th

105 FoCARS
Foundation Course For Agricultural Research Service

Digital Repository of
Course Materials

• Overview of HRM in Indian NARS

• Time Management
• Interpersonal Behaviour & Relationships
• Leadership styles
• Motivation
• Stress: Assessment and Management
• Group Dynamics & Teamwork
• Transactional Analysis
• Creativity and Problem Solving
• Emotional Intelligence
• Groups in Organization
• Presentation Skills
• Ethics in Agricultural Research
Course Coordinators
K. Kareemulla and S. Ravichandran

Support Team
P. Krishnan and P. Namdev
INTERPERSONAL BEHAVIOUR AND
RELATIONSHIPS

Introduction

Human beings are social animals. Among the various needs of human
beings, the one to interact with fellow being is perhaps the most
important. It establishes their relations with their associates, family and
friends. Interpersonal contact is a source of both pleasure and pain. The
situations of comradeship, healthy relationship with colleagues, love,
affection, group activities, or conflict, disagreement are all
manifestations of interpersonal behaviour.

Interpersonal behaviour is obviously very complex. In any

interpersonal encounter, the behaviour is determined by the
participants' conceptions of what are appropriate, since they have been
taught that some behaviours are correct and others are not. But their
behaviour is also determined by what other people pressurize them to
do, how much they enjoy or dislike this behaviour, what
consequences they see connected with the behaviour, and how much
they value these consequences. In addition, what persons do in an
encounter feeds on the behaviour that has just taken place. These
previous behaviours are interpreted according to what are assumed to
be the causes of these behaviours. The total social setting and some
aspect of the personality of the actors may also modify the course of
interpersonal relations.

One of the theories of interpersonal behaviour, Fundamental Inter-

personal Relations Orientation (FIRO) was propounded by Schutz
(1958). We have selected this theory because its instrument FIRO-B,
which we shall administer, provides valuable insight into one's
interpersonal relation orientation and behaviour. The basic assumption
of this approach is that people need people. Every human being, because
he/she lives in a society, must establish equilibrium between
himself/herself and the physical world. This social nature of human
beings give rise to certain interpersonal needs, which they must satisfy to
some degree while avoiding threat to themselves. These interpersonal
needs may be divided into three categories: issues surrounding inclusion,
issues surrounding control, and issues surrounding affection. Although
each individual has different intensities of need, and different
mechanisms for handling people, the three basic interpersonal needs are
common, and are explained in the following narration.

1
 th
105 FOCARS

The need for inclusion

This is the need to maintain a satisfactory relation between the self and
other people with respect to interaction or belongingness. Some people
like to be with other people all the time; they want to belong to
organizations, to interact, to mingle. Other people seek much less
contact; they prefer to be alone, to interact minimally, to stay out of
groups; to maintain privacy. If a continuum were to be drawn between
these two extremes, every personal could be placed at a point (or
region) at which he/she feels most comfortable. Thus, to a certain
degree, each individual is trying to belong to a group, but he/she is also
trying to maintain a certain amount of privacy. That is, he/she wishes,
to some degree, to have people initiate interaction towards him/her
through invitations and the like, and also wishes, to some degree, that
people would leave him/her alone. For this dimension, the following
two aspects may be distinguished. 1. The behaviour a person initiates
towards others, i.e. his/her expressed behaviour 2. The behaviour a
person prefers others to express towards him/her, his/her wanted
behaviour. This distinction will help in considering the compatibility
between people.

The need for control

This is the need to maintain a satisfactory relation between oneself and

other people with regard to power and influence. It will spell out the
extent an individual feels should have control over others, and the
extent he/she will allow others to control him/her. It is the people that
create the environment, and by controlling them a person wants to
control the situation and make the environment predictable for him/her.
This need varies from those who want to control no one in any
situation, no matter how appropriate controlling them would be, to
those who wish to control their entire environment and all the people
they come in contact with. People also vary with respect to the degree
they want to be controlled by others. On one side are those totally
dependent and want to be completely controlled by others, and on the
other extreme are those who want to make all their decisions accepted,
and are not willing to be controlled by others. These two aspects
illustrate the expressed behaviour and the wanted behaviour respectively.

The need for affection

This is the need to maintain a satisfactory relation between the self and
other people with regard to love and affection. In the scientific setting,
this need is seldom made overt, as it is done in family situation. It takes

2
 National Academy of Agricultural Research Management

the shape of friendship or close cooperation between two associates.

Affection is a relationship between two people. The intensity of the
relationship varies on a continuum, where at one end an individual may
like his/her personal relation to impersonal and distant, perhaps friendly
but not close and intimate. At the other end, an individual may like to
maintain close and personal relations with others. In between these two
extremes, everyone has a level of intimacy which is most comfortable
for him/her. This category also has an expressed and wanted dimension
depending on the fact that a person is making the overture or needs the
other personal to make the moves.

Scheme of interpersonal behaviour

The following table presents these three categories in their two

dimensions of expressed behaviour and wanted behaviour, and shows
the extreme positions that can be taken. Every personal will fit
somewhere between the extremes, most in the middle.

Given below are the brief descriptions of three types of behaviours: (1)
excess - indicating that the individual is constantly trying to satisfy the
need (2) deficient - indicating that the individual is not trying directly to
satisfy the need (3) ideal - indicating satisfaction of the need.

Inclusion types

The over social and social compliant: The over social and social
compliant person tends towards extroversion in his/her interpersonal
behaviour. Characteristically, this type of person seeks people

3
 th
105 FOCARS

incessantly and wants them to seek him/her out. This type person is also
afraid they will ignore him/her. This person's interpersonal dynamics
are the same as those of the withdrawn person, but his/her over
behaviour is the opposite. This person's unconscious attitude is
summarized by "Although no one is interested in me, I will make
people pay attention to me in any way I can". His/her inclination is
always to seek companionship. This person is the type who "can't
stand being alone". All of his/her activities will be designed to be done
"together".

The under social and counter social: The interpersonal

behaviour of the under social and counter social person tends to be
introverted and withdrawn. Characteristically, he/she avoids
associating with others and does not like to accept invitations to join
others. Consciously this person wants to maintain this distance
between himself/herself and others, and insists that he/she does not
want to get enmeshed with people and lose his/her privacy. This
person's biggest fears are that people will ignore him/her and generally
have no interest in him/her - their attitude is "No one is interested in
me, so I am not going to risk being ignored. I will stay away from
people and get along by myself.

The social: To this person, interaction with people does not present
any problem. He/she is comfortable with people and comfortable being
alone. He/she can be active or passive in a group, or can equally play a
moderate role, without anxiety. This type of person is capable of
strong commitment and involvement to certain groups and can also with
hold commitment if he/she feels. This type of people feel that they are
worthwhile, significant people and that life is worth living. They are
is fully capable of being genuinely interested in others and feels that
others will include them in their activities and that others are interested
in them. These people have an "identity" and” individuality".

Control types

The autocrat and rebellious: The autocrat and rebellious is a

person whose interpersonal behaviour often tends towards
dominating and non-acceptance of the authority of others.
Characteristically this person tries to dominate people and strongly
desires a power hierarchy with himself/herself at the top. This type of
person is the power seeker, and is afraid people will not be influenced
or controlled by him/her - that they will, in fact dominate him/her.
Commonly, this need to control people is displaced into other areas.
Intellectual or athletic or scientific superiority allows for considerable
control, as does the more direct method of attaining political power.

4
 National Academy of Agricultural Research Management

Basically, the person feels he/she is not responsible or capable of

discharging obligation and that this fact is known to others. This type
of person attempts to use every opportunity to disprove this feeling to
others and to himself / herself. This person's unconscious attitude is
"No one thinks I can make decisions for myself, but I will show
them. I am going to make all the decisions for everyone, always".

The abdicrat and submissive: This is a person who tends towards

submission and abdication of power and responsibility in his/her
interpersonal behaviour. Characteristically this person gravitates
towards subordinate position where he/she will not have to take
responsibility for making decision, and where someone else takes
charge. Consciously, these people want others to relieve them of their
obligations. This type of person does not control others even when
he/she should, and never take a decision that can be referred to
someone else. This kind of person is usually a follower, or at most a
loyal lieutenant, but rarely the person who takes the responsibility for
taking the final decision. Unconsciously, this type of person has the
feeling that he/she is incapable of responsible adult behaviour and
others know it. Behind this feeling are anxiety, hostility and lack of
trust towards others. This hostility is usually expressed as passive
resistance, since actual overt rebellion is too threatening.

The democrat: This individual successfully resolves his/her relations

with others in the control area. Power and control present no problem
to him/her. This type of person feels comfortable giving or not giving
orders, and taking or not taking orders, as is appropriate to the
situation. Unconsciously, this type of person feels that he is a capable
and responsible person and therefore he/she does not shirk from
responsibility or to try constantly to prove how competent he/she really
is. Unlike the abdicrat and autocrat, he/she is not preoccupied
with fears of his/her own helplessness, stupidity and incompetence.
He/she feels other people respect his/her competence and will be
realistic with respect to trusting him/her with decision making.

Affection types

The over personal and personal compliant: This type attempts to

become extremely close to others. This person definitely wants others
to treat him/her in a very close, personal way. They will be striving in
their interpersonal relations primarily to be liked. Being liked is
extremely important to them in their attempt to relieve their anxiety
about being always rejected and being unlovable. There are two
behavioural techniques for these types, the direct and the subtle. The
direct technique is an overt attempt to gain approval, be extremely

5
 th
105 FOCARS

personal, intimate and confiding. The subtle technique is more

manipulative, to devour friend and subtly punish any attempt by them
to establish other friendships, to be possessive.

The under personal and counter personal: This type tends to avoid
extremely close personal ties with others. They characteristically
maintain their dyadic relations on a superficial, distant level and are
most comfortable when others do the same to them. Consciously, this
person wishes to maintain this emotional distance, and frequently
expresses a desire not to get "emotionally involved"; unconsciously
he/she seeks a satisfactory affectionate relation. This person's fear is
that no one loves him/her. In a group situation this person is afraid
he/she won't be liked, and has a great difficulty genuinely liking
people, and distrusts their feeling towards him/her. This type of
person believes that if people get to know him/her well, they would
discover the traits that make him/her unlovable.

The personal: For the individual who successfully resolved

his/her affection relations with others in childhood, close emotional
relations with one other person present no problem. This person is
comfortable in such a personal relation, and he/she can also relate
comfortably in a situation requiring emotional distance. It is important
for this person to be liked, but if individual is not liked, he/she can
accept the fact that the dislike is the result of the relation
between himself/herself and one other person. Unconsciously, this
person feels that he/she is a lovable person who is lovable even to
people who do not know him/her well. This type of individual is
capable of giving genuine affection.

Causes of extreme positions: The inclusion anxiety of over social

under social, social compliant and counter social behaviour is due to
the feeling that the self has no value is worthless and empty. The
control anxiety of being autocratic, abdicratic, rebellious or submissive
is due to the feeling that the self is stupid and irresponsible. The
affection anxiety is that the self is nasty and bad leads to over personal,
under personal, personal compliant or counter personal behaviour.

Compatibility: This refers to the successful operation of an

interpersonal relation. The less compatible the relation, the more time
must be spent in finding ways of dealing with the difficulties. Thus,
there is less energy available to devote to the task, and there is more
internal dissatisfaction. It is more important to mention here, that
compatibility does not necessarily imply linking. It has mainly to do
with an ability to work together successfully.

6
 National Academy of Agricultural Research Management

FIRO -B

This theory of interpersonal relations and the data collected by FIRO-B

can be very useful to a research manager or a scientist in determining
the compatibility of the members of a group such as one to handle a
research project or an interdisciplinary research programme. If, at the
outset, we can choose a group of people who can work together
harmoniously we shall go far towards avoiding situations where a
group's efforts are wasted in interpersonal conflicts.

FIRO-B produces six scores; three on behaviour expressed towards

others and three on behaviour wanted from others, in the areas of
inclusion, control and affection. The six FIRO-B scores can be
summarized as in the following table:

I C A
Inclusion Control Affection
E
Expressed 1 2 3

W
wanted

It is useful in a number of situations, to look at the score patterns of

two individuals for insight into their relationship (supervisor,
subordinate, collegial, associates). In organisational development, it
may help to compare basic interpersonal relations orientations of two
parties.

Let us look at some interpersonal patterns as a demonstration of some

kinds of information that can be obtained.

Susheel: "Jaweed, why don't we form a tea club in our unit"?

Depicted here is a low congruence pattern between the scientists.

7
 th
105 FOCARS

Susheel has a high need to be included in other's activities. Jaweed has

low needs for being with people and prefers to avoid them. One is a
people’s person while the other is a loner.
In work situation, the control area is often the seat of difficulty, as
the following example illustrates.

Subordinate: "Boss we are ready to go, tell us what kind of research

project is to be formulated"?

Boss: "Well, you know the situation; do whatever you think is

best".

The subordinate want strong leadership while the boss is unable to give
it.

Frustration: The opposite case also occurs, as the following illustration

shows:

Subordinate: "Let us do this research project our way and we will give
the country a green revolution?

Boss: "You will do things the way I say to do".

Here, we have a group of scientists who do not want directive

leadership (as is most often the case in scientific culture) but who are
under a directive boss who does not want to be told what to do. The
result is usually loss of energy and spirit that the subordinates could
provide.

Thus, a study of interpersonal relationship orientation is valuable to a

research manager to understand the human interactions and effect
appropriate interventions for effective cooperation and collaboration,
while it is important to a research worker to gain valuable insights
into his/her own interpersonal orientation and behaviour, and the
activities of others to allow for a better team work in research projects.

8
 National Academy of Agricultural Research Management

References

Reiffer, J.W., Heslin, R. and Jones, J.E., Instrumentation in human

relations training. La Jolla, Calif: University Associates, Inc.
1976.

Ryan, L.R., Clinical interpretation of the FIRO-B, Palo Alto, Calif:

Consulting Psychologists Press, 1970.

Schutz, W.C., FIRO: A three-dimensional theory of interpersonal

behaviour, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1958.

Triandis, H.C., Interpersonal Behaviour Monetary, Calif: Brooks/Cole

Publishing Company, 1977.

9
 ¦ÉÉEÞò+xÉÖ{É - ®úɹ]ÅõÒªÉ EÞòÊ¹É +xÉÖºÉÆvÉÉxÉ |ɤÉÆvÉ +EòÉnù¨ÉÒ
®úÉVÉäxpùxÉMÉ®ú, ½èþnù®úɤÉÉnù-500030, iÉä±ÉÆMÉÉhÉÉ, ¦ÉÉ®úiÉ
ICAR-National Academy of Agricultural Research Management
(ISO 9001:2008 Certified)
Rajendranagar, Hyderabad-500030, Telangana, India
https://www.naarm.org.in