mechanisms like flipping a coin, and don’t trade decisions arbitrarily just so that things come out equally for people who remain committed to opposing views.

Sixth, resolve gridlock earnestly. Stop and ask, “Have we really identified every possible feasible way that our group might act?” If members of a group simply can’t agree on one alternative, see if they can all find and accept a next-best option. Then be sure to request an explicit statement from them that they are prepared to genuinely commit themselves to that option.

One variation on consensus decision-making calls upon a group’s leader to ask its members, before initiating a discussion, to agree to a deadline and a “safety valve.” The deadline would be a time by which everyone in the group feels they need to have reached a decision. The “safety valve” would be a statement that any member can veto the will of the rest of the group to act in a certain way, but only if he or she takes responsibility for moving the group forward in some other positive direction.

Although consensus entails full participation and assent within a group, it usually can’t be reached without guidance from a leader. One college president we knew was a master at escorting his executive team to consensus. Without coercing or rushing them, he would regularly involve them all in discussions and lead their conversations to a point at which everyone was nodding in agreement, or at least conveying acceptance of a decision. Rather than leaving things at that point, however, the president would generally say, “We seem to have reached a decision to do XYZ. Is there anyone who objects?” Once people had this last opportunity to add further comments of their own, the group could move forward with a sense that it had a common vision in mind.

Consensus decision-making is easiest within groups whose members know and respect each other, whose authority is more or less evenly distributed, and whose basic values are shared. Some charitable and religious groups meet these conditions and have long been able to use consensus decision-making as a matter of principle. The Religious Society of Friends, or Quakers, began using consensus as early as the 17 th century. Its affiliated international service agency, the American Friends Service Committee, employs the same approach. The Mennonite Church has also long made use of consensus decision-making.

Decision-Making by Leaders

People in the business world often need to make decisions in groups composed of their associates and employees. Take the case of a hypothetical businessperson, Kerry Cash.

Kerry owns and manages Wenatcheese, a shop which sells gourmet local and imported cheese. Since opening five years ago, the business has overcome the challenge of establishing itself and has built a solid clientele. Sales have tripled. Two full-time and four part-time employees—all productive, reliable, and customer-friendly—have made the store run efficiently and bolstered its reputation.

Now, with Christmas and the New Year coming, Kerry wants to decide, “Shall I open another shop in the spring?” Because the year-end rush is on, there’s not a lot of time to weigh pros and cons.

As the diagram indicates, many managers in Kerry’s situation employ two means to make decisions like this: intuition and analysis. They’ll feel their gut instinct, analyze appropriate financial facts, or do a little bit of both.

Unfortunately, this kind of dualistic decision-making approach restricts an individual leader’s options. It doesn’t do justice to the complexity of the group environment. It also fails to fully exploit the power and relevance of other people’s knowledge.

Too much feeling may produce arbitrary outcomes. And, as the management theorist Peter Drucker observed, too much fact can create stagnation and “ analysis paralysis ”: “(A)n overload of information, that is, anything much beyond what is truly needed, leads to information blackout. It does not enrich, but impoverishes.” Drucker, P.F. (1993). The effective executive. New York: Harperbusiness.

Fortunately, a couple of authorities wrote an article in 1973 which can help members of groups assess and strengthen the quality of their decision-making Tannenbaum, R., & Schmidt, W. (1973, May-June). How to choose a leadership pattern. Harvard Business Review, 3–11. Robert Tannenbaum and Warren Schmidt were those authorities. Their article so appealed to American readers that more than one million reprints eventually sold.

The Tannnenbaum-Schmidt Continuum

Kerry Cash, wondering whether to open another Wenatcheese outlet, can refer to the Tannenbaum-Schmidt model in Table 11.2 “Tannenbaum-Schmidt Continuum” to identify a spectrum of ways to resolve the question:

Table 11.2 Tannenbaum-Schmidt Continuum

Let’s take a look at the components of this continuum, from left to right. First, we have two autocratic options:

• OPTION ONE: Pure announcement. “All right, folks, I’ve decided we’re going to open a new shop in Dryden over Memorial Day weekend.”
• OPTION TWO: “Selling”. “I’d like us to open a new shop in Dryden. I have five reasons. Here they are…”

Next, three democratic options are available:

• OPTION THREE: Presentation with questions. “I’ve decided we’ll open a new shop in Dryden. What would you like to know about the plan?”
• OPTION FOUR: Tentative decision. “I want to open a new shop in Dryden. Do you have any observations or questions about this possibility?”
• OPTION FIVE: Soliciting suggestions. “I think we’re in a position to open a new shop. Dryden seems like the best location, but I’d also consider Cashmere or Leavenworth or Okanogan. I’ll decide which way to go after you give me your thoughts.”

Finally, two participative kinds of approaches present themselves:

• OPTION SIX: Limited group autonomy. “I want to open a new shop in either Dryden, Cashmere, or Leavenworth sometime between Easter and Independence Day. Talk it over and let me know what we should do.”
• OPTION SEVEN: Full group autonomy. “I’m willing to establish a new shop if you’d like. Let me know by two weeks from now whether you want to do that, and if so, where and when.”

Of course, many decisions embody more complications and include more details than Kerry Cash’s. Some are related to people: Shall we bring more people into the group? If we do, how many should be full-fledged and how many should be temporary or provisional? Or do we need to reduce our number of members?

Other decisions depend on financial variables and constraints: Can we trust the economy enough to invest in new equipment? Do we have time to develop and promote any new ideas?

The Tannenbaum-Schmidt model doesn’t tell us how to choose between its own options. Tannenbaum and Schmidt, however, did offer some advice on this score. These are some topics they suggested that leaders address as they decide where to position themselves on the continuum:

• THE ORGANIZATION. What kind is it? Is it a new, or is it relatively solid and secure?
• THE PEOPLE. How mature are they? How experienced? How motivated?
• THE PROBLEM OR DECISION. How intricate is it? What kind of expertise is required to solve it?
• TIME. What deadlines, if any, do we face? Is there enough time to involve as many people as we’d like?

Intel Corporation actually identifies in advance of its meetings the kind of decision-making that will be associated with each question or topic (( Matson, E. (1996, April-May)). The seven sins of deadly meetings. Fast company , 122. The four categories it uses resemble some of the components of the Tannenbaum/Schmidt model, as follows:

• Authoritative (the leader takes full responsibility).
• Consultative (the leader makes a decision after weighing views from the group).

Once you’ve reached a decision, take a few steps back. Ask yourself, “Is it truly consistent with our group’s values, or was it perhaps simply a technocratic outcome: i.e., procedurally proper but devoid of empathy and human understanding? Throughout history, many a group’s decision reached “by the book” later caused dissension, disappointment, or even dissolution of the group itself.

Key Takeaways

• Groups may choose among several methods of decision-making, including consensus, depending on their circumstances and the characteristics of their leaders and members. Making decisions which are consistent with the group’s values is of paramount importance.
• Think of major decisions made in the last couple of years by two groups you’re a part of. Which method from this section did the groups use in each case? Which of the decisions are you more satisfied with now? Why? To what degree do you feel the decision-making methods the groups used fit the circumstances and the characteristics of the groups themselves?
• Tell a classmate about a decision that a group you’re part of needs to make shortly. Ask the classmate for his/her advice on which decision-making method the group should employ.
• A major hesitation raised by some people with respect to consensus decision-making is that it requires much more time than voting or other direct methods. In what kind of situation would you be, or have you been, willing to invest “as much time as it takes” to reach consensus in a group?
• If you were compelled to make every decision either totally by intuition or totally by analysis, which would you choose? On the basis of what experience or value do you feel this way? If you could choose to have every group leader around you make decisions by only one of the two methods, which would you prefer, and why?

11.3 Effective Strategies for Group Creativity

• Define and explain “bisociation.”
• Describe brainstorming and identify criteria for its effective use.
• Differentiate between neophiles and neophobes.
• Distinguish between the creative styles of “brooders” and “spawners.”

Sisters, brothers, mothers, fathers, teachers—everybody starts to douse your imagination and creativity. At a young age it starts, and then all of a sudden you’re like a trunk going through an airport, covered in stickers. I think I have spent most of my life pulling off stickers.

Kim Basinger

Very few people do anything creative after the age of thirty-five. The reason is that very few people do anything creative before the age of thirty-five.

Joel Hildebrand

You can’t wait for inspiration. You have to go after it with a club.

Jack London

Human beings are naturally creative from an early age. Think of any four- or five-year-old child you’ve ever met, and you can verify this for yourself. Here are some examples from journals kept by one of the authors concerning his children’s development before age six:

I was reading Animal Farm the other day and mentioned that one of the “Seven Commandments” of the animals had to do with the beliefs that the beasts liked anything with four legs or wings. Amelia said, “Oh—then they like airplanes!”

Last night at dinner, Claire looked at the roll-top wooden bread storage compartment over the counter top in our kitchen and said, “That’s a garage door where food parks.”

When I was explaining that there are only four tastes which human tongues can detect—salty, sweet, sour, and bitter—Claire asked, “What about ‘yucky’?”

Last night on the way to folk-dancing, we started talking about vocabulary. For some reason, Amelia created a new word: “trampede.” According to her, a “trampede” is a centipede on a trampoline.

Solving problems and making decisions both work best if people in a group are creative; i.e., if they entertain new perspectives and generate new ideas. Can this be a simple matter of having the group’s leader tell people “Be creative,” though? Probably not. It’s like saying, “Don’t think of an elephant”: it’s apt to produce just the opposite effect of the command itself. Still, tools and techniques for encouraging creativity in a group do exist.

A Theory of Creativity

Arthur Koestler, a major intellectual and political force in Europe and the United States throughout most of the 20 th century, contended that all creativity comprises a process he called “ bisociation .” Koestler, A. (1964). The act of creation. New York: Macmillan. Koestler’s seminal book on this topic, titled The Act of Creation , put forth a theory that he believed accounted for people’s “Aha” reaction of scientific discovery, their “Ha-ha” reaction to jokes, and their “Ah” reaction of mystical or religious insight.

Above all, creativity creates new things—things that weren’t there before the creative act took place. In every kind of creative situation, according to Koestler, the result is produced by a meeting of lines of thought that bring together hitherto unconnected ideas and fuse them into something new. If the lines of thought concern devotional matters, mystical insight emerges, and when they concern more mundane matters the result is apt to be a joke. If they are scientific, the result is a scientific discovery.

The expression “to think outside the box” is often used to refer to creativity. Koestler’s view seems to be that creativity consists, instead, of linking existing but separate “boxes” together. One implication of his theory is that, to be creative, a person not only needs to depart from the status quo but also needs to be familiar and comfortable with a range of alternatives from a wide variety of fields. Koestler’s perspective would seem to be consistent with the association we often make between creativity on the one hand and intelligence and breadth of knowledge on the other.

Overcoming Inertia

At every crossroads on the path that leads to the future, tradition has placed 10,000 men to guard the past.

Maurice Maeterlinck

When you cannot make up your mind which of two evenly balanced courses of action you should take, choose the bolder.

William Joseph Slim

Groups generally comprise a mixture of people when it comes to openness to change. A small fraction of the members may position themselves at one end of the openness continuum or the other. Some of these people, called neophiles , will eagerly embrace almost anything novel. Others, known as neophobes , will invariably shun what’s new and prefer the security of what they know and have done in the past. The majority of people, however, probably don’t fit neatly into either of these categories. Instead, they may prefer to produce or experiment with new things under certain circumstances and resist them under others.

It’s rarely possible to provoke creativity on the part of an entire group all at once. You needn’t agree with Thomas Fuller’s aphorism that “a conservative believes nothing should be done for the first time” to realize that some people in groups will hold onto what they’re familiar with all the more stubbornly as others begin to waver and experiment with something new.

Brainstorming

In regard to every problem that arises, there are counselors who say, “Do nothing” [and] other counselors who say, “Do everything”…I say to you: “Do something”; and when you have done something, if it works, do it some more; and if it does not work, then do something else.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt

One familiar technique that experts in the realm of creative thinking have long recommended is brainstorming . Alex Osborn, an advertising executive, began using the term in the mid-1950s and described the method in detail in his book Applied Imagination: Principles and Procedures of Creative Problem Solving . Osborn, A.F. (1963) Applied imagination: Principles and procedures of creative problem solving (3rd revised ed.). New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.

One criterion of proper brainstorming is that it must begin with an unrestricted search for quantity and creativity rather than quality. It should actually solicit and reward craziness and zaniness, in other words.

A second criterion for good brainstorming is that it should encourage and praise “piggybacking” on ideas which have already emerged. A third is that brainstormers should avoid making any judgments until they’ve generated an extensive list of ideas.

Robert Sutton, a respected organizational consultant, published a book in 2002 called Weird Ideas That Work . Sutton, R. (2002). Weird ideas that work . New York: Free Press. Among other things, Sutton’s book paid tribute to brainstorming.

One of Sutton’s central contentions was that excellence arises from “a range of differences”—precisely what brainstorming aims to generate. To illustrate, Sutton declared that such prodigious geniuses as Shakespeare, Einstein, Mozart, Edison, and Picasso were first and foremost productive. In fact, he argued that these brilliant individuals didn’t succeed at a higher rate than anyone else; they just did more.

Mozart, for instance, started composing when he was seven years old and wrote at least 20 pieces of music per year from then until his death at the age of 35. Several of his compositions were routine or even dull, but many were sublime and some are unquestioned masterpieces.

Closer to home, Sutton noted that today’s toy business offers examples of the value of starting with lots of ideas and only then selecting quality ones. Skyline, an arm of California’s IDEO Corporation, employed just 10 staff members in 1998 but generated 4,000 ideas in that year for new toys.

According to Sutton, those 4,000 ideas boiled down to 230 possibilities worth examining through careful drawings or working prototypes. Of the 230 concepts, 12 were ultimately sold. In other words, the “yield” of saleable products came to only 3/10 of one per cent of the original ideas. Sutton quoted Skyline’s founder, Brendan Boyle, as saying, “You can’t get any good new ideas without having a lot of dumb, lousy, and crazy ones.”

The Ostrich and the Sea Urchin

Now let’s take a look at what two animals have to do with ideas in general, and with varied ways of being creative about ideas in specific. The two animals are the ostrich and the sea urchin.

The ostrich’s reproductive processes lies at one end of a continuum, the sea urchin’s at the other. Like the 350-pound mother which lays it, an ostrich egg is large, imposing, and tough. For 42 days after it’s laid, it grows until it weighs more than three pounds. It will then reliably crack open and release a baby ostrich. Unless something highly unexpected happens, its mother will tend it well, and that single baby ostrich will in turn grow up and become a mature ostrich.

A sea urchin differs in almost every respect from an ostrich. The whole animal takes up less space and weighs less than an ostrich egg, for one thing. It has no eyes. It hardly moves all its life. To propagate, an urchin spews a cloud of more than a million miniscule eggs into the ocean. The eggs disperse immediately into the tide pools and reef inlets populated by their spiny parents.

Some of the sea urchin eggs meet sea urchin sperm and combine to form tiny, transparent, free-floating embryos. Eggs remain viable for only 6–8 hours, however, so lots of them die before this happens. Of a one-million-egg cloud, those which are to have a chance of becoming embryos must do so within 48 hours. The odds aren’t good.

Then things thin out even more. A Stanford University publication points out that “the young embryo is totally at the mercy of the sea. There are many organisms that will consume the young sea urchin embryo and later the young sea urchin.” Brooders vs spawners.  In other words, the overwhelming majority of sea urchin eggs die of loneliness or get eaten.

Biologists call animals like ostriches “brooders” because they create only a few offspring but take care of each one faithfully. Creatures such as sea urchins, which produce vast numbers of candidates for fertilization but don’t take care of them and lose most of them to predators, are called “spawners.” Brainstorming is clearly a “spawning” process rather than a “brooding” one.

Threats to the Effectiveness of Brainstorming

Although it is meant to generate large quantities of ideas on which to base sound decision-making, brainstorming entails some same challenges. One group of researchers Stroebe, W., Diehl, M., & Abakoumkin, G. (1992). The illusion of group effectivity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 18 (5): 643–650. identified three potential weakening factors inherent within brainstorming:

• Blocking . Since only one person at a time in a group can speak, other members may lose the desire to contribute their own ideas or even forget those ideas in the midst of a lively brainstorming session.
• Social matching . Brown, V., & Paulus, P. B. (1996). A simple dynamic model of social factors in group brainstorming. Small Group Research, 27 , 91–114. People in a group tend to calibrate their own degree of contribution to its activities on the basis of what the other members do. If someone has lots of ideas but sees that the rest of the group is less productive, that person is apt to reduce his or her own creative production.
• Illusion of group productivity . Group members are apt to rate the level of their output as being higher than it actually is. For one thing, members describe their group as being above average in productivity with respect to other groups. They also overrate their individual contributions; people in one study, for instance, said that they had contributed 36% of their group’s ideas when in fact they had offered only 25%. Paulus, P. B., Dzindolet, M. T., Poletes, G., & Camacho, L. M. (1993). Perception of performance in group brainstorming: The illusion of group productivity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64 (4), 575–586.
• Creativity, which can play a positive role in group decision-making, has been described as a process of combining two disparate elements. It can be stimulated through brainstorming.
• Do you agree with Arthur Koestler that all creativity involves bringing disparate trains of thought together? Provide 2–3 examples which support your answer.
• Do you consider yourself a “brooder” or a “spawner”? Explain your response to a fellow student, providing examples which support your answer.
• When was the last time you showed exceptional creativity? What factors in your environment or within you at the time contributed most to that creativity?
• Think of a neophile and a neophobe whom you’ve encountered in a group. Describe actions that each person took which illustrate his/her neophilia or neophobia.

11.4 Facilitating the Task-Oriented Group

• Define “group facilitation”
• Identify five guidelines for facilitating a task-oriented group
• Distinguish between collaboration and “coliberation”

Remember the story that Pope John XXIII told about himself. He admitted, “It often happens that I wake at night and begin to think about a serious problem and decide I must tell the Pope about it. Then I wake up completely and remember that I am the Pope.”

Glenn van Ekeren

I’m extraordinarily patient provided I get my own way in the end.

Margaret Thatcher

You’ve probably experienced being part of groups that pleased and motivated you. One reason you experienced those positive feelings may have been that the groups planned and executed their tasks so smoothly that you were hardly aware the processes were taking place. In this section we’ll examine ways in which leaders can contribute to such pleasant, easy experiences.

Just as “facile” in English and “fácil” in Spanish mean “easy,” the word “facilitate” itself means “to make something easy” and “ group facilitation ” consists in easing a group’s growth and progress. Most student, community, and business groups are task-oriented, so we’ll consider here how they can most easily be guided toward accomplishing the tasks they set for themselves. Another section of this book deals specifically with the details of leading meetings, so for now we’ll consider broader questions and principles.

If you’re in a position to facilitate a group, you need to take that position seriously. Just as Pope John XXIII realized with respect to his authority and responsibility in the Catholic Church, it’s best to consider yourself the primary source of direction and the ultimate destination for questions in your group. With those concepts in mind, let’s consider five major guidelines you should probably follow in order to facilitate a group whose purposes include achieving tasks.

Know the group’s members. This means more than just identifying their names and recognizing their faces. If you hope to accomplish anything significant together, you need to be familiar with people’s opinions, their needs, their desires, and their personalities.

Perhaps one member of a group you’re leading is particularly time-conscious, another likes to make jokes, and a third prefers to see concepts represented visually. If you take these propensities into account and respond to them as much as possible, you can draw the best cooperative effort from each of the people.

You may want to keep track of who’s done what favors for whom within the group, too. Like it or not, many people operate at least from time to time on the principle that “I’ll scratch your back if you scratch mine.”

Weigh task and relationship considerations. The word “ equilibristic ” is sometimes applied to the actions of athletes and musicians. It refers to a capability to balance differing and sometimes conflicting forces so as to maintain continuous movement in a chosen direction.

Although almost any group has some work to do, and all groups comprise people whose welfare needs to be tended to, the effective facilitator realizes that it’s impossible to emphasize both those elements to the same degree all the time. If people are disgruntled or frustrated, they can’t contribute well to accomplishing a task. Likewise, if people are always contented with one another and their group but can’t focus on getting things done, the group will be unable to attain its objectives. To facilitate a group well, thus, requires that you be equilibristic.

Understand and anticipate prevalent features of human psychology. Keep in mind that everyone in a group will perceive what the facilitator does in light of his or her own circumstances and wishes.

Recall also that everyone possesses diverse and numerous capacities for self-justification and self-support. In their book Mistakes were made (but not by me) , Carol Tavris and Ellion Aronson referred to studies of married couples’ behavior. They indicated that when husbands and wives are asked what proportion of the housework they perform, the totals always exceed 100 percent by a large margin. Tavris, C., & Aronson, E. (2007). Mistakes were made (but not by me). Orlando, FL: Harcourt Tavris and Aronson also described the Museum of Tolerance in Los Angeles, which presents visitors with interactive exhibits portraying categories of people about whom many of us harbor negative preconceptions—including ethnic and racial minorities, obese individuals, people with disabilities, and so on. A video attempts to persuade visitors that they possess prejudices, after which two doors are offered as an exit. One is marked “Prejudiced” and the other is labeled “Unprejudiced.” The second door is locked, to make the point that all of us are indeed subject to prejudice.

Deal well with disruptions. The playwright Paddy Chayevsky wrote that “life is problems.” An effective group facilitator needs to anticipate and skillfully cope with problems as a part of life, whether they’re caused by other people’s behavior or by physical and logistical factors.

If you’re an adherent of Theory Y , you probably believe that people enjoy pursuing their goals energetically, in groups or individually. You also probably believe that people prefer to select times and places along the way to relax and recharge. Unfortunately, interruptions often arise in such a way as to make both these aims difficult to achieve. Think about all the unexpected academic, family, and work-related reasons why you and other students you know have found it challenging to “stay the course” toward your personal and collective goals.

A group’s facilitator, thus, needs to make sure that interruptions and disruptions don’t derail it. In fact, he or she might profit from actually celebrating these elements of life, as one Seattle office executive did. According to Dale Turner, the executive’s office had a sign on the wall reading “Don’t be irritated by interruptions. They are your reason for being.” Turner went on to quote the executive as saying “Happily, I have learned how to sit loose in the saddle of life, and I’m not usually disturbed by interruptions. I have made it a habit through the years to leave a stretch factor in my daily schedule. I start early and have tried not to so crowd my day with appointments that I have no time for the unexpected. I have not seen interruptions as an intrusion.” Turner, D. (1991, March 23). Slaves of habit—we lose when there’s no room for interruptions in our lives. Seattle Times . Retrieved from ProQuest Database.

Keep returning to the task. You’ve probably been part of a group in which the leader or facilitator had what might be called a divergent, rather than a convergent, personality. Perhaps that person had lots of good ideas but seemed to jump around from topic to topic and chore to chore so much that your head spun and you couldn’t keep track of what was going on. Maybe the person “missed the forest for the trees” because of dwelling excessively on minutia—small and insignificant details. Or perhaps each time you met with the group its facilitator led a discussion of something valuable and important, but every time it was a different thing.

The organizational theorist Anthony Jay wrote that it’s important for leaders to “look for problems through a telescope, not a microscope.” Jay, A. (1967). Management and Machiavelli: An inquiry into the politics of corporate life. New York: Bantam Books. He also contended that, as far as a leader is concerned, “other people can cope with the waves, it’s [the leader’s] job to watch the tide.” By these comments, Jay meant that the primary duty of a group facilitator is to maintain an unwavering focus on the group’s central tasks, whatever they may be.

The Dalai Lama has written, “Whether you are a spiritual leader or a leader in an organization, it is your job to inspire faith.” His Holiness the Dalai Lama & Muyzenberg, L. (2009). The leader’s way: The art of making the right decisions in our careers, our companies, and the world at large. New York: Broadway Books. Slogans, mottos, mission statements, quotations, logos, and written objectives can all contribute to a facilitator’s ability to inspire faith by maintaining a group’s focus and resolve to move in a common direction. Busy students and others in our society often need reminders like these to block out the competing stimuli surrounding them and focus their attention. Such mechanisms, however, should not be merely gimmicks, nor should they be used to promote blind faith in the group’s facilitator.

Another way to think of how a facilitator should keep bringing the group’s attention back to its tasks relates to the process of meditation. Practitioners of meditation know that people’s minds are naturally active and tend to move readily from subject to subject. When someone is meditating, they say, thoughts will naturally pop into his or her mind. The way to deal with this phenomenon is to regard the thoughts as clouds drifting across the sky. Rather than trying to banish them, the better approach is to allow them to pass by and dissipate, and then to return to serene contemplation. Rondon, N. (2006, Meditate. Current Health 2 (32), 20–23. Retrieved from ProQuest Database

Coliberation

Above all, a facilitator’s responsibility is to enable members of a group to function together as easily and happily as possible as they pursue their goals. When this happens, the group will achieve a high level of collaboration. In fact, it may rise beyond collaboration to achieve what the author and computer game designer Bernard DeKoven called “ coliberation .” In speaking about meetings, he had this to say: “Good meetings aren’t just about work. They’re about fun—keeping people charged up. It’s more than collaboration, it’s ‘coliberation’—people freeing each other up to think more creatively.” Matson, E. (1996, April-May). The seven sins of deadly meetings. Fast Company , 122.

• To facilitate a task-oriented group requires several skills and behaviors and can lead to a state of “coliberation.”
• Recall a time when you were in a group whose leader stressed either its task or relationship factors too much. How did the members of the group react? Did the leader eventually develop an equilibristic approach?
• Do you agree with the business executive who said that interruptions are “your reason for being”? In your studies and family life, what measures do you take to ensure that interruptions are beneficial rather than destructive? What further steps do you feel you might take in this direction?
• Think of someone who effectively facilitated a group you were part of. Did the person perform the job identified by the Dalai Lama—inspiring faith in the group? If so, how?
• What, if anything, do you feel members of most groups need to be “coliberated” from?

11.5 Summary

In this chapter we have explored problem-solving in groups. We have identified steps which groups can use to attack and solve problems, as well as several methods of reaching decisions. We have considered the nature of group creativity and reviewed how brainstorming may contribute to creative problem-solving and decision-making. Finally, we have identified methods which can be used to facilitate the problem-solving and decision-making behavior or task-oriented groups. Following systematic, sequential processes can help groups communicate in ways which resolve problems and lead to appropriate decisions.

Review Questions

Interpretive Questions

• In what 2–3 ways has your view of problem-solving or decision-making changed as a result of reading this chapter?
• Under what circumstances, or with what kinds of group members, do you feel brainstorming is most likely to produce better results than other methods of generating creative ideas?

Application Questions

• Call the office of a state senator or representative. Ask the person who answers the phone to provide you with a list of five creative ideas the legislator has put forth to solve problems facing his or her constituency. If you wanted to expand on the list, who else would you consult, and what process would you use to generate more ideas?
• Pick two historical figures who you believe made it easy for people they lived or worked with to achieve shared goals. Find two or three descriptions of episodes in which those figures took action demonstrating that capacity. Identify someone leading a group of which you’re now a member and share the information about the historical figures with that person. What is the person’s reaction? What do you feel might have made the leader’s response more positive?
• Look up the phrase “group decision support system” on line and locate 4–5 software programs meant to assist groups with decisions. List advantages and disadvantages of each and share your conclusions with your classmates.

Additional Resources

https://www.deepfun.com/coliberation-the-short-form/ : Bernard “Bernie” De Koven’s blog. A source of provocative ideas on why and how to indulge in creative fun as part of a group.

https://www.co-intelligence.org/I-decisionmakingwithout.html (“How to Make a Decision Without Making a Decision”): An article describing how guided “non-decision-making” can be used by groups to discover what the author refers to as “big obvious truths.”

http://www.tobe.net/ : The website of Dynamic Facilitation Associates, a non-profit organization dedicated to teaching groups how to create choices through intentional facilitation. One of the site’s pages, describes “Co-Counseling” and compassionate communication as further facilitation tools.

An Introduction to Group Communication, V2.0 Copyright © 2020 by Granite State College is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Master of Business Administration

• Career Outlook
• Admission Requirements

Developing Effective Interpersonal Communication Skills in the Workplace

February 10, 2017  |  4 Min Read

Interpersonal communication is a soft skill that encompasses how well an individual communicates with others. This skill set, also referred to as “people skills” or “social skills,” is one of the most important for success in the workplace. Communication can take place both verbally and nonverbally, either in person or through digital means such as email or instant messaging. In communication theory, there are six key components of interpersonal communication:

• The communicators: This refers to both the sender of the communication and the receiver. There are at least two communicators involved in all interpersonal communication.
• The message: One of the most important parts of interpersonal communication is the message. It can be conveyed in many ways: speech, body language, tone of voice, gestures and other indicators. Non-verbal messages provide additional information that may not be readily apparent through words.
• Noise: This refers to any distortion that causes differences between what is received and what it sent , according to resource website CommunicationTheory.org. Examples of noise include jargon, language barriers, inattention and more.
• Feedback: Feedback is the response of the receiver. In other words, it’s the message sent back to the sender. This allows the sender to know whether the message has been received and interpreted correctly.
• Context: Whether a message is received and interpreted correctly depends largely on context. “The emotional climate and expectations of the people, the place of occurrence, and social, political, cultural and environmental conditions comprise context,” CommunicationTheory.org says.
• Channel: Finally, this component refers to how the communication occurs. A message is sent and received through a specific channel, or medium.

Interpersonal Communication in the Workplace

Interpersonal communication is one of the most important life skills business professionals can have. In companies and organizations of all types, effective communication determines whether a team can operate effectively and accomplish core business goals. “It underlies the efficiency of key business functions such as managing, training, selling and resolving conflicts within an organization,” Chron Small Business explains.

Elements of Interpersonal Communication

Interpersonal communication can also be divided into subskills . Effective communication in the workplace relies on each of the following elements:

• Problem solving and decision making: One of the best ways to maintain professional relationships is through effective problem solving and decision making. Both of these skills align team members toward a common goal. If leaders are unable to take the steps necessary to solve problems and make the right decision for the team, a business can’t function successfully.
• Listening: Strong listening skills are invaluable for business professionals. They help individuals understand sent messages and act accordingly. If a manager provides instructions but team members are unable to listen and synthesize the information, roadblocks will arise that can derail projects and cause negative consequences.
• Assertiveness: A commonly undervalued element of interpersonal communication is assertiveness. The ability to influence others helps leaders drive the team toward a common goal. Being willing to take charge and effect change is one of the hallmarks of a business leader.
• Negotiation: This skill is a key element in conflict resolution. Finding common ground and identifying shared goals can help business professionals work effectively with others.  

How to Improve Interpersonal Communication in the Workplace

Here are some of the ways business professionals can improve interpersonal communication in the workplace.

• Research and plan: Gather facts and relevant data to plan for important conversations. This helps ensure clarity and accuracy.
• Determine your audience: Consider coworkers’ personality and mindset before approaching a conversation. Find the right communication style for your specific situation. Some conversations lend themselves to face-to-face meetings, while others can be best accomplished through email.
• Self-evaluation: Understand your own strengths and weaknesses when it comes to communication. Ask for honest feedback from coworkers and managers as a learning opportunity to better inform future interactions.
• Monitor expectations: Keep assumptions and expectations to a minimum before engaging with a coworker. You never know for sure how someone will react, so be ready to adapt as the situation demands.

Skill Development Through Graduate Coursework

Earning a Master of Business Administration (MBA) is an ideal way to develop stronger interpersonal communication skills. Concordia University, St. Paul’s fully online MBA balances advanced business coursework with hands-on projects that help students develop real-world skills for the workplace. On campus program options are also available.

If you are interested in advanced business topics like these, consider Concordia University, St. Paul’s online MBA program . You can also download our free guide , “Climbing the Corporate Ladder: Your Guide to the MBA and Beyond,” for an in-depth look at the value of the MBA.

Recommended Articles

Successful online learning strategies: the importance of time management for students, how to be successful as an online student, marketing vs. communications, differences between a b.a. in business and an mba, marketing vs. advertising: what’s the difference.

On This Page

Get Started

5.3 Problem Solving and Decision Making in Groups

Learning Objectives

• Discuss the common components of problems.
• Explain the five steps of the group problem-solving process.
• Describe the brainstorming and discussion that should take place before the group makes a decision.
• Compare and contrast the different decision-making techniques.
• Discuss the various influences on decision making.

Although the steps of problem solving and decision making that we will discuss next may seem obvious, we often don’t think to or choose not to use them. Instead, we start working on a problem and later realize we are lost and have to backtrack. I’m sure we’ve all reached a point in a project or task and had the “OK, now what?” moment. It’s frustrating to get to a crucial point in building or fixing something only to realize that you have to unscrew a support board that you already screwed in, have to drive back to the hardware store to get something that you didn’t think to get earlier, or have to completely start over. In this section, we will discuss the group problem-solving process, methods of decision making, and influences on these processes.

Group Problem Solving

The problem-solving process involves thoughts, discussions, actions, and decisions that occur from the first consideration of a problematic situation to the goal. The problems that groups face are varied, but they all share some common components.

Problems of all sorts have three common components (Adams & Galanes, 2009):

• An undesirable situation. When conditions are desirable, there isn’t a problem.
• A desired situation. Even though it may only be a vague idea, there is a drive to better the undesirable situation. The vague idea may develop into a more precise goal that can be achieved, although solutions are not yet generated.
• Obstacles between undesirable and desirable situation. These are things that stand in the way between the current situation and the group’s goal of addressing it. This component of a problem requires the most work, and it is the part where decision making occurs. Some examples of obstacles include limited funding, resources, personnel, time, or information. Obstacles can also take the form of people who are working against the group, including people resistant to change or people who disagree.

Discussion of these three elements of a problem helps the group tailor its problem-solving process, as each problem will vary.

Group Problem-Solving Process

There are several variations of similar problem-solving models based on US American scholar John Dewey’s reflective thinking process (Bormann & Bormann, 1988). As you read through the steps in the process, think about how you can apply what we learned regarding the general and specific elements of problems. Some of the following steps are straightforward, and they are things we would logically do when faced with a problem. However, taking a deliberate and systematic approach to problem solving has been shown to benefit group functioning and performance. A deliberate approach is especially beneficial for groups that do not have an established history of working together and will only be able to meet occasionally. Although a group should attend to each step of the process, group leaders or other group members who facilitate problem solving should be cautious not to dogmatically follow each element of the process or force a group along. Such a lack of flexibility could limit group member input and negatively affect the group’s cohesion and climate.

Step 1: Define the Problem

Define the problem by considering the three elements shared by every problem: the current undesirable situation, the goal or more desirable situation, and obstacles in the way (Adams & Galanes, 2009). At this stage, group members share what they know about the current situation, without proposing solutions or evaluating the information. Here are some good questions to ask during this stage: What is the current difficulty? How did we come to know that the difficulty exists? Who/what is involved? Why is it meaningful/urgent/important? What have the effects been so far? What, if any, elements of the difficulty require clarification? At the end of this stage, the group should be able to compose a single sentence that summarizes the problem called a problem statement . Avoid wording in the problem statement or question that hints at potential solutions. A small group formed to investigate ethical violations of city officials could use the following problem statement: “Our state does not currently have a mechanism for citizens to report suspected ethical violations by city officials.”

Step 2: Analyze the Problem

During this step a group should analyze the problem and the group’s relationship to the problem. Whereas the first step involved exploring the “what” related to the problem, this step focuses on the “why.” At this stage, group members can discuss the potential causes of the difficulty. Group members may also want to begin setting out an agenda or timeline for the group’s problem-solving process, looking forward to the other steps. To fully analyze the problem, the group can discuss the five common problem variables discussed before. Here are two examples of questions that the group formed to address ethics violations might ask: Why doesn’t our city have an ethics reporting mechanism? Do cities of similar size have such a mechanism? Once the problem has been analyzed, the group can pose a problem question that will guide the group as it generates possible solutions. “How can citizens report suspected ethical violations of city officials and how will such reports be processed and addressed?” As you can see, the problem question is more complex than the problem statement, since the group has moved on to more in-depth discussion of the problem during step 2.

Step 3: Generate Possible Solutions

During this step, group members generate possible solutions to the problem. Again, solutions should not be evaluated at this point, only proposed and clarified. The question should be what could we do to address this problem, not what should we do to address it. It is perfectly OK for a group member to question another person’s idea by asking something like “What do you mean?” or “Could you explain your reasoning more?” Discussions at this stage may reveal a need to return to previous steps to better define or more fully analyze a problem. Since many problems are multifaceted, it is necessary for group members to generate solutions for each part of the problem separately, making sure to have multiple solutions for each part. Stopping the solution-generating process prematurely can lead to groupthink. For the problem question previously posed, the group would need to generate solutions for all three parts of the problem included in the question. Possible solutions for the first part of the problem (How can citizens report ethical violations?) may include “online reporting system, e-mail, in-person, anonymously, on-the-record,” and so on. Possible solutions for the second part of the problem (How will reports be processed?) may include “daily by a newly appointed ethics officer, weekly by a nonpartisan nongovernment employee,” and so on. Possible solutions for the third part of the problem (How will reports be addressed?) may include “by a newly appointed ethics commission, by the accused’s supervisor, by the city manager,” and so on.

Step 4: Evaluate Solutions

During this step, solutions can be critically evaluated based on their credibility, completeness, and worth. Once the potential solutions have been narrowed based on more obvious differences in relevance and/or merit, the group should analyze each solution based on its potential effects—especially negative effects. Groups that are required to report the rationale for their decision or whose decisions may be subject to public scrutiny would be wise to make a set list of criteria for evaluating each solution. Additionally, solutions can be evaluated based on how well they fit with the group’s charge and the abilities of the group. To do this, group members may ask, “Does this solution live up to the original purpose or mission of the group?” and “Can the solution actually be implemented with our current resources and connections?” and “How will this solution be supported, funded, enforced, and assessed?” Secondary tensions and substantive conflict, two concepts discussed earlier, emerge during this step of problem solving, and group members will need to employ effective critical thinking and listening skills.

Decision making is part of the larger process of problem solving and it plays a prominent role in this step. While there are several fairly similar models for problem solving, there are many varied decision-making techniques that groups can use. For example, to narrow the list of proposed solutions, group members may decide by majority vote, by weighing the pros and cons, or by discussing them until a consensus is reached. There are also more complex decision-making models like the “six hats method,” which we will discuss later. Once the final decision is reached, the group leader or facilitator should confirm that the group is in agreement. It may be beneficial to let the group break for a while or even to delay the final decision until a later meeting to allow people time to evaluate it outside of the group context.

Step 5: Implement and Assess the Solution

Implementing the solution requires some advanced planning, and it should not be rushed unless the group is operating under strict time restraints or delay may lead to some kind of harm. Although some solutions can be implemented immediately, others may take days, months, or years. As was noted earlier, it may be beneficial for groups to poll those who will be affected by the solution as to their opinion of it or even to do a pilot test to observe the effectiveness of the solution and how people react to it.

Before implementation, groups should also determine how and when they would assess the effectiveness of the solution by asking,

“How will we know if the solution is working or not?” Since solution assessment will vary based on whether or not the group is disbanded, groups should also consider the following questions: If the group disbands after implementation, who will be responsible for assessing the solution? If the solution fails, will the same group reconvene or will a new group be formed?

Certain elements of the solution may need to be delegated out to various people inside and outside the group. Group members may also be assigned to implement a particular part of the solution based on their role in the decision making or because it connects to their area of expertise. Likewise, group members may be tasked with publicizing the solution or “selling” it to a particular group of stakeholders. Last, the group should consider its future. In some cases, the group will get to decide if it will stay together and continue working on other tasks or if it will disband. In other cases, outside forces determine the group’s fate.

Six Thinking Hats Method

Edward de Bono developed the Six Thinking Hats  method of thinking in the late 1980s, and it has since become a regular feature in problem-solving and decision-making training in business and professional contexts (de Bono, 1985). The method’s popularity lies in its ability to help people get out of habitual ways of thinking and to allow group members to play different roles and see a problem or decision from multiple points of view. The basic idea is that each of the six hats represents a different way of thinking, and when we figuratively switch hats, we switch the way we think. The hats and their style of thinking are as follows:

• White hat. Objective—focuses on seeking information such as data and facts and then neutrally processes that information.
• Red hat. Emotional—uses intuition, gut reactions, and feelings to judge information and suggestions.
• Black hat. Critical—focuses on potential risks, points out possibilities for failure, and evaluates information cautiously and defensively.
• Yellow hat. Positive—is optimistic about suggestions and future outcomes, gives constructive and positive feedback, points out benefits and advantages.
• Green hat. Creative—tries to generate new ideas and solutions, thinks “outside the box.”
• Blue hat. Process—uses metacommunication to organize and reflect on the thinking and communication taking place in the group, facilitates who wears what hat and when group members change hats.

Specific sequences or combinations of hats can be used to encourage strategic thinking. For example, the group leader may start off wearing the Blue Hat and suggest that the group start their decision-making process with some “White Hat thinking” to process through facts and other available information. During this stage, the group could also process through what other groups have done when faced with a similar problem. Then the leader could begin an evaluation sequence starting with two minutes of “Yellow Hat thinking” to identify potential positive outcomes, then “Black Hat thinking” to allow group members to express reservations about ideas and point out potential problems, then “Red Hat thinking” to get people’s gut reactions to the previous discussion, then “Green Hat thinking” to identify other possible solutions that are more tailored to the group’s situation or completely new approaches. At the end of a sequence, the Blue Hat would want to summarize what was said and begin a new sequence. To successfully use this method, the person wearing the Blue Hat should be familiar with different sequences and plan some of the thinking patterns ahead of time based on the problem and the group members. Each round of thinking should be limited to a certain time frame (two to five minutes) to keep the discussion moving.

• This problem-solving method has been praised because it allows group members to “switch gears” in their thinking and allows for role-playing, which lets people express ideas more freely. How can this help enhance critical thinking? Which combination of hats do you think would be best for a critical thinking sequence?
• What combinations of hats might be useful if the leader wanted to break the larger group up into pairs and why? For example, what kind of thinking would result from putting Yellow and Red together, Black and White together, or Red and White together, and so on?
• Based on your preferred ways of thinking and your personality, which hat would be the best fit for you? Which would be the most challenging? Why?

Decision Making in Groups

We all engage in personal decision making daily, and we all know that some decisions are more difficult than others. When we make decisions in groups, we face some challenges that we do not face in our personal decision making, but we also stand to benefit from some advantages of group decision making (Napier & Gershenfeld, 2004). Group decision making can appear fair and democratic but really only be a gesture that covers up the fact that certain group members or the group leader have already decided. Group decision making also takes more time than individual decisions and can be burdensome if some group members do not do their assigned work, divert the group with self-centered or unproductive role behaviors, or miss meetings. Conversely, though, group decisions are often more informed, since all group members develop a shared understanding of a problem through discussion and debate. The shared understanding may also be more complex and deep than what an individual would develop, because the group members are exposed to a variety of viewpoints that can broaden their own perspectives. Group decisions also benefit from synergy, one of the key advantages of group communication that we discussed earlier. Most groups do not use a specific method of decision making, perhaps thinking that they’ll work things out as they go. This can lead to unequal participation, social loafing, premature decisions, prolonged discussion, and a host of other negative consequences. So in this section we will learn some practices that will prepare us for good decision making and some specific techniques we can use to help us reach a final decision.

Brainstorming Before Decision Making

Before groups can make a decision, they need to generate possible solutions to their problem. The most commonly used method is brainstorming, although most people don’t follow the recommended steps of brainstorming. As you’ll recall, brainstorming refers to the quick generation of ideas free of evaluation. The originator of the term brainstorming said the following four rules must be followed for the technique to be effective (Osborn, 1959):

• Evaluation of ideas is forbidden.
• Wild and crazy ideas are encouraged.
• Quantity of ideas, not quality, is the goal.
• New combinations of ideas presented are encouraged.

Discussion Before Decision Making

The nominal group technique guides decision making through a four-step process that includes idea generation and evaluation and seeks to elicit equal contributions from all group members (Delbecq & Ven de Ven, 1971). This method is useful because the procedure involves all group members systematically, which fixes the problem of uneven participation during discussions. Since everyone contributes to the discussion, this method can also help reduce instances of social loafing. To use the nominal group technique, do the following:

• Silently and individually list ideas.
• Create a master list of ideas.
• Clarify ideas as needed.
• Take a secret vote to rank group members’ acceptance of ideas.

Specific Decision-Making Techniques

Some decision-making techniques involve determining a course of action based on the level of agreement among the group members. These methods include majority, expert, authority, and consensus rule. Table 5.3.1 “Pros and Cons of Agreement-Based Decision-Making Techniques” reviews the pros and cons of each of these methods.

Majority rule is a commonly used decision-making technique in which a majority (one-half plus one) must agree before a decision is made. A show-of-hands vote, a paper ballot, or an electronic voting system can determine the majority choice. Many decision-making bodies, including the US House of Representatives, Senate, and Supreme Court, use majority rule to make decisions, which shows that it is often associated with democratic decision making, since each person gets one vote and each vote counts equally. Of course, other individuals and mediated messages can influence a person’s vote, but since the voting power is spread out over all group members, it is not easy for one person or party to take control of the decision-making process. In some cases—for example, to override a presidential veto or to amend the constitution—a super majority of two-thirds may be required to make a decision.

Minority rule is a decision-making technique in which a designated authority or expert has final say over a decision and may or may not consider the input of other group members. When a designated expert makes a decision by minority rule, there may be buy-in from others in the group, especially if the members of the group didn’t have relevant knowledge or expertise. When a designated authority makes decisions, buy-in will vary based on group members’ level of respect for the authority. For example, decisions made by an elected authority may be more accepted by those who elected him or her than by those who didn’t. As with majority rule, this technique can be time saving. Unlike majority rule, one person or party can have control over the decision-making process. This type of decision making is more similar to that used by monarchs and dictators. An obvious negative consequence of this method is that the needs or wants of one person can override the needs and wants of the majority. A minority deciding for the majority has led to negative consequences throughout history. The white Afrikaner minority that ruled South Africa for decades instituted apartheid, which was a system of racial segregation that disenfranchised and oppressed the majority population. The quality of the decision and its fairness really depends on the designated expert or authority.

Consensus rule is a decision-making technique in which all members of the group must agree on the same decision. On rare occasions, a decision may be ideal for all group members, which can lead to unanimous agreement without further debate and discussion. Although this can be positive, be cautious that this isn’t a sign of groupthink. More typically, consensus is reached only after lengthy discussion. On the plus side, consensus often leads to high-quality decisions due to the time and effort it takes to get everyone in agreement. Group members are also more likely to be committed to the decision because of their investment in reaching it. On the negative side, the ultimate decision is often one that all group members can live with but not one that’s ideal for all members. Additionally, the process of arriving at consensus also includes conflict, as people debate ideas and negotiate the interpersonal tensions that may result.

Table 5.3.1: Pros and Cons of Agreement-Based Decision-Making Techniques

Influences on decision making.

Many factors influence the decision-making process. For example, how might a group’s independence or access to resources affect the decisions they make? What potential advantages and disadvantages come with decisions made by groups that are more or less similar in terms of personality and cultural identities? In this section, we will explore how situational, personality, and cultural influences affect decision making in groups.

Situational Influences on Decision Making

A group’s situational context affects decision making. One key situational element is the degree of freedom that the group has to make its own decisions, secure its own resources, and initiate its own actions. Some groups have to go through multiple approval processes before they can do anything, while others are self-directed, self-governing, and self-sustaining. Another situational influence is uncertainty. In general, groups deal with more uncertainty in decision making than do individuals because of the increased number of variables that comes with adding more people to a situation. Individual group members can’t know what other group members are thinking, whether or not they are doing their work, and how committed they are to the group. So the size of a group is a powerful situational influence, as it adds to uncertainty and complicates communication.

Access to information also influences a group. First, the nature of the group’s task or problem affects its ability to get information. Group members can more easily make decisions about a problem when other groups have similarly experienced it. Even if the problem is complex and serious, the group can learn from other situations and apply what it learns. Second, the group must have access to flows of information. Access to archives, electronic databases, and individuals with relevant experience is necessary to obtain any relevant information about similar problems or to do research on a new or unique problem. In this regard, group members’ formal and information network connections also become important situational influences.

The origin and urgency of a problem are also situational factors that influence decision making. In terms of origin, problems usually occur in one of four ways:

• Something goes wrong. Group members must decide how to fix or stop something. Example—a firehouse crew finds out that half of the building is contaminated with mold and must be closed down.
• Expectations change or increase. Group members must innovate more efficient or effective ways of doing something. Example—a firehouse crew finds out that the district they are responsible for is being expanded.
• Something goes wrong and expectations change or increase. Group members must fix/stop and become more efficient/effective. Example—the firehouse crew has to close half the building and must start responding to more calls due to the expanding district.
• The problem existed from the beginning. Group members must go back to the origins of the situation and walk through and analyze the steps again to decide what can be done differently. Example—a firehouse crew has consistently had to work with minimal resources in terms of building space and firefighting tools.

In each of the cases, the need for a decision may be more or less urgent depending on how badly something is going wrong, how high the expectations have been raised, or the degree to which people are fed up with a broken system. Decisions must be made in situations ranging from crisis level to mundane.

Personality Influences on Decision Making

The personalities of group members, especially leaders and other active members, affect the climate of the group. Group member personalities can be categorized based on where they fall on a continuum anchored by the following descriptors: dominant/submissive, friendly/unfriendly, and instrumental/emotional (Cragan & Wright, 1999). The more group members there are in any extreme of these categories, the more likely that the group climate will also shift to resemble those characteristics.

• Dominant versus submissive. Group members that are more dominant act more independently and directly, initiate conversations, take up more space, make more direct eye contact, seek leadership positions, and take control over decision-making processes. More submissive members are reserved, contribute to the group only when asked to, avoid eye contact, and leave their personal needs and thoughts unvoiced or give into the suggestions of others.
• Friendly versus unfriendly. Group members on the friendly side of the continuum find a balance between talking and listening, don’t try to win at the expense of other group members, are flexible but not weak, and value democratic decision making. Unfriendly group members are disagreeable, indifferent, withdrawn, and selfish, which leads them to either not invest in decision making or direct it in their own interest rather than in the interest of the group.
• Instrumental versus emotional. Instrumental group members are emotionally neutral, objective, analytical, task-oriented, and committed followers, which leads them to work hard and contribute to the group’s decision making as long as it is orderly and follows agreed-on rules. Emotional group members are creative, playful, independent, unpredictable, and expressive, which leads them to make rash decisions, resist group norms or decision-making structures, and switch often from relational to task focus.

Cultural Context and Decision Making

Demographic changes in the United States and increases in technology that can bring different people together make it more likely that we will be interacting in more and more heterogeneous groups (Allen, 2011). Some small groups are more homogenous, meaning the members are more similar, and some are more heterogeneous, meaning the members are more different. Diversity and difference within groups has advantages and disadvantages. In terms of advantages, research finds that, in general, groups that are culturally heterogeneous have better overall performance than more homogenous groups (Haslett & Ruebush, 1999). Additionally, when group members have time to get to know each other and competently communicate across their differences, the advantages of diversity include better decision making due to different perspectives (Thomas, 1999). Unfortunately, groups often operate under time constraints and other pressures that make the possibility for intercultural dialogue and understanding difficult. The main disadvantage of heterogeneous groups is the possibility for conflict, but given that all groups experience conflict, this isn’t solely due to the presence of diversity. We will now look more specifically at how some of the cultural value orientations we’ve learned about already in this book can play out in groups with international diversity and how domestic diversity in terms of demographics can also influence group decision making.

International Diversity in Group Interactions

As we learned in Chapter 4.3: “Intercultural Communication,” different cultural value dimensions can influence a person’s approach to group interactions. Cultural value orientations such as individualism/collectivism, power distance, and high-/low-context communication styles all manifest on a continuum of communication behaviors and can influence group decision making. Group members from individualistic cultures are more likely to value task-oriented, efficient, and direct communication. This could manifest in behaviors such as dividing up tasks into individual projects before collaboration begins and then openly debating ideas during discussion and decision making. Additionally, people from cultures that value individualism are more likely to openly express dissent from a decision, essentially expressing their disagreement with the group. Group members from collectivistic cultures are more likely to value relationships over the task at hand. Because of this, they also tend to value conformity and face-saving (often indirect) communication. This could manifest in behaviors such as establishing norms that include periods of socializing to build relationships before task-oriented communication like negotiations begin or norms that limit public disagreement in favor of more indirect communication that doesn’t challenge the face of other group members or the group’s leader. In a group composed of people from a collectivistic culture, each member would likely play harmonizing roles, looking for signs of conflict and resolving them before they become public.

Power distance can also affect group interactions. Some cultures rank higher on power-distance scales, meaning they value hierarchy, make decisions based on status, and believe that people have a set place in society that is fairly unchangeable. Group members from high-power-distance cultures would likely appreciate a strong designated leader who exhibits a more directive leadership style and prefer groups in which members have clear and assigned roles. In a group that is homogenous in terms of having a high-power-distance orientation, members with higher status would be able to openly provide information, and those with lower status may not provide information unless a higher status member explicitly seeks it from them. Low-power-distance cultures do not place as much value and meaning on status and believe that all group members can participate in decision making. Group members from low-power-distance cultures would likely freely speak their mind during a group meeting and prefer a participative leadership style.

How much meaning is conveyed through the context surrounding verbal communication can also affect group communication. Some cultures have a high-context communication style in which much of the meaning in an interaction is conveyed through context such as nonverbal cues and silence. Group members from high-context cultures may avoid saying something directly, assuming that other group members will understand the intended meaning even if the message is indirect. So if someone disagrees with a proposed course of action, he or she may say, “Let’s discuss this tomorrow,” and mean, “I don’t think we should do this.” Such indirect communication is also a face-saving strategy that is common in collectivistic cultures. Other cultures have a low-context communication style that places more importance on the meaning conveyed through words than through context or nonverbal cues. Group members from low-context cultures often say what they mean and mean what they say. For example, if someone doesn’t like an idea, they might say, “I think we should consider more options. This one doesn’t seem like the best we can do.”

In any of these cases, an individual from one culture operating in a group with people of a different cultural orientation could adapt to the expectations of the host culture, especially if that person possesses a high degree of intercultural communication competence (ICC). Additionally, people with high ICC can also adapt to a group member with a different cultural orientation than the host culture. Even though these cultural orientations connect to values that affect our communication in fairly consistent ways, individuals may exhibit different communication behaviors depending on their own individual communication style and the situation.

Domestic Diversity and Group Communication

While it is becoming more likely that we will interact in small groups with international diversity, we are guaranteed to interact in groups that are diverse in terms of the cultural identities found within a single country or the subcultures found within a larger cultural group.

Gender stereotypes sometimes influence the roles that people play within a group. For example, the stereotype that women are more nurturing than men may lead group members (both male and female) to expect that women will play the role of supporters or harmonizers within the group. Since women have primarily performed secretarial work since the 1900s, it may also be expected that women will play the role of recorder. In both of these cases, stereotypical notions of gender place women in roles that are typically not as valued in group communication. The opposite is true for men. In terms of leadership, despite notable exceptions, research shows that men fill an overwhelmingly disproportionate amount of leadership positions. We are socialized to see certain behaviors by men as indicative of leadership abilities, even though they may not be. For example, men are often perceived to contribute more to a group because they tend to speak first when asked a question or to fill a silence and are perceived to talk more about task-related matters than relationally oriented matters. Both of these tendencies create a perception that men are more engaged with the task. Men are also socialized to be more competitive and self-congratulatory, meaning that their communication may be seen as dedicated and their behaviors seen as powerful, and that when their work isn’t noticed they will be more likely to make it known to the group rather than take silent credit. Even though we know that the relational elements of a group are crucial for success, even in high-performance teams, that work is not as valued in our society as the task-related work.

Despite the fact that some communication patterns and behaviors related to our typical (and stereotypical) gender socialization affect how we interact in and form perceptions of others in groups, the differences in group communication that used to be attributed to gender in early group communication research seem to be diminishing. This is likely due to the changing organizational cultures from which much group work emerges, which have now had more than seventy years to adjust to women in the workplace. It is also due to a more nuanced understanding of gender-based research, which doesn’t take a stereotypical view from the beginning as many of the early male researchers did. Now, instead of biological sex being assumed as a factor that creates inherent communication differences, group communication scholars see that men and women both exhibit a range of behaviors that are more or less feminine or masculine. It is these gendered behaviors, and not a person’s gender, that seem to have more of an influence on perceptions of group communication. Interestingly, group interactions are still masculinist in that male and female group members prefer a more masculine communication style for task leaders and that both males and females in this role are more likely to adapt to a more masculine communication style. Conversely, men who take on social-emotional leadership behaviors adopt a more feminine communication style. In short, it seems that although masculine communication traits are more often associated with high status positions in groups, both men and women adapt to this expectation and are evaluated similarly (Haslett & Ruebush, 1999).

Other demographic categories are also influential in group communication and decision making. In general, group members have an easier time communicating when they are more similar than different in terms of race and age. This ease of communication can make group work more efficient, but the homogeneity may sacrifice some creativity. As we learned earlier, groups that are diverse (e.g., they have members of different races and generations) benefit from the diversity of perspectives in terms of the quality of decision making and creativity of output.

In terms of age, for the first time since industrialization began, it is common to have three generations of people (and sometimes four) working side by side in an organizational setting. Although four generations often worked together in early factories, they were segregated based on their age group, and a hierarchy existed with older workers at the top and younger workers at the bottom. Today, however, generations interact regularly, and it is not uncommon for an older person to have a leader or supervisor who is younger than him or her (Allen, 2011). The current generations in the US workplace and consequently in work-based groups include the following:

• The Silent Generation . Born between 1925 and 1942, currently in their mid-seventies to mid-nineties, this is the smallest generation in the workforce right now, as many have retired or left for other reasons. This generation includes people who were born during the Great Depression or the early part of World War II, many of whom later fought in the Korean War (Clarke, 1970).
• The Baby Boomers . Born between 1946 and 1964, currently in their late fifties to mid-seventies, this is the largest generation in the workforce right now. Baby boomers are the most populous generation born in US history, and they are working longer than previous generations, which means they will remain the predominant force in organizations for ten to twenty more years.
• Generation X . Born between 1965 and 1981, currently in their early forties to mid-fifties, this generation was the first to see technology like cell phones and the Internet make its way into classrooms and our daily lives. Compared to previous generations, “Gen-Xers” are more diverse in terms of race, religious beliefs, and sexual orientation and also have a greater appreciation for and understanding of diversity.
• Generation Y . Born between 1982 and 1999, “Millennials” as they are also called are currently in their late twenties up to about forty years old. This generation is not as likely to remember a time without technology such as computers and cell phones. They are just starting to enter into the workforce and have been greatly affected by the economic crisis of the late 2000s, experiencing significantly high unemployment rates.
• Generation Z . Born between 2000 and 2012, are sometimes called iGen. They are just joining the workforce. This generation came of age alongside social media. They were the first population to have to cope with cyber-bullying and other pervasive internet issues. This generation also faced more school violence and concerns over climate crisis than past generations.
• Generation Alpha . Born 2013-2025, are currently coming of age. This is the first generation born to parents who grew up fluent with technology such as the internet, cell phones, tablets, social media, etc. This is the most racially diverse and technologically adept generation so far.

The benefits and challenges that come with diversity of group members are important to consider. Since we will all work in diverse groups, we should be prepared to address potential challenges in order to reap the benefits. Diverse groups may be wise to coordinate social interactions outside of group time in order to find common ground that can help facilitate interaction and increase group cohesion. We should be sensitive but not let sensitivity create fear of “doing something wrong” that then prevents us from having meaningful interactions. Reviewing Chapter 4: “Culture and Communication” will give you useful knowledge to help you navigate both international and domestic diversity and increase your communication competence in small groups and elsewhere.

Key Takeaways

• Every problem has common components: an undesirable situation, a desired situation, and obstacles between the undesirable and desirable situations. Every problem also has a set of characteristics that vary among problems, including task difficulty, number of possible solutions, group member interest in the problem, group familiarity with the problem, and the need for solution acceptance.

The group problem-solving process has five steps:

• Define the problem by creating a problem statement that summarizes it.
• Analyze the problem and create a problem question that can guide solution generation.
• Generate possible solutions. Possible solutions should be offered and listed without stopping to evaluate each one.
• Evaluate the solutions based on their credibility, completeness, and worth. Groups should also assess the potential effects of the narrowed list of solutions.
• Implement and assess the solution. Aside from enacting the solution, groups should determine how they will know the solution is working or not.
• Before a group makes a decision, it should brainstorm possible solutions. Group communication scholars suggest that groups (1) do a warm-up brainstorming session; (2) do an actual brainstorming session in which ideas are not evaluated, wild ideas are encouraged, quantity not quality of ideas is the goal, and new combinations of ideas are encouraged; (3) eliminate duplicate ideas; and (4) clarify, organize, and evaluate ideas. In order to guide the idea-generation process and invite equal participation from group members, the group may also elect to use the nominal group technique.
• Common decision-making techniques include majority rule, minority rule, and consensus rule. With majority rule, only a majority, usually one-half plus one, must agree before a decision is made. With minority rule, a designated authority or expert has final say over a decision, and the input of group members may or may not be invited or considered. With consensus rule, all members of the group must agree on the same decision.

Several factors influence the decision-making process:

• Situational factors include the degree of freedom a group has to make its own decisions, the level of uncertainty facing the group and its task, the size of the group, the group’s access to information, and the origin and urgency of the problem.
• Personality influences on decision making include a person’s value orientation (economic, aesthetic, theoretical, political, or religious), and personality traits (dominant/submissive, friendly/unfriendly, and instrumental/emotional).
• Cultural influences on decision making include the heterogeneity or homogeneity of the group makeup; cultural values and characteristics such as individualism/collectivism, power distance, and high-/low-context communication styles; and gender and age differences.
• Scenario 1. Task difficulty is high, number of possible solutions is high, group interest in problem is high, group familiarity with problem is low, and need for solution acceptance is high.
• Scenario 2. Task difficulty is low, number of possible solutions is low, group interest in problem is low, group familiarity with problem is high, and need for solution acceptance is low.
• Scenario 1: Academic. A professor asks his or her class to decide whether the final exam should be an in-class or take-home exam.
• Scenario 2: Professional. A group of coworkers must decide which person from their department to nominate for a company-wide award.
• Scenario 3: Personal. A family needs to decide how to divide the belongings and estate of a deceased family member who did not leave a will.
• Scenario 4: Civic. A local branch of a political party needs to decide what five key issues it wants to include in the national party’s platform.
• Group communication researchers have found that heterogeneous groups (composed of diverse members) have advantages over homogenous (more similar) groups. Discuss a group situation you have been in where diversity enhanced your and/or the group’s experience.

Adams, K., and Gloria G. Galanes, Communicating in Groups: Applications and Skills , 7th ed. (Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill, 2009), 220–21.

Allen, B. J., Difference Matters: Communicating Social Identity , 2nd ed. (Long Grove, IL: Waveland, 2011), 5.

Bormann, E. G., and Nancy C. Bormann, Effective Small Group Communication , 4th ed. (Santa Rosa, CA: Burgess CA, 1988), 112–13.

Clarke, G., “The Silent Generation Revisited,” Time, June 29, 1970, 46.

Cragan, J. F., and David W. Wright, Communication in Small Group Discussions: An Integrated Approach , 3rd ed. (St. Paul, MN: West Publishing, 1991), 77–78.

de Bono, E., Six Thinking Hats (Boston, MA: Little, Brown, 1985).

Delbecq, A. L., and Andrew H. Ven de Ven, “A Group Process Model for Problem Identification and Program Planning,” The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 7, no. 4 (1971): 466–92.

Haslett, B. B., and Jenn Ruebush, “What Differences Do Individual Differences in Groups Make?: The Effects of Individuals, Culture, and Group Composition,” in The Handbook of Group Communication Theory and Research , ed. Lawrence R. Frey (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1999), 133.

Napier, R. W., and Matti K. Gershenfeld, Groups: Theory and Experience , 7th ed. (Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin, 2004), 292.

Osborn, A. F., Applied Imagination (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1959).

Spranger, E., Types of Men (New York: Steckert, 1928).

Stanton, C., “How to Deliver Group Presentations: The Unified Team Approach,” Six Minutes Speaking and Presentation Skills , November 3, 2009, accessed August 28, 2012, http://sixminutes.dlugan.com/group-presentations-unified-team-approach .

Thomas, D. C., “Cultural Diversity and Work Group Effectiveness: An Experimental Study,” Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 30, no. 2 (1999): 242–63.

A single sentence that summarizes the problem

A question that guides that group as it generates possible solutions

A technique that guides decision making through a four-step process that includes idea generation and evaluation and seeks to elicit equal contributions from all group members

A decision-making technique in which a majority must agree before a decision is made

A decision-making technique in which a designated authority or expert has final say over a decision and may or may not consider the input of other group members

A decision-making technique in which all members of a group must agree on the same decision

The group born in the US between 1925 and 1942; the smallest generation in today’s workforce due to retirement or other reasons

The group born in the US between 1946 and 1964; the largest and most predominant generation in the current workforce

The group of people born in the US between 1965 and 1981; the first generation to see technology (cell phones, Internet) make its way into classrooms and daily life; have a greater appreciation for and understanding of diversity

The group of people born in the US between 1982 and 2000; also called millennials; have never experienced a time without technology such as computers and cell phones

Born between 2000 and 2012, are sometimes called iGen. This generation came of age alongside social media. They were the first population to have to cope with cyberbullying and other pervasive internet issues. This generation also faced more school violence and concerns over climate crisis than past generations

The group of people born 2013-2025 and currently coming of age. This is the first generation born to parents who grew up fluent with technology such as the internet, cell phones, tablets, social media, etc. This is the most racially diverse and technologically adept U.S. generation so far

Interpersonal & Small Group Communication Copyright © 2023 by Weber State University is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons
• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

12.2: Teams – The Problem Solving Process

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 152971

Life is full of challenges. A huge part of life is solving those challenges. Sometimes those challenges are at home – how do we keep pine needles from clogging our gutters? Other times they are at work. Ford Motor Company is spending a lot more money fixing product defects after the car has left the factory lot than General Motors.

Teams exist to solve problems. That’s true whether it’s a committee the PTA president has put together to figure out how to raise money for new playground equipment or a team to launch a new product. Often a big problem turns out to be a problem wrapped in a problem wrapped in a problem wrapped in a . . . . well, you get the idea. So, one large team might be composed of a number of smaller teams, each focused on solving one part of a larger problem.

In the following video, Ariana Glantz shares her approach to tackling each day’s problems with a solution-minded point of view.

Find Problem, Solve Problem | Ariana Glantz | TEXxMemphis

• What are the five components of being solution-minded? Be prepared to discuss in class. If an online class, list the five steps.

But what, exactly, is the problem-solving process? This video gives a seven-step process for both personal and professional life. Watch this video and identify the seven steps.

How to solve any real-life problem with these 7 steps (Problem solving explained)

• List and explain each of the seven steps. In an online class, submit the list to your instructor. In a face-to-face class, this will be discussed in class.

Only an engineering graduate student would have applied the problem-solving process to making a small boat to sail in a cocktail. See how she did it, here:

Problem-Solving Process

Your instructor will assign you to a team. You and your teammates will define a social problem and develop a solution. The solution will be presented in class in the form of a PowerPoint (or similar) presentation.

Assessing 21st Century Skills: Summary of a Workshop (2011)

Chapter: 3 assessing interpersonal skills.

Assessing Interpersonal Skills

The second cluster of skills—broadly termed interpersonal skills—are those required for relating to other people. These sorts of skills have long been recognized as important for success in school and the workplace, said Stephen Fiore, professor at the University of Central Florida, who presented findings from a paper about these skills and how they might be assessed (Salas, Bedwell, and Fiore, 2011). 1 Advice offered by Dale Carnegie in the 1930s to those who wanted to “win friends and influence people,” for example, included the following: be a good listener; don’t criticize, condemn, or complain; and try to see things from the other person’s point of view. These are the same sorts of skills found on lists of 21st century skills today. For example, the Partnership for 21st Century Skills includes numerous interpersonal capacities, such as working creatively with others, communicating clearly, and collaborating with others, among the skills students should learn as they progress from preschool through postsecondary study (see Box 3-1 for the definitions of the relevant skills in the organization’s P-21 Framework).

It seems clear that these are important skills, yet definitive labels and definitions for the interpersonal skills important for success in schooling and work remain elusive: They have been called social or people skills, social competencies, soft skills, social self-efficacy, and social intelligence, Fiore said (see, e.g., Ferris, Witt, and Hochwarter, 2001; Hochwarter et al.,

________________

1 See http://www7.national-academies.org/bota/21st_Century_Workshop_Salas_Fiore_Paper.pdf [August 2011].

BOX 3-1 Interpersonal Capacities in the Partnership for 21st Century Skills Framework

Work Creatively with Others

• Develop, implement, and communicate new ideas to others effectively
• Be open and responsive to new and diverse perspectives; incorporate group input and feedback into the work
• Demonstrate originality and inventiveness in work and understand the real-world limits to adopting new ideas
• View failure as an opportunity to learn; understand that creativity and innovation is a long-term, cyclical process of small successes and frequent mistakes

Communicate Clearly

• Articulate thoughts and ideas effectively using oral, written, and nonverbal communication skills in a variety of forms and contexts
• Listen effectively to decipher meaning, including knowledge, values, attitudes, and intentions
• Use communication for a range of purposes (e.g., to inform, instruct, motivate, and persuade)
• Utilize multiple media and technologies, and know how to judge their effectiveness a priori as well as to assess their impact
• Communicate effectively in diverse environments (including multilingual)

Collaborate with Others

• Demonstrate ability to work effectively and respectfully with diverse teams
• Exercise flexibility and willingness to be helpful in making necessary compromises to accomplish a common goal
• Assume shared responsibility for collaborative work, and value the individual contributions made by each team member

2006; Klein et al., 2006; Riggio, 1986; Schneider, Ackerman, and Kanfer, 1996; Sherer et al., 1982; Sternberg, 1985; Thorndike, 1920). The previous National Research Council (NRC) workshop report that offered a preliminary definition of 21st century skills described one broad category of interpersonal skills (National Research Council, 2010, p. 3):

Complex communication/social skills: Skills in processing and interpreting both verbal and nonverbal information from others in order to respond appropriately. A skilled communicator is able to select key pieces of a complex idea to express in words, sounds, and images, in order to build shared understanding (Levy and Murnane, 2004). Skilled communicators negotiate positive outcomes with customers, subordinates, and superiors through social perceptiveness, persuasion, negotiation, instructing, and service orientation (Peterson et al., 1999).

Adapt to Change

• Adapt to varied roles, jobs responsibilities, schedules, and contexts
• Work effectively in a climate of ambiguity and changing priorities

Be Flexible

• Incorporate feedback effectively
• Deal positively with praise, setbacks, and criticism
• Understand, negotiate, and balance diverse views and beliefs to reach
• workable solutions, particularly in multicultural environments

Interact Effectively with Others

• Know when it is appropriate to listen and when to speak
• Conduct themselves in a respectable, professional manner

Work Effectively in Diverse Teams

• Respect cultural differences and work effectively with people from a range of social and cultural backgrounds
• Respond open-mindedly to different ideas and values
• Leverage social and cultural differences to create new ideas and increase both innovation and quality of work

Guide and Lead Others

• Use interpersonal and problem-solving skills to influence and guide others toward a goal
• Leverage strengths of others to accomplish a common goal
• Inspire others to reach their very best via example and selflessness
• Demonstrate integrity and ethical behavior in using influence and power

Be Responsible to Others

• Act responsibly with the interests of the larger community in mind

SOURCE: Excerpted from P21 Framework Definitions, Partnership for 21st Century Skills December 2009 [copyrighted—available at http://www.p21.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=254&Itemid=120 [August 2011].

These and other available definitions are not necessarily at odds, but in Fiore’s view, the lack of a single, clear definition reflects a lack of theoretical clarity about what they are, which in turn has hampered progress toward developing assessments of them. Nevertheless, appreciation for the importance of these skills—not just in business settings, but in scientific and technical collaboration, and in both K-12 and postsecondary education settings—has been growing. Researchers have documented benefits these skills confer, Fiore noted. For example, Goleman (1998) found they were twice as important to job performance as general cognitive ability. Sonnentag and Lange (2002) found understanding of cooperation strategies related to higher performance among engineering and software development teams, and Nash and colleagues (2003) showed that collaboration skills were key to successful interdisciplinary research among scientists.

WHAT ARE INTERPERSONAL SKILLS?

The multiplicity of names for interpersonal skills and ways of conceiving of them reflects the fact that these skills have attitudinal, behavioral, and cognitive components, Fiore explained. It is useful to consider 21st century skills in basic categories (e.g., cognitive, interpersonal, and intrapersonal), but it is still true that interpersonal skills draw on many capacities, such as knowledge of social customs and the capacity to solve problems associated with social expectations and interactions. Successful interpersonal behavior involves a continuous correction of social performance based on the reactions of others, and, as Richard Murnane had noted earlier, these are cognitively complex tasks. They also require self-regulation and other capacities that fall into the intrapersonal category (discussed in Chapter 4 ). Interpersonal skills could also be described as a form of “social intelligence,” specifically social perception and social cognition that involve processes such as attention and decoding. Accurate assessment, Fiore explained, may need to address these various facets separately.

The research on interpersonal skills has covered these facets, as researchers who attempted to synthesize it have shown. Fiore described the findings of a study (Klein, DeRouin, and Salas, 2006) that presented a taxonomy of interpersonal skills based on a comprehensive review of the literature. The authors found a variety of ways of measuring and categorizing such skills, as well as ways to link them both to outcomes and to personality traits and other factors that affect them. They concluded that interpersonal effectiveness requires various sorts of competence that derive from experience, instinct, and learning about specific social contexts. They put forward their own definition of interpersonal skills as “goal-directed behaviors, including communication and relationship-building competencies, employed in interpersonal interaction episodes characterized by complex perceptual and cognitive processes, dynamic verbal and non verbal interaction exchanges, diverse roles, motivations, and expectancies” (p. 81).

They also developed a model of interpersonal performance, shown in Figure 3-1 , that illustrates the interactions among the influences, such as personality traits, previous life experiences, and the characteristics of the situation; the basic communication and relationship-building skills the individual uses in the situation; and outcomes for the individual, the group, and the organization. To flesh out this model, the researchers distilled sets of skills for each area, as shown in Table 3-1 .

Fiore explained that because these frameworks focus on behaviors intended to attain particular social goals and draw on both attitudes and cognitive processes, they provide an avenue for exploring what goes into the development of effective interpersonal skills in an individual. They

TABLE 3-1 Taxonomy of Interpersonal Skills

SOURCE: Klein, DeRouin, and Salas (2006). Reprinted with permission of John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

FIGURE 3-1 Model of interpersonal performance.

NOTE: Big Five personality traits = openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism; EI = emotional intelligence; IPS = interpersonal skills.

SOURCE: Stephen Fiore’s presentation. Klein, DeRouin, and Salas (2006). Copyright 2006, Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Reprinted with permission of John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

also allow for measurement of specific actions in a way that could be used in selection decisions, performance appraisals, or training. More specifically, Figure 3-1 sets up a way of thinking about these skills in the contexts in which they are used. The implication for assessment is that one would need to conduct the measurement in a suitable, realistic context in order to be able to examine the attitudes, cognitive processes, and behaviors that constitute social skills.

ASSESSMENT APPROACHES AND ISSUES

One way to assess these skills, Fiore explained, is to look separately at the different components (attitudinal, behavioral, and cognitive). For example, as the model in Figure 3-1 indicates, previous life experiences, such as the opportunities an individual has had to engage in successful and unsuccessful social interactions, can be assessed through reports (e.g., personal statements from applicants or letters of recommendation from prior employers). If such narratives are written in response to specific

questions about types of interactions, they may provide indications of the degree to which an applicant has particular skills. However, it is likely to be difficult to distinguish clearly between specific social skills and personality traits, knowledge, and cognitive processes. Moreover, Fiore added, such narratives report on past experience and may not accurately portray how one would behave or respond in future experiences.

The research on teamwork (or collaboration)—a much narrower concept than interpersonal skills—has used questionnaires that ask people to rate themselves and also ask for peer ratings of others on dimensions such as communication, leadership, and self-management. For example, Kantrowitz (2005) collected self-report data on two scales: performance standards for various behaviors, and comparison to others in the subjects’ working groups. Loughry, Ohland, and Moore (2007) asked members of work teams in science and technical contexts to rate one another on five general categories: contribution to the team’s work; interaction with teammates; contribution to keeping the team on track; expectations for quality; and possession of relevant knowledge, skills, and abilities.

Another approach, Fiore noted, is to use situational judgment tests (SJTs), which are multiple-choice assessments of possible reactions to hypothetical teamwork situations to assess capacities for conflict resolution, communication, and coordination, as Stevens and Campion (1999) have done. The researchers were able to demonstrate relationships between these results and both peers’ and supervisors’ ratings and to ratings of job performance. They were also highly correlated to employee aptitude test results.

Yet another approach is direct observation of team interactions. By observing directly, researchers can avoid the potential lack of reliability inherent in self- and peer reports, and can also observe the circumstances in which behaviors occur. For example, Taggar and Brown (2001) developed a set of scales related to conflict resolution, collaborative problem solving, and communication on which people could be rated.

Though each of these approaches involve ways of distinguishing specific aspects of behavior, it is still true, Fiore observed, that there is overlap among the constructs—skills or characteristics—to be measured. In his view, it is worth asking whether it is useful to be “reductionist” in parsing these skills. Perhaps more useful, he suggested, might be to look holistically at the interactions among the facets that contribute to these skills, though means of assessing in that way have yet to be determined. He enumerated some of the key challenges in assessing interpersonal skills.

The first concerns the precision, or degree of granularity, with which interpersonal expertise can be measured. Cognitive scientists have provided models of the progression from novice to expert in more concrete skill areas, he noted. In K-12 education contexts, assessment developers

have looked for ways to delineate expectations for particular stages that students typically go through as their knowledge and understanding grow more sophisticated. Hoffman (1998) has suggested the value of a similar continuum for interpersonal skills. Inspired by the craft guilds common in Europe during the Middle Ages, Hoffman proposed that assessment developers use the guidelines for novices, journeymen, and master craftsmen, for example, as the basis for operational definitions of developing social expertise. If such a continuum were developed, Fiore noted, it should make it possible to empirically examine questions about whether adults can develop and improve in response to training or other interventions.

Another issue is the importance of the context in which assessments of interpersonal skills are administered. By definition, these skills entail some sort of interaction with other people, but much current testing is done in an individualized way that makes it difficult to standardize. Sophisticated technology, such as computer simulations, or even simpler technology can allow for assessment of people’s interactions in a standardized scenario. For example, Smith-Jentsch and colleagues (1996) developed a simulation of an emergency room waiting room, in which test takers interacted with a video of actors following a script, while others have developed computer avatars that can interact in the context of scripted events. When well executed, Fiore explained, such simulations may be able to elicit emotional responses, allowing for assessment of people’s self-regulatory capacities and other so-called soft skills.

Workshop participants noted the complexity of trying to take the context into account in assessment. For example, one noted both that behaviors may make sense only in light of previous experiences in a particular environment, and that individuals may display very different social skills in one setting (perhaps one in which they are very comfortable) than another (in which they are not comfortable). Another noted that the clinical psychology literature would likely offer productive insights on such issues.

The potential for technologically sophisticated assessments also highlights the evolving nature of social interaction and custom. Generations who have grown up interacting via cell phone, social networking, and tweeting may have different views of social norms than their parents had. For example, Fiore noted, a telephone call demands a response, and many younger people therefore view a call as more intrusive and potentially rude than a text message, which one can respond to at his or her convenience. The challenge for researchers is both to collect data on new kinds of interactions and to consider new ways to link the content of interactions to the mode of communication, in order to follow changes in what constitutes skill at interpersonal interaction. The existing definitions

and taxonomies of interpersonal skills, he explained, were developed in the context of interactions that primarily occur face to face, but new technologies foster interactions that do not occur face to face or in a single time window.

In closing, Fiore returned to the conceptual slippage in the terms used to describe interpersonal skills. Noting that the etymological origins of both “cooperation” and “collaboration” point to a shared sense of working together, he explained that the word “coordination” has a different meaning, even though these three terms are often used as if they were synonymous. The word “coordination” captures instead the concepts of ordering and arranging—a key aspect of teamwork. These distinctions, he observed, are a useful reminder that examining the interactions among different facets of interpersonal skills requires clarity about each facet.

ASSESSMENT EXAMPLES

The workshop included examples of four different types of assessments of interpersonal skills intended for different educational and selection purposes—an online portfolio assessment designed for high school students; an online assessment for community college students; a situational judgment test used to select students for medical school in Belgium; and a collection of assessment center approaches used for employee selection, promotion, and training purposes.

The first example was the portfolio assessment used by the Envision High School in Oakland, California, to assess critical thinking, collaboration, communication, and creativity. At Envision Schools, a project-based learning approach is used that emphasizes the development of deeper learning skills, integration of arts and technology into core subjects, and real-world experience in workplaces. 2 The focus of the curriculum is to prepare students for college, especially those who would be the first in their family to attend college. All students are required to assemble a portfolio in order to graduate. Bob Lenz, cofounder of Envision High School, discussed this online portfolio assessment.

The second example was an online, scenario-based assessment used for community college students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) programs. The focus of the program is on developing students’ social/communication skills as well as their technical skills. Louise Yarnall, senior research scientist with SRI, made this presentation.

Filip Lievens, professor of psychology at Ghent University in Belgium, described the third example, a situational judgment test designed

2 See http://www.envisionschools.org/site/ [August 2011] for additional information about Envision Schools.

to assess candidates’ skill in responding to health-related situations that require interpersonal skills. The test is used for high-stakes purposes.

The final presentation was made by Lynn Gracin Collins, chief scientist for SH&A/Fenestra, who discussed a variety of strategies for assessing interpersonal skills in employment settings. She focused on performance-based assessments, most of which involve role-playing activities.

Online Portfolio Assessment of High School Students 3

Bob Lenz described the experience of incorporating in the curriculum and assessing several key interpersonal skills in an urban high school environment. Envision Schools is a program created with corporate and foundation funding to serve disadvantaged high school students. The program consists of four high schools in the San Francisco Bay area that together serve 1,350 primarily low-income students. Sixty-five percent qualify for free or reduced-price lunch, and 70 percent are expected to be the first in their families to graduate from college. Most of the students, Lenz explained, enter the Envision schools at approximately a sixth-grade level in most areas. When they begin the Envision program, most have exceedingly negative feelings about school; as Lenz put it they “hate school and distrust adults.” The program’s mission is not only to address this sentiment about schools, but also to accelerate the students’ academic skills so that they can get into college and to develop the other skills they will need to succeed in life.

Lenz explained that tracking students’ progress after they graduate is an important tool for shaping the school’s approach to instruction. The first classes graduated from the Envision schools 2 years ago. Lenz reported that all of their students meet the requirements to attend a 4-year college in California (as opposed to 37 percent of public high school students statewide), and 94 percent of their graduates enrolled in 2- or 4-year colleges after graduation. At the time of the presentation, most of these students (95 percent) had re-enrolled for the second year of college. Lenz believes the program’s focus on assessment, particularly of 21st century skills, has been key to this success.

The program emphasizes what they call the “three Rs”: rigor, relevance, and relationships. Project-based assignments, group activities, and workplace projects are all activities that incorporate learning of interpersonal skills such as leadership, Lenz explained. Students are also asked to assess themselves regularly. Researchers from the Stanford Center for Assessment, Learning, and Equity (SCALE) assisted the Envision staff in

3 Lenz’s presentation is available at http://www7.national-academies.org/bota/21st_Century_Workshop_Lenz.pdf [August 2011].

developing a College Success Assessment System that is embedded in the curriculum. Students develop portfolios with which they can demonstrate their learning in academic content as well as 21st century skill areas. The students are engaged in three goals: mastery knowledge, application of knowledge, and metacognition.

The components of the portfolio, which is presented at the end of 12th grade, include

• A student-written introduction to the contents
• Examples of “mastery-level” student work (assessed and certified by teachers prior to the presentation)
• Reflective summaries of work completed in five core content areas
• An artifact of and a written reflection on the workplace learning project
• A 21st century skills assessment

Students are also expected to defend their portfolios, and faculty are given professional development to guide the students in this process. Eventually, Lenz explained, the entire portfolio will be archived online.

Lenz showed examples of several student portfolios to demonstrate the ways in which 21st century skills, including interpersonal ones, are woven into both the curriculum and the assessments. In his view, teaching skills such as leadership and collaboration, together with the academic content, and holding the students to high expectations that incorporate these sorts of skills, is the best way to prepare the students to succeed in college, where there may be fewer faculty supports.

STEM Workforce Training Assessments 4

Louise Yarnall turned the conversation to assessment in a community college setting, where the technicians critical to many STEM fields are trained. She noted the most common approach to training for these workers is to engage them in hands-on practice with the technologies they are likely to encounter. This approach builds knowledge of basic technical procedures, but she finds that it does little to develop higher-order cognitive skills or the social skills graduates need to thrive in the workplace.

Yarnall and a colleague have outlined three categories of primary skills that technology employers seek in new hires (Yarnall and Ostrander, in press):

4 Yarnall’s presentation is available at http://www7.national-academies.org/bota/21st_Century_Workshop_Yarnall.pdf [August 2011].

Social-Technical

• Translating client needs into technical specifications
• Researching technical information to meet client needs
• Justifying or defending technical approach to client
• Reaching consensus on work team
• Polling work team to determine ideas
• Using tools, languages, and principles of domain
• Generating a product that meets specific technical criteria
• Interpreting problems using principles of domain

In her view, new strategies are needed to incorporate these skills into the community college curriculum. To build students’ technical skills and knowledge, she argued, faculty need to focus more on higher-order thinking and application of knowledge, to press students to demonstrate their competence, and to practice. Cooperative learning opportunities are key to developing social skills and knowledge. For the skills that are both social and technical, students need practice with reflection and feedback opportunities, modeling and scaffolding of desirable approaches, opportunities to see both correct and incorrect examples, and inquiry-based instructional practices.

She described a project she and colleagues, in collaboration with community college faculty, developed that was designed to incorporate this thinking, called the Scenario-Based Learning Project (see Box 3-2 ). This team developed eight workplace scenarios—workplace challenges that were complex enough to require a team response. The students are given a considerable amount of material with which to work. In order to succeed, they would need to figure out how to approach the problem, what they needed, and how to divide up the effort. Students are also asked to reflect on the results of the effort and make presentations about the solutions they have devised. The project begins with a letter from the workplace manager (the instructor plays this role and also provides feedback throughout the process) describing the problem and deliverables that need to be produced. For example, one task asked a team to produce a website for a bicycle club that would need multiple pages and links.

Yarnall noted they encountered a lot of resistance to this approach. Community college students are free to drop a class if they do not like the instructor’s approach, and because many instructors are adjunct faculty,

BOX 3-2 Sample Constructs, Evidence of Learning, and Assessment Task Features for Scenario-Based Learning Projects

Technical Skills

Sample knowledge/skills/abilities (KSAs):

Ability to document system requirements using a simplified use case format; ability to address user needs in specifying system requirements.

Sample evidence:

Presented with a list of user’s needs/uses, the student will correctly specify web functionalities that address each need.

Sample task features:

The task must engage students in the use of tools, procedures, and knowledge representations employed in Ajax programming; the assessment task requires students to summarize the intended solution.

Social Skills

Sample social skill KSAs:

Ability to listen to team members with different viewpoints and to propose a consensus.

Presented with a group of individuals charged with solving a problem, the student will demonstrate correctly indicators of active listening and collaboration skills, including listening attentively, waiting an adequate amount of time for problem solutions, summarizing ideas, and questioning to reach a decision.

Sample social skill characteristic task features:

The assessment task will be scenario-based and involve a group of individuals charged with solving a work-related problem. The assessment will involve a conflict among team members and require the social processes of listening, negotiation, and decision making.

Social-Technical Skills

Sample social-technical skill KSAs:

Ability to ask questions to specify user requirements, and ability to engage in software design brainstorming by generating examples of possible user interactions with the website.

Sample social-technical skill evidence:

Presented with a client interested in developing a website, the student will correctly define the user’s primary needs. Presented with a client interested in developing a website, the student will correctly define the range of possible uses for the website.

Sample social-technical skill characteristic task features:

The assessment task will be scenario-based and involve the design of a website with at least two constraints. The assessment task will require the use of “querying” to determine client needs. The assessment task will require a summation of client needs.

SOURCE: Adapted from Louise Yarnall’s presentation. Used with permission.

their positions are at risk if their classes are unpopular. Scenario-based learning can be risky, she explained, because it can be demanding, but at the same time students sometimes feel unsure that they are learning enough. Instructors also sometimes feel unprepared to manage the teams, give appropriate feedback, and track their students’ progress.

Furthermore, Yarnall continued, while many of the instructors did enjoy developing the projects, the need to incorporate assessment tools into the projects was the least popular aspect of the program. Traditional assessments in these settings tended to measure recall of isolated facts and technical procedures, and often failed to track the development or application of more complex cognitive skills and professional behaviors, Yarnall explained. She and her colleagues proposed some new approaches, based on the theoretical framework known as evidence-centered design. 5 Their goal was to guide the faculty in designing tasks that would elicit the full range of knowledge and skills they wanted to measure, and they turned to what are called reflection frameworks that had been used in other contexts to elicit complex sets of skills (Herman, Aschbacher, and Winters, 1992).

They settled on an interview format, which they called Evidence-Centered Assessment Reflection, to begin to identify the specific skills required in each field, to identify the assessment features that could produce evidence of specific kinds of learning, and then to begin developing specific prompts, stimuli, performance descriptions, and scoring rubrics for the learning outcomes they wanted to measure. The next step was to determine how the assessments would be delivered and how they would be validated. Assessment developers call this process a domain analysis—its purpose was to draw from the instructors a conceptual map of what they were teaching and particularly how social and social-technical skills fit into those domains.

Based on these frameworks, the team developed assessments that asked students, for example, to write justifications for the tools and procedures they intended to use for a particular purpose; rate their teammates’ ability to listen, appreciate different points of view, or reach a consensus; or generate a list of questions they would ask a client to better understand his or her needs. They used what Yarnall described as “coarse, three-level rubrics” to make the scoring easy to implement with sometimes-reluctant faculty, and have generally averaged 79 percent or above in inter-rater agreement.

Yarnall closed with some suggestions for how their experience might be useful for a K-12 context. She noted the process encouraged thinking about how students might apply particular knowledge and skills, and

5 See Mislevy and Risconscente (2006) for an explanation of evidence-centered design.

how one might distinguish between high- and low-quality applications. Specifically, the developers were guided to consider what it would look like for a student to use the knowledge or skills successfully—what qualities would stand out and what sorts of products or knowledge would demonstrate a particular level of understanding or awareness.

Assessing Medical Students’ Interpersonal Skills 6

Filip Lievens described a project conducted at Ghent University in Belgium, in which he and colleagues developed a measure of interpersonal skills in a high-stakes context: medical school admissions. The project began with a request from the Belgian government, in 1997, for a measure of these skills that could be used not only to measure the current capacities of physicians, but also to predict the capacities of candidates and thus be useful for selection. Lievens noted the challenge was compounded by the fact the government was motivated by some negative publicity about the selection process for medical school.

One logical approach would have been to use personality testing, often conducted through in-person interviews, but that would have been very difficult to implement with the large numbers of candidates involved, Lievens explained. A paper on another selection procedure, called “low-fidelity simulation” (Motowidlo et al., 1990), suggested an alternative. This approach is also known as a situational judgment test, mentioned above, in which candidates select from a set of possible responses to a situation that is described in writing or presented using video. It is based on the proposition that procedural knowledge of the advantages and disadvantages of possible courses of action can be measured, and that the results would be predictive of later behaviors, even if the instrument does not measure the complex facets that go into such choices. A sample item from the Belgian assessment, including a transcription of the scenario and the possible responses, is shown in Box 3-3 . In the early stages of the project, the team used videotaped scenarios, but more recently they have experimented with presenting them through other means, including in written format.

Lievens noted a few differences between medical education in Belgium and the United States that influenced decisions about the assessment. In Belgium, prospective doctors must pass an admissions exam at age 18 to be accepted for medical school, which begins at the level that for Americans is the less structured 4-year undergraduate program. The government-run exam is given twice a year to approximately 4,000 stu-

6 Lievens’ presentation is available at http://www7.national-academies.org/bota/21st_Century_Workshop_Lievens.pdf [August 2011].

BOX 3-3 Sample Item from the Situational Judgment Test Used for Admissions to Medical School in Belgium

Patient: So, this physiotherapy is really going to help me?

Physician: Absolutely, even though the first days it might still be painful.

Patient: Yes, I suppose it will take a while before it starts working.

Physician: That is why I am going to prescribe a painkiller. You should take three painkillers per day.

Patient: Do I really have to take them? I have already tried a few things. First, they didn’t help me. And second, I’m actually opposed to taking any medication. I’d rather not take them. They are not good for my health.

What is the best way for you (as a physician) to react to this patient’s refusal to take the prescribed medication?

a. Ask her if she knows something else to relieve the pain.

b. Give her the scientific evidence as to why painkillers will help.

c. Agree not to take them now but also stress the importance of the physiotherapy.

d. Tell her that, in her own interest, she will have to start changing her attitude.

SOURCE: Louise Yarnall’s presentation. Used with permission.

dents in total, and it has a 30 percent pass rate. Once accepted for medical school, students may choose the university at which they will study—the school must accept all of the students who select it.

The assessment’s other components include 40 items covering knowledge of chemistry, physics, mathematics, and biology and 50 items covering general cognitive ability (verbal, numerical, and figural reasoning). The two interpersonal skills addressed—in 30 items—are building and maintaining relationships and exchanging information.

Lievens described several challenges in the development of the interpersonal component. First, it was not possible to pilot test any items because of a policy that students could not be asked to complete items that did not count toward their scores. In response to both fast-growing numbers of candidates as well as technical glitches with video presentations, the developers decided to present all of the prompts in a paper-and-pencil format. A more serious problem was feedback they received ques-

tioning whether each of the test questions had only one correct answer. To address this, the developers introduced a system for determining correct answers through consensus among a group of experts.

Because of the high stakes for this test, they have also encountered problems with maintaining the security of the test items. For instance, Lievens reported that items have appeared for sale on eBay, and they have had problems with students who took the test multiple times simply to learn the content. Developing alternate test forms was one strategy for addressing this problem.

Lievens and his colleagues have conducted a study of the predictive validity of the test in which they collected data on four cohorts of students (a total of 4,538) who took the test and entered medical school (Lievens and Sackett, 2011). They examined GPA and internship performance data for 519 students in the initial group who completed the 7 years required for the full medical curriculum as well as job performance data for 104 students who later became physicians. As might be expected, Lievens observed, the cognitive component of the test was a strong predictor, particularly for the first years of the 7-year course, whereas the interpersonal portion was not useful for predicting GPA (see Figure 3-2 ). However, Figure 3-3 shows this component of the test was much better at predicting the students’ later performance in internships and in their first 9 years as practicing physicians.

FIGURE 3-2 Correlations between cognitive and interpersonal components (situational judgment test, or SJT) of the medical school admission test and medical school GPA.

SOURCE: Filip Lievens’ presentation. Used with permission.

FIGURE 3-3 Correlations between the cognitive and interpersonal components (situational judgment test, or SJT) of the medical school admission test and internship/job performance.

Lievens also reported the results of a study of the comparability of alternate forms of the test. The researchers compared results for three approaches to developing alternate forms. The approaches differed in the extent to which the characteristics of the situation presented in the items were held constant across the forms. The correlations between scores on the alternate forms ranged from .34 to .68, with the higher correlation occurring for the approach that maintained the most similarities in the characteristics of the items across the forms. The exact details of this study are too complex to present here, and the reader is referred to the full report (Lievens and Sackett, 2007) for a more complete description.

Lievens summarized a few points he has observed about the addition of the interpersonal skills component to the admissions test:

• While cognitive assessments are better at predicting GPA, the assessments of interpersonal skills were superior at predicting performance in internships and on the job. 7
• Applicants respond favorably to the interpersonal component of the test—Lievens did not claim this component is the reason but noted a sharp increase in the test-taking population.

7 Lievens mentioned but did not show data indicating (1) that the predictive validity of the interpersonal items for later performance was actually greater than the predictive validity of the cognitive items for GPA, and (2) that women perform slightly better than men on the interpersonal items.

• Success rates for admitted students have also improved. The percentage of students who successfully passed the requirements for the first academic year increased from 30 percent, prior to having the exam in place, to 80 percent after the exam was installed. While not making a causal claim, Lievens noted that the increased pass rate may be due to the fact that universities have also changed their curricula to place more emphasis on interpersonal skills, especially in the first year.

Assessment Centers 8

Lynn Gracin Collins began by explaining what an assessment center is. She noted the International Congress on Assessment Center Methods describes an assessment center as follows 9 :

a standardized evaluation of behavior based on multiple inputs. Several trained observers and techniques are used. Judgments about behavior are made, in major part, from specifically developed assessment simulations. These judgments are pooled in a meeting among the assessors or by a statistical integration process. In an integration discussion, comprehensive accounts of behavior—and often ratings of it—are pooled. The discussion results in evaluations of the assessees’ performance on the dimensions or other variables that the assessment center is designed to measure.

She emphasized that key aspects of an assessment center are that they are standardized, based on multiple types of input, involve trained observers, and use simulations. Assessment centers had their first industrial application in the United States about 50 years ago at AT&T. Collins said they are widely favored within the business community because, while they have guidelines to ensure they are carried out appropriately, they are also flexible enough to accommodate a variety of purposes. Assessment centers have the potential to provide a wealth of information about how someone performs a task. An important difference with other approaches is that the focus is not on “what would you do” or “what did you do”; instead, the approach involves watching someone actually perform the tasks. They are commonly used for the purpose of (1) selection and promotion, (2) identification of training and development needs, and (3) skill enhancement through simulations.

Collins said participants and management see them as a realistic job

8 Collins’ presentation is available at http://www7.national-academies.org/bota/21st_Century_Workshop_Collins.pdf [August 2011].

9 See http://www.assessmentcenters.org/articles/whatisassess1.asp [July 2011].

preview, and when used in a selection context, prospective employees actually experience what the job would entail. In that regard, Collins commented it is not uncommon for candidates—during the assessment—to “fold up their materials and say if this is what the job is, I don’t want it.” Thus, the tasks themselves can be instructive, useful for experiential learning, and an important selection device.

Some examples of the skills assessed include the following:

• Interpersonal : communication, influencing others, learning from interactions, leadership, teamwork, fostering relationships, conflict management
• Cognitive : problem solving, decision making, innovation, creativity, planning and organizing
• Intrapersonal : adaptability, drive, tolerance for stress, motivation, conscientiousness

To provide a sense of the steps involved in developing assessment center tasks, Collins laid out the general plan for a recent assessment they developed called the Technology Enhanced Assessment Center (TEAC). The steps are shown in Box 3-4 .

BOX 3-4 Steps involved in Developing the Technology Enhanced Assessment Center

SOURCE: Adapted from presentation by Lynn Gracin Collins. Used with permission.

Assessment centers make use of a variety of types of tasks to simulate the actual work environment. One that Collins described is called an “inbox exercise,” which consists of a virtual desktop showing received e-mail messages (some of which are marked “high priority”), voice messages, and a calendar that includes some appointments for that day. The candidate is observed and tracked as he or she proceeds to deal with the tasks presented through the inbox. The scheduled appointments on the calendar are used for conducting role-playing tasks in which the candidate has to participate in a simulated work interaction. This may involve a phone call, and the assessor/observer plays the role of the person being called. With the scheduled role-plays, the candidate may receive some information about the nature of the appointment in advance so that he or she can prepare for the appointment. There are typically some unscheduled role-playing tasks as well, in order to observe the candidate’s on-the-spot performance. In some instances, the candidate may also be expected to make a presentation. Assessors observe every activity the candidate performs.

Everything the candidate does at the virtual desktop is visible to the assessor(s) in real time, although in a “behind the scenes” manner that is blind to the candidate. The assessor can follow everything the candidate does, including what they do with every message in the inbox, any responses they make, and any entries they make on the calendar.

Following the inbox exercise, all of the observers/assessors complete evaluation forms. The forms are shared, and the ratings are discussed during a debriefing session at which the assessors come to consensus about the candidate. Time is also reserved to provide feedback to the candidate and to identify areas of strengths and weaknesses.

Collins reported that a good deal of information has been collected about the psychometric qualities of assessment centers. She characterized their reliabilities as adequate, with test-retest reliability coefficients in the .70 range. She said a wide range of inter-rater reliabilities have been reported, generally ranging from .50 to .94. The higher inter-rater reliabilities are associated with assessments in which the assessors/raters are well trained and have access to training materials that clearly explain the exercises, the constructs, and the scoring guidelines. Providing behavioral summary scales, which describe the actual behaviors associated with each score level, also help the assessors more accurately interpret the scoring guide.

She also noted considerable information is available about the validity of assessment centers. The most popular validation strategy is to examine evidence of content validity, which means the exercises actually measure the skills and competencies that they are intended to measure. A few studies have examined evidence of criterion-related validity, looking at the relationship between performance on the assessment center exer-

cises and job performance. She reported validities of .41 to .48 for a recent study conducted by her firm (SH&A/Fenestra, 2007) and .43 for a study by Byham (2010). Her review of the research indicates that assessment center results show incremental validity over personality tests, cognitive tests, and interviews.

One advantage of assessment center methods is they appear not to have adverse impact on minority groups. Collins said research documents that they tend to be unbiased in predictions of job performance. Further, they are viewed by participants as being fairer than other forms of assessment, and they have received positive support from the courts and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

Assessment centers can be expensive and time intensive, which is one of the challenges associated with using them. An assessment center in a traditional paradigm (as opposed to a high-tech paradigm) can cost between $2,500 and $10,000 per person. The features that affect cost are the number of assessors, the number of exercises, the length of the assessment, the type of report, and the type of feedback process. They can be logistically difficult to coordinate, depending on whether they use a traditional paradigm in which people need to be brought to a single location as opposed to a technology paradigm where much can be handled remotely and virtually. The typical assessment at a center lasts a full day, which means they are resource intensive and can be difficult to scale up to accommodate a large number of test takers.

This page intentionally left blank.

The routine jobs of yesterday are being replaced by technology and/or shipped off-shore. In their place, job categories that require knowledge management, abstract reasoning, and personal services seem to be growing. The modern workplace requires workers to have broad cognitive and affective skills. Often referred to as "21st century skills," these skills include being able to solve complex problems, to think critically about tasks, to effectively communicate with people from a variety of different cultures and using a variety of different techniques, to work in collaboration with others, to adapt to rapidly changing environments and conditions for performing tasks, to effectively manage one's work, and to acquire new skills and information on one's own.

The National Research Council (NRC) has convened two prior workshops on the topic of 21st century skills. The first, held in 2007, was designed to examine research on the skills required for the 21st century workplace and the extent to which they are meaningfully different from earlier eras and require corresponding changes in educational experiences. The second workshop, held in 2009, was designed to explore demand for these types of skills, consider intersections between science education reform goals and 21st century skills, examine models of high-quality science instruction that may develop the skills, and consider science teacher readiness for 21st century skills. The third workshop was intended to delve more deeply into the topic of assessment. The goal for this workshop was to capitalize on the prior efforts and explore strategies for assessing the five skills identified earlier. The Committee on the Assessment of 21st Century Skills was asked to organize a workshop that reviewed the assessments and related research for each of the five skills identified at the previous workshops, with special attention to recent developments in technology-enabled assessment of critical thinking and problem-solving skills. In designing the workshop, the committee collapsed the five skills into three broad clusters as shown below:

• Cognitive skills: nonroutine problem solving, critical thinking, systems thinking
• Interpersonal skills: complex communication, social skills, team-work, cultural sensitivity, dealing with diversity
• Intrapersonal skills: self-management, time management, self-development, self-regulation, adaptability, executive functioning

Assessing 21st Century Skills provides an integrated summary of the presentations and discussions from both parts of the third workshop.

READ FREE ONLINE

Welcome to OpenBook!

You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

Show this book's table of contents , where you can jump to any chapter by name.

...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

Switch between the Original Pages , where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter .

Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

View our suggested citation for this chapter.

Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

Get Email Updates

Do you enjoy reading reports from the Academies online for free ? Sign up for email notifications and we'll let you know about new publications in your areas of interest when they're released.

Transforming Communication: Interpersonal Therapy Examples

Understanding interpersonal therapy.

Interpersonal Therapy (IPT) is a form of psychotherapy that focuses on improving  interpersonal relationships  and enhancing communication skills. By addressing interpersonal conflicts and difficulties, IPT aims to alleviate psychological distress and promote emotional well-being.

Overview of Interpersonal Therapy

IPT is based on the premise that  social relationships  play a significant role in a person’s mental health. It recognizes that difficulties in interpersonal interactions can contribute to the development or exacerbation of various mental health issues, such as depression, anxiety, and eating disorders . Through the therapeutic process, individuals can gain insight into their relational patterns and learn more effective ways of relating to others.

The primary focus of IPT is on the  here and now , with an emphasis on exploring current interpersonal difficulties. By examining specific interpersonal issues, IPT seeks to identify and address the underlying emotional and behavioral patterns that contribute to the individual’s distress. IPT is typically structured and time-limited, consisting of a set number of sessions that are tailored to the individual’s needs.

Goals and Principles of Interpersonal Therapy

The goals of IPT are multifaceted and can vary depending on the specific needs of the individual. However, some common goals of IPT include:

• Improving interpersonal relationships : IPT aims to enhance communication skills, resolve conflicts, and promote healthier and more satisfying relationships. By focusing on the individual’s interpersonal difficulties, IPT helps them develop strategies for effective communication, assertiveness, and conflict resolution.
• Enhancing emotional well-being : IPT seeks to alleviate symptoms of mental health issues by addressing underlying interpersonal problems. By improving the individual’s ability to navigate social interactions and manage interpersonal stressors, IPT promotes emotional well-being and reduces psychological distress.
• Increasing self-awareness : Through the therapeutic process, IPT helps individuals gain insight into their own interpersonal patterns and how they contribute to their difficulties. This increased self-awareness allows them to make more conscious choices in their relationships and develop healthier ways of relating to others.
• Building a support network : IPT recognizes the importance of social support in maintaining mental health. It helps individuals identify and strengthen their support networks, fostering a sense of belonging and connection.

The principles of IPT are rooted in a collaborative and empathetic therapeutic relationship. The therapist creates a safe and non-judgmental space for the individual to explore their interpersonal issues. They actively listen, validate the individual’s experiences, and provide guidance and support throughout the therapy process.

By understanding the  overview  and  goals  of Interpersonal Therapy, individuals can gain insight into how this therapeutic approach can help improve their interpersonal relationships and enhance their emotional well-being. For more information on specific techniques employed in IPT, explore our article on  interpersonal therapy techniques .

Interpersonal Therapy Techniques

Interpersonal therapy utilizes various techniques to help individuals improve their relationships and enhance their emotional well-being. Here are three commonly used techniques within interpersonal therapy:  communication analysis ,  role play , and  problem solving .

Communication Analysis

Communication analysis is a fundamental technique in interpersonal therapy. It involves examining how individuals communicate with each other and identifying patterns of interaction. By analyzing communication styles, verbal and nonverbal cues, and listening skills, individuals can gain insights into the dynamics of their relationships.

During communication analysis, the therapist encourages clients to explore their thoughts, feelings, and needs in specific situations. This technique helps individuals become more aware of their communication patterns and identify areas for improvement. By recognizing patterns that may contribute to misunderstandings or conflicts, individuals can develop strategies to enhance their communication skills.

Role play is another powerful technique used in interpersonal therapy. It involves acting out scenarios to simulate real-life interpersonal interactions. Through role play, individuals can practice effective communication, problem-solving, and conflict resolution skills in a safe and controlled environment.

During role play sessions, the therapist may take on the role of one person in the scenario, while the client takes on the role of another. This allows individuals to explore different perspectives and experiment with new approaches to communication. Role play provides an opportunity to practice assertiveness, active listening, and empathy, helping individuals develop more constructive ways of relating to others.

Problem Solving

Problem solving is a technique employed in interpersonal therapy to address specific challenges within relationships. It involves identifying and defining the problem, generating potential solutions, evaluating the pros and cons of each solution, and implementing the most appropriate one.

The therapist guides individuals through the problem-solving process, helping them break down complex issues into manageable steps. By encouraging open and honest communication, the therapist facilitates collaboration and cooperation between individuals. Problem solving enables individuals to develop effective strategies for resolving conflicts, improving communication, and enhancing their relationships.

By incorporating these interpersonal therapy techniques, individuals can gain valuable insights into their relationships, improve their communication skills, and resolve conflicts more effectively. These techniques, along with other interventions, contribute to the overall success of interpersonal therapy. To learn more about interpersonal therapy and its applications, check out our article on  interpersonal therapy techniques .

Interpersonal Therapy Examples

Interpersonal therapy (IPT) offers a range of techniques and strategies to address various interpersonal challenges. Here are three  interpersonal therapy examples  that highlight specific applications of this therapeutic approach:

Example 1: Improving Communication in Romantic Relationships

In this example, IPT can help couples enhance their communication skills and strengthen their bond. The therapist may facilitate open and honest dialogue between partners, encouraging active listening and empathy. Through communication analysis and role-playing exercises, couples can identify problematic communication patterns and develop healthier ways of expressing their needs and emotions. By improving communication, couples can foster understanding, resolve conflicts, and build a more fulfilling romantic relationship.

Example 2: Resolving Conflict in Family Relationships

Family conflicts can often arise due to misunderstandings, differences in values, or unmet expectations. IPT can be valuable in resolving these conflicts by promoting effective communication and problem-solving within the family unit. The therapist may guide family members through communication analysis, helping them identify patterns of miscommunication and areas of tension. Through role-playing and problem-solving techniques, family members can learn to express themselves constructively, understand each other’s perspectives, and work together towards resolving conflicts and building stronger familial bonds.

Example 3: Enhancing Social Skills in Professional Settings

Interpersonal challenges can extend beyond personal relationships and impact professional environments. In this example, IPT can assist individuals in developing effective social skills and improving their interactions in the workplace. The therapist may focus on enhancing assertiveness, active listening, and conflict resolution techniques. By addressing specific workplace scenarios through role-playing exercises, individuals can gain confidence in their communication abilities and build positive relationships with colleagues. This can lead to improved teamwork, increased job satisfaction, and better professional outcomes.

By exploring these interpersonal therapy examples, it becomes evident how IPT can be tailored to address a wide range of interpersonal difficulties. Through techniques such as communication analysis, role-playing, and problem-solving, individuals can gain valuable insights, develop new skills, and experience positive changes in their interpersonal relationships. For more information on interpersonal therapy techniques and interventions, visit our article on  interpersonal therapy techniques .

Case Studies in Interpersonal Therapy

To illustrate the effectiveness of interpersonal therapy, let’s explore three  case studies  that highlight the positive outcomes achieved through this therapeutic approach.

Case Study 1: Jane and John – Rebuilding Trust in a Marriage

Jane and John sought interpersonal therapy to address the underlying issues that were straining their marriage. The couple had been experiencing a breakdown in communication and trust due to unresolved conflicts and misunderstandings. Through interpersonal therapy sessions, Jane and John learned effective  communication analysis  techniques, which helped them recognize and address the root causes of their conflicts.

By engaging in  role-playing exercises , they were able to practice new communication strategies and develop empathy for each other’s perspectives. Additionally, the therapist guided them through  problem-solving  exercises, enabling them to collaboratively find solutions to their marital challenges.

Over time, Jane and John experienced a significant improvement in their relationship. They rebuilt trust, enhanced their understanding of each other’s needs, and developed healthier ways of resolving conflicts. Through the guidance of their therapist, they learned valuable skills that empowered them to maintain a strong and loving marriage.

Case Study 2: Sarah and Emma – Healing Parent-Child Relationship

Sarah sought interpersonal therapy to repair her strained relationship with her teenage daughter, Emma. Their relationship had become strained due to frequent conflicts and miscommunication. In therapy, Sarah and Emma engaged in open and honest conversations facilitated by their therapist.

Through interpersonal therapy, they learned to express their emotions effectively and empathize with each other’s experiences. The therapist employed various  communication analysis  techniques to help Sarah and Emma understand the patterns of their interactions and identify areas for improvement.

By engaging in therapeutic  role-playing exercises , Sarah and Emma practiced new ways of communicating and resolving conflicts. They learned to listen actively, validate each other’s feelings, and develop healthy boundaries. Through the healing process, their relationship transformed, and they were able to rebuild trust and strengthen their bond.

Case Study 3: Mark and Alex – Improving Workplace Dynamics

Mark and Alex, colleagues in a high-stress work environment, sought interpersonal therapy to address their strained professional relationship. Their constant conflicts and difficulty collaborating were negatively impacting their productivity and overall work environment.

Through interpersonal therapy, Mark and Alex learned effective  communication analysis  techniques, which helped them identify the underlying causes of their conflicts. The therapist facilitated open and honest discussions, allowing both individuals to express their concerns and perspectives.

Using  problem-solving  techniques, Mark and Alex worked together to find common ground and develop strategies for effective collaboration. Their therapist also helped them explore their individual strengths and weaknesses, fostering an environment of empathy and understanding.

As a result of their therapy sessions, Mark and Alex experienced a significant improvement in their workplace dynamics. They developed better communication skills, gained a deeper understanding of each other’s work styles, and learned to appreciate each other’s contributions. The therapy not only improved their working relationship but also positively influenced the overall productivity and harmony within the workplace.

These case studies demonstrate the efficacy of interpersonal therapy in various interpersonal contexts. By employing techniques such as communication analysis, role-playing, and problem-solving, individuals can experience positive transformations in their relationships, whether in a romantic, familial, or professional setting.

Benefits of Interpersonal Therapy

Interpersonal Therapy (IPT) offers several valuable benefits that can enhance individuals’ lives and improve their overall well-being. By focusing on improving interpersonal relationships and communication skills, IPT helps individuals navigate various challenges and develop healthier ways of relating to others. Here are some key benefits of Interpersonal Therapy:

Improved Interpersonal Relationships

One of the primary goals of IPT is to improve interpersonal relationships. By addressing conflicts, improving communication, and fostering understanding, individuals can experience more fulfilling and satisfying connections with others. IPT provides individuals with the tools and strategies to navigate relationship challenges, rebuild trust, and create stronger bonds. With improved relationships, individuals can experience increased support, intimacy, and overall happiness in their personal and professional lives.

Enhanced Communication Skills

Effective communication is essential for healthy relationships. IPT focuses on improving communication patterns by helping individuals develop active listening skills, express themselves assertively, and understand the impact of their words and actions on others. Through techniques such as  communication analysis  and  role play , individuals can gain insights into their communication styles and learn how to communicate more effectively and empathetically. By enhancing communication skills, individuals can resolve conflicts, express their needs and emotions, and foster better understanding in their relationships.

Increased Self-awareness and Emotional Well-being

IPT also promotes increased self-awareness and emotional well-being. By exploring how interpersonal dynamics and relationships influence emotions, individuals can gain a better understanding of their own feelings and reactions. IPT encourages individuals to reflect on their own needs, values, and boundaries, helping them develop a stronger sense of self. Through this process, individuals can gain insight into patterns of behavior and make positive changes that lead to greater emotional well-being and personal growth.

Moreover, IPT assists individuals in addressing specific mental health concerns, such as depression, anxiety, grief, and eating disorders. By focusing on interpersonal factors contributing to these issues, IPT helps individuals develop healthier coping mechanisms, improve social support, and enhance overall mental well-being.

In summary, Interpersonal Therapy offers numerous benefits, including improved interpersonal relationships, enhanced communication skills, and increased self-awareness and emotional well-being. By incorporating IPT techniques and interventions into their practice, mental health professionals can help individuals lead more fulfilling lives and cultivate healthier connections with others. To explore specific techniques and interventions in IPT, check out our article on  interpersonal therapy techniques .

Download free guide (PDF)

Discover how to engage your clients on autopilot while radically scaling your coaching practice.

Coach, This Changes Everything (Free PDF)

Apply our problem solving method

Learn problem solving skills: interpersonal communication styles.

• Learn to recognize differences in communication styles
• Learn how interpersonal communication styles can affect relational outcomes.
• Learn how to use the Interpersonal Circle to adapt your interpersonal communication style to the situation.

“ They may forget what you said, but they will never forget how you made them feel. ” —Carl Buechner

“ The most important single ingredient in the formula of success is knowing how to get along with people .” —Theodore Roosevelt

Do you notice that you act in different ways around certain people? Perhaps you act inhibited around your advisor but act self-assured around your students. Maybe you wish you could be as sociable with your labmates as you are so easily around your friends. These descriptors: inhibited, sociable, assured, and deferent are all examples of interpersonal communication styles (Kiesler, 1982). 

This module is designed to address the interpersonal communication styles that you bring to a communication interaction. The more you know about interpersonal communication styles, the more you can deliberately choose to use a style or not, depending on the situation.

The concepts of interpersonal communication styles and personality overlap, but they do not mean the same thing. People often say “that’s just the way I am.” However, interpersonal communication styles are actually changeable and more in your control than you might think.

Think back to a time in which you communicated with someone and by virtue of the initial interaction you developed a new approach that you tried the next time. For example, perhaps when talking with your advisor you were reserved and didn’t speak up when someone was getting recognition for your work; the next time the topic of work credit came up you were more assertive and spoke up for yourself. 

The fact that you are able to change your approach, and essentially the impression you make (see The Impression You Make ), are different from personality. Personality is more steady and consistent and is most often viewed in terms of traits—a stable, enduring quality that a person shows in most situations (i.e., who we are)—rather than a behavior (i.e., how we act). [See Your Personality and Preferences for more.]

One of the interesting things about interpersonal communication styles is that they can be specific to a situation (e.g., you are different around a faculty member) or defined by how you behave in most communication situations (e.g., you are sociable with most people). You can choose when to use the interpersonal communication style that best serves you in the situation. 

Over time, recognizing and selecting which interpersonal communication approach you wish to use in a particular instance will become easier. With practice the ability to choose will help you break the patterns that don’t work for you in certain situations.

There are many different approaches to defining interpersonal communication styles. Here we describe a couple of models that have received ample research support. We focus on the Interpersonal Circle and its accompanying theory, “Complementarity.” 

The Interpersonal Circle

Interpersonal theorists (Carson, 1969; Kiesler, 1983; Leary, 1957) created the Interpersonal Circle to explain the ways in which people relate to each other interpersonally. The model is based on a system of similarity and dissimilarity and is meant to explain and predict the ways in which two different people may interact in a given situation. 

In this model, 16 interpersonal styles are positioned around a circle. Interpersonal theory has been applied both to traits and behaviors. Here we discuss its applications to real-time communication exchanges of individuals in a dyadic interaction.

The model represents a system that charts interpersonal communication across two dimensions: Power and Affiliation. In the model, the Power (Dominance) axis runs vertically. On this dimension, those interpersonal styles positioned directly across from each other are viewed as complementary to each other. 

In practice, this would mean that in a given interpersonal interaction, individuals who act in a dissimilar manner on the Power axis would likely get along well with each other. For example, if one individual were to act in a dominant manner, then the behavioral response that would likely lead to the best outcome would be for the other person to respond with deference. This makes sense if you consider how the alternative might play out—that is, two people competing for dominance.

The Affiliation axis runs horizontally. Contrary to the Power dimension, similarity is complementary on the Affiliation dimension. For example, if one person acts in a friendly manner, then the responses that would likely predict the best outcome would be for the second person to respond in an equally friendly, warm or sociable manner.

There are multiple reasons why the interpersonal circle is relevant to your life. Using the interpersonal circle is a relatively simple way to identify your own tendencies toward particular styles with certain individuals. There is evidence that those who view the social world using a structure similar to that of the interpersonal circle report fewer interpersonal problems and higher levels of satisfaction with life, self-confidence, and self-liking.

Complementarity

The powerful theory that arose from the Interpersonal Circle is complementarity. Complementarity is the idea that individuals interact in a manner that elicits a restricted class of behaviors (e.g., dominance requests submission and friendliness invites similar behaviors) and you have the choice to either act in a complementary fashion or not. 

The degree to which another individual complements those behaviors has some predictive utility for measuring how well the relationship will go. The deliberate choice to complement or not is called Complementarity.

The theory suggests that certain behaviors “pull” particular responses from the other person. Being friendly generally elicits friendliness from the other person. Complementary behaviors on the friendliness (affiliation) axis generally indicate better communication and mutual liking. 

If you as a student approach a colleague or a professor in a friendly manner, you are more likely to get a friendly response. If a faculty member is friendly in your exchange and you respond in a chilly manner (maybe you had a bad day or you are unhappy with the professor), the (anticomplementary) interaction will probably be uncomfortable and set a negative tone.

Another example of complementarity could be that your professor treats his students in a dominant manner. This dominance sends the message that the professor sees himself as having power and that he expects his students to submit to his behaviors. If you understand this dynamic and view his interpersonal behavior in this manner, you can make a deliberate choice to complement this behavior or not complement this behavior.

In this case, complementing would mean that you validate the professor’s interpersonal message by being more deferent. Not complementing might mean responding in an assured manner by communicating that you have opinions or knowledge about the topic, work, etc. and you will not merely submit to the professor’s interpersonal message. 

Neither response is inherently bad, but each response above carries consequences with it. If you submit, you may not have your voice heard or you may not have important decisions go the way you’d like.  Implying to this professor that you consider yourself to be on the same level as they are may not go well.

However, if you do not submit, it might lead to a power struggle with your professor, which is never an ideal situation for any graduate student. The point is to recognize the interpersonal messages people send and to make deliberate decisions about when to complement those messages and when not to do so.

Be aware: if you are redefining your interpersonal approach with an individual who is used to you acting in a particular manner, there might be a period of discomfort, or even backlash, as they adjust to your new way of conducting yourself. Although the time of adjustment is often uncomfortable, it is quite normal. Stick with it, if that is your preferred path.

Consider the example of a professor who spouts orders, asserts himself as dominating, and expects his students to be subservient. He considers his research assistants to be personal assistants and sends them on personal errands and expects them to be available at all hours of the day and night.

Which graduate student response would be complementary to his behavior?

• A. Submitting by way of obeying all orders and never asserting yourself.
• B. Responding in an assured manner by communicating that you have opinions, knowledge, and boundaries, and you will not merely submit to the professor’s interpersonal message.

Complementarity occurs when individuals interact in a manner that elicits a restricted class of behaviors (e.g., dominance requests submission and friendliness invites similar behaviors) and you have the choice to either act in a complementary fashion or not.

Interesting question for you: What if this professor is a woman? Would you have a different emotional reaction? We are all socialized to have gender role expectations. Therefore, it would not be surprising to be even more critical of a woman with a dominant interaction style.

Think of someone with whom you have trouble communicating. Once you have that person in mind, use the interpersonal circle to identify that individual’s interpersonal communication style. 

How would you choose to complement or not complement their style? Is there anything you want to change about how you would approach your communication with that person? How does the model help you think about this?

Marissa works in a lab with three labmates. One labmate, Liang, treats Marissa as if she were the lab mom. He asks her to order supplies, to clean up, to order lunch for the group during working meetings, etc. 

Marissa usually complies with Liang’s requests. That is, she usually complements Liang’s dominant interpersonal communication style with a submissive interpersonal communication style. 

However, she wants very badly to change her dynamic with Liang so he stops bossing her around. The following interaction is one in which Marissa deliberately chooses not to complement Liang’s interpersonal style in order to change their interpersonal dynamic. 

Remember, when thinking interpersonally, the way in which you deliver the message through nonverbals and the words you choose are equally if not more important than the content of the discussion. Let’s see how Marissa does.

LIANG: [walking up to Marissa, while she’s working] Marissa, we are out of toner and paper and I need to print these results. Can you go to the department secretary and see if they have some we can use and then order more. [Liang’s interpersonal communication style is best defined as dominant: he is making demands and bossing Marissa around]

MARISSA: [continuing to work] Sorry, Liang, I’m busy. You’re going to have to go yourself. [now making eye contact with Liang]. Also, I think it’s time someone else in the lab besides me orders supplies. If you need help figuring it out, I am happy to help, but I’m relieving myself of the responsibility of ordering things for everyone. I have a lot of work to do before I graduate and I’ve done my fair share—it’s someone else’s turn. [Marissa’s interpersonal communication style here is assured].

LIANG: [caught off guard and looking perplexed] What is this? Are you upset because I didn’t say “please” and “thank you”? [Liang meets Marissa’s assured interpersonal message with a stronger form of dominance]

MARISSA: [stopping what she’s doing, turning to face Liang and deliberately using a calm voice that does not convey hostility]. Liang, a “please” or a “thank you” would have been nice, but this isn’t a reaction in the moment. I’ve given it some thought and I have decided it’s time someone else takes care of ordering things around here. [Marissa continues to use an Assured interpersonal communication style and stays on message]

LIANG: [now clearly frustrated] We’ll see how this goes. I don’t have time for this [Liang walks away]

MARISSA: I don’t either, Liang. That’s the point.

Let’s debrief:

Marissa deliberately chose to not complement Liang’s dominant interpersonal communication style, both in the words she chose (e.g., I have decided it’s time someone else takes care of ordering things around here.) and the nonverbals she conveyed (e.g., making eye contact instead of staring down at her work). 

In the face of Liang’s persistence in expecting that she did what he wanted, Marissa stuck to her message while also communicating that she wasn’t looking for a hostile confrontation.

There are some elements of this interaction that would likely play out in most similar situations:

• When people send an interpersonal message that is not validated by the other person, they usually try to send the message again, only this time with more intensity. Liang did this by becoming even more dominant and attacking Marissa on an interpersonal level, when he said, “is this because you didn’t get a “please” or “thank you”?
• When Liang began to send a stronger dominant message, Marissa likely felt uncomfortable. When faced with this type of discomfort, most people give up and return to submissiveness or, conversely, they meet the other person’s attempt at dominance with hostility or a dominant message of their own—essentially, they tell the person, “you are not in charge,” but they do so in a hostile or confrontational way. Marissa anticipates this and stays on message while also communicating that she is not looking for a hostile confrontation.
• Marissa was also very effective at keeping the interaction in the “here and now” instead of talking about past incidents.
• Marissa also used “I” statements such as “I can’t do this” and “I’ve made a decision.” Many people unintentionally sabotage their interaction by putting things on other people by making statements like, “you’re bossy” or “you just want to boss me around.” These types of accusations are almost impossible to prove in the moment and usually turn into an argument. By avoiding these types of statements, Marissa avoids a whole other area of interaction that would most likely turn into an argument.

Carson, R. C. (1969). Interaction concepts of personality . Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co.

Cheng, C., Wang, F., & Golden, D. L. (2011). Unpacking cultural differences in interpersonal flexibility: Role of culture-related personality and situational factors. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 42 (3), 425-444. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022110362755

Fan, H., & Han, B. (2018). How does leader‐follower fit or misfit in communication style matter for work outcomes? Social Behavior and Personality, 46 (7), 1083–1100. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.6925

Gifford, R. (1991). Mapping nonverbal behavior on the Interpersonal Circle. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61 (2), 279–288. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.61.2.279

Graham, K., Mawritz, M., Dust, S., Greenbaum, R., & Ziegert, J. (2019). Too many cooks in the kitchen: The effects of dominance incompatibility on relationship conflict and subsequent abusive supervision. The Leadership Quarterly, 30( 3), 351–364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2018.12.003

Kiesler, D. (1983). The 1982 Interpersonal Circle: A taxonomy for complementarity in human transactions. Psychological Review, 90 (3), 185–214. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.90.3.185

Kurzius, E., Borkenau, P., & Leising, D. (2021). Spontaneous interpersonal complementarity in the lab: A multilevel approach to modeling the antecedents and consequences of people’s interpersonal behaviors and their dynamic interplay. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , Advance Online Publication. http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy1.lib.asu.edu/10.1037/pspi0000347

Leary, T. (1957). Interpersonal diagnosis of personality. New York: John Wiley & Sons

Locke, K. (2019). Development and validation of a circumplex measure of the interpersonal culture in work teams and organizations. Frontiers in Psychology, 10 , 850–850. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00850  

Mainhard, T., Van Der Rijst, R., Van Tartwijk, J., & Wubbels, T. (2009). A model for the supervisor-doctoral student relationship. Higher Education, 58 (3), 359–373. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-009-9199-8  

Markey, P., Lowmaster, S., & Eichler, W. (2010). A real‐time assessment of interpersonal complementarity. Personal Relationships, 17 (1), 13-25. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.2010.01249.x  

Moskowitz, D. S., Ho, M. R., & Turcotte-Tremblay, A.-M. (2007). Contextual influences on interpersonal complementarity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33( 8), 1051–1063. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167207303024

Orellana, M. L., Darder, A., Pérez, A., & Salinas, J. (2016). Improving doctoral success by matching PhD students with supervisors. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 11 , 87-103. https://doi.org/10.28945/3404  

Sullivan, H. S. (1953). The interpersonal theory of psychiatry . New York: W.W. Norton.& Company.

Tracey, T. (1994). An examination of the complementarity of interpersonal behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67( 5), 864–878. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.5.864

Wiggins, J. (1979). A psychological taxonomy of trait-descriptive terms: The interpersonal domain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37 (3), 395–412. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.37.3.395  

On Speaking Up: A Conference Experience

Confronting a male colleague with contradictory findings at a conference.

Stubbornness and Tenacity

Highlights the obstacles faced when trying to have research reviewed by the advisor and emphasizes the steps necessary to make adequate progress in the program.

Critical Mass

Captures the annoyance of male colleagues making sexist assumptions and the challenges with conference travel as a female graduate student.

Persuading an Advisor

Suggestions for defining research.

I Have Not Figured Out How to Say "No"

Emphasizes the challenge with saying no, but the importance of learning to do so.

Asserting Yourself in the Face of Authority

The importance of standing up for yourself.

Paths of Family Planning and Different Options Along the Way

How a flexible schedule as a professor made it possible to have a family and a career.

Proactive Approach and Adapting Environments

How to adapt experimental methods to match a lifestyle.

An Arizona State University project, supported by the National Science Foundation under grants 0634519, 0910384 and 1761278

Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. © 2021  Career WISE. All rights reserved. Privacy | Legal

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it's official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you're on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• Browse Titles

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

National Research Council (US) Committee on the Assessment of 21st Century Skills. Assessing 21st Century Skills: Summary of a Workshop. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2011.

Assessing 21st Century Skills: Summary of a Workshop.

• Hardcopy Version at National Academies Press

3 Assessing Interpersonal Skills

The second cluster of skills—broadly termed interpersonal skills—are those required for relating to other people. These sorts of skills have long been recognized as important for success in school and the workplace, said Stephen Fiore, professor at the University of Central Florida, who presented findings from a paper about these skills and how they might be assessed (Salas, Bedwell, and Fiore, 2011). 1 Advice offered by Dale Carnegie in the 1930s to those who wanted to “win friends and influence people,” for example, included the following: be a good listener; don’t criticize, condemn, or complain; and try to see things from the other person’s point of view. These are the same sorts of skills found on lists of 21st century skills today. For example, the Partnership for 21st Century Skills includes numerous interpersonal capacities, such as working creatively with others, communicating clearly, and collaborating with others, among the skills students should learn as they progress from preschool through postsecondary study (see Box 3-1 for the definitions of the relevant skills in the organization’s P-21 Framework).

Interpersonal Capacities in the Partnership for 21st Century Skills Framework. Develop, implement, and communicate new ideas to others effectively Be open and responsive to new and diverse perspectives; incorporate group input and feedback into the work (more...)

It seems clear that these are important skills, yet definitive labels and definitions for the interpersonal skills important for success in schooling and work remain elusive: They have been called social or people skills, social competencies, soft skills, social self-efficacy, and social intelligence, Fiore said (see, e.g., Ferris, Witt, and Hochwarter, 2001 ; Hochwarter et al., 2006 ; Klein et al., 2006 ; Riggio, 1986 ; Schneider, Ackerman, and Kanfer, 1996 ; Sherer et al., 1982 ; Sternberg, 1985 ; Thorndike, 1920 ). The previous National Research Council (NRC) workshop report that offered a preliminary definition of 21st century skills described one broad category of interpersonal skills ( National Research Council, 2010 , p. 3):

• Complex communication/social skills: Skills in processing and interpreting both verbal and nonverbal information from others in order to respond appropriately. A skilled communicator is able to select key pieces of a complex idea to express in words, sounds, and images, in order to build shared understanding ( Levy and Murnane, 2004 ). Skilled communicators negotiate positive outcomes with customers, subordinates, and superiors through social perceptiveness, persuasion, negotiation, instructing, and service orientation ( Peterson et al., 1999 ).

These and other available definitions are not necessarily at odds, but in Fiore’s view, the lack of a single, clear definition reflects a lack of theoretical clarity about what they are, which in turn has hampered progress toward developing assessments of them. Nevertheless, appreciation for the importance of these skills—not just in business settings, but in scientific and technical collaboration, and in both K-12 and postsecondary education settings—has been growing. Researchers have documented benefits these skills confer, Fiore noted. For example, Goleman (1998) found they were twice as important to job performance as general cognitive ability. Sonnentag and Lange (2002) found understanding of cooperation strategies related to higher performance among engineering and software development teams, and Nash and colleagues (2003) showed that collaboration skills were key to successful interdisciplinary research among scientists.

• WHAT ARE INTERPERSONAL SKILLS?

The multiplicity of names for interpersonal skills and ways of conceiving of them reflects the fact that these skills have attitudinal, behavioral, and cognitive components, Fiore explained. It is useful to consider 21st century skills in basic categories (e.g., cognitive, interpersonal, and intrapersonal), but it is still true that interpersonal skills draw on many capacities, such as knowledge of social customs and the capacity to solve problems associated with social expectations and interactions. Successful interpersonal behavior involves a continuous correction of social performance based on the reactions of others, and, as Richard Murnane had noted earlier, these are cognitively complex tasks. They also require self-regulation and other capacities that fall into the intrapersonal category (discussed in Chapter 4 ). Interpersonal skills could also be described as a form of “social intelligence,” specifically social perception and social cognition that involve processes such as attention and decoding. Accurate assessment, Fiore explained, may need to address these various facets separately.

The research on interpersonal skills has covered these facets, as researchers who attempted to synthesize it have shown. Fiore described the findings of a study ( Klein, DeRouin, and Salas, 2006 ) that presented a taxonomy of interpersonal skills based on a comprehensive review of the literature. The authors found a variety of ways of measuring and categorizing such skills, as well as ways to link them both to outcomes and to personality traits and other factors that affect them. They concluded that interpersonal effectiveness requires various sorts of competence that derive from experience, instinct, and learning about specific social contexts. They put forward their own definition of interpersonal skills as “goal-directed behaviors, including communication and relationship-building competencies, employed in interpersonal interaction episodes characterized by complex perceptual and cognitive processes, dynamic verbal and non verbal interaction exchanges, diverse roles, motivations, and expectancies” (p. 81).

They also developed a model of interpersonal performance, shown in Figure 3-1 , that illustrates the interactions among the influences, such as personality traits, previous life experiences, and the characteristics of the situation; the basic communication and relationship-building skills the individual uses in the situation; and outcomes for the individual, the group, and the organization. To flesh out this model, the researchers distilled sets of skills for each area, as shown in Table 3-1 .

Model of interpersonal performance. NOTE: Big Five personality traits = openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism; EI = emotional intelligence; IPS = interpersonal skills. SOURCE: Stephen Fiore’s presentation. Klein, (more...)

Taxonomy of Interpersonal Skills.

Fiore explained that because these frameworks focus on behaviors intended to attain particular social goals and draw on both attitudes and cognitive processes, they provide an avenue for exploring what goes into the development of effective interpersonal skills in an individual. They also allow for measurement of specific actions in a way that could be used in selection decisions, performance appraisals, or training. More specifically, Figure 3-1 sets up a way of thinking about these skills in the contexts in which they are used. The implication for assessment is that one would need to conduct the measurement in a suitable, realistic context in order to be able to examine the attitudes, cognitive processes, and behaviors that constitute social skills.

• ASSESSMENT APPROACHES AND ISSUES

One way to assess these skills, Fiore explained, is to look separately at the different components (attitudinal, behavioral, and cognitive). For example, as the model in Figure 3-1 indicates, previous life experiences, such as the opportunities an individual has had to engage in successful and unsuccessful social interactions, can be assessed through reports (e.g., personal statements from applicants or letters of recommendation from prior employers). If such narratives are written in response to specific questions about types of interactions, they may provide indications of the degree to which an applicant has particular skills. However, it is likely to be difficult to distinguish clearly between specific social skills and personality traits, knowledge, and cognitive processes. Moreover, Fiore added, such narratives report on past experience and may not accurately portray how one would behave or respond in future experiences.

The research on teamwork (or collaboration)—a much narrower concept than interpersonal skills—has used questionnaires that ask people to rate themselves and also ask for peer ratings of others on dimensions such as communication, leadership, and self-management. For example, Kantrowitz (2005) collected self-report data on two scales: performance standards for various behaviors, and comparison to others in the subjects’ working groups. Loughry, Ohland, and Moore (2007) asked members of work teams in science and technical contexts to rate one another on five general categories: contribution to the team’s work; interaction with teammates; contribution to keeping the team on track; expectations for quality; and possession of relevant knowledge, skills, and abilities.

Another approach, Fiore noted, is to use situational judgment tests (SJTs), which are multiple-choice assessments of possible reactions to hypothetical teamwork situations to assess capacities for conflict resolution, communication, and coordination, as Stevens and Campion (1999) have done. The researchers were able to demonstrate relationships between these results and both peers’ and supervisors’ ratings and to ratings of job performance. They were also highly correlated to employee aptitude test results.

Yet another approach is direct observation of team interactions. By observing directly, researchers can avoid the potential lack of reliability inherent in self- and peer reports, and can also observe the circumstances in which behaviors occur. For example, Taggar and Brown (2001) developed a set of scales related to conflict resolution, collaborative problem solving, and communication on which people could be rated.

Though each of these approaches involve ways of distinguishing specific aspects of behavior, it is still true, Fiore observed, that there is overlap among the constructs—skills or characteristics—to be measured. In his view, it is worth asking whether it is useful to be “reductionist” in parsing these skills. Perhaps more useful, he suggested, might be to look holistically at the interactions among the facets that contribute to these skills, though means of assessing in that way have yet to be determined. He enumerated some of the key challenges in assessing interpersonal skills.

The first concerns the precision, or degree of granularity, with which interpersonal expertise can be measured. Cognitive scientists have provided models of the progression from novice to expert in more concrete skill areas, he noted. In K-12 education contexts, assessment developers have looked for ways to delineate expectations for particular stages that students typically go through as their knowledge and understanding grow more sophisticated. Hoffman (1998) has suggested the value of a similar continuum for interpersonal skills. Inspired by the craft guilds common in Europe during the Middle Ages, Hoffman proposed that assessment developers use the guidelines for novices, journeymen, and master craftsmen, for example, as the basis for operational definitions of developing social expertise. If such a continuum were developed, Fiore noted, it should make it possible to empirically examine questions about whether adults can develop and improve in response to training or other interventions.

Another issue is the importance of the context in which assessments of interpersonal skills are administered. By definition, these skills entail some sort of interaction with other people, but much current testing is done in an individualized way that makes it difficult to standardize. Sophisticated technology, such as computer simulations, or even simpler technology can allow for assessment of people’s interactions in a standardized scenario. For example, Smith-Jentsch and colleagues (1996) developed a simulation of an emergency room waiting room, in which test takers interacted with a video of actors following a script, while others have developed computer avatars that can interact in the context of scripted events. When well executed, Fiore explained, such simulations may be able to elicit emotional responses, allowing for assessment of people’s self-regulatory capacities and other so-called soft skills.

Workshop participants noted the complexity of trying to take the context into account in assessment. For example, one noted both that behaviors may make sense only in light of previous experiences in a particular environment, and that individuals may display very different social skills in one setting (perhaps one in which they are very comfortable) than another (in which they are not comfortable). Another noted that the clinical psychology literature would likely offer productive insights on such issues.

The potential for technologically sophisticated assessments also highlights the evolving nature of social interaction and custom. Generations who have grown up interacting via cell phone, social networking, and tweeting may have different views of social norms than their parents had. For example, Fiore noted, a telephone call demands a response, and many younger people therefore view a call as more intrusive and potentially rude than a text message, which one can respond to at his or her convenience. The challenge for researchers is both to collect data on new kinds of interactions and to consider new ways to link the content of interactions to the mode of communication, in order to follow changes in what constitutes skill at interpersonal interaction. The existing definitions and taxonomies of interpersonal skills, he explained, were developed in the context of interactions that primarily occur face to face, but new technologies foster interactions that do not occur face to face or in a single time window.

In closing, Fiore returned to the conceptual slippage in the terms used to describe interpersonal skills. Noting that the etymological origins of both “cooperation” and “collaboration” point to a shared sense of working together, he explained that the word “coordination” has a different meaning, even though these three terms are often used as if they were synonymous. The word “coordination” captures instead the concepts of ordering and arranging—a key aspect of teamwork. These distinctions, he observed, are a useful reminder that examining the interactions among different facets of interpersonal skills requires clarity about each facet.

• ASSESSMENT EXAMPLES

The workshop included examples of four different types of assessments of interpersonal skills intended for different educational and selection purposes—an online portfolio assessment designed for high school students; an online assessment for community college students; a situational judgment test used to select students for medical school in Belgium; and a collection of assessment center approaches used for employee selection, promotion, and training purposes.

The first example was the portfolio assessment used by the Envision High School in Oakland, California, to assess critical thinking, collaboration, communication, and creativity. At Envision Schools, a project-based learning approach is used that emphasizes the development of deeper learning skills, integration of arts and technology into core subjects, and real-world experience in workplaces. 2 The focus of the curriculum is to prepare students for college, especially those who would be the first in their family to attend college. All students are required to assemble a portfolio in order to graduate. Bob Lenz, cofounder of Envision High School, discussed this online portfolio assessment.

The second example was an online, scenario-based assessment used for community college students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) programs. The focus of the program is on developing students’ social/communication skills as well as their technical skills. Louise Yarnall, senior research scientist with SRI, made this presentation.

Filip Lievens, professor of psychology at Ghent University in Belgium, described the third example, a situational judgment test designed to assess candidates’ skill in responding to health-related situations that require interpersonal skills. The test is used for high-stakes purposes.

The final presentation was made by Lynn Gracin Collins, chief scientist for SH&A/Fenestra, who discussed a variety of strategies for assessing interpersonal skills in employment settings. She focused on performance-based assessments, most of which involve role-playing activities.

Online Portfolio Assessment of High School Students 3

Bob Lenz described the experience of incorporating in the curriculum and assessing several key interpersonal skills in an urban high school environment. Envision Schools is a program created with corporate and foundation funding to serve disadvantaged high school students. The program consists of four high schools in the San Francisco Bay area that together serve 1,350 primarily low-income students. Sixty-five percent qualify for free or reduced-price lunch, and 70 percent are expected to be the first in their families to graduate from college. Most of the students, Lenz explained, enter the Envision schools at approximately a sixth-grade level in most areas. When they begin the Envision program, most have exceedingly negative feelings about school; as Lenz put it they “hate school and distrust adults.” The program’s mission is not only to address this sentiment about schools, but also to accelerate the students’ academic skills so that they can get into college and to develop the other skills they will need to succeed in life.

Lenz explained that tracking students’ progress after they graduate is an important tool for shaping the school’s approach to instruction. The first classes graduated from the Envision schools 2 years ago. Lenz reported that all of their students meet the requirements to attend a 4-year college in California (as opposed to 37 percent of public high school students statewide), and 94 percent of their graduates enrolled in 2- or 4-year colleges after graduation. At the time of the presentation, most of these students (95 percent) had re-enrolled for the second year of college. Lenz believes the program’s focus on assessment, particularly of 21st century skills, has been key to this success.

The program emphasizes what they call the “three Rs”: rigor, relevance, and relationships. Project-based assignments, group activities, and workplace projects are all activities that incorporate learning of interpersonal skills such as leadership, Lenz explained. Students are also asked to assess themselves regularly. Researchers from the Stanford Center for Assessment, Learning, and Equity (SCALE) assisted the Envision staff in developing a College Success Assessment System that is embedded in the curriculum. Students develop portfolios with which they can demonstrate their learning in academic content as well as 21st century skill areas. The students are engaged in three goals: mastery knowledge, application of knowledge, and metacognition.

The components of the portfolio, which is presented at the end of 12th grade, include

• A student-written introduction to the contents
• Examples of “mastery-level” student work (assessed and certified by teachers prior to the presentation)
• Reflective summaries of work completed in five core content areas
• An artifact of and a written reflection on the workplace learning project
• A 21st century skills assessment

Students are also expected to defend their portfolios, and faculty are given professional development to guide the students in this process. Eventually, Lenz explained, the entire portfolio will be archived online.

Lenz showed examples of several student portfolios to demonstrate the ways in which 21st century skills, including interpersonal ones, are woven into both the curriculum and the assessments. In his view, teaching skills such as leadership and collaboration, together with the academic content, and holding the students to high expectations that incorporate these sorts of skills, is the best way to prepare the students to succeed in college, where there may be fewer faculty supports.

STEM Workforce Training Assessments 4

Louise Yarnall turned the conversation to assessment in a community college setting, where the technicians critical to many STEM fields are trained. She noted the most common approach to training for these workers is to engage them in hands-on practice with the technologies they are likely to encounter. This approach builds knowledge of basic technical procedures, but she finds that it does little to develop higher-order cognitive skills or the social skills graduates need to thrive in the workplace.

Yarnall and a colleague have outlined three categories of primary skills that technology employers seek in new hires ( Yarnall and Ostrander, in press ):

Social-Technical

• Translating client needs into technical specifications
• Researching technical information to meet client needs
• Justifying or defending technical approach to client
• Reaching consensus on work team
• Polling work team to determine ideas
• Using tools, languages, and principles of domain
• Generating a product that meets specific technical criteria
• Interpreting problems using principles of domain

In her view, new strategies are needed to incorporate these skills into the community college curriculum. To build students’ technical skills and knowledge, she argued, faculty need to focus more on higher-order thinking and application of knowledge, to press students to demonstrate their competence, and to practice. Cooperative learning opportunities are key to developing social skills and knowledge. For the skills that are both social and technical, students need practice with reflection and feedback opportunities, modeling and scaffolding of desirable approaches, opportunities to see both correct and incorrect examples, and inquiry-based instructional practices.

She described a project she and colleagues, in collaboration with community college faculty, developed that was designed to incorporate this thinking, called the Scenario-Based Learning Project (see Box 3-2 ). This team developed eight workplace scenarios—workplace challenges that were complex enough to require a team response. The students are given a considerable amount of material with which to work. In order to succeed, they would need to figure out how to approach the problem, what they needed, and how to divide up the effort. Students are also asked to reflect on the results of the effort and make presentations about the solutions they have devised. The project begins with a letter from the workplace manager (the instructor plays this role and also provides feedback throughout the process) describing the problem and deliverables that need to be produced. For example, one task asked a team to produce a website for a bicycle club that would need multiple pages and links.

Sample Constructs, Evidence of Learning, and Assessment Task Features for Scenario-Based Learning Projects. Ability to document system requirements using a simplified use case format; ability to address user needs in specifying system requirements. Presented (more...)

Yarnall noted they encountered a lot of resistance to this approach. Community college students are free to drop a class if they do not like the instructor’s approach, and because many instructors are adjunct faculty, their positions are at risk if their classes are unpopular. Scenario-based learning can be risky, she explained, because it can be demanding, but at the same time students sometimes feel unsure that they are learning enough. Instructors also sometimes feel unprepared to manage the teams, give appropriate feedback, and track their students’ progress.

Furthermore, Yarnall continued, while many of the instructors did enjoy developing the projects, the need to incorporate assessment tools into the projects was the least popular aspect of the program. Traditional assessments in these settings tended to measure recall of isolated facts and technical procedures, and often failed to track the development or application of more complex cognitive skills and professional behaviors, Yarnall explained. She and her colleagues proposed some new approaches, based on the theoretical framework known as evidence-centered design. 5 Their goal was to guide the faculty in designing tasks that would elicit the full range of knowledge and skills they wanted to measure, and they turned to what are called reflection frameworks that had been used in other contexts to elicit complex sets of skills ( Herman, Aschbacher, and Winters, 1992 ).

They settled on an interview format, which they called Evidence-Centered Assessment Reflection, to begin to identify the specific skills required in each field, to identify the assessment features that could produce evidence of specific kinds of learning, and then to begin developing specific prompts, stimuli, performance descriptions, and scoring rubrics for the learning outcomes they wanted to measure. The next step was to determine how the assessments would be delivered and how they would be validated. Assessment developers call this process a domain analysis—its purpose was to draw from the instructors a conceptual map of what they were teaching and particularly how social and social-technical skills fit into those domains.

Based on these frameworks, the team developed assessments that asked students, for example, to write justifications for the tools and procedures they intended to use for a particular purpose; rate their teammates’ ability to listen, appreciate different points of view, or reach a consensus; or generate a list of questions they would ask a client to better understand his or her needs. They used what Yarnall described as “coarse, three-level rubrics” to make the scoring easy to implement with sometimes-reluctant faculty, and have generally averaged 79 percent or above in inter-rater agreement.

Yarnall closed with some suggestions for how their experience might be useful for a K-12 context. She noted the process encouraged thinking about how students might apply particular knowledge and skills, and how one might distinguish between high- and low-quality applications. Specifically, the developers were guided to consider what it would look like for a student to use the knowledge or skills successfully—what qualities would stand out and what sorts of products or knowledge would demonstrate a particular level of understanding or awareness.

Assessing Medical Students’ Interpersonal Skills 6

Filip Lievens described a project conducted at Ghent University in Belgium, in which he and colleagues developed a measure of interpersonal skills in a high-stakes context: medical school admissions. The project began with a request from the Belgian government, in 1997, for a measure of these skills that could be used not only to measure the current capacities of physicians, but also to predict the capacities of candidates and thus be useful for selection. Lievens noted the challenge was compounded by the fact the government was motivated by some negative publicity about the selection process for medical school.

One logical approach would have been to use personality testing, often conducted through in-person interviews, but that would have been very difficult to implement with the large numbers of candidates involved, Lievens explained. A paper on another selection procedure, called “low-fidelity simulation” ( Motowidlo et al., 1990 ), suggested an alternative. This approach is also known as a situational judgment test, mentioned above, in which candidates select from a set of possible responses to a situation that is described in writing or presented using video. It is based on the proposition that procedural knowledge of the advantages and disadvantages of possible courses of action can be measured, and that the results would be predictive of later behaviors, even if the instrument does not measure the complex facets that go into such choices. A sample item from the Belgian assessment, including a transcription of the scenario and the possible responses, is shown in Box 3-3 . In the early stages of the project, the team used videotaped scenarios, but more recently they have experimented with presenting them through other means, including in written format.

Sample Item from the Situational Judgment Test Used for Admissions to Medical School in Belgium. Situation: Patient: So, this physiotherapy is really going to help me?

Lievens noted a few differences between medical education in Belgium and the United States that influenced decisions about the assessment. In Belgium, prospective doctors must pass an admissions exam at age 18 to be accepted for medical school, which begins at the level that for Americans is the less structured 4-year undergraduate program. The government-run exam is given twice a year to approximately 4,000 students in total, and it has a 30 percent pass rate. Once accepted for medical school, students may choose the university at which they will study—the school must accept all of the students who select it.

The assessment’s other components include 40 items covering knowledge of chemistry, physics, mathematics, and biology and 50 items covering general cognitive ability (verbal, numerical, and figural reasoning). The two interpersonal skills addressed—in 30 items—are building and maintaining relationships and exchanging information.

Lievens described several challenges in the development of the interpersonal component. First, it was not possible to pilot test any items because of a policy that students could not be asked to complete items that did not count toward their scores. In response to both fast-growing numbers of candidates as well as technical glitches with video presentations, the developers decided to present all of the prompts in a paper-and-pencil format. A more serious problem was feedback they received questioning whether each of the test questions had only one correct answer. To address this, the developers introduced a system for determining correct answers through consensus among a group of experts.

Because of the high stakes for this test, they have also encountered problems with maintaining the security of the test items. For instance, Lievens reported that items have appeared for sale on eBay, and they have had problems with students who took the test multiple times simply to learn the content. Developing alternate test forms was one strategy for addressing this problem.

Lievens and his colleagues have conducted a study of the predictive validity of the test in which they collected data on four cohorts of students (a total of 4,538) who took the test and entered medical school ( Lievens and Sackett, 2011 ). They examined GPA and internship performance data for 519 students in the initial group who completed the 7 years required for the full medical curriculum as well as job performance data for 104 students who later became physicians. As might be expected, Lievens observed, the cognitive component of the test was a strong predictor, particularly for the first years of the 7-year course, whereas the interpersonal portion was not useful for predicting GPA (see Figure 3-2 ). However, Figure 3-3 shows this component of the test was much better at predicting the students’ later performance in internships and in their first 9 years as practicing physicians.

Correlations between cognitive and interpersonal components (situational judgment test, or SJT) of the medical school admission test and medical school GPA. SOURCE: Filip Lievens’ presentation. Used with permission.

Correlations between the cognitive and interpersonal components (situational judgment test, or SJT) of the medical school admission test and internship/job performance. SOURCE: Filip Lievens’ presentation. Used with permission.

Lievens also reported the results of a study of the comparability of alternate forms of the test. The researchers compared results for three approaches to developing alternate forms. The approaches differed in the extent to which the characteristics of the situation presented in the items were held constant across the forms. The correlations between scores on the alternate forms ranged from .34 to .68, with the higher correlation occurring for the approach that maintained the most similarities in the characteristics of the items across the forms. The exact details of this study are too complex to present here, and the reader is referred to the full report ( Lievens and Sackett, 2007 ) for a more complete description.

Lievens summarized a few points he has observed about the addition of the interpersonal skills component to the admissions test:

• While cognitive assessments are better at predicting GPA, the assessments of interpersonal skills were superior at predicting performance in internships and on the job.
• Applicants respond favorably to the interpersonal component of the test—Lievens did not claim this component is the reason but noted a sharp increase in the test-taking population.
• Success rates for admitted students have also improved. The percentage of students who successfully passed the requirements for the first academic year increased from 30 percent, prior to having the exam in place, to 80 percent after the exam was installed. While not making a causal claim, Lievens noted that the increased pass rate may be due to the fact that universities have also changed their curricula to place more emphasis on interpersonal skills, especially in the first year.

Assessment Centers 8

Lynn Gracin Collins began by explaining what an assessment center is. She noted the International Congress on Assessment Center Methods describes an assessment center as follows 9 :

a standardized evaluation of behavior based on multiple inputs. Several trained observers and techniques are used. Judgments about behavior are made, in major part, from specifically developed assessment simulations. These judgments are pooled in a meeting among the assessors or by a statistical integration process. In an integration discussion, comprehensive accounts of behavior—and often ratings of it—are pooled. The discussion results in evaluations of the assessees’ performance on the dimensions or other variables that the assessment center is designed to measure.

She emphasized that key aspects of an assessment center are that they are standardized, based on multiple types of input, involve trained observers, and use simulations. Assessment centers had their first industrial application in the United States about 50 years ago at AT&T. Collins said they are widely favored within the business community because, while they have guidelines to ensure they are carried out appropriately, they are also flexible enough to accommodate a variety of purposes. Assessment centers have the potential to provide a wealth of information about how someone performs a task. An important difference with other approaches is that the focus is not on “what would you do” or “what did you do”; instead, the approach involves watching someone actually perform the tasks. They are commonly used for the purpose of (1) selection and promotion, (2) identification of training and development needs, and (3) skill enhancement through simulations.

Collins said participants and management see them as a realistic job preview, and when used in a selection context, prospective employees actually experience what the job would entail. In that regard, Collins commented it is not uncommon for candidates—during the assessment—to “fold up their materials and say if this is what the job is, I don’t want it.” Thus, the tasks themselves can be instructive, useful for experiential learning, and an important selection device.

Some examples of the skills assessed include the following:

• Interpersonal : communication, influencing others, learning from interactions, leadership, teamwork, fostering relationships, conflict management
• Cognitive : problem solving, decision making, innovation, creativity, planning and organizing
• Intrapersonal : adaptability, drive, tolerance for stress, motivation, conscientiousness

To provide a sense of the steps involved in developing assessment center tasks, Collins laid out the general plan for a recent assessment they developed called the Technology Enhanced Assessment Center (TEAC). The steps are shown in Box 3-4 .

Steps involved in Developing the Technology Enhanced Assessment Center. SOURCE: Adapted from presentation by Lynn Gracin Collins. Used with permission.

Assessment centers make use of a variety of types of tasks to simulate the actual work environment. One that Collins described is called an “inbox exercise,” which consists of a virtual desktop showing received e-mail messages (some of which are marked “high priority”), voice messages, and a calendar that includes some appointments for that day. The candidate is observed and tracked as he or she proceeds to deal with the tasks presented through the inbox. The scheduled appointments on the calendar are used for conducting role-playing tasks in which the candidate has to participate in a simulated work interaction. This may involve a phone call, and the assessor/observer plays the role of the person being called. With the scheduled role-plays, the candidate may receive some information about the nature of the appointment in advance so that he or she can prepare for the appointment. There are typically some unscheduled role-playing tasks as well, in order to observe the candidate’s on-the-spot performance. In some instances, the candidate may also be expected to make a presentation. Assessors observe every activity the candidate performs.

Everything the candidate does at the virtual desktop is visible to the assessor(s) in real time, although in a “behind the scenes” manner that is blind to the candidate. The assessor can follow everything the candidate does, including what they do with every message in the inbox, any responses they make, and any entries they make on the calendar.

Following the inbox exercise, all of the observers/assessors complete evaluation forms. The forms are shared, and the ratings are discussed during a debriefing session at which the assessors come to consensus about the candidate. Time is also reserved to provide feedback to the candidate and to identify areas of strengths and weaknesses.

Collins reported that a good deal of information has been collected about the psychometric qualities of assessment centers. She characterized their reliabilities as adequate, with test-retest reliability coefficients in the .70 range. She said a wide range of inter-rater reliabilities have been reported, generally ranging from .50 to .94. The higher inter-rater reliabilities are associated with assessments in which the assessors/raters are well trained and have access to training materials that clearly explain the exercises, the constructs, and the scoring guidelines. Providing behavioral summary scales, which describe the actual behaviors associated with each score level, also help the assessors more accurately interpret the scoring guide.

She also noted considerable information is available about the validity of assessment centers. The most popular validation strategy is to examine evidence of content validity, which means the exercises actually measure the skills and competencies that they are intended to measure. A few studies have examined evidence of criterion-related validity, looking at the relationship between performance on the assessment center exercises and job performance. She reported validities of .41 to .48 for a recent study conducted by her firm ( SH&A/Fenestra, 2007 ) and .43 for a study by Byham (2010) . Her review of the research indicates that assessment center results show incremental validity over personality tests, cognitive tests, and interviews.

One advantage of assessment center methods is they appear not to have adverse impact on minority groups. Collins said research documents that they tend to be unbiased in predictions of job performance. Further, they are viewed by participants as being fairer than other forms of assessment, and they have received positive support from the courts and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

Assessment centers can be expensive and time intensive, which is one of the challenges associated with using them. An assessment center in a traditional paradigm (as opposed to a high-tech paradigm) can cost between $2,500 and $10,000 per person. The features that affect cost are the number of assessors, the number of exercises, the length of the assessment, the type of report, and the type of feedback process. They can be logistically difficult to coordinate, depending on whether they use a traditional paradigm in which people need to be brought to a single location as opposed to a technology paradigm where much can be handled remotely and virtually. The typical assessment at a center lasts a full day, which means they are resource intensive and can be difficult to scale up to accommodate a large number of test takers.

Lievens mentioned but did not show data indicating (1) that the predictive validity of the interpersonal items for later performance was actually greater than the predictive validity of the cognitive items for GPA, and (2) that women perform slightly better than men on the interpersonal items.

See http://www7 ​.national-academies ​.org/bota/21st ​_Century_Workshop_Salas_Fiore_Paper ​.pdf [August 2011].

See http://www ​.envisionschools.org/site/ [August 2011] for additional information about Envision Schools.

Lenz’s presentation is available at http://www7 ​.national-academies ​.org/bota/21st ​_Century_Workshop_Lenz.pdf [August 2011].

Yarnall’s presentation is available at http://www7 ​.national-academies ​.org/bota/21st ​_Century_Workshop_Yarnall.pdf [August 2011].

See Mislevy and Risconscente (2006) for an explanation of evidence-centered design.

Lievens’ presentation is available at http://www7 ​.national-academies ​.org/bota/21st ​_Century_Workshop_Lievens.pdf [August 2011].

Collins’ presentation is available at http://www7 ​.national-academies ​.org/bota/21st ​_Century_Workshop_Collins.pdf [August 2011].

See http://www ​.assessmentcenters ​.org/articles/whatisassess1.asp [July 2011].

• Cite this Page National Research Council (US) Committee on the Assessment of 21st Century Skills. Assessing 21st Century Skills: Summary of a Workshop. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2011. 3, Assessing Interpersonal Skills.
• PDF version of this title (1003K)

In this Page

Other titles in this collection.

• The National Academies Collection: Reports funded by National Institutes of Health

Recent Activity

• Assessing Interpersonal Skills - Assessing 21st Century Skills Assessing Interpersonal Skills - Assessing 21st Century Skills

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

Connect with NLM

National Library of Medicine 8600 Rockville Pike Bethesda, MD 20894

Web Policies FOIA HHS Vulnerability Disclosure

Help Accessibility Careers