UVA-OB-0338

SCORING AND INTERPRETING FIRO-B

Scoring FIRO-B

FIRO-B comes in several forms including self-scoring, questionnaire only and on-line. If
you have the self-scoring form, you can follow the instructions on the instrument to generate your
scores. If you have the questionnaire only, you will have to send your answers to Consulting
Psychologists Press to be scored. Test booklets are available to qualified administrators from CPP.
If you take the instrument on-line, you’ll get a file describing your scores and how to interpret
them. Once you have your scores, this note may help you understand what they mean.

What is FIRO-B?

FIRO-B, Fundamental Interpersonal Relations Orientation - Behavior, is a questionnaire

designed by Will Shutz, formerly of Stanford University, distributed by Consulting Psychologists
Press of Palo Alto, California. FIRO-B measures a person's self-perception of how they
characteristically relate to other people. In addition to giving information about how individuals
see themselves behaving in interpersonal relationships, the instrument can also be used to facilitate
effectiveness in those relationships. For this reason, FIRO-B has been used widely in a variety of
settings including the study of individual personality dynamics, sensitivity training, marriage
counseling, personnel selection and assignment, team building, and significantly, managerial
relationships.

FIRO-B addresses three dimensions of human relations: Inclusion, Control, and Affection.
Mr. Shutz describes these dimensions through the analogy of a boat ride: Inclusion concerns
whom you would like to take a boat ride with; Control has to do with who is operating the engine
and rudder; and Affection has to do with close relationships that may develop between individuals
on the boat.

In more formal terms, the Inclusion scores reflect behavior of “moving toward” or
“moving away from” people. Some might call this “extroversion” or “introversion.” Another way
of thinking of this is as “in” or “out.” In some ways, this scale is a reflection of a person’s general

This case was prepared by Eileen A. Hogan and James G. Clawson, and was written as a basis for class discussion
rather than to illustrate effective or ineffective handling of an administrative situation. Copyright  2001, 2010 by
the University of Virginia Darden School Foundation, Charlottesville, VA. All rights reserved. To order copies,
send an e-mail to [email protected]. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval
system, used in a spreadsheet, or transmitted in any form or by any means—electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording, or otherwise—without the permission of the Darden School Foundation..
 -2- UVA-OB-0338

social orientation. The Control scores reflect the degree to which person perceives him or herself
assuming responsibility, making decisions or dominating others; in some ways, a reflection of
leadership behavior. One can think of this as “up” or “down.” The Affection scores indicate the
degree to which a person sees himself or herself becoming emotionally involved with others, a
tendency toward deep relationships rather than superficial ones. “Close” or “distant” capture the
dimension here.

For each of these three dimensions, FIRO-B produces two scores, one an indication of
expression and one of want. Thus, in looking at one’s own scores, one can consider six elements
of one's interpersonal behavior:

expressed Inclusion (eI), wanted Inclusion (wI),

expressed Control (eC), wanted Control (wC),
expressed Affection (eA), and wanted Affection (wA).

Expressed scores reflect what we think we do with others in relationship with them. Wanted
scores reflect what we want from others in relationship. Expressed scores are reflections of
outward-bound behaviors, while wanted scores are reflections of desired incoming behaviors.
Exhibit 1 presents some simple statements that summarize the dominant perspective of each of
these six basic FIRO-B categories.

Interpreting Your FIRO-B

A good first step in interpreting your FIRO-B scores is to understand the magnitude of the
scores. Each of these six scores may range from zero to nine. The higher your score, the more you
indicated that you believe that the statements in Exhibit 1 reflect your behavior. You can think of
the strength of your scores as ranging from extremely weak to extremely high as indicated below:

0-l extremely low, compulsive

2-3 low, noticeably characteristic
4-5 borderline, may be a tendency
6-7 high, noticeably characteristic
8-9 extremely high, compulsive

As you compare the strength of your scores with their verbal indications above, you might
ask yourself with each one, how that particular tendency might affect your ability to work with
individuals in your organization.

Next, we can compare the Expressed and Wanted scores on each of the three basic
dimensions. If your scores are similar, you might conclude tentatively that you tend to give as
much or as little as you expect. If the scores are divergent, you might conclude that you tend either
to give more than you expect or that you want more than you give on that particular dimension.
For example, a high wI (wanted Inclusion) score coupled with a low eI (expressed Inclusion) score
would indicate someone who wants to be involved in social activities but who does not express this
desire to others. This person may be perceived as being distant, aloof, or not interested, while in
 -3- UVA-OB-0338

reality the person may be feeling resentful for having been left out. Wide differences in scores can
lead to conflict and frustration in relationships. Again, thinking about what your particular pattern
might mean for you in your organizational relationships, dealing with superiors, peers, and
subordinates, is where the real benefit of this exercise comes.

The third step in interpretation is analyzing how your orientations in the three areas may
help or hinder each other. For example, a person with a high wA (wanted Affection) score wants
to establish close personal relationships and may be able to do this given the opportunity. If he/she
also has a low eI (expressed Inclusion) score, he/she may not be engaging in enough social
contacts to meet persons with whom he/she can become close.

Exhibit 1

SCORING AND INTERPRETING FIRO-B

FIRO-B Scoring Categories

Expressed Inclusion (eI) Expressed Control (eC) Expressed Affection (eA)

I make efforts to include I try to exert control & I make efforts to become
other people in activities influence other things. I close to people. I express
and to get them to include take charge of thing & tell friendly & affectionate
me in theirs. I try to belong, other people what to do. feelings & try to be personal
to join social groups, to be and intimate.
with people as much as
possible.

Wanted Inclusion (wI) Wanted Control (wC) Wanted Affection (wA)

I want other people to I want others to control and I want others to express
include me in their activities influence me. I want other friendly and affectionate
and to invite me to belong people to tell me what to do. feelings toward me and to
even if I do not make an try to become close to them.
effort to be included.
 -4- UVA-OB-0338

AN EXAMPLE OF FIRO-B INTERPRETATION

Here is a sample interpretation of a set of FIRO-B scores for you to consider. See if you
can make the connections between the individual’s scores and the comments made by the
interpreter.

Jack, an executive, age 42:

I C A SUM
e 3 8 1 12
w 1 1 0 2
Sum 4 9 1
Difference 2 7 1

Inclusion: Jack is somewhat uncomfortable around people and will tend to move away
from them. He is very selective about the associates he chooses, and tends to have an “I’ll call
you, don’t call me” attitude. He is neither a “joiner” nor a meeting lover. He prefers autonomy for
himself and his subordinates.

Control: Jack can and does take on the responsibilities of leadership. His self-concept is
one of confidence and adequacy, so much so that he may walk into areas where most “angels fear
to tread.” He has a strong need for recognition and is driven to do well. He may be
overcompensating for some real or imagined inferiority by compulsively taking on large amounts
of responsibility to gain the recognition he desires. Since he avoids anxiety by maintaining
superiority, he’s attracted to others who give him the recognition he needs and also to those who do
not desire to control him or try to make decisions for him.

Affection: Jack is very cautious about the development of close, intimate relationships and
is very selective about those with whom he forms these deep relationships. Low scores here don’t
mean he cannot form such close, personal relationships, but that it is unusual for him to do so.
Thus, close relationships are few and far between, developed only after he over time develops trust
for the person. The reason for this may be from being deeply hurt at some time in the past.

He is most comfortable when other people do not attempt to become emotionally involved
with him, even to the extent of being suspicious of affection shown him. He’s reserved about his
inner feelings, he exhibits little warmth or consideration for others' feelings. He may, because of
this, seem much more critical than complimentary while he is merely exercising objectivity in
interpersonal issues.

General: As mentioned above, in managerial roles Jack prefers autonomy for himself and
his subordinates. His strong desire for recognition may, however, cause him to drive his "troops"
unduly in order to achieve. Coupled with his low scores in the affection area this might indicate
that he comes across as cold and domineering.
 -5- UVA-OB-0338

Exercises in Interpreting FIRO-B Scores

Here are some FIRO-B scores reported by individuals. Examine them carefully and draw
what careful, tentative inferences as you can about the individuals. Be sure to note carefully the
exact data that you use to draw you implications.

LYLE

I C A SUM
e 1 O 2 3
w 6 4 9 19
Sum 7 4 11
Difference 5 4 7

Notes:

JOE

I C A SUM
e 7 6 7 20
w 8 8 8 24
Sum 15 14 15
Difference 1 2 1

Notes:
 -6- UVA-OB-0338

DON

I C A SUM
e 7 9 2 18
w 1 5 5 11
Sum 8 14 7
Difference 6 4 3

Notes:

ALANNA

I C A SUM
e 3 4 2 9
w 1 5 5 11
Sum 4 9 7
Difference 2 1 3

Notes: