Leadership and communication 9789144088921

Citation preview

a Studentlitteratu r

Leadership and communication

Björn Nilsson Anna-Karin Waldemarson

Leadership and communication Björn Nilsson Anna-Karin Waldemarson

A Studentlitteratur

,L COPYING PROHIBITED All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. The papers and inks used in this product are eco-friendly.

Art. No 37350 ISBN 978-91-44-08892-1

© The authors and Studentlitteratur 2013 www.studentlitteratur.se Studentlitteratur AB, Lund, Sweden Layout: Daniel Sjofors, BIS huset Cover design: Francisco Ortega Cover picture: PhotoDisc

Printed by Elanders Poland, Poland 2013

Content

PART ONE

PART TWO

COMMUNICATION 5

LEADERSHIP 47

1 The basics of communication 7

4 The basis of leadership 49

Introduction 7

What is leadership? 49

What is communication? 8

Leadership styles 51

Communication models 10

Important factors 52

Basic aspects of communication 14 Message levels 17 Identity and relationship 19 2 Social perception 23 Perception and interpretation 23 To perceive personal traits 25 Assessment of others is difficult 28

5 Leadership and diversity 61 Gender and communication 61 Generation and communication 64 6 Leadership and culture 69 Culture and communication 69 Different cultures — different rules 72 Organizational culture 75

3 Beyond the words 35 Non-verbal communication 35 Expression and impression 36 What we see 37 What we hear 42 Non-verbal conversation signals 45

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

Content

3

PART THREE LEADERSHIP AND COMMUNICATION 77

PART FOUR LEADERSHIP AND CHANGE 125

7 Conducting a dialogue 79 The professional dialogue 79 Aims for the dialogue 80 Implementation 81 Stress and crisis 83 Difficult conversations 84 Silence 87

11 Leading group development 127 Groups are important 127 What is a group? 128 Group structure 130 Groups are changing! 135 Leading a group's development 138

8 Listening and giving feedback 91 Listening 91 Different kinds of listening 93 Feedback 95 9 Handling disturbances in the communication 101 Sources of disturbances 101

12 Leading change 143 Some models for organization change 143 Reactions to change 147 Conclusion 154 References 155 Index 158

10 Managing conflicts 111 What is a conflict? 111 Different kinds of conflicts 113 Conflict development 114 Reaction patterns 116 Managing a conflict 117 Different ways of managing conflicts 121

4

Content

0 The authors and Studentlitteratur

PART ONE COMMUNICATION

The word communication is linked to the Latin word "communis" meaning that something is shared. Communication is thus how we inform and share something with other people — such as experiences, thoughts and values.

The basics of communication Introduction Communication is really the human activity that we know best and have most experience of — maybe we as humans also have the best capacity for it. Ever since our first moment of life we have been bent on communicating with both people and things in the world around us. Supposedly, therefore, there should be no risk of misunderstanding and we shouldn't have to think very much about communication — we ought to be our own experts, not in need of books or theories that tell us how to interact with people. And it must be said: communication between human beings is really problem-free most of the time, and most of the uncertainties and misunderstandings we handle without difficulty, not even thinking about this to any greater extent. But we also cannot escape the fact that today we are much more different or diverse from one another than in the past — we have increasingly more divergent goals, experiences and expectations, we belong to different cultures — and thereby the risk of misunderstanding and disturbances increases in the interaction. The consequences of misunderstandings also tend to be more difficult to handle. An important motive for the study of communication is thus to become aware of how it all works, what messages we send to and receive from others and what sources of error that can be encountered. This will give us a better understanding of how we interact, how quick we are to draw conclusions about what other people think and how difficult it sometimes can be to talk about sensitive issues. We can thus also learn how to make ourselves understood in a better way — in that way we can get a better perspective on our own actions. For leaders, teachers and other professionals who in their daily work meet people, communication is a very important tool. This may involve providing information on work goals and how to communicate norms and values, discuss business or guide individuals and groups. They may need to reflect on different kinds of conversations and leadership, they might want to get themselves prepared to deal with the difficulties that sometimes arise in the co-operation at the workplace and with all the processes and problems that appear in the context of organizational change.

€0 The authors and Studenditteratur

1

The basics of communication

7

Books about communication can be useful when it comes to reflection and readiness for action, but we can't use books and theories of learning to deal with the thousands of situations we normally encounter in everyday life. It would be an almost endless list of all the norms and rules or every way there is to behave towards one another. It is also difficult to learn something useful just by reading about it. However, a book can be a starting point and provide basic knowledge which gives us insight into and perspective on what is obvious so we can deal with the unusual or unexpected, e.g. misunderstandings and distortions in the communication.

What is communication? The word "communication" is linked to the Latin word "communis" meaning that something is shared. Communication is thus how we inform and share something with other people - such as experiences, thoughts and values. The communication process comprises information, persuasion, affirmation and confirmation. It is a process in which two or more people send different messages to each other and where they show how they both affect and are affected by each other, how they perceive themselves and what content they put into their messages. The interaction occurs through many channels, e.g. language and speech, facial expressions and other body movements; expectations and values influence the process as well. Language and communication make it possible for us to interact with other people, but in some way we also can meet ourselVes - it's in other people's reactions to us that we so to speak can see or catch sight of ourselves. That we can come together and create something in common means ___ that we have the skills to master our language, both psychologically and socially. We get this expertise in the same way as we learn to ride a bike or eat with a knife and a fork - as children we mostly unconsciously learned how it "should be", we observed and tested our way, and finally we learnt how to deal with language and communication in a relatively unreflective and unconscious way.

Communication is always interpretations All human beings have something in common. We all have the same basic needs and to a certain extent similar experiences; we all have a

8

1 The basics of communication

©

The authors and Studentlitteratur

language and an everyday life, we all grow older, have dreams for the future and get hungry. That we are alike means that we pretty much can predict what other people will do in different situations. But all humans are also unique persons with unique experiences; we have a personality and an identity that we don't share with someone else — in a way we also are unpredictable. The fact that we at the same time are both alike and different means that communication and interaction becomes difficult to interpret and holds many pitfalls and risks of misunderstandings. It sometimes requires patience and imagination to understand what others say, since language in itself is ambiguous and since the starting points we have and the situations we are in when we talk with one another also are different. If we constantly should strive to be precise and concrete in what we say, we wouldn't have a chance of saying what we really want to convey. In fact, we don't expect to get a complete and true picture of what others are talking about. We are used to fill in all the uncertainties, obscurities and things that have been left out — if something can not be sorted out, we are waiting for the context or what follows next to clarify the message.

Images of reality

We never see reality directly. It is through our senses, experiences and concepts that we create an image of the outside world. Our concepts of reality can be conceived as mental glasses or filters that we use to interpret the meaning of what other people say and do. Using these filters, we create meaning of the world and we also feel solidarity with people who have the same filter, that is experiences, values and preconceived ideas. When we meet people with a different picture of the world and with views that are different from ours, it can be difficult for us to understand them and to agree with them. We think we're talking about reality, but instead we talk about our respective images of that reality. Without thinking about it, we assume that what is obvious to us is just as obvious to others. But the same word seldom raises exactly the same associations for two different persons who interact with each other. Therefore, an interpretation is also a matter of understanding what people mean by their words, their intentions. If someone for example says, "The time is now a quarter past", we can conclude that the person believes that the clock right now is (about) a quarter past six, eight, or whatever time is intended. This is the outward or superficial meaning and not so much to discuss; it is more or less in

0 The authors and Studentlitteratur

1

The basics of communication

9

accordance with the objective time measurement. But the inner or intentional meaning is perhaps that "It is a quarter past, and we have not started yet!", "Someone is ignorant enough to come late!" or "Where the heck is everybody?"

Communication models A model stands for a simplification of reality, and models result in a notion of reality that is easier to manage and discuss. But in order to simplify and understand, we must also cut away some information, which makes the reality in the form of the model look too simple. We have many different models that describe the communication process, but none of them can capture all that is important in the communication — in that case the model would become so complex, detailed and confusing that it would lose its purpose to be simple and transparent.

They are deceptively simple Many communication models are useful and usable, but for several reasons, they also are deceptively simple. Firstly, they are principally unidirectional — it is easy to perceive them as "ping-pong models". They imply that the transmitter by way of introduction is sending a message, then the receiver interprets the message, formulates an appropriate response and sends his or her response. Then the transmitter (which now becomes the recipient) receives, interprets, and formulates a message that he or she sends to the other person again. But when we watch people talking to each other, we soon find that they are both transmitter and receiver simultaneously, not one at a time. Anyone who speaks is at the same time listening and sending body messages on the basis of the recipient's message. The receiver namely sends a stream of messages, while he or she listens to what the speaker says. It's not like a radio transmitter — where people send and listen alternately — it rather works like two flashlights that simultaneously light up on and become illuminated by one another. Secondly, communication is not about copying or about an imprinting of ideas. People do not transmit ideas in their communication; they send messages that are expressions or symbols for these ideas. A

10

1 The basics of communication

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

message has to bring about the same idea for both parties in order for them to understand each other. It is therefore important that the message has the same meaning for both transmitter and receiver. This is complicated by the fact that the receivers are not passive, they pick and choose among the messages they receive and actively create meanings to what they see and hear. Here we will not go into all the theoretical and fairly complex communication models available, but only briefly describe some practical or commonplace models that people use.

The "Hammer model" An everyday model that is often used is what we can call the "Hammer model". It is based on the idea that effective communication, if there is a risk of misunderstanding, is just a matter of speaking sufficiently loud or repeating a message over and over again, much like hitting a nail. The more and the harder we hammer, the firmer is the nail and the message — we (erroneously) believe! This model is often used when we interact with people who are close to us, including children, and who do not understand what we say in a given situation. We then have a tendency to repeat what we have said in the same words but a little louder each time, without realizing that each repetition can create fear and irritation. It is far better to wait a while, ask for feedback and explain the purpose or intent behind ones own message.

The Barrier model Another common model assumes that there are numerous barriers or obstacles that hinder a direct contact or a direct transfer of messages between two persons. An obvious obstacle is that our thoughts and experiences reside in our mind, inside the brain. What is going on in another person's perception of the world is impossible for us to perceive from the outside. Understanding another individual is not like opening a box to see what's in it. Even if we could look directly into someone else's brain, we will never see a thought or an image. But by transforming thoughts and feelings into speech and actions, we have an opportunity to understand each other — in this way we so to speak can make the invisible visible.

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

1 The basics of communication

11

Filter

Person B Interpretation Behaviour (that needs to be interpreted)

Needs Values Experiences Expectations This is an example of the fact that B only can "see" A's thoughts and intentions by way of his or her behaviour, which B must interpret.

Other challenges concern previous experiences, values, needs, gender, age, culture, education and position in society — factors that create expectations which make our perception selective, in other words we only perceive some parts of the world around us. This means that the only thing we can observe when it comes to another human being's mind is his or her behaviour, which must be interpreted. Communicational barriers serve as a filter that makes the intentions behind the behaviour different from the perception or the interpretation we make of that behaviour. The same intent can for different people result in different behaviours, and the same behaviour can stand for different things, depending on who the performer is. Therefore, we must interpret the underlying factors, for instance intentions, motives, experiences, motivation, and needs, and we must be good at translating the external — behaviour — into something internal, for instance interpretations and experiences, in the person we are communicating with. We should focus on each other's understanding of the communication — first understand the other person, then express what we ourselves believe or refer to. An example is a person with frowning eyebrows, a behaviour that can stand for surprise, criticism, rejection, lack of understanding or that he or she is thinking of something appropriate to say. A single expression or gesture that is taken out of context is difficult to interpret; most often it is the context that contains clues about the "real" and intended meaning.

12

1 The basics of communication

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

The Information model Another practical and prescriptive model looks very briefly like this: Who says what, to whom, in what medium and with what effect? It is a kind of checklist for keys to our own or someone else's message, and it is useful when considering the communication process. • Who refers to the sender or transmitter. Even if it's the same person saying the same thing in different situations, he or she needs not always mean the same thing with the spoken words. We talk differently with different people, and different kinds of relationships and social situations govern our choice of words and our intended meaning. Hence we may assume that we know what another person will say, just because he or she belongs to a group that we have previous experience of. • What stands for the message or the content of the communication. This is for many of us the most important part of the interaction, sometimes the only thing we think about. • To whom is all about the receiver or the recipient. The message shall be adjusted to the expectations, knowledge and values of the receiver in order to get the intended effect. • In what medium concerns the way of communication, if it for instance is done with words, gestures, by letter or on a poster. • Effect is the outcome or the impact that the communication results in. A person who works with advertising or information, for example, must have some knowledge of people's values, habits and preferences in order to be able to predict how a commercial or a piece of information will affect them. If we intend to inform people about something, this and the other points will supply us with a solid foundation for the kind of preparations we may need to do to make the message received and understood.

Context Many of these communication models have a tendency to ignore the social context. They often perceive the transmitter and receiver almost as isolated individuals who are unaffected by groups, organizations, society and culture. The situations in which we interact and exchange messages are often so familiar and commonplace that we do not notice all the factors involved, or how they affect us and our interpretations of one another. However, all communication takes place in a physical, psychological, social and cultural context that affects both the messages we send and our interpretation of others' signals.

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

1 The basics of communication

13

• The physical is about things such as location, time and external events - the external environment. • The psychological is about thoughts, feelings, experiences, expectations, needs, stress and prejudice - the internal environment. • The social has reference to identity, relationships, power and roles - the social environment. • The cultural concerns values, attitudes, worldview and language shared by a group of people - the cultural environment. If we study the communication without regarding the context, we risk drawing wrong conclusions, expect other actions than our counterparts have in mind and misjudge the impact of communication. The meaning of a moment of silence from someone in a conversation is controlled mostly by the situation or context - does the person disagree, reflect on something, is he or she unpleasantly affected by something or about to end the conversation? Taken out of context the intention behind a message is often misinterpreted. We can often find examples of this in television commercials, political campaigns or strategic reasoning in an organization. The sender produces brochures and other information without putting himself firmly in the situation of the recipient who reads and interprets the information, and thus there is a risk that the intended effect isn't obtained.

Basic aspects of communication Innate ability but learned skill The capacity for language and social interaction is innate, but the skill to be able to talk and interact is an acquired ability. We continually learn and develop this skill through encounters with other people, and with training and experience we become better and better at communicating. By learning more about communication, how we interpret other people and how others perceive us, we can improve our interactions and relationships with other persons. We can thus get accustomed to talk about difficult things and be secure in such situations. We can learn to avoid unnecessary disruptions and disturbances, know what can be found on the surface and grasp what lies beneath it and isn't visible.

14

1 The basics of communication

©

The authors and Studentlitteratur

Awareness, intentions and words

A relatively large part of the communication is of course conscious and deliberate, but we also communicate on an unconscious and/or unintentional level. • Conscious and often deliberate or intentional messages are we aware of sending, for instance when someone asks us something and we shake our heads as a "No". • Intentional messages are intended to achieve a special effect on the listener, for instance when we allow someone to take the place before us in a queue or when we greet someone in the street. • Unconscious messages are those that a recipient can perceive, but we aren't aware of them, for example a twitching of the face, a strained voice or a certain tone of voice. • Unintended messages are those that we cannot help to send. It doesn't matter whether they are conscious or not, because we can't control them. A blush, a slip of the tongue and a slurred speech are examples of content-rich messages that we might not want to send. Most messages contain a mixture of all levels. Flushing or blushing is an example of a message that is usually unintentional and very conscious. A recurrent and involuntary twitching of facial muscles can be both unconscious and unintentional. Adding a "or whatever" or "you know" at the end of every sentence are messages that may have been unintentional and unconscious (but which could easily be the opposite, for example when you want to make a joke about something that another person has said).

It never stops ...

Communication is also a continuous process — an external communication with a real person or an internal communication with ourselves or with someone in our thoughts. Even dreams can be considered as a form of communication. When we are sleeping, other persons interpret this "message" as we are asleep and cannot receive any external messages — no use in talking to us! Communication is not something we turn on and off when we wake up or go to bed. Asleep, awake or unconscious, we always send off signals that hold potential messages to a recipient. Life is a constant flow of communication, even if we often have an idea that the only interaction that exists is that which is deliberate

• The authors and Studentlitteratur

1 The basics of communication

15

and conscious. We are constantly changing, the people we associate with change, and the environment changes. This also changes the way we communicate, whether we are aware of it or not. Sometimes these changes occur in such small steps that they are imperceptible to us. Only when we recollect something that has happened some time before, for example when we look at what we have written long ago or look at an older photo of ourselves, we can see that we have changed.

... and we can not help doing it ... Communication is also inevitable, we cannot not communicate. Everything we do or don't do contain messages and possible/different interpretations. Words and silences, activity and passivity can be given a content. Any behaviour can hold a message, there is so to speak no "un-behaviour" Even if we stop to talk to someone that we are on bad terms with, the air is probably so tense and full of tension that the signals are many more than usual. Even the most expressionless face, the most immobile body and the quietest mouth contain many messages. We can try to refrain from communicating, but the result is often that others interpret us as strange, shy, scared, depreciative or something like that. If we succed in our attempts to avoid sending messages, it usually creates uncertainty or confusion in other people around us. ... and it can not be undone The Danish philosopher SOren Kierkegaard argued that while life only can be understood backwards, it must be lived forwards. Life goes on in only one direction and that is forward. Every situation and every interaction or date is a new situation and a new interaction. We can't go back to a communication sequence and change it as if it hadn't taken place, it's irrevocable and cannot be wiped out — we can of course suppress or forget it, but that's another matter. We are thus never in exactly the same event more than once. Afterwards, we can say "Sorry, I didn't mean that, I take it back". But even if it is possible to nullify the seriousness and intent of what has been said, we cannot take it back. When the words are spoken, they might be forever inscribed in the memory of the other person, especially if the message is perceived as hurtful or offensive. In any case, it's not possible to put back a word in the mouth making it unsaid. Perhaps

16

1 The basics of communication

©

The authors and Studentlitteratur

this is precisely why we sometimes need to apologize or justify our behaviour. An apology is indeed an act which aims to reduce the negative effects of the stupid things we may say or do and to show that the intention was short-sighted and not well thought out, maybe also too emotionally charged.

Message levels Content messages and relational messages A conversation holds at the same time two message levels: What is being said and how it is said. The first level is about the words we use in the communication, and the other is what we do while we're talking or listening. We may blink to indicate that what is said is meant as a joke or that we are teasing; we can lean forward to indicate an interest in the other person. Consequently, there are two channels in a single message: • A content level (= what) that contains the information that we want to communicate. It is verbal, usually abstract, rather slow and relatively conscious. • A relational level (= how) that represents a physical behaviour and is an indication of how we want others to interpret what we say. It is actually an expression of the relationship, what we are allowed to do in relation to each other. This level is substantial, rapid and often unconscious. Accordingly, how we say something is basically often a reflection of the relationship, what rights and obligations we believe that we have in relation to each other. It determines the nature of the relationship and indicates factors such as status, hostility and level of proximity. The main function of the relational message or the meta-communication is to show how something is to be understood. It provides clues about how to interpret what someone else is saying and how we want the recipient to perceive our own message. A relational messages or a meta-message is therefore "a message about the message". A "no", for example, is one and the same word (content level), but it can be said heartily, doubtful or as a rejection (relationship level). Meta-messages or relational messages thus complement our words and tells others what feelings, attitudes and intentions we have when we interact with them.

C The authors and Studentlitteratur

1 The basics of communication

17

The content level is fairly easy to interpret and relatively easy to talk about and get some distance to; it is mostly about things that we can look up in a dictionary The relational level, however, is more difficult because it is more diffuse and unspoken, and relational messages will not turn up in any dictionary. There is a great risk that we reckon that these messages do not exist or that they can be interpreted every which way. The relational level is also transient in a way that the content level isn't. Normally the messages on these two levels function in combination with and complement each other; but sometimes they can contain contradictions. When the levels don't express coherent meanings they contain different messages, which can cause confusion and misunderstandings in the communication. When there is too big a difference between what we say and how we feel about it, we send inconsistent messages, and this usually confuses the recipient. A common conclusion is that the speaker is not honest or sincere when these two levels don't match - this is also known as mixed or double messages. The conscious message is easier to control than the unconscious message. That is why we sometimes say that it is more difficult to lie with our body than with our words, or that behaviour speaks louder than words. Relational messages are thus used to expand and illustrate what is said and done in the interaction. They can amplify, cancel or contradict the message on the content level - as when we say "Well, isn't this just great!" when something did not work as planned. They are also used to provide guidance on what the conversation is all about. The differences in, for example, questioning, arguing, instructing, criticizing encouraging, challenging and accusing are often evident from these relational messages. It is a great difference between a manager's comment, "May I have a few words with you?" and "In two seconds, I want you in my office!". In both cases, what is said - the content level or the meaning of the words - implies that he or she want to have a talk with the employee. The relational level, however, expresses something about what the sender intends and how the receiver is supposed to interpret the message - if there will be a telling-off or an intimate conversation. All this is conveyed through, for instance, the tone of voice, the eye contact, the physical distance and the choice of words.

18

1 The basics of communication

©

The authors and Studentttteratur

Identity and relationship Communication helps to mould or shape our self-image. The identity involves issues of who we are (self-image), what we think we are able to do (self-confidence), what we dare to do (self-efficacy) and what the self is worth (self-esteem). Most conceptions of our identity are rooted in communication with other people. Other people function both as mirrors and as contributors to our own self-image.

Self-image and self-esteem

Self-image and self-esteem are very important factors — there are few things that we generally appreciate more; we virtually always strive for a positive self-image and a positive self-esteem. They therefore constitute an important basis for communication, and from them we can develop or worsen our relationships with other people. We may say that the self is the rudder of our actions or something that makes our behaviour goal-oriented. The self is also the sum of the thoughts, feelings and experiences we have about of ourselves. The self has many aspects; some of them are as follows: • Who we are deep inside (the core of the self). • Who we think we are (self-image). • How we value the content of our self-image (self-esteem). • What we want or think we should be (ideal self). • What we believe we can and dare to tackle (self-confidence and self-efficacy). A negative self-image is often linked to poor self-esteem, which leads to mistrust towards others. This in turn helps to confirm the poor self-esteem and reduce the possibility of change for the better. To maintain a good self-esteem is as important as maintaining our selfimage, that is to say our approach to and our assessment of ourselves. A negative self-image often lacks a firm basis in reality, it's something we have been taught or intimidated into believing. There are three effective ways to undermine the self-esteem: • We hide parts of ourselves that we dare not to show to others. • We pretend to be someone else, which isn't true. • We comply with external standards to the letter and behave as we "should" or ought to do, for instance to please others.

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

1 The basics of communication

19

Striving for appreciation from others is to some extent debilitating for the self. We can give up more authentic parts of ourselves and sacrifice what we really are, in order to become what and how we think others want us to be. But the more we succeed in pleasing other people, the harder it is to accept appreciation and positive evaluations. The praise is then about something we have pretended to be — it concerns a role and not what we really are. Our actions are based on who we believe ourselves to be, on our perceptions of what other people are like, on what kind of situation we are involved in and on the relationship we have or expect to have in relation to the other persons. All of us want to maintain our self-image — even if it's negative — and we want to have a positive self-esteem. Much of the communication is therefore about proving to others that we actually are the person we think we are or want to be. Consistency in our various self-images — we've got several, often linked to our various roles in private and professional situations — brings harmony and a positive self-esteem, which in turn provides opportunities for an open communication. A self-image based on reality makes it possible for us to show a tenable image of ourselves and for others to get to know us in a comfortable or appropriate pace. That means we don't show too much or too little from the start, but instead create an interplay that squares with or is in accordance with the expectations and the demands of the situation.

20

1 The basics of communication

©

The authors and Studentlitteratur

,

11

•

s

. :

-

-

•

-•-_, .. _

1'1,4..

•

a • • SKI•

• ,..

2 +.,

•.,,- ..

.

• . ..7 • '': .4•, ,p. ,, •ei::: ...:., ... ,

•....er. -:.' .-„,_,.'-,-..- •. ei.

i -. ,

?.,

+

-

.

• ',, ,i, - - . .."4.: , ....;-2.,' , .2,•_t,,,, .:, ,.'..7 ,.f ',.22.71, . •.:j-,2, ' .,7'. ... -r •••• ..-4— ,_ 9 +.1.-, . . -.-

. ,7,,z:. ,,, •

, .. '..

,

• _-',-. ,;.-ze-m,, . 2:e... ,. - ,: L,,... wk,„,v 1-se‘'. ,e,-,' ,' -±f-1 e ''' ei ".1 ''''-'" 2''' -4 . -+A -..J. ,,-..,' -'1.- •.-J k‘.-. - . -• " -1, = 4,-

-„,-..,,,,- ,• e. -',.

„•;,2e2.•

-

si

It is not what objectively is being said and done in the communication that governs our perceptions or images of one another; it is what we suppose that others have meant that shapes our perceptions and actions.

Social perception Perception and interpretation Perception in general is about how we perceive the immediate environment and make it meaningful. Social perception is about how we perceive others, how we ascribe qualities and intentions to them and how we interpret their behaviour. Once we have created an image or an idea about another person, this notion will control what we say and do in relation to him or her. It is important to be able to predict what other people might do. If we for instance late at night encounter a heavily built man on the street, we must quickly determine if he's a body-builder, a robber, an assailant, a beggar or someone who just wants to ask for directions. When we meet people we do not know, we need to get a grip on the situation and form an idea about what might happen, in order to decide how to act and thus what behaviour we can expect from the other. This applies in many different situations: on the bus, at the sidewalk cafe, at a party or in a classroom. Self-image affects interpretation

Perception is the course of events that we experience through our senses and in this way we become aware of the outside world — people, things, events. What makes perception important is that it influences the way we communicate with others. The messages we send and receive are influenced by how we perceive our surroundings and ourselves. To perceive others in a proper way is largely a matter of being able to perceive ourselves properly, and this functions as a filter or a lens through which we look at other people and form impressions of them. An aggressive person will probably recognize hostile intentions, a well-balanced person is looking for opportunities and a suspicious person will often find hidden motives. Even if we believe that the eye is like a window that we look through, it may well prove to be a mirror where our self-image is blended with impressions from the outside world. "Reality" is always a picture of what we call reality and it is mediated via our senses and coloured by past experiences and values. A visual experience, for instance, starts with an impact on the retina, which then is sent through the optic nerve to the brain. These reactions are coded, compared and interpre-

OD The authors and Studentlitteratur

2 Social perception

23

ted. When they finally reach the brain's visual cortex, a perception or an image of what the eye has responded to arises. It is inside the brain's darkness we see or experience light, colours and images.

Perception is active and selective Perception is an active process, it is a result of what exists in our world and of our experiences, needs and desires, but we also do something with that information. When what is happening around us awakens our interest, we will be active observers. Instead of just reacting, we are looking. Rather than just hearing, we start to listen. Perception is also a selective or controlled process — otherwise we would quickly drown in the enormous number of impressions that constantly bombard the senses. We need to understand our environment, and by sorting among all the impressions we receive, we make the surroundings meaningful. We filter, organize and interpret incoming information based upon both the expectations and experiences and upon how meaningful the information appears to be. Information that does not appear to be false or seems improper we can emphasize or ignore, and we can even ignore information that implicates that something is dangerous — for example by driving too fast in traffic. We also tend to be more open to messages and information that confirms our beliefs, fits with our goals and past experiences, or in any other way is rewarding to us. It's not the truth as much as what is meaningful for us that we are eager to find. Look at the following figure for a moment. Is there anything special about it? In many cases people don't think so but, for safety's sake, take another look.

24

2 Social perception

The authors and Studentlitteratur

On a closer examination most people detect that there are two "the" in the text. The eye registers this but the brain tends to ignore it, because it seems ungrammatical and probably is a typing error. That's why we don't observe or notice this — it is, again, the meaning and the significance we are searching for, not the true picture. If it now is so easy to overlook such a detail, how is it then when we meet a real human being in a real situation? It is then easy to overlook what is actually there and instead see something that is in accordance with our preconceptions and ignore what we don't like or expect. The ability to be selective in this way means that we have more time to interpret impressions without overloading the brain, and we can focus on what we think is important. We get a faster track of things and can concentrate on getting something done in the interaction with others. But at the same time this is limiting our perception of the world; we may fail to see what is actually there. Truly, daily routines create order and security, but they also represent a certain risk of bias and narrow-mindedness. We can thus use a large part of communication to reinforce what we already believe, instead of discovering how things really are. What we believe is going on tends also to influence our perception — what we believe is the truth for us. It's not that we believe in what we see — it is rather that we see it only when we believe it. Prejudices are a good example of this.

To perceive personal traits We normally do not need much information in order to create an image of another person. But when we come to the conclusion that a person has one or another specific feature, several others follow in the bargain, for instance properties that in our mind are associated with the first one. When we meet strangers we take to categorizations, preconceived ideas and schemes in order to quickly get an idea of who and how this person is.

Schemes

When we perceive the surroundings, we organize information by creating different schemes, structures or templates that will help us to sort out the numerous impressions we receive from the outside world and the information we already have in our minds. These are general categories, or compartments, that we can place things, people and

C The authors and Studentlitteratur

2 Social perception

25

events in. We have schemes for ourselves, for young and old, for men and women, for coffee breaks, job interviews and business meetings, and for situations when we meet a friend or a stranger.

Categorizations Based on people's external traits we draw conclusions about internal qualities. It's easy to get stuck by an appearance and care less about internal or intrinsic characteristics and qualities — at least in connection with a first meeting with others. An appearance can make us place people in categories, ready-made templates for their personalities. We can, for example, think that glasses and intellectual interests go together, that chubby people are cheerful and that narrow faces suggest stubbornness. Via predictions in the shape of such categorizations, we form notions that we use when we meet other people. This gives us a certain order and security, a sense of control, but this is often fragile and flawed, and it can be an obstacle in the communication. When we place people in certain categories or putting labels on them, we thus readily and unknowingly give them some additional features. It is as if a particular property brings out a stamp, which in our minds develops into a complete idea of what kind of person the other is. By placing someone in a particular category, we add all the properties that fall into this category on the other person, who we don't know and don't have any information of. We think: "Well, everybody knows what police officers, politicians, oldies, punk rockers etc. are like."

Stereotypes A "stereotype" stands for something unchangeable — the word actually means a copied casting. Stereotypical views are sometimes the same as prejudices, they are like categories that explain how people are and why they behave as they do, without considering the facts. A stereotype is an almost invariable impression or a fixed image we have of individuals and groups. This means that we assume that a person who belongs to a certain group of people is just like all the others in the group. The way we judge the group in general, we transfer to the individual and behave towards him or her in the same way as we do towards the other group members, or in a way others think that we should behave towards them.

26

2 Social perception

The authors and Studentlitteratur

Both categories and stereotypes create expectations of how others are and how they will behave. A11 Danish are ... , all Americans are ... , all women are ... etc. It's as if we brand or label properties and intentions in other people's minds — but basically it's something that what we do in our own minds. Even if it seems that stereotypes are difficult to change, we can in various ways counteract them. If we have personal information about someone else, it usually reduces the impact of stereotyping. If we are motivated to acquire an understanding as real as possible or if we want to get more acquainted to another person, we can set aside our prejudices or refrain from drawing hasty conclusions.

Self-fulfilling prophecy Categorizations and expectations may be developed into so-called self-fulfilling prophecies. This means that a prediction or a prejudice becomes true precisely because it has been formulated and because we behave in accordance with it. It can be done as follows. 1. We create an expectation or opinion about a person. It could be someone we don't know but who we erroneously form a negative picture of. 2. We act towards him or her as if this perception were true. This may mean that we for example keep ourselves neutral and direct us to the others in a group. We make brief eye contacts with the person and we don't smile. In short, we close up. 3. The other person notices of course our behaviour and interprets it as negative, and comes to the conclusion that we are not especially nice. Then he or she behaves in the same way towards us, that is takes on the same neutral position, and has brief eye contacts. That is the moment when we tell ourselves: "Ah, I saw that at once, I knew he was a disagreeable person." What we thought about the person thus becomes true — even if we were wrong from the start. By way of our expectations and our behaviour we helped to create something real from what originally was unreal and probably incorrect.

Expectations rule! What was said in the last passage may also apply to us. If we have negative expectations for a course or for a date it could be a failure; positive expectations increase the likelihood that the result also will

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

2 Social perception

27

be positive. If we think it will be nice to go to a party, that we can talk with people in a spontaneous and natural way and get a positive exchange of the social interaction, we are creating conditions under which this very well might occur. What is known as "positive thinking" can thus make us succeed, because we create a kind of positive bias that increases the possibility of success. It is not what objectively is being said and done in the communication that governs our perceptions or images of one another; it is what we suppose that others have meant that shapes our perceptions and actions. Intention and action — what we wanted to say and what we actually said — are rarely unanimous. What we said and what the other person heard us saying is even more seldom the same thing. What we express verbally and non-verbally is really only an intermediary stage, something that is needed for transmitting a message, but we often see it as the most important or the most critical in the communication process. If for example two people are arguing, it is no point in clinging to what one or the other objectively has said or done. It is what we think we and the other has said and done that is important. This governs reactions, perceptions and memories of the situation. We should be more focused on interpretations and not on what we, often erroneously, believe to be factual in our interactions with others.

Assessment of others is difficult It is difficult to make accurate assessments of people. Sometimes we try to "delude" others by showing off an embellished picture of ourselves or by hiding less pleasant aspects. We may be exposed to social pressure that makes us polite rather than honest. What we say or do doesn't need to reflect what we really think or what we really would like to do. If we want to make a good impression on others, we can consciously behave in ways that make others sympathetic to us. We can try to look interested (although we are not) and show an inviting smile. With a little effort we can get others to perceive us as open and friendly people. With all the possible errors when it comes to interpretation, it seems difficult to make accurate assessments of other people. Sometimes we are actually really bad judges of others. We may have too much trust in an acquaintance, we are fooled by imposters and can be let down by our friends.

28

2 Social perception

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

Implicit theory of personality When we meet a stranger, we very quickly and often unconsciously assess him or her. Consider the following examples and decide (without thinking too long) which option is best for each person:

Eve is good-humoured, positive and ...

outgoing, extrovert shy

slim Bill is smart, full of life and ...

7 stout

pleasant

7

Mary is intelligent, beautiful and ... unpleasant

sympathetic

7

Andy is tall, handsome and ... arrogant

What makes many of us convinced that some options are more correct, and that the other option doesn't feel right, is called an implicit personality theory, or a culturally determined system consisting of often unconscious rules that indicate that a person's characteristics are in accordance with other properties. What is called the halo effect is an example of this — if we believe a person possesses a certain positive feature, we will assume without comment that he or she also possesses several other positive features; and vice versa if a negative trait is considered. Therefore, we must be careful that such illogical conclusions don't colour our perception of other people, especially if we don't know them. It can also give rise to self-fulfilling prophecies. The fundamental attribution error Attribution or to ascribe something is about our thoughts concerning the causes and intentions behind people's behaviour. An attribute is actually a clause element that describes the properties of objects and

0 The authors and Studentlitteratur

2 Social perception

29

people. The fundamental attribution error is a question of exaggerating the importance of internal factors/causes and underestimating the importance of external factors/causes. This phenomenon follows two principles: If it's about something positive, we are inclined to believe that it depends on internal factors when it comes to ourselves, but on external factors when others are concerned. If it's a matter of a more negative aspect, then the opposite applies - we find that external factors control us, but that it is internal factors that influence others. We therefore have a tendency to believe that other people do what they do because they are that kind of people, not because they are in a situation that affects them. When someone is late for work, we tend to think in terms of for example laziness, irresponsibility and lack of interest - not that it may be due to a difficult family situation or traffic problems. In relational conflicts we think that it is the other's fault, while the solution to various problems primarily is a result of our own efforts. We thus have a general tendency to perceive our own negative behaviour as controlled by factors outside ourselves - that it depends on the situation - while we perceive other people's negative behaviour as guided by their inner qualities. Why, for example, is someone stumbling on the stairs - do we find the cause inside the person or in the situation? If we are the one who stumbles, we probably conclude it's because the steps are too high or because they are built in a strange way. But if someone else does the same thing, we tend to think that he or she is clumsy. We further believe that our own beliefs and values are shared by more people than is actually the case, "I guess everyone reason just as judicious as I do." In the same way - only in reverse - it works with positive phenomena. If we are doing well at work or on a course we tend to think that it depends on internal factors, i.e. that we are capable and well prepared or that we have a winning personality. If we fail on the course or with the tasks at work, we are happy to refer the cause to external factors, such as a poor course management, unclear tasks and failure of technology. If we get into a conflict, we interpret it in the same way: We have a tendency to treat the other party's negative behaviour as controlled by internal or personality factors and our own negative behaviour as controlled by external causes. This is usually also the case when it comes to conflicts between groups. We tend to see our own members' positive behaviour as driven from within - "we are clever and nice people"- and that the positive behaviour that members of other groups show is controlled by external factors, "we tend to bring out

30

2 Social perception

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

the best in other people". Our own negative behaviour we perceive as imposed from outside, "we couldn't help it, it was outside our control". But if someone from a group we disapprove of behaves in a similar way, we believe it is controlled from within — "no wonder, they really are like that"— and that it depends on laziness, incompetence and unwillingness to admit they are wrong.

First or last impression? There is an old controversial issue in psychology that is related to how we perceive others: Is it the first or last impression that is most important when we consider and assess another human being? It is sometimes said that the first impression is the most crucial and that we can only make a first impression once. This also applies to our evaluation of what happens at the beginning of an appointment. The question is what makes the biggest impression if a person, for example, seems stiff and a bit boring at the beginning of a date, but after a while opens up and offer more of him- or herself. If the negative aspect adheres in our memory, then it tends to be the first impression that lasts. But if we forget this for the other and more positive aspects, then the "now-impression" or the recency effect is stronger — what has just occurred will affect our opinion. A psychological experiment shows how fast we draw conclusions about people and how important the first impression can be. In one study, the researcher formulated two lists of traits and gave one list to one group of persons and the other list to an another group. The respondents should then describe the person behind these properties or traits. The two lists were as follows: A

B

intelligent

intelligent

skilled

skilled

industrious

industrious

warm

cold

resolute

resolute

practical

practical

careful

careful

It was only one trait that separated the two persons — "warm" and "cold", but the differences in perceptions were relatively large. The first person was also described as generous, humorous and popular, and the other as unhappy, ruthless and negative. If these two adjec-

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

2 Social perception

31

tives were replaced with "polite—impolite" hardly any difference at all could be noticed. A conclusion from this kind of experiment is that certain characteristics are more important or more prominent than others, and that it is these qualities that we first note in an evaluation of another person. The initial information enables us to form a scheme for the person, and once this scheme is formed, we tend to ignore information that contradicts it. Therefore we can say that the first impression is likely to be important (the scheme functions as a filter for the information we will take in). The tendency to let early information in a meeting or an encounter be of great importance, for example in a job interview, can lead us to create a false image. Most people are nervous in that kind of situation — even if some manage to hide it better than others — and if you're an interviewer you might think that it is a true expression of a trait, and that can influence the entire interview. If we receive conflicting information about a person, the first impression tends thus to be important, and what comes later on to be largely ignored. This is most important when it comes to occasional or isolated meetings. If we have personal or repeated contacts with another person this will reduce the importance of the first impression. There is always a possibility to deepen the relationship, add and change the information and the interpretations — that goes for both parties. The significance of the last or most recent impression is thus large, from experience we know that we can change our image or perception of another person. The recency effect is then at work, and it is based on what has happened previously; we can change our perceptions and judgments accordingly. Although we are often advised not to judge people only from the outside, it's what we usually do when we meet people we haven't met before. Then it is important to know that the first meeting might as well be characterized by coincidence or by inexperience and nervousness.

32

2 Social perception

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

Behind or beyond the words we have the wordless or the non-verbal communication. Just as in spoken communication, bodily expressions can be both conscious and intentional or unconscious and unintentional.

Beyond the words Non-verbal communication As we mentioned earlier communication takes place through both verbal and nonverbal channels. Just as we with the help of words can share our experiences with others, we can through facial expressions and gestures also share our thoughts and feelings. That experiences and bodily expressions go together is evident in some linguistic expressions — we are talking about losing face, poking one's nose in to something, show a hanging lip, be taken aback, cock up one's ears, react in a sour manner, losing one's head and keeping both feet on the ground. The word "verbal" comes from Latin and means "that which has to do with words", and behind or beyond the words we have the wordless or the non-verbal communication. Just as in spoken communication, bodily expressions can be both conscious and intentional or unconscious and unintentional. In some cases, symbols and signals operate entirely without words as in sign language, dance or mime. Non-verbal communication is a generic term for all the messages that one can't find in an ordinary dictionary. It covers: • posture, movements, gestures and facial expressions • eye contact and eye movements • silence, tone of voice, intonation, voice strength, voice timbre, dialect and language style • touch — how we touch ourselves and others • smell and taste • how we create our own spaces and keep a distance from other people • colours and shapes • bodily adornments such as clothing, hairstyles, makeup and tattoos

What is included? Non-verbal communication expresses feelings and moods, and it can provide information about intentions, attitudes and values. It is through body language that we form and maintain our relationships

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

3 Beyond the words

35

with each other, and thus we show signs of belonging, acceptance and rejection. In this way the non-verbal communication influences interactions among people. In new phases of life, the non-verbal communication is central, since the identity in the first place is confirmed through these channels. When our identity and social roles are changing — as in puberty, being unemployed or after a divorce — we become extra sensitive to how we are treated by others. For anyone working with groups, it may be easier to both understand and predict how the interaction will develop by observing the participants' non-verbal messages. One can discover who turn to each other, have high or low social status, or aren't really accepted and who the other group members don't trust. If leaders want to pursue an open and creative climate in a group, it is important that they let their own non-verbal messages convey tolerance and trust. If words are not enough, as when someone is filled with strong emotions or becomes very uncertain and suspicious, it is easier to support the person through non-verbal expressions than with the help of words alone. For a person in crisis a physical contact can sometimes be more soothing than words. The verbal level is in such situations of minor importance.

Expression and impression When we describe people's behaviour, we can make use of two different approaches. Firstly, some say that our body signals have a fixed and specific meaning. If you do it one way, it means this; if you do it in another way, it means something else. The very expression is in focus and the non-verbal communication is considered solely from the sender's perspective. This is, however, a simplification that underestimates the complexity of personal and cultural differences; at the same time it ignores the intentions behind the other person's message. Secondly, the importance of the non-verbal communication is to a large extent created in our own perceptions and interpretations of other persons; it is also a result of what we ourselves say and do. This means that different people in different situations interpret individual bodily expressions in different ways. This second way of describing non-verbal expressions is based partly on the context, partly on the other's perspective and in the impressions we get from each other. We must also take into account the intent behind the messages.

36

3 Beyond the words

0

The authors and Studentlitteratur

It is therefore difficult to interpret non-verbal messages correctly. A simplistic approach or general interpretations are not sustainable, and as we said earlier, one cannot work out a dictionary for these messages in the same way that we can design a dictionary for the meaning of words. It is also difficult, if not impossible, to draw conclusions about people's thoughts, feelings, behaviours and intentions on the basis of a single detail in a facial expression or in a gesture. We need to have knowledge of both the person and the situation before we can venture a guess concerning an accurate interpretation of what a body expression means. The non-verbal message can be interpreted only when we consider the context and interpret the message along with other kinds of information. For example, if someone has his arms folded, this does not necessarily indicate a defensive attitude — it might as well be because he's cold or finds it comfortable to sit or stand in that position.

What we see It is through our senses that we receive information from others. Vision is our primary source of information, and vision is the sensory organ that receives the highest number of non-verbal cues. Even if we cannot hear what a person says, like when we see someone at a distance or from a bus window, we'll still get a lot of information that helps us to understand the person's moods, emotions and reactions. We can observe his or her appearances, movements and behaviour. We get impressions from the physical environment, and we are influenced by the surroundings, by colours and by shapes, decorations and the architecture of a house or a room.

The face When we meet someone for the first time, we look mostly on the other's face and especially on eyes and mouth. The face is an open channel of information and a part of the body that almost never is hidden, at least not the eyes. And when we talk, we usually do it face to face. It is on the basis of facial features that we recognize others or find that we actually don't know them at all. All faces are similar in that the different parts are placed in a certain way in relation to each other — and yet people are so different! The facial features function

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

3 Beyond the words

37

as a personal code, everybody has their own smiles and their special facial expressions in different situations, and at the same time there is something in the expression that is common for all human beings.

The eyes Based on facial expressions, we can draw conclusions about inner experiences, feelings and values. The eyes are said to be the mirror of the soul — or maybe a window to the mind. This is because relationships, liking or disliking and interests are reflected in the eye contact. If we're curious about something or have difficulty understanding what we see, we look intensively and for a long time. If we like somebody our pupils usually get larger. An eye contact and a smile are gateways to communication with both acquaintances and strangers. There are unspoken and cultural standards for how long we can look at each other in order to feel that it is "natural", that it is according to cultural norms. Every culture has its own rules for how long we can look at other people and how long one can let the gaze linger. In a Western culture, we look less at each other when we are depressed, talk about difficult things, or are reasonably close to each other. We look longer and more often if we like one another, find ourselves at a certain distance from each other or talk about mundane things. A person, who is attracted to someone else, also looks longer and intensively — the same goes for aggression; we can compare it with the phrase "drowning in someone's eyes". But looks can easily be transformed from being an expression of mutual interest to become a question about power and control. A person, who is fixing his eyes upon another person, may be perceived as aggressive, intrusive or dominant. To "stare each other out" is a game that children often are fascinated by, and it can act as a strengthening of the relationship. Adults tend however to become irritable and aggressive when somebody "stare" at them. A rejection or protest may be expressed by an outright refusal to look the other person in the eyes. If we're in a hurry, want to hide something or avoid an uncomfortable question, we usually try to avoid eye contact. If someone looks away can thus be a signal that indicates that he or she wants to be left alone. Another possible interpretation could be that the person is embarrassed, not interested or would like to emphasize their higher position. People of high status also tend to look less on others than what people with low status do.

38

3 Beyond the words

co The authors and Studentlitteratur

When we say that someone out of anger turns white in the face, it may be due to the fact that the pupils contract and the eyelids are lifted, allowing the white of the eye to be marked. The fact that we have pale cheeks when blood leaves the superficial blood vessels also contributes to this. The phrase "having a black gaze" may be caused by the fact that we screw up our eyes, and then the dark pupil is accentuated. The body

We all have our own rhythm, "a basic pulse", reflected in breathing and movement patterns. And this is why it is sometimes called a personal energy and a personal tempo. Others may perceive it in our typical way to sit, stand, walk and talk. The rhythm and intensity of our movements contribute to the individual expression and allows us to be recognized from a distance, even in new and unexpected surroundings. Our posture conveys for instance relationships and status differences. We are more natural with some people, and then it is easier to be relaxed. Some postures we find more open and inviting than others, as when someone is standing firmly with relaxed arms and a smiling face. A person who conveys openness and trust can easily disarm aggression and threats. Anyone who is tense or depreciating creates uncertainty and can help increase others' uneasiness or aggression. Skin colour and skin tone have some bearing on how we are perceived and valued by others. Diseases, stress and tension may, for example, affect the superficial blood vessels. Our skin get pale and blotchy. We might blush from exertion, anger or nervousness and get pale by fatigue, fear or disease. In most social and everyday situations, the body itself also holds a symbolic value. In our culture we value youth and beauty more than old age. We therefore spend time and money to rejuvenate the body— we want to have fashionable clothes, tint our hair, go to the solarium, do a face lift and devote ourselves to body-building. Gestures

Gestures we can call "the body's shorthand". This often involves conscious and deliberate movements accompanied by facial expressions and words. Normally our gestures clarifies, underlines, comments or complement the verbal messages. Sometimes they can also completely replace what is being said with words. With our expres-

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

3 Beyond the words

39

sive hands we can for instance beg, warn, command, impede, intimidate, ask to speak or greet one another. With culturally agreed gestures, bodily expressions and signals we also mark affinity with and distance to other people. Gestures are also used in the case of communication at large distances, in noisy environments, for signalling at sea or issuing of orders. Sign language is an extension of symbolic language in which rhythm and intensity, gestures and facial expression all interact and are important in order to understand the message. Proximity and distance In an encounter with other people, we share a common social space. People tend to have a capacity and willingness to adapt to each other so that the space is distributed fairly equally between them. Proximity or nearness and distance are based on both physical needs and social habits. This is known as different spheres, a sort of "safe space" that we create around our own person and that can be described as intimate, personal and public distances. • In the intimate sphere, usually including family members, young children and good friends — the body contact is both possible and wanted. • The personal distance is more far-reaching. It's the distance we have if we remain where we are after having greeted each other. Then we have contact and can touch each other, but at the same time control our "own" space. • The public or formal distance is the expanded space we need in relation to people we don't know or whom we have a formal relationship with. If strangers come too close, we often regard this as unpleasant or challenging. Some times the normal rules for distance are put aside, such as a visit at the hairdresser, the dentist or the doctor. Then we have to redefine the situation, enter a formal relationship or pretend it isn't a social situation at all. We can then be close to strangers without arousing discomfort. By habit and conventions, we reinterpret the other's actions and presence as something professional and therefore "not personal", which allow us to relax and accept the physical proximity. If the same person, however, would deal with us the same way

40

3 Beyond the words

c

The authors and Studentlitteratur

in another situation, as in a café or on the bus, we would probably react quite strongly. A similar phenomenon occurs in confined spaces. We regard a crowded bus as a non-social situation and then we don't have to make contact with the other passengers. In an elevator, we behave as if other people don't exist; we look away, study the elevator buttons and look straight ahead without meeting the others' gaze. As long as we all agree upon it, our pretending is successful and will not interfere with either the bodily nearness or the forced body contact. The definition of the different spaces is associated with personal integrity. Some people seek proximity and contact, others like to be left alone. In a coffee room at work, many usually sit with persons they like to talk to and hang out with — groupings that may mean that some persons are left out. For others, it is important to have their own space, for instance at school, during a break at work or at home, in order not to experience an intrusion on the personal area. Some need to have quite a distance from others in order to feel comfortable and they may find it uncomfortable to be forced to sit close to completely strangers in a confined space. It could raise uneasiness and give rise to aggression. Distance and nearness can be used as a means of self-assertion in relationships and discussions. We can get a picture of the status we have in relation to other people in a group. When we for instance sit down to talk, different power relationships often come to the surface in the way we sit in relation to each other. Active or passive body posture, gaze and engagement are also important signals about togetherness or distance between people. We can sometimes see how someone who is interested in or admire a person, more often turns to him or her and maybe even sit or move in a similar way. If we feel vulnerable, we may find dealings with others unpleasant or threatening, and because of that we seek some form of protection. Physically, we can start to "nest" around ourselves by sitting with a closed body, keeping our legs together and our arms crossed. We can create a greater demarcation if we hide behind bags and binders. Sitting behind a desk or standing behind a lectern hinders transparency and can be experienced as a form of protection, but at the same time it degrades the connectedness with others persons.

0 The authors and Studentlitteratur

3 Beyond the words

41

What we hear We are constantly surrounded by sounds, but we have an ability to distinguish and consciously register certain sounds and exclude others. From experience we learn which sounds are important for our survival and what sounds we can ignore. We react on certain sounds automatically, for example when we are frightened by a sudden noise. We can for instance focus our attention on listening to a particular person's voice in a room full of buzzing people. The same phenomenon occurs when we are engaged in a conversation and suddenly hear someone a little further away mention our name.

Voices We all have our own vocal range, the strength of our voice, our own timbre and intonation. Based on this and on tone and emphasis, we decide if the other person is young or old, male or female. Men have a larger larynx and longer vocal cords than women and children, something that results in a deeper voice, which probably has been a survival value in the past. We recognize other people by their voice, even when it is distorted as when we talk on the phone. It may have been a long time since we talked to an old friend, and yet we have seldom any difficulty in determining who it is that has called us. When we know someone well, we can sometimes conclude from his or her voice tone if he or she is talking on the phone with an acquaintance, a salesman or a government official. We can perceive others' emotions and attitudes through their voices. Only by listening can we detect if someone is upset, thoughtful or friendly. When the mood is changing, the voice is usually affected. An anxious person, for example, often speaks faster than usual and with a higher pitch. Sadness often results in a slower speech and a lower tone of voice; aggression tends to strengthen the power of the voice. Our voice often fills our messages with "subtexts", and these can tell us something about the speaker's inner thoughts and feelings, highlighting both the conscious and unconscious motives and intentions in what is said. When we convey information, our voice is often neutral and objective. When we want to warn or urge somebody, the pressure on the voice increases and the pitch may be high. A question might begin with a gently rising "Mmm ..." followed by a inquiring pause in order to observe the reactions which are aroused by the introduction. In

42

3 Beyond the words

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

connection with serious conversations we are lowering the tone and we speak slower than usual. We also get information about people's origin from their voices — it is seldom difficult to place other people, both geographically and socially, on the basis of their dialect and how they use the language and their voice. Sound, noise and "non-sound" We make a lot of sounds — we cough, clear our throat, click our tongue, gasp, stutter and stumble on the words. We are tapping the fingers, stamp our feet and play with the pen. If we are nervous, we might not be aware of these behaviours. Even if we don't hear these sounds ourselves, other people will. If the sounds recur frequently when we're talking, they can disrupt the information that we want to convey, and other people can be annoyed by them — sometimes they also regard them as a part of our personality. We also use "non-sounds", such as pauses and silences. It can be interpreted as expectation or that someone is doubtful. It can highlight a point that we want to emphasize and lend weight to our words. A pause can also be an expression of power, be used deliberately by someone who wants time to reflect and it may be a signal for not having anything to say or not wishing to respond or speak. Acoustic surroundings We are constantly surrounded by sounds. Whether we listen consciously to them or not, we are affected by them. The opposite of sound is silence, i.e. absence of sound, but we can't get a totally quiet environment as long as our hearing organs function normally. We cannot shut our ears the same way as we can close our eyes, we have no "ear lids". We always perceive vibrations from the world around us. It may be the traffic noise, a whirring fan system or the sounds of our heartbeats and our breathing. Music is today a natural part of our everyday life and it fills our homes, workplaces and public places. Such background music is meant to make us relaxed, feel at ease or become more active; it works most effectively when we don't notice it. Silence is nowadays in short supply, as machinery and electronics gradually have filled our living space with artificial noise. We have cell phones, electric clocks, computers, washing machines, televisions, elevators, and air conditioning. The sounds from these sources are often such a natural part of our environment that we don't notice

0 The authors and Studentlitteratur

3 Beyond the words

43

them until they are shut down. This doesn't apply to cell phones — the loud signals from them often alert the nervous system. The high or low sound waves that are out of reach for our auditory sense still affect us. These imperceptible sounds may in the long run be even more tedious than the audible. When city people go to the countryside, they probably feel that it is quiet and peaceful in contrast to the noise in the city. Sometimes this can also be perceived as an "unnatural" or even uncomfortable silence.

Touch ("haptics") Haptics is the interpretation of touch. Touching behaviour is an important part of the body language. We use our hands to stroke, hold, hug, slap, pinch and tickle. We shake hands, pat others on the back and applaud a performance. Touching someone else affect both us and the other one. Touching often affects the emotions — the word "emotion" (feeling) originally means "from movement" — we can also be "moved to tears". Hands that reach out to touch can convey tenderness, playfulness, hesitation, strength, ownership, or punishment. When other people touch us, and when we touch them, we can get the impression of heat, cold, softness or firmness. At the same time we can learn who the other person is and what intentions he or she has. When someone takes hold of us, we interpret therefore this act primarily on the basis of intentions and context. Therefore, the same kind of touch, which physically is similar, can in different situations be interpreted as anything from an affectionately nip to a more heavy-handed slap. Social and cultural norms determine where and how we can touch each other. Family, friends, acquaintances and strangers touch us in different ways. In different surroundings various forms of touch are allowed. Our interpretation of what happens depends on our relationship to the person who touches us and on the situation where the interaction takes place. There is a difference between holding someone on the dance floor, in the bus or in the bedroom. Touching other people's hands and shoulders are socially accepted in most cultures, while the face and hips are considered as more personal and intimate areas. When we end up in new and unfamiliar situations, we easily become unsure. The tension can be reduced by physical contact, in the same way as when we have hurt ourselves and rub the sore place to ease the pain. We can often see how people both consciously and unconsciously touch themselves when they need support or want to regain

44

3 Beyond the words

The authors and Studentlitteratur

control of a situation. We pass for instance our hands lightly on the throat or neck, pull our ears, touch the nose or scratch our neck. Personal habits and manners often arise when we are confused and uncertain. If we think we are observed, the uncertainty can be blended with a desire to make a good impression. We may suddenly start to correct the hair and arrange our clothes. This is also common when we meet someone we are fond of; such behaviour is called "self-polishing".

Non-verbal conversation signals Non-verbal messages are often a prerequisite for getting a conversation to flow freely. They may be called "language traffic signals", and they include everything from agreeing on who shall take the floor, whose turn it is to talk, how to avoid talking at the same time and what to do if this happens. Since the talking does not have any dots or commas, the non-verbal must take care of this in terms of pauses and accents. If it were not so, the talk would be as enigmatic as a written text without any punctuation or spacing. The listener watches the person who is speaking and continuously provide feedback with nods and sounds like "uhuh", "I see", "okay" and "yes". This gives the speaker information about how the listener perceives and reacts to what is said. The person who speaks both looks directly at and away from other participants in the conversation in fairly evenly spaced periods. We avoid eye contact when we need to consider what we have said and when we want to retain the word. A person who doesn't look up or is letting his eyes wander, we often perceive as unsafe, unreliable or that he or she wants to avoid getting a question or an assignment. A "turn" is when someone in the conversation has the floor, and usually also the right to speak. When we want to get into a conversation — take the next turn — we tend to lean forward, lift the hands, draw breath and seek eye contact with the speaker. Once we get into the conversation, we usually avoid eye contact, and our tone of voice may be slightly higher than normal. Then, to retain the word, we can avoid eye contact at the end of sentences. At any pause, we emphasize that we have not finished by looking away, lifting our hands and speak faster than before. When we have said what we want to say, we lessen our gestures, let our hands fall down and lower the tone of voice. In that way we mark that someone else can take over the turn.

0 The authors and Studentlitteratur

3 Beyond the words

45

i

_ t,

‚.1A4 I

•-••

•I

7

_

2.• ...• •••

••,, • '

•

r-L;f

'••.•

II•

,jj

•

fi 4

.• .

3 I

. •

PART TWO LEADERSHIP

The ability to lead others is not a rare gift that only a small number of people have, it is a kind of competence that many of us already have or can acquire.

The basis of leadership What is leadership? Leadership has in all cultures and at all times been of importance. In all likelihood, the leadership has in early history and long after that been of an accepted and authoritative kind. But with the emergence of large states, the link between leadership and the exercise of power became more evident. Regarding early influences in the professional leadership in manufacturing and production, we have not much information. Within the field of crafts, we have descriptions of the "master" in the Middle Ages as a participating and learning leader. As the economy from the Renaissance and onwards developed and the demand for products increased, the master's role changed from an individual and process-directed tutor to a form of production-oriented supervisor. The leadership was focused more on management and allocation of tasks to large groups of apprentices and journeymen. During the industrialization era with large production units, a "foremanship" was developed that largely consisted of control over information, materials, labour and employees. In today's work we are moving towards a less authoritarian and more communicative and coaching form of leadership, where organizational development, problem solving and quality are key concepts. The modern empirical research has systematically studied leaders and leadership. Based on the then authoritarian leadership — in the middle of last century — and as a legacy of the early Industrial Revolution, the early research on leadership contributed to a democratic or team-oriented leadership. In the latter part of the 20th century, a situational leadership was developed and after that ideas about an authoritative, strategic and transformational leadership were introduced. In the beginning of this century, a form of leadership with a focus on coaching and communication was developed. If we look at the meaning of words, i.e. "leader" and "manager", the word "lead" has maintained its meaning, i.e. to guide, show, point out; it stands for behaviour and action. The word "manager" denotes "taking care of" and involves thinking and planning. The fact that the individual employee is of greater importance in today's working life compared to earlier times, a third component has become important, namely attending to feelings or emotions. This involves both the

The authors and Studentlitteratur

4 The basis of leadership

49

leader's and the employees' experiences and emotions. Thus, we can in today's management ideals rediscover an ancient and holistic view of humans, which is characterized by thought, feeling and action. And with the Greek philosopher Aristotle we can state that reason and emotion are connected to each other, not their opposites, they're a prerequisite for each other. The demands in contemporary leadership are therefore a challenge for anyone who takes on the leadership role. You shall not only manage and distribute the tasks, you shall also handle personnel, and train, motivate, and develop groups and teams, resolve conflicts, ensuring quality and implement changes in the organization. Leadership is more specific about responding to and managing the processes by which one or more members of a group or organization affects the other members. The leaders use their leverage to influence others, sometimes but not necessarily always toward the targets that the group or the organization has formulated. Sometimes, there's a distinction between "manager" and "leader." One way to consider the difference is that a manager is a person who is appointed by the organization, while the leader is elected or designated by the employees. Such separation means that all managers aren't leaders and all leaders aren't managers. A leader is thus someone who can influence the group and is perceived to have the right to do so. Management is actually a special case of leadership. A manager has a formal position with formal power, and may or may not be recognized as a leader. Today, however, we have increasing demands for managers to also be leaders in this sense, i.e. as a legitimate leader or guide that is authoritative and accepted. The ability to lead others is not a rare gift that only a small number of people have, it is a kind of competence that many of us already have or can acquire. Maturity, experience and knowledge are three essential ingredients of leadership. The knowledge factor includes insights on leadership functions and group processes. Maturation requires life experience, which we not only get by reading books or attending courses but mainly by interacting with other people and reflecting on different kinds of situations. Our development as a leader will never be finished or completed, but one thing is obvious - the more widespread or comprehensive our behavioural repertoire is, the better leader we can become and then be able to handle different situations and respond to new demands and expectations. Leadership is exercised by communicating with individuals and groups. Being able to switch between different ways of dealing with

50

4 The basis of leadership

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

Focus on:

Manager

Leader

appointed

accepted informal "together with" participation relation, consideration

formal "over" control task

A manager is formally designated by the organisation, but isn't necessarily accepted by the members as leader of the group.

people makes it easier to listen when needed, to mediate when there has been disagreement and to give direction when a decision has been made and shall be enforced.

Leadership styles Sometimes we talk about different leadership styles, and leaders are then described as for instance "limp" or "severe". The most common division is derived from some famous studies carried out in the middle of the 20th century; they distinguished between a permissive, authoritarian, and democratic (or group oriented) leadership style. A yielding leader — a "laissez-faire style"— is distant, indistinct in his role, does not provide information, does not take hold of conflicts and does not address negative behaviours. A group that has such leaders often react aggressively. Bullying and scapegoating are common, probably due to a lack of structure. There are many unresolved conflicts and a low cohesion in the group; accomplishments are neither quantitatively nor qualitatively particularly good. Authoritarian leaders are more effective in the decisions and routine tasks, but the commitment and the autonomy of its members tend to be weak. An authoritarian leader doesn't care about what members think, he decides everything by himself, emphasizing his power,

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

4 The basis of leadership

51

doesn't hesitate to threaten the individual participants and doesn't care about the relationships within the group. A group can work well with such a leader, at least in terms of routine tasks, but the leader must frequently control the group and inspect the work. If he or she leaves the group, the activity tends to halt. Aggressive reactions are relatively common, and the leader is rarely a popular person. An authoritarian leadership tends to arouse negative connotations, but it can also stand for a person who realizes that the situation requires orders and fast action. He or she accepts the responsibilities that come with a leadership position, even when difficult decisions have to be made. Democratic or group-oriented leaders tend to create better morale and higher satisfaction and commitment in the group, but the decisionmaking takes time, and sometimes such leaders are perceived as weak, especially if former leaders have been of an authoritarian kind. A group-oriented leader ensures that there will be a general discussion of the goals, strives for participation and responsibility, making an effort to develop a positive working atmosphere and encouraging equality in the group. Such groups are working well even if the leader is not present, they don't always perform as much as an authoritarian group, at least not in terms of routine tasks, but they are better at solving problems and working with complex tasks. Satisfaction with their own work and their group is often high. We can virtually never meet pure leadership styles of this kind in reality, leaders more often show a mixture of all three styles. Moreover, it is largely the situation that will dictate which leader style that is best suited. In the case of a mature and competent group, the leader can delegate a number of tasks and a lot of responsibility. If on the other hand an emergency situation emerges that requires quick decisions, the leader must act more in an authoritarian way, without being despotic. Again, this means that a leader should possess a broad behavioural repertoire.

Important factors Research on leadership has been much concerned with both the characteristics a leader should possess and how the situation governs the demands on a leader. Researchers have also been studying how leaders should form a balance between the two main functions related to task and relations. The most current studies of leadership discuss the need for a transformative leadership — leading in times of change.

52

4 The basis of leadership

The authors and Studentlitteratur

Leadership traits? The trait approach is the oldest in the leadership philosophy, and it is founded on the idea that good leaders either possess leadership skills or have other special characteristics or traits as motivation, interpersonal skills and a good self-confidence. The link between leadership qualities and personality traits is thus an old tradition, but so far it hasn't been possible to establish any clear empirical connection. On the basis of traits it doesn't seem possible to predict who will become a good leader. Leadership researchers have not been able to agree on the features that distinguish great leaders from the not so good ones. One explanation for the popularity that this approach has had for a long time can be ascribed to the fundamental attribution error. The idea that people tend to exaggerate personal factors and underestimate external or situational factors in the assessment of other people, and of their performances, also applies to assessments of leaders. And this may have contributed to the long and strong position of this approach. Another weakness is that this perspective hasn't take into account the factor that many groups may have several both formal and informal leaders, and that the situation can influence how leadership is formed. Besides, it has not added weight to the significant differences between leaders in different fields and organizations. Leaders also meet different requirements depending on which position they have in relation to the organization's goals, direction and structure. The expectations that are directed to leaders are based on what level they can be found in the organization and what tasks they have to fulfil. A first-line manager, for example, does not fulfil the same functions or meet the same requirements as a middle manager or a manager on higher levels in the organization. It is easy from a trait approach to put excessive demands on a leader. He or she should be willing to take responsibility, be sensitive, loyal, have the ability to adapt, possess courage and be clear in his or her communication. Leaders, however, can often tell you that they relatively often feel that they lack experience and knowledge, may be reluctant to be open, get irritated at other people's sluggishness and unwillingness to change, misinterpret others, make the wrong decisions and would rather be elsewhere in a difficult and emotional situation. But they still seem to function fairly well and are appreciated for their leadership - which in itself raises the question of what kind of traits that actually are required in a leadership position.

eD The authors and Studentlitteratur

4 The basis of leadership

53

Personality Today leadership skills cannot be unambiguously linked to specific traits, but still there might exist a certain connection between leadership and personality. We have an approach in personality psychology called "Big Five". According to this notion a plurality of traits forms a kind of ideal that leads to a successful behaviour in various groups and that are usually in line with the behaviour excellent leaders exhibit. A good leader on the basis of this approach is: • conscientious, reliable and responsible — a performance-oriented and responsible person with good self-knowledge that can create a functional work ethic in the group • outgoing and social and can influence others by his or her behaviour and will also be appreciated for this • emotionally stable and self-controlled, doesn't flare up and is willing and able to handle complex situations • easy to deal with, flexible, cooperative and quick to build trust • intelligent, open to new ideas and tries new approaches, is thus relatively creative and enjoys challenges.

Task and relation When studying cooperation in newly formed groups, it has been shown that a group structure developed rather quickly. The aim of that structure is to find forms of cooperation in order to effectively work with group tasks and in order to address relations within the group. How well the group does this can be linked to leadership. A good leader is someone who behaves in a way that the group can reach its goals in an efficient manner, getting the members to focus both on the group's task and on the relationship pattern. In a given situation it can therefore be a certain person that will take on a certain leadership role, in another situation it could be someone else who shoulders the leadership role when the group requires a different kind of ability or effort. Task functions are all about group goals; they must be defined and clarified, and norms and rules need to be pronounced. How to reach the objectives must be discussed, and the group members shall have access to the information required to make the process work. Con-

54

4 The basis of leadership

©

The authors and Studentlitteratur

tinuous control of the work and its quality might also be necessary. A leader who focuses on the task is good at organizing, solving problems, managing, summarizing, assessing and evaluating — rational in other words. In short, it's all about creating a group structure. But even if the group gets the job done effectively, this is not enough in the long run. Group members also ought to work together on a social level. They should feel that they get something personal from the group interaction, and that the group isn't solely working with task objectives. Group members want to satisfy their social needs, e.g. to be accepted, be acknowledged and feel that they belong to the group. It is important for the group climate that different kinds of tensions are neutralized, team spirit is created and conflicts are resolved. A leader who focuses on relationships should be good at supporting the group members, read their needs and have a good knowledge of basic group processes. On the basis of this line of argument, researchers say that there is four styles of leadership, which in many respects are similar to the situational leadership: • directing (task focus) • coaching (both task and relationship focus) • supportive (relationship focus) • delegating (no specific focus on either relations or task). How well each style works depends on the group's maturity level, that is how knowledgeable, skilled and experienced the members are both in terms of solving the task and forming a positive group climate. Interviews show that group members often describe their managers and leaders in these two categories — production-oriented or relationship-oriented. However, there is not just one style that is the best one. Both task-oriented and relationship-oriented leaders work well in different kinds of situations. We can perhaps propose that it is the ability to, when needed, switch between task and relationship that is crucial. What kind of leader a group needs is as said to a large extent depending on the situation. If you work with everyday tasks, you don't need the leader's support. But if you have more complex tasks, then both task and focus of the group's activities need to be clarified. If the group is new and inexperienced, a leader needs to structure the task, get the group to discuss goals and norms, support the group

0 The authors and Studentlitteratur

4 The basis of leadership

55

identity and form functional roles. If the group is out of balance or have a conflict, the focus should instead be on the relations between the members. Most group members and employees seem to thrive best with leaders who take on a social responsibility.

Situation That the leadership is adapted to the situation — a situational leadership — has been implicit in the previous section, and it also recurs in the description of group development later on. This approach builds on a description of when and how leaders become important. It is based on the fact that people can learn to adapt to the group and to the demands of the situation and that (almost) everyone can become a leader, perhaps even an excellent leader, by gaining experience, and start with the members' needs and the job requirements. When the group is newly formed or inexperienced the leader shall focus on the task, be clear in his or her leadership and control many aspects. When group members gradually become more familiar and confident in their work — become more mature — the leader can have a stronger focus on the interaction and the social relations in the group. He or she should still be an explicit leader, but give more support and confirmation and ensure that people can work effectively together. A new level of maturity means that members get more participative when it comes to responsibility, planning, decision-making and evaluation. The members are then ready for autonomy, which means that the leader can delegate tasks and responsibilities, and he or she needs only to respond to major changes or crises. In this situation, a leader allows the group to manage the daily operations and focus on the development of the assignments and activities at large and on general issues and long-term planning. The causes to why a person fails as a leader are in most cases not a lack of certain traits, but rather that he or she doesn't have sufficient group skills. The pitfalls can be many. Perhaps the leader does not know how to "read" the group's needs or doesn't understand what is going on between the members. Perhaps the members' intentions and messages are misinterpreted, maybe the leader doesn't understand how he or she can bring out the skills and social resources in the group. He or she can also be unable to enforce decisions or unable to direct members towards the tasks and the goals.

56

4 The basis of leadership

©

The authors and Studentlitteratur

Transformative and communicative leadership Recently an important criterion for a good leader has been formulated, namely that he or she can create and drive change - i.e. the ability to inspire people to participate in a change process and to achieve new goals for the organization and its operations. Today there are several researchers who believe that this visionary or transformational leadership, along with a communicative approach, is the best and that its importance will increase in future. Instead of focusing on the group task and on an a "here-and-now"-focus, the transformational leadership focuses on mutual objectives, needs and participation, motivations and values that promote social change. It's largely about a perspective that means that the leader must be engaging, clear, reliable, honest and showing integrity. The transformative and communicative leadership can be described with the help of the following: • The leader should convey values and show a behaviour that makes the group willing to create learning and change. The group members shall accept and stand for important values of quality, efficiency and mutual respect and willingness to analyse and question what is happening. • In an organization characterized by a transformational leadership we have a commitment to openness for new ideas, and we have employees that understand the processes related to both individual and group organization. This is an approach based on participation and learning through experience. • The leader should possess communication skills, group skills and know what to do and when it shall be done - and also what not to - and constantly strive to create and maintain a positive group climate. The communicative leadership is essentially about change and influence in such a way that this supports and strengthens employees' intrinsic motivation. Today's leaders have many functions other than merely controlling, which was characteristic of the former foreman role. They must create a desire among employees to do a good job. This means that a communicative leader understands how people might react in difficult situations before something new and unknown is a fact, which a change often means, and how to react to the anxiety and the resistance that may arise in the group. A fundamental aspect of leadership is to create confidence among individuals and groups.

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

4 The basis of leadership

57

In order to influence in this manner requires a meeting or encounter on a psychological level. The Danish philosopher Soren Kierkegaard said that if we want to help and lead people, we must meet them where they are (otherwise we will be somewhere else) and that we have to understand what they understand, but also understand more than they understand. This means that a leader must have an idea of how employees think and feel — empathy is a modern word for this skill. This interpersonal encounter is all about communication and talk. The various forms of conversations that are about reprimands, development, conflict management etc. involve feelings, and these must be handled in a constructive way. Very often leadership is about leading groups, using them as a tool to make business work better. Thus the leader must also have an eye for what a team really means and not look only at its individuals. From this perspective, we can formulate the following model:

Impact/change

( Communication/conversation

Dealing with emotions

Development of the group

This means that leaders are not private persons — they have to "take a role" in order to manage their own and others' feelings and expe-

58

4 The basis of leadership

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

riences. This perspective is basically a matter of three different aspects, when you are a leader: being in yourself, being in role and being in the situation:

Being in role

Being in yourself

Private areas

Task, duty

Self-

Focus

knowledge

Tool

Presence Reflection Learning

Being in the situation

Being in yourself means of course that you are yourself, as well as you can, that you have self-awareness or a self-knowledge but also that you are able to leave this private sphere. Being in role means that you have a task; your focus is on another person or a group, you're a tool or an instrument for an individual, a group or an organization. An excellent leader is capable of both intimacy and distance in the encounter/meeting with other people and is able to switch between these two levels. Being in situation is, in essence, about a presence "here-and-now", that you dare to be present without fear, defences or avoidance reactions. This also means that you're trying to have control over your own preconceptions and try to avoid unsubstantiated interpretations and self-fulfilling prophecies.

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

4 The basis of leadership

59

All cultures have both similar and different beliefs and values when it comes to what is appropriate for men and women.

Leadership and diversity Gender and communication Most differences between men and women can be attributed to two main sources: biological and social factors, including the power inequalities inherent in the social positions that are different for men and women. As always when we discuss gender differences, we distinguish between the general and the individual, that is between what belongs to expectations and roles and what applies to a single individual. Our social sex (gender) forms a fundamental part of our personality. When we're growing up we acquire both a gender identity and gender role. The images, ideas and norms that are part of this we learn early in life. All cultures have both similar and different beliefs and values when it comes to what is appropriate for men and women. Naturally enough, more men are masculine and more women are feminine than vice versa, but still the gender roles are a matter of degree with large individual differences. Individuals do not follow their gender role model to the letter, rather the opposite is usually the case — men are not one-sidedly "masculine" and women are not one-sidedly "feminine"; most of us have both female and male characteristics.

Girls and boys There are a lot of sex differences between boys and girls in general, but there are also many misconceptions. Boys are, for example, generally not less social, not better on intellectual tasks and not more performance-oriented than girls are. This is something that varies with the situation and tasks, not with the sex. Girls in general don't adapt themselves to rules and norms, they are not better on routine tasks, not more anxious or have lower self-esteem. They assert themselves and stand for their rights as often as boys, at least during the first school years. Already in early childhood children have pretty clear ideas about what the gender roles contain and what expectations that are placed on children and adults, boys and girls, men and women. Girls usually have a closer relationship with their mothers, not least because they're of the same sex, and they get an early training in how to be close to

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

5 Leadership and diversity

61

another human beings. They will generally also be brought up to have a relatively greater control over themselves. Boys have more freedom and are encouraged to take more initiative. They have less close contact and receive less comfort from both parents and they are engouraged to be more independent. Early in life, they usually also are encouraged to show more curiosity and independence than girls do.

Communication styles

It is sometimes said that men and women have different communication styles, which primarily is of importance in mixed groups and these styles can therefore give rise to confusion, misunderstanding and conflict. In order to clarify the communication patterns, we will in the following text make rather sweeping generalizations with the intent to mark out men as a group and women as a group. As we stated earlier, communication takes place on two levels simultaneously. The first level is about what is being said, the verbal content or the meaning of words. The second is about how this is mediated, which is often expressed non-verbally. Men tend to focus on the content level, it's also a rational or factual level. Women tend to be more focused on the second level, the relationship level. One can often hear that women in general are more likely to both express and interpret non-verbal messages, and this may be due to their emphasis on relationships and care. It should be noted that such differences do not need to depend on gender, but just as easily could be due to power differences and different positions in an organization. "Speaking is silver, silence is golden" is a proverb that is said to characterize men's idea of a good relationship. But that does not mean that men can't talk about feelings. They can and they do, but in a different way than women. With their fact-oriented focus and rational structure in the conversations, men talk about feelings in an orderly and structured manner. They want order in the emotional talk. Men may also want to talk about one thing at a time, separating out the issues, not to make any unnecessary digressions, and they have a general rather than a personal approach. They also express emotions more with actions than with words. In a conversation, women often initiate topics, but it is men who more often, at least in formal contexts like work, develop and follow them up, perhaps to thereby gain control of the talk. This means that, in the context of a formal meeting, women in general give praise and positive feedback, while men more often offer suggestions and opinions.

62

5 Leadership and diversity

The authors and Studentlitteratur

Women give and expect to get much support and feedback. When they nod and smile during a call, it doesn't mean that they agree — it is chiefly an indication that they are listening. Men often postpone their reactions to get an overall view before they show what they think. We can say that women often give their feedback continuously, while men tend to give feedback at intervals. If men do not like a particular effect, they tend to hold back their feedback. If they nod and smile, it's an indication that they agree with the speaker. These differences in conversation styles can easily lead to misunderstandings. It is often said that men in public situations, such as a formal meeting, talk and interrupt more, take up more space and have less eye contact than women do. But that behaviour is also typical for people with high status in a group and because men generally are more likely to have higher status, that can be interpreted as a kind of expectation of that behaviour pattern. In this case, the behaviour as well is a token of status differences and not of gender differences. It is typical that a minority person in an organization is not allowed to compete for status — if he or she does so, it's usually ignored. If persons belonging to minority show assertive behaviour can this be interpreted as obstinacy or that they are "bitchy". If they show emotional reactions, this is often perceived as weakness; if they exhibit kindness, it is thought to be flattery. Now, if female managers are a minority in an organization this can account for that kind of reactions — not because they are women but because they belong to a minority. If so, we have a parallel to the fact that gender differences in an organization can at least partly be a question about power differences. Also when it comes to communicative differences between men and women, this is not something that is fixed and given. First, the expectations regarding gender roles are changing and secondly the terms and conditions of employment have changed considerably over the last forty years. Women, men and leadership

It is often argued that women and men differ in their role as managers and leaders. Managers at senior positions in business and in politics are often men. Is the reason for this that they hold that position because they are better as managers or are there certain processes that create this pattern? Something that has been discussed is what is called a glass ceiling, an invisible barrier that makes it difficult for women to pursue careers and something that preserves the male lead-

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

5 Leadership and diversity

63

ership. This makes it difficult for women to reach these positions, and if they succeed they will be opposed. The reason can also be a kind of rectification —"birds of a feather flock together" — the decision makers that hire new managers base their employment decisions on the beliefs they have about the manager's role. If the management group consists of men, they tend to select what they find recognizable, "men are seeking men". The women who adopt a more "male" or authoritarian style of leadership is usually perceived more negatively by employees than male managers with the same leadership style. Male employees also evaluate women with that style more negatively than female employees. If women manage to cross the "glass ceiling", they are perceived more positively if they adopt a softer leadership style. There are, however, no gender differences in terms of a transformational leadership. This management style seems to escape both gender and culture, i.e. it is practiced in a similar manner regardless of the leader's gender and cultural origin.

Generation and communication In all complex societies there probably has been opposition and antagonism between the older and the younger generations. In ancient times, we have for example texts about how the elderly complain about the youth's recklessness and lack of respect for tradition and for the elderly. In our contemporary society such disagreements remain, particularly at the workplace, but they are of a different character and we have a different and more open dialogue between older and younger persons. After World War II a new phenomenon came into existence, the teens — a stage between childhood and adulthood. Today it seems that one more phase has appeared before the "real" adulthood is achieved. This period is called the emerging adulthood.

Becoming a (real) adult

When do you become an adult? It is unusually difficult to answer that question today. Formerly it was said that you were a grown-up when you finished elementary school or got a steady job. Today, a bit exaggeratedly, the choice is to be unemployed or choose more education. This means that the entry into labour market occurs later, and it contributes to the fact that it takes longer time before you regard

64

5 Leadership and diversity

©

The authors and Studentlitteratur

yourself as an adult. Schools and education has thus been extended in line with demands for specialized skills in organizations. It is not uncommon that it for a youth who leave high school will take a decade or more before he or she has a permanent address, a steady job and has settled down with a family. The road to adulthood and the time between youth and the "real" adulthood has been extended. This means that we today have a new and more or less distinct phase of life known as "emerging adulthood" from about 20 to about 30 years of age. According to the American developmental psychologist Jeffrey Arnett, this emerging adulthood contains a number of aspects, including the following: • a focus on themselves and their own identity • instability in their life • a feeling of being "in between" The emerging adulthood involves a focus on yourself and means that you are thinking about who you are and how one's adult life will be. When it comes to love relationships you feel your way regarding short or long intimate relationships, and when it comes to work you explore different educational and professional opportunities. Moving away from home was more or less a must fifty years ago. Today, it is not as crucial as you temporarily can move back home again, for economic reasons or for other causes, such as difficulties in finding a place to live. In the search for who you really are, you often change aim and direction. You change jobs, education, partner, and perhaps above all housing and this means the existence is somewhat unstable. A common pattern in northern Europe and in the USA is that you leave home at the end of adolescence, often in conjunction with or after a secondary education. You then move in with friends or a partner, move again if the relationship ends, spend some time travelling, thinking about or planning a higher education or an advanced vocational training. In the emerging adulthood period you may also feel that you're neither an adolescent nor an adult, and that you are in "in-between". Marriage used to be a symbol for adulthood, but that is no longer the case for most people today, at least in the Western world. Being married or having a permanent cohabitation ends now up rather low on the scale when it comes to what makes you feel adult. Other factors are more important — to be financially independent, to make decisions on your own and to take responsibility for your own actions — that is relevant to only relatively few individuals in this "inbetween period".

O The authors and Studentlitteratur

5 Leadership and diversity

65

In summary, emerging adulthood stands for high hopes and a sense of strong optimism. There are very few doors that are closed and dreams about the future are still alive and realistic. That the future rarely becomes as bright as you think is still not a reality — marital conflicts, divorce, children having problem at school and unhappiness at work is still far away. Many young people stake out their future in the form of various "life projects" — travel project, educational project, career project and family project. They may perceive different jobs as a step in a planned career, which sometimes leads to working intensively for some time to save money for something and to then trying to find a new and hopefully more exciting work. As a leader, it is a good thing to be aware of the fact that young people today, compared with earlier generations, may have a slightly different view of family life and of work demands. If young people's lives today are characterized by mobility, this is sometimes contrary to those who have been working for decades or are at the end of their careers. For them, stability is often an ideal, especially in difficult economic times when there's risk of a company closing down or being merged with a bigger company. If you are 55 or 60 years old, it may be difficult to get a new job or make a new career. The consequence of this is often that the ideal for many seniors is that they should remain at their workplace, while many young people do not feel that it is any disaster to be out of work — "there are always new opportunities" they may think. As a leader it is important to recognize such differences between values that concern mobility and safety, and the motives behind it, as there in many working groups are a mix of ages and generations.

66

5 Leadership and diversity

©

The authors and Studentlitteratur

Suspiciousness, fear of diversity and erroneous ideas are often barriers to encounters across cultural boundaries.

Leadership and culture Culture and communication Culture as a concept has many meanings. One of them concerns the way of life or lifestyle that characterizes a group of people, and it includes the basic values of family and work, life and death, society and nature. It also includes habits and patterns of behaviour, knowledge and opinions, roles and relationships. Language and communication patterns are very much the carriers of the culture, but they can also be regarded as its mirror. What characterizes a particular culture may be what sets it apart from another. People from different cultures have in other words different habits, and they communicate in different ways. But it is also important to note that the differences within a culture can often be greater than the differences between two cultures. Compared with gender and age are cultural differences something that is easy to describe in general and sweeping terms. This is of course important to know, but there's a risk that the differences are simplified and fairly shallow. You might believe that the interactions between people from different culture mostly are about simple rules and, if they are handled correctly, everything will run smoothly. Our contacts with other cultures are quite common today, and therefore it becomes increasingly important to manage encounters with strangers, make us understood and interpret others more or less correctly. There are several reasons for the increasing inter-cultural contacts. The mobility is increasing, not least because of globalization, more and more people moves to other countries, and the number of refugees from war or oppression is rising. The interaction between people from different cultures ("cross-cultural communication") is thus becoming increasingly common in both work and private life. When having contacts with people from other cultures and subcultures than our own, we need to be open and responsive to nuances in the communication and we need to have a certain distance to things that are taken for granted. We must realize that the one mode of expression is not better than the other. Becoming aware of for instance your own non-verbal communication also increases the understanding of how people from different cultures make use of their body language.

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

6 Leadership and culture

69

People in a modern society must have a certain inner security to be able to manage the unfamiliar, but also a degree of curiosity and willingness to understand other people. Suspicions, fear of the different and erroneous beliefs are often barriers to encounters across cultural boundaries. One difficulty is called ethnocentrism, which means that you regard yourself and your own group as the standard, the only right thing, and that you regard a deviant person in a negative way. Other people's ways of being and dealing with everyday problems are seen as distortions of your own specific way of life. An ethnocentric approach is based on the belief that your own culture is better and more true, a belief that easily results in both confusion and in a defensive attitude when people from different cultures interact.

Individualistic and collectivistic cultures One way to describe the cultural differences is about individualistic and collectivistic cultures. An individualistic culture is characterized by a strong belief in individual autonomy and self-determination; Sweden and USA are examples of such cultures. Individualistic cultures are those in which people primarily value the self and what the individual can achieve. Competition is thought to be something good. You value personal rights, privacy, individual responsibility and innovation. Each individual is responsible for his or her own life and way of living, and the individual's ability to independently manage this is highly valued. The education emphasizes freedom and your own standpoints. People are seen as unique beings, and they are encouraged to try to meet their life goals. Conversations with others are seen as an opportunity to assert their own views and gain a position in the group. Collectivistic cultures value the interests and the harmony of the group and the collective. Decisions are formed on the basis of what is best for the whole group. You value cooperation and non-conflict. Therefore you have strong bonds with the groups you belong to. Collaboration, shared interests and steering clear of embarrassing situations are important factors; China and Japan are examples of such cultures. The group membership is characterized by mutual dependence and expectations of loyalty. The culture emphasizes a relatively strong control and the schools reward obedience and solidarity. Conversations with other people focus on an understanding of the other party's standpoint, and the opinions that individuals express should be for the best of the collective.

70

6 Leadership and culture

©

The authors and Studentlitteratur

People from these two cultures have different views on conflict — assertiveness and argument is valued in individualistic cultures; accord and harmony in collectivistic cultures.

Dealing with uncertainty Cultures differ in how they perceive and deal with situations that can accommodate uncertainty, for example, in work situations or in groups when people meet for the first time. In some cultures, causing a lack of clarity will be no major problem, and individuals have no need to clarify the situation. Uncertainty isn't a problem, but is seen as a part of everyday life; uncertainty isn't threatening and you don't have to activate defence reactions when an uncertainty arises. There are thus differences between cultures due to uncertainty and unpredictable situations. Low uncertainty-avoidance cultures are tolerant of uncertainty in people's behaviour and you don't have to try to reduce the uncertainty. If you belong to this kind of culture you probably can accept uncertainty and ambiguities. Risk, initiative and a few rules as possible are factors that are valued. The rules for different communication situations need not be conclusive or too many; this makes it easier to accept differences and diversity that create a certain degree of uncertainty. It is also easier to have a perspective-oriented thinking — it is in that way easier to change attitudes and to gain an understanding of others' perspectives. For instance, a manager or a teacher doesn't have to have all the answers, but can in spite of that be perceived as an authority. Sweden and India are examples of such cultures. If you belong to a high uncertainty-avoidance culture like Greece or Japan, you are not especially tolerant of unpredictable situations, behaviour and relations. You probably prefer formal rules and believe that they can reduce risks. You're not so tolerant of other people with deviant or strange behaviour. You might also be wary of strangers and you prefer to meet new people after they have been introduced by a friend or a family member. Individuals are easily disturbed by not having a clear picture of what is going on, what will happen in a few minutes, or not knowing who someone is or what position the person holds. They do need to know what to do and are depending upon clear lines of work, communication and how to deal with different kinds of relationships. They often want to have a manager that is relatively detailed when it comes to performing the tasks and they want clear answers to various questions — not "under certain circumstances ..." or "it depends ...". They

0 The authors and Studentlitteratur

6 Leadership and culture

71

want the manager or the teacher to be an expert, who can answer all kinds of questions. When people from these two types of cultures meet, it is readily understood that communication disorders can occur. A leader from a culture where there is a high level of tolerance for uncertainty expects that employees will be on time for work, take initiative and don't stop working when they encounter a problem, but instead try to resolve this. If the leader however, belong to a high uncertainty-avoidance culture where the threshold for uncertainty to be addressed is much lower, he or she can more readily accept that employees work only when they need to do it and that they follow working hours regardless of whether a task is completed or not. Ti me awareness Time awareness, i.e. our perception of time, differs between different cultures. In Western cultures the waking hours are usually organized according to a schedule of some sort. You often feel that the time must be controlled and measured, you're looking for gaps in the calendar, you do just one thing at a time, and trying to be punctual is important — above all, you should always be on time. If time is approximately regarded as a kind of tape measure, marked by minutes, hours and days, it usually is perceived as a scarce resource that you have to be careful with, even though time perhaps is the only thing we have — or don't have! In other places you emphasize actions, not time. It is the behaviour that is important, and things must take the necessary time. Then you are seldom interested in saving time, but you do not waste it but start an event when everyone has arrived, which can sometimes take a certain amount of time. You take breaks when you need to rest or get new inspiration, not at specific break or lunch times. And you end the task when you are ready, not when the allotted time has run out.

Different cultures - different rules Language difficulties in an encounter between two strangers are caused not only by a different grammar and different vocabulary. Part of our identity is founded in the language and affects our attitude to what is happening around us. We may have learned a foreign language's grammatical patterns and express ourselves linguistically correct, but it can still go wrong. We may be too clear in our statement or ask question about wrong things.

72

6 Leadership and culture

©

The authors and Studentlitteratur

We run a risk of violating a number of more or less established cultural codes that govern how and when you are supposed to talk and to whom. In Scotland, for example, a student shouldn't ask a teacher what he or she shall have for dinner. In Thailand you don't contradict a business partner, and in Brazil you can't demand your host for an exact point of time when you shall to turn up for a dinner. Every day many different situations are to be handled, primarily with the help of language. We know what will work on the bus, in the bank, in a ticket line or when someone asks for directions. There are seldom any doubts about what you can say, when you can talk, when you shall listen and how long the eye contact shall be. We train and practise these skills during childhood and adolescence, and they are so thoroughly consolidated that for an adult they have become selfevident routines. People are often surprised when they go abroad, as for a holiday or a job abroad, when the familiar habits and what they have taken for granted no longer are correct. They arrive too late or too early to meetings, and they stand too close or too far away from others in a queue. They talk too fast or too slow, have too long or too short breaks and show too much or too little emotion. Every culture has its own rules for communication that determine what is convenient and what is rude or offensive. When people from different cultures meet one another, they take their own patterns for granted, something that is natural and obvious, and that doesn't create a good basis for consensus but is a source to constant misunderstandings. It is difficult to break up from an obvious and ingrained environment and come to a foreign country. You have to deal with many new situations; it's not just a new environment and new people, but also a whole new culture that can be very difficult to understand. In the new culture, there are usually more or less the same social functions as in your own country, for instance work, coffee shops, government agencies, shops, buses, police, money, school, child rearing, and gender roles. But the expectations from other people and the interactions in such situations follow other rules; you'll be present in many situations that you know and yet do not know.

Rules for talking Sometimes it is claimed that for instance people in northern Europe shall not interrupt, shut somebody down or speak all at once. Even if there's some justification for such a view, it is obvious that they also interrupt or speak at the same time as another person. It's hard

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

6 Leadership and culture

73

to imagine a group discussion, a dinner party or a coffee break on the shop floor as constantly polite, vapid or harmless events. But this is of course about our interpretation of the fact that someone, for instance, interrupts. The possible negative attitude to this is considered to be a consequence of the factual and intellectual stance that Scandinavians are claimed to have. The form for the structure and processes in the conversation can in an individualistic culture become more important than the content. You tend there to emphasize formal rules, keeping to the list of speakers, while in collectivist cultures you tend to focus on the content. What you are discussing or debating is more important than worrying about whose turn it is to talk. A short pause in a conversation can for the listener mean that the speaker is finished, and therefore he begins to talk. But the person who spoke first assumed they were following his rules, which meant that it was just a rhetorical pause, a short pause before he would continue talking. He thus can think that he has been interrupted by the other person, who, however, is of the opinion that he's been invited to take over the turn. Probably, both will be annoyed. There is also a rule that tells us to be aware of our speaking partner and maintain eye contact for a brief second before the turn is taken over. For a person from another culture, this can be interpreted to mean that we want to emphasize what is said, and thus an indistinct pause arises. The cultural and subtle differences that are manifested when we take turns in conversations are often unconscious, but the consequences are more pronounced. This can easily produce stereotypes of ethnic groups. It is natural to experience people who allow longer pauses than ourselves as sluggish, slow and a bit stupid. Conversely, we perceive people who have a lower tolerance for silence, and who often interrupt and take the word as pushy or reckless. By way of feedback, we find out how what we are saying is received and how others react to this. We can adapt our ways of expression to match the other's way of talking, in order to achieve different objectives in the interaction. If the feedback is given in various and contradictory ways, we are heading for confusion and disruption. In some cultures you withhold feedback until the speaker is finished, in other cultures you can provide a more continuous feedback. Independent of how the feedback is given, the differences between expectation and reality, can create uncertainty about whether we have been understood or not. We can therefore begin to wonder if the

74

6 Leadership and culture

©

The authors and Studentlitteratur

other person rejects what is said or reject us as a person. This means that we might stop short or break off the conversation. Non-verbal communication Some cultures put more emphasis on body language than others do. They listen, so to speak, as much with their eyes as with their ears. This means that anyone who is accustomed to essentially put the emphasis on the words and the verbal messages might find people from such cultures difficult to talk to. You cannot really make contact, or else you think the interaction is too intensive. To say yes or no, and to agree or deny anything, differ between countries. In some cultures, it is enough with just the words "yes" or "no". Other times, we also need a head movement along with the words. In some cultures, the non-verbal nodding or shaking of the head is the important key, while the words are not so important. It's hard to talk if you do not have eye contact. The cultural rules govern how we should look at each other, and this affects the perception of what is normal and what is socially correct. In some cultures, a lack of eye contact signals a lack of interest, in others the same thing indicates dishonesty or spite. In still others, it means respect. Considering all the possibilities of misunderstanding, the prospects for an effective cross-cultural communication are not so spectacular. On the basis of different rules and norms in different cultures, difficulties arise when it comes to create a common basis for communication. But knowledge and awareness of diversity gives us at least an opportunity for a better understanding.

Organizational culture Organizational and group culture stands for the approach "This is how we do it here, this is our way of doing business", and this holds common standards, values, concepts of reality, habits and attitudes. The culture of both organizations and groups provides a common understanding and an idea of "us". An organization often contains several different cultures that are group based. Culture provides a basis for social identity, group identity, outlook on life and ideas on leadership. It is also about what kind of control system that is at work and how it can be avoided, reward system, the degree of openness, loyalty and feedback.

0 The authors and Studentlitteratur

6 Leadership and culture

75

Organizational culture is usually a very difficult factor when it comes to change; it basically consists of values and norms that govern ingrained patterns of behaviour. If you do not take the culture into account, an intervention or a change runs the risk of coming to a halt. At the organizational level, there is still a tendency to hold on to old hierarchical patterns. Unclear decision-making, indistinct sources of information, obscure forms of influence and the use of different forms of power as a form of control are not too unusual. If so, this tends to make it harder for individuals to fulfil their needs, and it also hampers the development of efficient cooperation and a functional division of responsibilities between the groups in the organization. The cultural characteristics of both groups and organizations are invisible and a leader must be able to "read" the culture in order to manage the norms and values that affect how people behave in the organization, especially in times of change.

76

6 Leadership and culture

©

The authors and Studentlitteratur

PART THREE LEADERSHIP AND COMMUNICATION

A professional dialogue is characterized by both closeness and distance, it is subjective as well as objective. The subjective aspect is about empathy, understanding and acceptance, and the objective is about clarity and structure.

Conducting a dialogue Habitual talk and professional conversations are in many respects similar, but there are also some crucial differences. An ordinary conversation is very rarely something we are planning in advance, it is relatively egalitarian in that all people involved basically have the same right to speak and comment on what is being said. Each participant's personal desires and needs of confirmation are allowed to be expressed; we are in short relatively equal in this sense.

The professional dialogue A professional conversation or dialogue is unlike an ordinary conversation however a tool to achieve certain objectives, for instance to handle something that has happened, provide support, create involvement, assign responsibility and try to increase motivation. We also have a specific and preferably stated aim for the professional dialogue, as getting to know each other, clarify goals, deal with problems, assess and plan, reprimand, and perhaps also convey unpleasant information. Based on a formal position as manager it may be required that we carry out a structured conversation with the people we are responsible for or working with. The talks can be seen as situated on a scale with a supporting dialogue at one end, a career development discussion somewhere in the middle, and a reprimand on the other end. Supporting dialogues

A professional and supportive conversation means that we put our private feelings and reactions aside for the time being, especially our own concerns and problems, in order to function as a tool for another's sake. This means that our role primarily is based on listening. The function we chose to have in a supporting dialogue can be anything from giving advice to provide that kind of support that a manager can give his or her employees. It is better that the person we talk to by himself or herself can discover solutions to different problems, rather than having them delivered by someone else. If a person is experiencing chaos, our own advice is seldom functional, even if we ourselves think that it is excellent.

C The authors and Studentlitteratur

7 Conducting a dialogue

79

We needn't be a specialist, for instance a psychologist, a counsellor or a priest in order to be able to give social support. A good start is characterized by basic knowledge about human beings, personal experiences, having met people in different situations and a reflective approach. Trying to apply a sincere listening capacity is also of great help. Sometimes it is enough that we with questions and displaying an interest in the other person show that we care about him or her. Difficult conversations are not about psychological treatment or handling internal personal and emotional problems — this is for therapists and psychologists to provide. "Ordinary" people shall not diagnose other persons' psychological problems and difficulties and attempt to resolve internal causes of the problems. In the role as manager we shall instead have the behaviour, current relationships and the "here and now" in focus. Reprimands Is the talk about a reprimand, a telling-off or that we want to do something concerning a negative situation, we are responsible for the conversation and we serve as a tool for the organization, not for the individual. The conversation can for example be about noncompliance in a group, too much absence, evidence of a drug abuse or that the work goals are not achieved. We then have a more reserved or severe approach, we are more neutral in our expressions, we have a clear goal orientation and a focus on behavioural change.

Aims for the dialogue It is important that before we start a professional conversation, we formulate goals and aims for the talk — outlining what we really want to achieve with the conversation. The aim can often be reasonably simple, for instance that the other person shall have an opportunity to formulate views and concerns about his or her situation or to come up with different suggestions for handling some kind of problem. The goal is not to solve the other's problems, but something much simpler — to give him or her the opportunity to talk about the problem and its consequences. If we have a clear idea about the aims of a conversation, it's much easier to control what is happening in the dialogue and keeping it at the right level — not too shallow or too private. Without a clear objective for the conversation, it is very easy to end up in irrelevant

80

7 Conducting a dialogue

©

The authors and Studentlitteratur

side-tracks or to be completely lost, without noticing when this happens. A conscious and well thought-out goal makes it easier for us to know where we are in the conversation and to keep it "on track".

Implementation A moment of concentration just before a conversation is excellent for being able to stay focused during the talk. We shall "listen from the beginning", focus on the content of the conversation, on what the other says and does and also on how this is done. There is no standard way to start, but good starting points are to introduce the topic, be polite, do some small talk for a minute and then specify the purpose and object of the dialogue and how much time it will take. If it involves recurring talks, it is useful to recapitulate what was discussed at the previous meeting. During the dialogue, we as responsible for the dialogue shall try to create a "mental map" of what is being said, that is we note the main thread and the major themes in our talk, and we note unclear points and areas that we can go back to after a while. This outline needs to be repeated, and that will be a great help for both our attention and our memory — it also helps us to keep a necessary distance. It will also be easier to summarize the main points in the conversation when we are finished. A professional dialogue is characterized by both closeness and distance, it is subjective as well as objective. The subjective aspect is about empathy, understanding and acceptance, and the objective is about clarity and structure. Intimacy creates commitment and a sense of being understood, and in keeping a distance we can avoid our own feelings and private thoughts taking over the dialogue. Is the conversation for example about conflict management, then clarification is important: What has been done and said, and who are involved in a certain situation? In a problem-solving discussion, it is important to highlight how far we have come in the dialogue, what proposed solutions that have been presented, describe positive and negative aspects of these and decide which solution we shall start with. To wind up the conversation, we summarize and repeat decisions and agreements. Afterwards, important issues, decisions and the time for further talks shall be noted. This will be a reminder and it helps us to distinguish between different talks. Immediately after a conversation we seldom think there's a need to summarize it, because we

0 The authors and Studentlitteratur

7 Conducting a dialogue

81

have it so vividly in our mind. But after a day, or after two or three talks, their contents start to fuse with each other and to some extent disappear from memory. Therefore, it is important to write down important themes in the conversation, possible agreements and our own reflections.

"1-statements"

An important aspect of talking to someone is what is called I-statements or I-messages — personal and direct messages that show how we have perceived and interpreted something that another person has said and how we express our own feelings and needs. The opposite of this is "you-statements" that have the other person in focus and often amounts to accusations, generalizations and labelling. That kind of messages is often about the other's intentions, which we actually don't know anything about, it's about judging the other person instead of talking about our own thoughts and experiences. An accusation often leads to hostile reactions or repudiation, in the form of silence, for instance. Even if we are right in an allegation, it conveys an idea that it is only the other person that is imperfect. If we in this way try to force people to change their mind, it is usually just then that they show the greatest resistance. By using I-statements, we can avoid confusion and accusations. We talk with people instead of to them. We are asking instead of describing or questioning. We use the word "I", not "you" or "people". We are not so often saying "Why?" but rather "How?" and "What?", as the latter type of questions invites to reciprocity and clarification. Attention

Attention is another important factor in an effective conversation. Attention and concentration requires energy and is therefore tiring. Our thoughts can easily start wandering — we can start to think about other things and might miss what our interlocutor says and means. It is easy to stop listening, because usually we are quick to form an image of what the other person is trying to convey. Broadly speaking, there are two kinds of attention. The one we normally think of is conscious and has its focus on something particular. It functions like a pair of binoculars, and we can call it a focused form of attention. We enlarge and get a better picture of what is happening, but we also lose many details in the surroundings.

82

7 Conducting a dialogue

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

The second form of attention is unfocused, and we can compare it to a radar. The radar sweeps the horizon and so to speak reads the situation. If something that previously did not seem to be important suddenly turns out to be so, we can use our "binoculars" to examine in more detail what actually happened or what a "blip" on the radar screen might entail. Both these forms of attention are important. The first one makes it possible to be mentally present and focused, and the other one enables us to keep the necessary distance in a professional dialogue. The latter allows us to keep track of what has been said and done during the conversation and we can avoid being drawn into the recipient's perception of the environment in a personal and emotional way.

Stress and crisis Everybody sometimes finds themselves involved in some sort of crisis and, far more often, are vulnerable to stress. "Negative stress" is an undesirable condition that occurs when the demands on us are greater than our ability to handle them. The reactions can be triggered when we leave school, fail in a test, leave home, marry, have children, are undergoing a divorce, are fired or are forced to change residence. Changes in our private life or at work can cause negative stress and strong emotions. Then we usually need someone to talk to, someone who can provide support by listening and understanding. Traumatic events trigger stress and can be a contributory cause to a crisis. We may find it difficult to cope by ourselves and to control our emotional reactions, when we become involved in accidents, war, disasters or when we are suffering a serious illness or if a loved one dies. Crises are usually divided up into life crises and traumatic crises. The former ones are associated with life changes such as teenage crisis, becoming a parent and retirement. Sometimes, such changes mean that we somehow aren't capable to deal with them; they get beyond our control. A traumatic crisis can occur when you lose someone or something that you love, or when you're at risk of losing someone. It may also occur if we get offended or insulted as a human being, for instance being caught by the police, being the victim of cyber-bullying or suffering a disaster, like a major accident, earthquake or fire. In both types of crises, the need is usually strong to have someone to talk to, someone who can provide support by listening, show an understanding, and provide a new approach to a problem.

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

7 Conducting a dialogue

83

A person in crisis needs help when it comes to expressing and describing his or her feelings, and perhaps also help to make them conscious. Even if it is difficult to meet a person in crisis, we as friend, colleague or manager can be an important kind of moral support. Just being there for the other person may sometimes be enough. It is the one who is in a crisis that shall have a chance to talk about his or her experiences, sometimes over and over again. What this person needs the least is comments like "cheer up", "get a grip of yourself" or "stop harping on the same string". It is worthwhile to remember that the experience is always "true" to the other person, although the event itself may seem quite trivial to an outside observer.

Difficult conversations Talking to people in crisis or in an acute stress condition is often perceived as a difficult and challenging task. Exactly what we perceive to be difficult differs however — it might be the conversation in itself, the relationship, a lack of skills or what we fear will happen during the talk. Primarily, we might become uneasy when our dialogue partner is showing strong emotions, perhaps also because we will experience feelings of distress or discomfort. It need not be the conversation itself that is difficult, but rather something in the situation that is perceived as difficult. If a serious message is to be presented, the conversation can become difficult. It is no use making a long story of it or, at worst, avoiding the conversation all together. Unpleasant or tragic news are rarely better, if they're wrapped up or expressed so eloquently that the other person doesn't get the message. It is sometimes said that there are no "soft handgrenades" — even if we wrap the grenade in flowers or paint it with bright colours, the effects will still be heavy when the grenade explodes. In a situation where we need to leave a negative message, it is important to be relatively brief and direct, and give the other time for reflection, questions and clarifications.

Defence and resistance In difficult conversations, the other party might use defence mechanisms. It is therefore important that we both secure a spirit of cooperation and see the first meeting as a prelude to further talks. We should not believe that a difficult problem is settled just because the parties have been talking about them for half an hour or so.

84

7 Conducting a dialogue

The authors and Studentlitteratur

Defence is a reaction to threats of different kinds; threats that may be of an internal or external nature. Anxiety, a battered self-esteem or memories of difficult situations could be the basis of internal threats. The risk of losing a loved one, being excluded from a group or being insulted and subjected to physical and psychological abuse create perceptions of external threats. A defence mechanism basically means that anyone who feels threatened is reinterpreting the threatening situation in order to make it easier to handle and securing that you aren't overwhelmed by strong emotions. Examples of defence mechanisms are rationalization (explaining away), denial, projection (transmitting your own more or less illicit emotions and self-blame on someone else) and regression (responding in an immature manner). Resistance arouses easily when a person is faced with internal or external threats; he or she can try to ignore the difficult thoughts or memories, turn off the feelings, distort facts, and doesn't want to talk any more. These are examples of irrational processes that we as partners shall not argue against or attempt to refute. We should instead accept the resistance — otherwise it might be even stronger — and assume that it fills a psychological function for the other person. Defensive communication A defensive behaviour arises, therefore, when a person feels threatened in some way and wants to defend himself against a real or imagined threat to self-esteem and sense of belonging. This also leads to a defensive listening, which means that we find it difficult to concentrate on the messages the other party sends and that our perception of them are being distorted. The opposite of such a defensive climate is a supportive attitude. It is based on the fact that both parties in the dialogue are descriptive rather than evaluative, understanding instead of accusing and problem-oriented rather than controlling. Both are empathetic rather than aloof, and they strive for equality in the dialogue instead of using power or expressions of superiority. Emotions Strong emotions can be an effective barrier to positive listening and understanding. If someone expresses strong emotions, like anger or anxiety, we can be overwhelmed by the emotional message and find it difficult to take in what actually is being said. It can be difficult

The authors and Studentlitteratur

7 Conducting a dialogue

85

to resist other people's emotions, because emotions have a strong tendency to infect or "rub off" on you. This is a sign that we are relational beings, and during the course of development of the human race we had to quickly understand what went on inside another person's mind. This is also the reason for the expressiveness that human faces exhibit — we are also talking about to "read someone like an open book" when we interpret the emotional expressions. That the emotions tend to be contagious is also one of the reasons why it is important and necessary that we, in a professional conversation, keep a certain distance simultaneously with the nearness or intimacy. One way to deal with these emotions is to leave room for them, allowing them to both flare up and decrease in intensity and avoid reinforcing an emotional outburst by calling it stupid or unnecessary. We shall also, as mentioned earlier, be aware of our own emotional reactions when facing other's emotional expressions. How do we as leaders manage to handle for instance anger, anxiety or despair? Are we tolerant towards another person's intensity and our own reactions, that is the corresponding emotions that are awakened in us? It is important to be aware of our own reactions in order to control them regarding both impression and expression. Anger is sometimes an excuse or an alibi or a cover for other emotions, even if the anger of course also can be real. The anger displayed might in reality be based on an projection of sadness, loneliness or fear. Often the anger is also diffuse and therefore needs to be pacified, for instance by asking ourselves what the anger is about and what it is directed at. Anger needs, like most other strong emotions, some time to emerge, evolve and diminish in intensity. To provide an opportunity to talk about problems means that the other person can get both a structure and a certain distance to them — it will then be easier to handle the reactions. By translating emotions into words, we can integrate them with our experiences and memories. Talking about emotions can result in not being overwhelmed by them and not letting chaotic experiences affect our existence. Just the fact that you can talk about difficulties can create some order in the chaos you experience. By discussing tough experiences can lead to seeing them more objectively and gain some distance to them.

Holding or containing It often takes someone else's listening ear in order to be able to express difficult experiences in a good way. If we are leading the dialogue, we will then listen to these experiences and strong feelings — we must

86

7 Conducting a dialogue

©

The authors and Studentlitteratur

"hold" the difficult part for a while and then hand it over again in the form of an "Mm" or "That must have been hard". Then the very expression of the experiences has so to speak left the one experiencing the difficulties and are contained by another person, who despite the strength of the feelings can keep control without responding back with the same intensity. It is easier to consider the feelings and difficulties with a certain distance when they have been expressed, and when somebody else appears to understand how it is. This whole process is known as holding or containing. It is, however, impossible not to sometimes become upset or angry and apprehensive, when the dialogue is about very difficult things. Emotional reactions are a natural part of such conversations — in the role of being responsible for the dialogue it is difficult to remain neutral. To then be able to hold another person's thoughts and feelings, to accept and endure them without denying or throwing them back, is an important part of the conversation. Containing or holding is thus a kind of vicarious suffering, we literally take care of the other's strong or unbearable feelings. It means that we as a leader of the conversation have to endure discomfort, excessive anxiety or hostility. We shall also serve as a model for another person when it comes to thinking about and dealing with a difficult situation — we shall be balanced in our emotions and reasoning in our thoughts and opinions. We shall definitely not be judgmental in our attitude towards the other person or to the topics and reactions that occur.

Silence Silence may not be the first thing you think of in connection with a dialogue, but silence always tends to hold different kinds of messages. It is thus not simply an absence of the message, but it also involves a content message. We sometimes describe silence as with the expressions as "telling", "icy", "embarrassing" and "in mute amazement". The messages a silence stands for can be about reflection, interest, indifference, anxiety, rejection, misunderstanding, suspicion, questioning and respect. In addition, the silence also can express sympathy, solidarity and acceptance. What we need to do as responsible for the dialogue is to put the silence in a context. We shall ask ourselves what has happened just before, or when the "radar" gave a response, and be alert to the other party's non-verbal reactions, principally gestures and facial expressions.

0 The authors and Studentlitteratur

7 Conducting a dialogue

87

How we experience silence is both a personal and cultural matter. Some people think that half a minute of silence during a conversation can be relaxing and natural, while others experience it as an uncomfortably long time. People can get nervous, because they are accustomed to constantly filling up every silence. In some cultures, silence can mark respect during a talk, while another culture sees it as acceptance — "silence means consent", which isn't necessarily true. Some also think that if you disagree with someone, then this should be expressed verbally, while others feel that this should be shown non-verbally; anything else would be rude. Silence can be difficult to interpret in the interaction because it can mean so many different things, especially when it comes to sensitive topics.

Advice • Get ready for the dialogue. Reflect on the objectives. If it is a continuation of a previous talk, refresh the memo. • Just before the dialogue starts, give yourself a moment of selfconcentration. • Open up the dialogue with a description of the purpose of the conversation. • During the talk, make a mental note of important information that is presented and of any emotional reactions. At the end of the dialogue, wind up and summarize. • After finishing the conversation, write down a few summary words about what has been said and what the parties have agreed upon. • Stay in your role as organizer of the conversation. Don't be private, but feel free to be personal, which isn't the same as being private. • Note that a dialogue requires attention and takes energy; you will get tired if you have several conversations in a row. • Maintain the nearness or intimacy by being attentive and at the same time being distant by keeping track of the key points that are being discussed; be aware of how much time there's left. • Be prepared for emotional reactions, defences and resistance. These don't need to occur, but a readiness for it allows you to handle them if they come to the fore.

88

7 Conducting a dialogue

C The authors and Studentlitteratur

• Normally most people are aware that the silence can be interpreted in different ways depending on what situation they are in. However, many seem to forget this when talking with someone from another culture or with a different background than their own. • Don't defend yourself, if you are criticized or accused. If you walk into this trap, the focus of the conversation will not be on the interlocutor but on yourself. If you disagree with your conversation partner about something, you can of course say this but not necessarily convince him or her of your own position. It is enough to clarify the differences by saying, for instance, "Here we obviously think differently". The best is to accept criticism for what it probably is — an expression of an experience, which may be correct or incorrect. Ask questions only if there is something you don't understand.

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

7 Conducting a dialogue

89

Listening in the sense of only hearing someone isn't enough when it comes to personal communication. Interest and commitment are an inte-

Listening and giving feedback Listening The communication holds two basic aspects: speaking (expression) and listening (impression and interpretation). One culture can, however, emphasize stating and performance, and not so much listening — even if we have two ears but only one mouth, as the proverb says. Listening can thus sometimes be associated with passivity, sometimes also with weakness, which might mean that it is seen as something relatively unimportant. It is important to state that the key to good communication is the art of listening, even if we in many cases are quite poor listeners. We often think more about what we ourselves shall say in a while, rather than listen to what the other really is saying. That's one of the reasons why we don't take in everything, neither what is said nor what lies in-between the lines. We also might be tempted into a kind of "slack" listening". Many TVchannels, with their talk shows and reality shows, invite to a passive consumption of the programs that we watch. It is obvious that it is a one-way communication, but it also creates a passive recipient role. The uncommitted listening and the easily digested material that we see on television have a tendency to spread to habitual conversations and to communication in general. One could also say that we have learned the art of not listening. We are constantly bombarded with sounds and noises as well as images and texts that are loaded with messages. In order not to drown in this flow of information, we need to turn off most parts of it. This entails the risk that we continue to turn off the messages also in customary conversations with other people. We are led to adopt a passive attitude, even when we are required to be active and show involvement, both at work and in leisure hours. Talking and listening Talking and listening are not fully in phase with each other. The transmitter has already planned what he or she should say and wants mainly to have a reaction from the listener, who on his part mainly wants to understand what is being said and take part in the conversation — all this can make it difficult to use feedback.

0 The authors and Studentlitteratur

8 Listening and giving feedback

91

When we talk we usually do it with a speed of 100-150 words per minute, but our listening capacity is much higher, about 500 words a minute. Generally, people have seldom trouble understanding such a high speech rate, even if there is a bit awkward and tiring in the long run. The normal and comfortable speed seems to be just under 200 words per minute. Listening capacity is thus higher than the capacity to talk; the question is what we do with "surplus time" as we probably get a hunch of what the speaker wants to say before he or she is finished. There's a risk that we start to think about other things and allow associations to appear in our mind — or even answer a question before it has been formulated — and in that case we'll lose information from the speaker. Instead of this, we should actively do something with this surplus time, for example summarizing what has been said so far, compare it with earlier conversations and think about whether we are on track in the conversation or not. Effective listening is active, because there's so much that can be unclear in communication. The more difficult or unusual the content of the communication is, the greater is the risk of misunderstandings. We shall not only ask questions when we don't understand, but sometimes even when we think we have understood, in order to be sure that we have interpreted the other person in a correct way. Listening is often taken for granted and something that everyone ought to be good at it. Yet, inadequate listening is a common cause of misunderstandings and can worsen a conflict. Merely hearing what someone says is not the same as listening. We can take the following exchange as an example of this; A is recounting her day at work to her partner (B), who however doesn't seem to show any greater commitment: A

You don't seem to listen to what I am saying!

B

Oh yes, I do! If you wish I'll tell you what you have said. First, you were too late for the bus. During the coffee break you met Anna, who told you about the party last Friday. She had a great time, but Patrick was not there. Is there something else? Have I listened, or what!

A

You're totally hopeless!

Listening in the sense that only hearing someone isn't enough in a personal communication. What might be missing in the above example is interest and commitment, and that is an integral part of listening. Hearing can be seen as a physical activity and if so, then listening is a mental process by which speech is converted into a meaning. We could say that we hear with our ears, but listen with the brain or mind.

92

8 Listening and giving feedback

©

The authors and Studentlitteratur

Listening is not just about repeating what someone else has said, it's also about understanding the intent of the messages and what this may mean, and reflect and respond with our own interjections and comments. It is also important to listen to both verbal and nonverbal messages. Listening with only one ear is the same as "slack" listening, while listening with both ears is the same as having your attention connected. Listening to the "third ear" means that we should listen inwardly, that is on our own reactions. What do we experience when the other person is talking? Do our thoughts starts wandering, are we becoming nervous, slightly irritated or do we get an urge to yawn? Listening between the lines is to notice the tone of voice, emphasis, pauses and voice timbre. We should use our eyes, not only our ears, to discover what happens during a dialogue. To listen to the unspoken is to pay attention to what is not said but in some way is missing, a gap in an argument or statement — perhaps what the other person consciously or unconsciously avoid.

Different kinds of listening An active listening thus means that our attention is directed towards the other person and that we, while we at the same time that we listen also reflect on what the other says and does. We can talk about different kinds of listening, listening for understanding, critical listening and empathic listening.

Listening for understanding A first-rate listening is initially focused on an understanding of the other's thoughts, experiences and ideas, so that we in a better way are able to interpret the other's messages and ask questions if we have any doubts. The ideas and meanings are important, not just the words, and our reaction is important as a feedback to the speaker. Effective listening is actually both critical and uncritical. Having an "uncritical" attitude when we listen means that we initially are focused exclusively on understanding what the other person thinks, feels and means, and what he or she wants to communicate regarding this. For a large part of the conversation, we should let the critical, judging or controlling functions rest. It can be a later issue to consider what we have heard and seen.

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

8 Listening and giving feedback

93

Evaluative listening An evaluative or critical listening is focused on an assessment of the tenability or accuracy of what is said. To be "critical" really means to be testing and verifying (the word "criterion" means touchstone). We compare what has been said to something, for instance what has been said earlier, an intention or an objective. First we get the whole picture, which gives understanding, and then we analyse and assess of what has been said and how tenable or valid it is, for instance: "What does this actually mean? Is that all?" In problem-solving conversations it may be important to keep an eye on tacit conditions and who in effect "owns" a problem. It is easy to take over a problem from another person and make it our own responsibility rather than the other's - we "let the monkey jump over to our own shoulder"; as in the saying where the monkey stands for the problem. The other person then feels relieved and we have increased our workload. To avoid that from happening, it is important to let the responsibility for a problem or difficulty remain with the other, while we assist in clarifying the problem and the formulation of solutions to it.

Empathy An empathic listening is about to understand what the other person wants and to understand his or her thoughts and feelings and to communicate this understanding. "Pathi" comes from the Greek language and is connected to the meaning of emotion. Sympathy means "feeling with" and is important in an ordinary conversation. Sympathy means that we care about the other and, based on our own experience, understand how the other person's situation has been and maybe even have experienced the same or similar emotion. Empathy is a form of compassion and means that we create a vicarious experience of the other's thoughts and feelings, not from our own perspective but from the other's. We experience the other's view of the world as if it was our own. Antipathy or "feeling against" often implies opposition and a defensive attitude. If we are met with antipathy, it is best to just accept it as a challenge and that the same kind of response only increases the resistance. Empathy goes deeper than sympathy, we understand both with our reason and our emotions. It requires commitment, identification and insight. There's for example no need for us to experience the same anxiety in order to have an empathic understanding of another person's anxiety, it is enough to know how it feels.

94

8 Listening and giving feedback

The authors and Studentlitteratur

Surface and depth We also have a kind of listening that lies on the surface, and one that goes deeper. When we're communicating and listening, we have an obvious meaning — often a content level, which consists of verbal messages — and a more elusive or more profound meaning, which is on a relational level and consists of non-verbal messages. The deeper level can sometimes be contrary to the superficial meaning; sometimes the surface and depth are only a signs of an illusory correlation. When we use our surface listening together with our deeper listening, we pay attention to both verbal and non-verbal messages and what may appear inconsistent and omitted. Both the content and relationship levels are of importance and, if necessary, we should pause and ask what the other's intent is.

Disturbing listening There is finally something that we can call an annoying or disturbing listening — a listening style that creates disturbances in the interaction. An example is the "mute" listener who doesn't give any feedback at all on what is being said, and who is sitting expressionless. The monotone listener reacts, but always in the same unchanging way, which means that after a while we start to wonder what is wrong with what we say or how we talk. We also have persons who have difficulty with a direct eye contact, looking everywhere except at us, which of course complicates the communication. A further example is a listener who is just waiting for the other one to stop talking so that he or she can take over the turn, regardless of the content that the other for the moment conveys. Another example on a disturbing listening style is the person who often fill in what we just are going to say, but in the wrong way.

Feedback Active listening Active listening is reflected in body language — we show our interest and commitment when we hum, nod, have eye contact and when we have a certain posture. This often means that we clarify ambiguous experiences and feelings. Active listening also conveys an acceptance of other's feelings and opinions, even if we don't agree with them; in that way we can go

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

8 Listening and giving feedback

95

deeper into an issue or an experience and create clarity and intensification. What's important in this active listening is that we ask questions when needed, express the fact that we have understand, or that we maybe haven't done that, and that we sometimes, in our own words and using I-statements, repeat the meaning of what the other person has said. Active participation is essential for an effective communication, especially if the topic of the conversation is a difficult one. Usually it is just this active listening that we fail to live up to. It requires both a physical and a psychological tension to be expressed, verbally and non-verbally. This makes the other party aware of the fact that we are trying to understand his or her meaning and intentions. We must not however forget that the passive or "silent" listening also has its merits. Our concentration may make us sit quite still and have eye contact with another person — even if we are relatively immobile and silent, the message is conveyed that we are focused on trying to understand the other. Feedback is like a receipt or an acknowledgment to the other that we strive for understanding and clarity. The feedback is used to clarify that we listen and to tell someone else that we are considering what he or she has said and done, and how it affects us. Getting feedback helps us to find out what kind of thoughts and feelings we awaken in others. In some situations, we use the feedback as a tool, such as in performance reviews and coaching dialogues. Dialogue, confirmation and feedback are effective tools to highlight, utilize and develop employee skills. It provides a positive basis for the leader and the organization to detect and respond to employees' latent knowledge and experience.

Feedback versus confirmation and acknowledgement Confirmation or acknowledgement is about paying attention to each other as human beings. Confirmation at work is often related to how well (or poorly) we believe that individuals manage their job-related assignments. Confirmation is a part of defining the situation and relationship. Sometimes it can also be about "redefinition", as when work groups are formed and the members shall work together in new combinations with other goals and new tasks. Sometimes you also have to redefine

96

8 Listening and giving feedback

0 The authors and Studentlitteratur

each other: "We are the same persons as before, but we must now consider and respond to each other in a new way, based on our new work roles (job functions)". A large part of the confirmation is done on the relationship level, and this is mostly nonverbal. By looking at the other, and by facial expressions and gestures, we convey our attitude to ourselves and to the others, maybe at the same time as we deal with work-related issues in an informative and factual way. As a leader or manager we can contribute to a favourable working environment and positive social climate by reflecting on when, how, what and why we shall give feedback to employees and how we can confirm and support team members. This may be especially important when individuals and groups are faced with new challenges, new job assignments or in connection with reorganization and downsizing in the organization. From a general point of view, new tasks and new challenges very often result in a development and growth for employees. Uncertainty about the social process can, however, create doubts and ambiguities. Energy and working hours can then be devoted to discussions about job roles, and this temporarily shifts the focus away from the work goals.

Levels

There are different types or levels of feedback, including information, personal response and assessment. • Information is about an active listening and clarification of how we, objectively speaking, have perceived another person. We only repeat what we have heard the other say or do: "Have I understood you correctly if ...?" or "Do you by this mean that ...?". The other person then has a chance to confirm that we have understood him or her correctly, or tell us what actually was intended. • A personal reaction aims at a description of how we emotionally have perceived the other's behaviour. There may be reactions like: "When you say like that, I am disappointed, I don't think you take me seriously" or "I get annoyed when you're late". • Assessment is an evaluation of the other's behaviour. It may be about performance or how someone has handled a particular situation. The assessment must be made cautiously. We can for instance say "I think you have to train more on this in order to be a better leader" or "My opinion is that you didn't do this in an optimal way; instead you might try ...".

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

8 Listening and giving feedback

97

Assessments and evaluations tend to arouse both opposition and suspicion, which make this a difficult form of feedback. It can be used in situations where a specific assessment is part of the situation, for example during a tutorial where the people involved have different status, like manager and employee. It requires trust and confidence in the relation, if the feedback shall function properly. Managing feedback In an assessment it is difficult at the same time to give both positive and negative feedback. If we start with positive comments and finish with negative ones, the latter might take the edge off the positive. Starting with the negative can create a repudiating attitude, which ends up in a defensive position. A better model is to start with something positive, continue with things that must be changed or taken care of — the "negative" — and conclude with something more positive or repeat the positive aspect mentioned earlier. It is important to agree on how the "negative", that is what has been criticized, shall be followed up. A functional feedback is characterized by being direct, honest, relevant and concrete. Direct means that it should be given as soon as possible after an incident has occurred. The effect of the feedback is stronger the earlier it is presented. What is happening "here and now" should as far as possible be the focus. Being honest isn't the same as being reckless. But on the other hand we shouldn't avoid unpleasantness, simply rubbing someone the right way or just telling what the other person likes to hear — that gives no ground for change. But being clear about that something needs to be changed, while showing that it isn't necessarily anything wrong with the person himself, can make him or her willing to change without getting a lower self-esteem. Relevance means that the feedback is connected with the situation. That the feedback is concrete means that it should be easy to understand and be related to a specific behaviour. It is therefore important to be specific and focus on issues or conditions that can be changed. A feedback should therefore have the following form. Who thinks what, when, and about whom or what? The feedback shall thus be tentative and descriptive, not judgmental and normative (prescriptive). We should ideally focus on strengths rather than weaknesses. Descriptions of how someone is should be se-

98

8 Listening and giving feedback

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

parated from descriptions of what anyone does. If the purpose of feedback is change, it must be future-oriented. We can influence the future, but what has happened is impossible to change. Therefore a focus on the future tends to bring less resistance, because it reduces the risk that something will be perceived as an accusation. A feedback that is wanted by the other person also works better than an enforced feedback. Those who give feedback, especially in the case of an assessment, are usually more accustomed to evaluate others, compared to the persons who are to be judged. It is therefore important that we give feedback with caution, taking one thing at a time and give room for comments and discussion. As we ourselves receive feedback, we shall not do so uncritically, but we should not argue or defend ourselves. It's better to just ask when we think something is unclear, and wait with our own comments until later. If we become defensive, we are sending out signals that the other person should stop talking about his or her ideas and feelings. Then we might miss our objective, namely what we want to achieve with the feedback. It can sometimes be difficult to receive feedback. If we don't trust or don't like the person giving the feedback, we can interpret this as accusations, criticisms, or control. Whether the intent is positive or not, the consequences will then be negative. We can respond by retaliating, being defensive or denying what the other says. But if we like and trust someone, we can listen more accurately to what he or she says. We can then more easily take in the feedback and have a greater chance for change and development. Advice • A good starting point for effective listening is "first understand, then make yourself understood". Only when you have listened to the other, and to his or her views, you can present your own views and relevant arguments. • Active listening means that you in your own words repeat what another person has said, i.e. how you have interpreted or understood the content. This active listening should have a tentative start, for example, "Do you mean...?", "Your view is then...?" and "I think you mean ... is that correct?" • Open questions provide longer answers and often lead to reflection. Open questions often begin with the words where, when, how and what or "Please tell me more about your last comment".

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

8 Listening and giving feedback

99

Quite often it's not the content but how we communicate that creates problems ... We rarely make any distinction between what we have perceived and what we believe the other has meant, and we assume that other people express things the same way as we do.

Handling disturbances in the communication Sources of disturbances Communication is a fragile thing. Our language is ambiguous, we have different expectations and the situation we are involved in can be interpreted in many different ways. The risks of misunderstandings and conflicts are thus relatively large. Quite often it's not the content but how we communicate that creates problems. By obscure and incomplete message another person can try to avoid responsibility for what is said and done, which of course creates uncertainty in the communication. We might know that all isn't what it seems to be, but we cannot always pinpoint what is wrong. There arises a disturbance in the interaction, and there are many ways to interfere. Sometimes, however, the speaker deliberately exploits language in order to create disturbances and make room for diverse and sometimes erroneous interpretations. Vagueness and ambiguity can be used deliberately by someone who doesn't want to be responsible for his or her own opinions and behaviour. He or she might want to avoid intrusive questions or to confuse the interlocutor. For those who seek an open and honest communication, it may be worthwhile to pay attention to such sources of disturbance that affect the interaction and to reflect on ways of addressing them.

Our own point of departure There are many reasons for the misunderstandings and for the fact that communication isn't working as it should do. Many times it depends on the fact that we communicate from our own perspective. We often believe that what we say is just the same as what we have planned to say and that our message is consistent with our intentions. We assume that others without difficulties understand what we mean. We rarely make any distinction between what we have perceived and what we believe the other has meant, and we assume that other people express things the same way as we do.

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

9 Handling disturbances ...

101

When we listen to others, it is not enough with a "dictionary" to understand what they mean. We must also take into account the situation and the other's perception of it. Words and intentions may be two different things. Therefore it is no use to get stuck on the literal meaning or what someone literally said, because the meanings of words are not absolute. If we think words have a meaning that is independent of person and situation, it is easy to talk past each other — especially if the atmosphere is agitated. We then fire away our words but we miss the target, because the sight is poorly positioned and we do not want to understand each other. The following exchange of words is a typical example. A You said so! B I did not! A You did too, there's nothing wrong with my hearing. B Don't tell me what I have said or not said, I know that better than you do. Memory is an unreliable witness, also to what was said just a moment ago. It is easy for us to remember what we meant, but it's harder to know how our voice sounded and which words we actually used. It's so easy to remember what we heard, but not what the other person actually said. Those kinds of deadlocks have repercussions throughout the interaction and create confusion and misconceptions.

Content level and relational level

Conflicts and disagreements that are situated on the content level are relatively easy to solve. They relate to concrete issues that are easy for the disputants to point out and be aware of. Conflicts on the relationship level are much more difficult to be aware of, partly because they deal with rights and obligations, partly because they're about unspoken and "unreal" factors. We can for example start arguing about how the cleaning is managed in our home. We may think that we too often tidy up after another person. To resolve the conflict, it is easy to start discussing the cleaning — as if that was the whole problem. Certainly it is important, but what stirs up emotions is the question of who is responsible for the tidying, and who it is that has the right to demand certain things of others. The latter is about the relationship level, and this is central to a family quarrel. If we resolve the conflict on the content level by agreeing, by

102

9

Handling disturbances ...

©

The authors and Studentlitteratur

way of example, not to throw dirty socks all over the place we have not solved what is important, namely the norms and rules that apply to cleaning among other things. It may well happen that there will be order when it comes to socks, at least for a while, but easily other items of equipment will be scattered about. The basis of the quarrel is the content of the relationship, and the unspoken demands and expectations the people involved have of each other and of their common concerns, which must be resolved first. If it is about the socks or anything else is less important. The key is in such cases how the rights and responsibilities are distributed among the two persons.

Double-bind messages

A double-bind message is based on that there sometimes is a contradiction between the content level and the relationship level. In a double message, both cannot be true simultaneously. As listeners, we need to figure out what the intended message is. Take for instance a person who says, "I'm not mad" quite high, with compressed jaws and eyes wide open. Obviously something is not right. A good rule is that actions are clearer and "truer" than words, and that the non-verbal is difficult to control. Therefore, this particular example, regardless of the person is angry or not, is easy to solve and to get a reasonably clear meaning of. But it could also be that you both want and don't want something or that you simultaneously have opinions that go in both one way and another. This can lead to ambiguities that make it difficult for others to understand the speaker. We can take the following example of a cohabiting couple. One of them (the woman) shall visit a restaurant with her friends. This is a somewhat delicate situation, but they have talked about it and have agreed upon it. When she's leaving she says: "Hey, I'm going now, okay?" Her partner looks away and replies with a weak voice and no eye contact: "Well, you just go ahead. I can manage on my own, don't bother about me". She hesitates at the door, hadn't they agreed on this, or what?"

The content message is clear — "do as you said you should do"— but the relational message is about disappointment, betraying, not be-

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

9 Handling disturbances ...

103

ing liked any more, coming second. It creates vague feelings of bad conscience, guilt and discomfort in both of them. If she leaves, the atmosphere probably will be slightly grumpy or whining when she gets back. If she stays, she may very well be annoyed and irritated because she has not been "allowed" to go out and meet her friends. In this way, double-bind messages highlight former conflicts and give rise to even more unresolved conflicts. It takes willingness, responsiveness and openness in order to sort out things like this.

Irony An ambiguous tenor doesn't have to be disturbing in itself. Sometimes it is a prerequisite for the intent behind the message to come out. The speaker wants the listener to discover that there lies something else in, and behind, what actually is being said. This goes for irony — we say one thing on the content level and at the same time we indicate at the relational level that the content message shouldn't be perceived in a concrete way. It's rather the other way around — we mean the opposite of what the words say. The content level doesn't convey the intended meaning. An example is when the parent says to the teenager who is late for dinner: "Are you home already, we haven't even got to the dessert yet?" With irony, we usually assume that the other person understands that it is the opposite of what we are saying that is important. If he or she does understand it, the irony can strengthen the relation, and we can together laugh at the comical in the situation. But the irony is often based on very small and subtle nuances of intonation and facial expressions, which are easy to misunderstand. If the irony for instance is about looks or ability, it can greatly affect the other party's self-esteem.

Hinting or insinuating A hint or an insinuation often contains accusations that we send off without having to take the consequences of them. We say something tangible on the content level, but the relational message means a blow or an accusation that is designed to land on the relational level. This message is only implied, and therefore it's easy to call attention to only the content message and deny the insinuation: "I never said that! A11 I said was ... am I right or not?"

104

9 Handling disturbances ...

o The authors and Studentlitteratur

Here is an illustrative example: This is our cohabiting couple again who, after breakfast, has been out shopping and now is back home. When they walk into the kitchen, one of them says, "Oh oh, here we have the milk carton still standing on the table!" It is a somewhat strange statement — both of them can see that there is a carton of milk on the table. It is so obvious that it seems nonsensical to point it out; it's also a fact that is hard to deny. But the reaction from the other shows that we also have another meaning. The answer is namely put forward in a rather loud voice, tense shoulders and maybe even a slight reddening of the face: — Oh, and how about you then!? You are certainly no better, yesterday the cheese was left at the table and became dry. And by the way, why is it always me that have to ... ? The dry and factual allegation is not nearly as simple or as obvious as it seemed at a first glance. There is an insinuation embedded in what is said, an additional message which conveys: — Here's the milk on our table being ruined and there is someone who should have put it in the fridge and whom of us two is really slaving away to get us something to eat in this home ... ? The insinuation does not appear in words, but can only be noticed by non-verbal cues. It is obvious that both of them take the relational message as the actual and important message. But because it's an unspoken insinuation, one of them can dodge it by saying: — But really, don't overdo it; have you been sleeping poorly? I only said that the milk still is on the table — it does, doesn't it? Do you think there is anything else on the table, or what!? The quarrel is soon in full swing and a contributing cause to the argument is that the accusation is so obvious and yet so difficult to single out. The hint is on top and says, "it's only what we can see that is important". But if we listen carefully, there's a range of possible meanings pour out which almost always takes the form of accusations, pricks and attacks from behind. To avoid being drawn into a destructive quarrel, we have to clarify what we have reacted to. We need words for the two levels and, for example, say: — Oh yes, I can also see that the milk carton is on the table and that's a shame. But if you mean that it is only my job to put the milk back into the fridge, say it straight out! I am also of the opinion that it's something we should discuss and decide together. Now, what did you mean?

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

9 Handling disturbances ...

105

Unspoken or tacit assumptions We are quick to draw conclusions from what is actually happening. We start with what we see and observe, but also with how we think things should be. Observation and guesswork run easily into each other. But it is important not to confuse them, as they have varying degrees of certainty. Observations can only be made by an observer, but anyone can draw a conclusion. There is a risk that we listen to what someone else says, but draw our own conclusions that later on turn up in the form of "truths". These truths can then give rise to misunderstandings and misinterpretations. Take the following story as an example of how tacit assumptions can influence a listener's or reader's interpretation of a situation. Anita was out for a walk and met an old school friend with whom she had been very close, but she had neither seen nor heard from her friend for over a decade. They greeted each other warmly. The school friend was accompanied by a child at the age of approximately five years and Anita asked: "Is that your boy?" She found out that it was so, and that her friend had been married for over six years ago. Anita asked the boy what his name was, and he replied: "Dad and I are called the same!" "Well", said Anita, "then your name is Peter". How could she know that when she did not even know that her friend had had a child?

The story is a good example of how preconceived ideas and tacit assumptions can influence both the interpretation and behaviour. How could Anita know the boy's name? The answer is of course evident once we have clarified the unspoken prerequisite — Anita knew the boy's name because her school friend is Peter's father, and not his mother, which we can be led to believe.

Mind-reading We sometimes think that some things are so obvious that they do not even need to be spelled out — without reflecting that someone else might not think it's as evident as we do. Sometimes we say some-

106

9 Handling disturbances ...

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

thing out loud, while at the same time having something more in our mind that we don't express, but we believe that others have heard and understood everything we were thinking of. Quite often we are content with a half or a partly concealed message. We might remember what we were thinking, but not what we actually said. To assume that others know what we want, and then act accordingly, is an example of a very indistinct or turbid communication.

Smoke screens

We can get an answer from others that on the surface seems to be true, but when we ponder on it, we realize that it is no answer. It's like froth — as soon as we try to grasp what has been said, it's slipping away. We are confused because we are trying to understand what the other person says, and even though the answer makes sense, it is incomprehensible in the context. Here's an example: A

How will you as a manager act to ensure that we'll have stand-ins for us during our holiday?

B

As the matters now stand, it is important to secure the consequences of each decision, and l will work for a re-prioritizing within the individual sectors of our organization and simultaneously keeping a tight financial control.

Side-tracks

If someone's response catches on a small detail of what formerly is said and contains long and complicated expositions, it becomes difficult to retain the essence of the conversation. Sometimes, as an end in itself, we can require detailed explanations of various things or just stick to the content level and avoid the relational level. We ignore the context and catch on to the words we hear, for instance: Are you saying that I am throwing socks around? Whereto? I don't see any socks! What socks are you talking about? Is it my black socks or the brown socks you bought without asking me? They are too thin! What a waste of money!

0 The authors and Studentlitteratur

9 Handling disturbances ...

107

Unclear messages Uncertainty is of course not always destructive, and clarity is not always something that eliminates disturbances and misunderstandings. Poetry, jokes and creativity are based on unpredictability and ambiguity; it is their essence and as such they need not be disturbing. The indistinctiveness develops into a disorder only when it becomes a pattern or when misunderstandings constantly arise. For example, evasive answers and vague words, such as "maybe" and "later", can create confusion in connection with promises of for instance a higher salary, advancement or benefits. It then becomes almost impossible for the other person to know when such a promise shall be fulfilled. Sometimes it happens that we omit important information that the other party needs in order to make a correct interpretation. The result is unclear when it comes to context, reasoning and argument. We may stop mid-sentence or stop short with a "well, you know ...". Or when someone tells a colleague, that has been on a sick leave, about the recent staff meeting: "Christine, as usual, started harping on that we should exchange offices; I of course thought directly of you who weren't here and surely is going to get an inferior room, but it will probably be ... well, you know ... Anyhow that's what I think". The person can thus think she has said all she planned to say and insist that Christine in this case shall react to what she has been thinking.

Generalizations Generalizations are incomplete and overloaded messages that are both sweeping and often clearly unrealistic. You cannot really avoid them, because language in itself is a collection of generalizations, but they lead up to difficulties when it comes to understand exactly what another person is saying. Words like always, never, people and someone are common examples of this: "Why do you always have to destroy everything?", "Those people can never ...", "Someone has taken my book" or "They are all stupid in that department". It is difficult to know if "people" and "they" refers to the listener, to everyone or just to those who are present. It is extremely rare that words like "always" or "never" have a coverage in reality. It cannot possibly be that someone always is in a certain way — expressions like "You are always so grumpy" or "Why can't I ever have a quiet moment in this house?" are therefore claims that look as factual statements on the content level, but at the relation level they are hidden accusations.

1 08

9 Handling disturbances ...

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

Advice for managing disturbances The best way to break a misleading or disturbing communication is to request clarifications and explanations. If we make it a habit to be clear, we can avoid many instances of poor communication and it will be easier showing others that we expect the same behavior from them. The more we reflect on what is being said on both the content and the relational level, the more adept we will become at spotting ambiguities and disturbing messages. In order to avoid or stop a misleading communication, we can apply meta-communication, that is talking about what is happening or "sending a message about the message" or use l-statements to ask question and provide feedback. • Clarification means that we in different ways on both the content level and the relationship level clarify what we mean, and we ask about the other's opinions and intentions. • l-statements mean that we are as clear and open as possible in our own statements and explain how we perceive, feel and react to what the other person says. • Feedback means that we inform the other person about how we perceive his or her statements/behaviour and ask if this is in accordance with what they wanted to communicate. • Meta-communication means that we take a kind of pause in the talk and describe what we think is happening. We change the perspective and may say: "Now when we are talking, you don't answer my questions, you start talking about other things instead" or "You are getting quieter and quieter, is there anything that you can't or won't say to me?"

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

9 Handling disturbances ...

109

Virtually everything can give rise to a conflict in a certain situation, while what was causing the conflict . .

Managing conflicts What is a conflict? The word conflict means "crash" or "clash" — a collision between such factors as expectations, demands, values, goals, needs, desires, habits, attitudes and personalities. The list can be made longer, because virtually everything can give rise to a conflict in a certain situation, while what was causing the conflict may go unnoticed in another situation. The cause may be about a misunderstanding or that a certain message arouses defence and resistance. Many contradictions and conflicts are resolved quickly and almost imperceptibly — they are handled as a matter of routine — while others may remain unresolved and grow until they explode. The determining factor in a conflict situation is that something becomes so fraught that it evokes negative feelings and opposition. A conflict exists when two parties confront each other in a situation where one party in one way or another represents an obstacle to the other party's efforts to reach a goal, meet a need and create, or avoid, a change. The parties are trying by various means to influence each other in order to achieve their own goals, while they rarely are willing to listen to the other's views. It is easy to cause a conflict with other people. One reliable way is to emphasize the negative in someone's behaviour and thoughts, focus on what separates the parties and strive to disagree as much as possible. If there is no difference and no dissent, you can make them up: look for exceptions to everything that is said or ask if the other person really knows what he or she says. To show hostility, superiority, and contempt is a great way to get people to adopt a defensive position. Use sarcasm and irony to tread on another person's self-esteem and you'll get a breeding ground for conflict. To emphasize errors, weaknesses, mistakes, illogical reasoning, stupidity and lack of experience mean that we almost certainly end up in a destructive conflict and open hostility.

To prevent a conflict Preventing conflict is doing the opposite to all this. We turn our attention to what we agree upon, we focus on the issue in question and not on the person. We show that we want to elucidate what isn't clear.

0 The authors and Studentlitteratur

10 Managing conflicts

111

We are prepared to both understand and accept the other person, and we endeavour to ensure that there will not be a question of winning or losing. We believe that there are no unambiguous answers to tough questions and that nothing is either completely right or completely wrong — except for fairly simple facts, of course. We look for lacunas or gaps in our own arguments and try to create understanding and trust.

Conflicts at work Conflicts are inevitable in groups; they are actually a natural part of group life. Even open and harmonious groups now and then face conflicts and oppositions. Some conflicts, however, tend to survive because they are not formulated, and managed, or because they are so severe that they cannot be solved routinely. Work life is just like other social arenas, that is an environment where problems and conflicts nowadays arise to a greater extent than before. It's not that workplace conflicts are unique and different from others kinds of conflict, but rather that our attitude towards work influences how we react to and behave towards each other. In today's workplaces we have developed a greater interdependence between individuals and groups, so that one person's ability to perform his or her duties well is depending on others fulfilling their responsibilities in a satisfactory manner. A stronger dependence means that more areas might be developed into "war zones". Conflicts at work can arise from the fact that you experience injustice in resource allocations or rivalry and stress. Staff turnover and competition for jobs can also create conflicts between individual employees. Expressions of discontent and open confrontations are becoming more common during periods of insecurity, for example when we deal with reorganizations, downsizing and demands on higher efficiency. Sometimes the lack of information, or an information overload, is the basis of a conflict, and other times the breeding ground may be too strong requirements for job performance and thus risk for failures. Communication becomes destructive when one party is blocking the other; the interaction might develop into a fight and then the goal is to win and that the other party loses. Constructive conflict development is about seeing opportunities, clearing up misunderstandings, talking about possible consequences and regarding the problems as a common task to face and to solve. Conflicts can both strengthen and ruin a good working climate depending on how the people involved deal with the situation.

112

10 Managing conflicts

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

Positive effects of a conflict consist of a change of rigid patterns, a more open climate, clear and distinct rules and goals, new ideas and a stimulation of group creativity. Negative effects are about destructive emotions, stress, impaired communication, less focus on the tasks, less concord, poor decisions, if any, and an approach that creates winners and losers. There may also be an ambiguous view on conflicts. Even if a manager is convinced that a conflict in an organization can have some positive effects, if it is handled properly, he or she can still be reluctant to deal with them and prefer to avoid them as long as possible, because of unfamiliarity with or fear of emotional expression.

Different kinds of conflicts There are several ways to define conflicts and their origins. We may distinguish between structural and personal conflicts. Structural conflicts are related to the organization of workplaces and the distribution of status and positions. Personal conflicts are related to an interpersonal level and are about rights and obligations, power and influence, personal preferences and misconceptions. Expectations and self-fulfilling prophecies can also affect the development of a conflict. Conflicts may also have originated within a person, that is psychological conflicts that arise out of more or less deep-going mental disturbances. Psychological conflicts and their causes are not something we can manage well without having professional knowledge. They are distinguished by a "there-and-then", which makes them difficult to handle; they are usually deep-rooted. A conflict can also be caused by the way a group is working together, that makes it a relational conflict. This kind of conflict should always be expressed in a "here-and-now"-language, which makes it relatively easy to handle. Conflicts can also have their origin in how an organization is structured and how it works — then we have structural conflicts or intergroup conflicts. These can also be a part of the socio-political relations that exists between various sub-cultures or communities. The latter are examples of social conflicts, which often depend on political and religious conflicts. Compared with interpersonal conflicts, social conflicts are characterized by a "there-and-now", but they can easily develop into relational conflicts by letting one's expectations and attributions regarding the other group be transferred to a member of that group.

C The authors and Studentlitteratur

10 Managing conflicts

113

All these conflicts can thus manifest themselves as interpersonal conflicts, but their causes may differ. Regardless of the origins of the conflict, it is always experienced inside the mind. Our reactions are almost always based on our own true or false image of the conflict situation.

Conflict development Causes

Disagreements develop into conflicts only when the parties have problems working together and no longer can focus on finding a joint solution. Most workplace conflicts have started as a structural or personal conflict and have then developed into a mixture of rational and emotional experiences and attitudes. Disagreement between groups can create a consensus within them, a unity that is usually reinforced by a rejection and depreciation of the other group. Person-related issues can lead to a polarization between members and between groups and result in exclusion processes that manifest themselves in an identification of scapegoats and oppression. Every conflict has its own history and development, where the causes of conflict, and experiences and reactions from others create a course of events which, if nothing is done, in the worst cases can lead to deadlocks, apathy, impaired work performance, discontent, destructive communication and absence due to illness. It may therefore be useful to reflect on the behaviours and reactions that may be a sign of that something is wrong — and to learn to recognize the signals that indicate that a conflict is taking place or is about to be deepened and exacerbated. Moreover, the behaviour in a group where some or all members are involved in a conflict isn't necessarily related to the present situation. It might be connected to something that happened a week, a month or even a year ago. If we do not know the history, we'll have difficulties managing the conflict effectively, as the group's behaviour is guided by their perception of this history. Escalation

When we're involved in a conflict, we sometimes try to convince others that we are the ones who are right about whatever we are arguing — and that is really not a good strategy for reaching a solution to the conflict. It has long been known that if one party in a conflict

114

10 Managing conflicts

0

The authors and Studentlitteratur

is speaking in favour of their own tenable arguments, this actually has the effect that the other party is strengthened in his or her position. The commitment to one's own position also increases when it really ought to be the other way around. This is called a psychological reactance — we need to establish our freedom to have our own opinions when that freedom is being threatened. A discussion or debate where the parties become more convinced of their "own excellence and the absurdity of the other's opinions" isn't in itself a sign of discord. It will become a deadlock only when it develops into a polarization, where the two factions are not listening to each other's arguments or condemn them beforehand. This can easily lead to a glorification of one's own group and to both groups ignoring the other's views. At the workplace the groups can intentionally and consciously withhold information from each other, delaying deadlines or even openly refusing to have anything to do with each other. If the parties reach a point where they no longer talk to each other, each of them will find a way to maintain their self-esteem, convince themselves of the accuracy of their own standpoint and call the others' behaviour into question. If the conflict is aggravated, it begins to resemble an open struggle. Subgroups can be formed, which leads to a polarization where the groups are defaming one another. Half unconscious fantasies are manifested in behaviour and can create, among other things, scapegoats. This can, in turn, lead to backbiting, threats, hidden or open aggression that can be directed to the other party. If a manager doesn't take hold of the conflict, it may eventually lead the parties to question not only the opinions of others but also them as human beings; this may involve bullying. Conflict development can be seen as an escalation of reactions and behaviours that aggravate the destructive communication. It can start with a disturbing message that is misunderstood and perceived as a personal attack; if this isn't attended to, it might cause a thorn in somebody's mind. The thorn can cause infection, thereby increasing the discomfort. Anyone who feels he's being attacked by others will retaliate, first in the form of adding a hidden agenda in everything that is said, which in turn will generate discussions that are vague in nature. There will be a violation of the rules and norms that have existed in the group, and then the conflict is growing and creates serious interaction problems, where defence and generalized communication are common. Someone could for example misunderstand a comment, thinking "I won't forget this", and just waits for a suitable moment to hit back, which will be a principal motive for the person's behaviour. When he

0 The authors and Studentlitteratur

10

Managing conflicts

115

The conflict deepens

.0*

••

••

••

••

••

••

••

••

Disagreement Problem Disturbance Polarization Battle Intensity levels in a conflict.

or she gets a chance to avenge, the other party will often be unaware of this motive and react with surprise to something that certainly is seen as a unfounded attack. Then this person wants to get back at the other, preferably a little stronger, and thus an escalation is in full swing.

Reaction patterns Conflicts and direct confrontations often bring a feeling of insecurity, anxiety and uneasiness. When we are involved in a conflict and want to defend ourselves or convince others of something that is important to us, strong emotional expressions very likely appear. Common reactions are anger, aggression, apathy, crying, despair; other possible reactions are fight, flight, denial or excuses.

Cultural differences Cultural differences affect attitudes to conflict and conflict processes, which especially influences the climate of cooperation in multinational companies. In what is called context-independent cultures (such as Scandinavia and USA) people think that you should speak your mind, that you should stand for your opinions and resolve differences with either confrontation/struggle or with reasoning/cooperation. Opinions should be expressed clearly and openly discussed, and words

116

10 Managing conflicts

0

The authors and Studentlitteratur

with a positive overtone in the conflict are confidence, equality and freedom from reprisal. Anyhow, that's the ideal situation. Context-dependent cultures like China distinguish between what is intended and what is actually expressed; it is important not to lose one's face. Much of the communication about different opinions and conflicts is effected via subtle non-verbal cues. You avoid confronting others and try instead to listen to others' choice of words and facial expressions. Disputes are often countered by avoidance. Maintaining self-esteem is a powerful force in all cultures. It is always worth noting that people act in order to maintain their self-image and self-esteem — which often is more evident in conflict situations. In some situations, the preservation of self-esteem may be more important than the relationship to the other, and sometimes so important that you may choose to leave both the conflict and work in order to keep your self-image intact.

Managing a conflict Just as a conflict develops in different stages or phases, the managing of a conflict also contains different steps. If a manager takes hold of the situation at an early stage, it may be enough to get the group together and discuss various proposals for how the group should handle the discord that has arisen. If the conflict has led to a positioning of views and arguments, you have to talk to both individuals and the group as a whole. If there are threats and attacks, you need to be clear about rules and norms.

Approaches What do we do when a conflict has arisen? There are no general rules that are suitable for all individuals, all groups or all situations; here are anyhow some possible approaches and guidelines. A ,basic prerequisite for dealing with ambiguities, conflicts and problems is that there is openness in the interaction and in the relationships. This creates a kind of order, which means that the parties don't have to yell at or constantly interrupt each other. If they feel that they can't have their say, it soon becomes more important to take the floor and show that another person is wrong, instead of having a constructive conversation. Open communication is direct, problem-

0 The authors and Studentlitteratur

10 Managing conflicts

117

oriented and trusting, while a closed and negative communication is unclear and hopeless. When people are evaluative, criticize and give negative assessments, it leads to a defensive climate and a closed way of communication. An educational tool is clarification and I-statements; we specify the intent and the meaning of messages and focus on what we ourselves feel, not what we think others are thinking or feeling. The best way to do this is to tell others how we have interpreted something, and ask if this corresponds with the other's opinion. Inquiring is important — otherwise it can easily become statements about something that the other person knows much better than we do; an example is, "You're not angry, just tired!". All humans can change and grow — that's a good starting point when working with people. Taking hold of the conflict is essential in order to avoid destructive deadlocks. It's much better to acknowledge what everyone already know, instead of sweeping the problem under the carpet. We sometimes have a tendency to avoid conflicts and think that they will disappear by themselves, if we just ignore them or pretend they do not exist. Conflicts can often be experienced as a failure, and it gives us still another reason to avoid them. But it often means that they show up again at another time, or give rise to additional conflicts precisely because the first ones hadn't been handled. Managing conflict requires good will and cooperation. A good conflict resolution is based on cooperation, not on power or violence. It is important to reduce the experience of loss of control or threat, and create a suitable environment for managing the conflict. This includes ensuring that conflict management is constructive and future-oriented. The goal should be that as many persons as possible, preferably all, benefit from the solution. It is not necessary to completely resolve a conflict, more often it's a question of reducing the negative consequences of it.

Analysis When conflicts arise, we as managers need to determine how we can grasp the situation in an effective way. We need to get a picture of on what level the conflict exists, which individuals are included, possible causes and consequences. We should prepare ourselves for an encounter with a group or a couple of individuals and choose a strategy for the conflict management. It is important to make such an analysis of the conflict. Conflicts easily give rise to apprehension and resentment. We may risk seeing

118

10 Managing conflicts

©

The authors and Studentlitteratur

a solution too quickly, before we have analysed how the conflict has arisen and how it has evolved. When we risk acting blindly, it can create even worse deadlocks or getting a group stuck in a scapegoatbehaviour. Therefore we must find out what the conflict is about. How is the situation defined by the individuals, how do they react to what is happening? What are their ideas about the source of the conflict? The psychological climate between people and in a group is important. Is it supportive and tolerant or defensive with accusations and suspicions? Is the interaction collaborative or competitive? How long has the conflict been evident, and what opinions exists about causes and proposed solutions? How have they acted in the past and what has been achieved? It's all about identifying the problem and the core of the conflict. A starting point might be to focus on these key questions: "How do we deal with the situation?", "What are the consequences?" and "What is our goal?" Everyone should be given enough time to share his or her views on the conflict. We shall endeavour to make concrete descriptions of what someone has said and done, or has failed to say or do, to get an idea of what stands in the way of a solution. The ultimate goal of this first step is that everyone involved must agree on what the core of the conflict is. With practice and experience, a manager can get a better understanding of the social patterns that appear. But we may also need time and distance to get different angles for approaching the problem and determine what action to take. Being direct, biding the time or being compromising and co-operating hold both advantages and disadvantages, and they are all more or less appropriate attitudes, depending on the nature of the conflict and its development and consequences.

Objectives After all this, we shall decide what we want to achieve by talking about or solving the problem/conflict. Both the objectives and the proposed solutions should be as realistic and concrete as possible, i.e. the change that a proposed solution leads to must be tangible. A goal should not be formulated as a more straight and honest communication; it is namely not possible to directly observe if someone is straight or honest. However, you can see if someone picks up after himself, arrives on time and have done what you previously have agreed upon. One should therefore translate words like "straight" or "frank" to concrete behaviour that can be perceived.

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

10 Managing conflicts

119

Straight or frank communication isn't the solution to all problems. Advice such as "be honest and straight with each other" will not help if people think that they are honest, but mean different things with honesty.

Solutions The next step in a constructive conflict is about discussing different solutions. Actually, difficulties arise only when the parties want to solve a problem, but don't succeed in doing that. If they have found the cause or the root of the conflict, the solution might be to just change the circumstances and conditions that have caused the conflict. It's easy to believe that just because we've talked about a conflict, we also have solved it. It is therefore important to investigate whether the proposed solutions are working or not. If it should turn out that we were trying to accomplish too much at too short time, we lower the ambition and go through it all over again, step by step. The same applies when a proposed solution doesn't work. Then we make a new analysis of the problem or try another solution. An evaluation can of course show that the conflict has been resolved; it is then important to confirm this.

If the conflict persists If the conflict persists, despite the fact that both parties have agreed on how to change the situation, we may need other strategies to approach the problem again. It may turn out that the problems have other causes, or are more complicated than we assumed it to be from the beginning. It might be positive to get some respite, and in the meantime perhaps agree upon some ways to cope with continued cooperation, that is declare a "truce" or decide upon a time-out. When the discussions are to be reopened, we should focus on the goal and letting everyone describe their views about possible causes of past failures and listen to each other's ideas without discussion, argument and defence. In addition, we may want to establish the fact that positive change is what the group shall strive for and that it is only the perception of how it should be done that there may be different opinions about.

120

10 Managing conflicts

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

What first seemed to be the cause of the conflict might be an effect of something else, which then constitutes the real source of the conflict. This may mean that previous attempts at solutions have solved a different problem than the actual core of the conflict.

Different ways of managing conflicts One way to understand the reactions that occur in a group, and sometimes also in ourselves as managers, is to reflect on how different people relate to conflict and conflict management. Based on experience, habits and personal preferences, it is common that we show any of the following behavioural patterns: • Avoidance • Adjustment • Competition • Compromise • Collaboration Important Collaboration

[ Competition

r

Compromise

[\ Avoidance

Your own interests J Adjustment

Unimportant Unimportant E - Cooperation - 4.- Important Conflicts can be described on the basis of (a) the importance of cooperation, and (b) the importance of our own interests.

An avoiding style means that we ignore conflicts, hoping they will go away by themselves. We refer to formal rules in trying to resolve the conflict and postpone important matters. This style is useful when the conflict issue isn't important to us, when the negative consequences of conflict management is greater than the benefits, when more information is needed before making a decision or when other

• The authors and Studentlitteratur

10 Managing conflicts

121

current problems for the time being are more important to address. A difficulty with an avoidance style is that the communication pattern can become entrenched or cemented and that the conflict, however small and insignificant it seems to be, will remain and may develop into a destructive direction. The employees often perceive a manager who chooses to avoid conflicts as a weak person. A compromising style is based on negotiation ("horse trading") and on an effort to arrive at a solution that all persons involved can perceive as a fairly acceptable solution, even if it isn't the best one for all participants. This style fits when the goals are important, but not worth the negative consequences that may arise from an open conflict, or when we are short on time but still want to come up with a workable solution. If the time limits don't permit a lengthy discussion of the conflict, a compromising style is probably the best. A disadvantage is when none of the group members are satisfied with the solution that they have found. It can dampen their willingness to work or to found maintain good relationships in the group. A competing style is based on power and rivalry, with the aim to gain or lose something in order to get others to give in, so we can get what we want for ourselves. When we are absolutely confident that we are right, this is an appropriate style; problems can of course arise when others are equally sure that they are right. This style is also functional when quick decisions are required or when a crisis demands immediate action. It results, however, rarely in any positive outcomes when it comes to group climate and it is never appropriate if you mean that the relationship factor is important in the group. The problem with this competing style is that it pretty quickly creates animosity and a desire to retaliate when appropriate. An adjusting style means that we subside and adapt to others' decisions and wishes. This style works best when we have realized that we have been wrong on an issue or in an argument, when an issue is more important to others than it is for ourselves or when we believe that the harmony of the group is more important than our own opinions. In the latter case, there is a risk that we value the comfort, well-being and unity so much that we do not address important problems and issues. A collaborative style is fundamentally a problem-solving approach. We are looking for solutions that everyone can accept; problems and conflicts are perceived as positive challenges. This style works best when we search for a solution that works for everyone, when two positions are so important that a compromise will not work or when we

1 22

10 Managing conflicts

c

The authors and Studentlitteratur

want to create a commitment to a solution. The main disadvantage is that this style requires relatively much time. The main advantage is that it provides experience and skill when it comes to dealing with disagreements and interpersonal relationships. 407065%,

MOW,

Advice for conflict management When managing conflicts, it is always important to consider the origins of the conflict and the reasons for why those that are involved in the conflict might have different views of the causes. The manager shall act as a coach to ensure that the group members themselves propose and take responsibility for ideas and solutions. The person who is managing the conflict should be aware of the fact that he or she often gets the blame for other people's frustration, uncertainty and anxiety. It is virtually always a laborious and difficult process to manage conflicts, but there is no other way than to deal with them. A workable managing of a conflict often means that things eventually are getting better, and then the trouble has been worth while. It's challenging to be the only person that is managing the conflict; if it is possible, have a colleague or someone from human resources department with whom you can discuss experiences and problems with. If a group leader is an important part of the conflict, it is usually best that someone else is called in to lead the discussions.

The authors and Studentlitteratur

10 Managing conflicts

123

if

t • 61-, ,.,

f

4. •

• , .

PART FOUR LEADERSHIP AND CHANGE

For an individual it is important to belong to groups in order to experience solidarity and meaningfulness and to be able to take part in the culture of a society.

Leading group development Groups are important Groups are a link between individuals and society; they are the cornerstones of social organization. In order for society to get individuals to embrace and live by its social norms, and to endow legitimacy and authenticity in them, it seems necessary that this is mediated in a group context. For individuals, it is important to belong to groups in order to experience community and meaning. Many "difficult" deviants have been living outside groups and have never been accepted or confirmed in a positive way. They have thereby gained a poorly anchored self-image, a low self-esteem and a lack of belongingness. It is thus in small groups most of the social control is exercised, and there the socialization takes place, that is the process through which individuals restrain their own needs, adapt to one another and learn the basic norms and behaviours that are accepted in different situations. In most cases, large organizations cannot exercise this kind of internal control. It is in the small group context that people learn and internalize values and social skills. Small groups give organizations the tools needed to improve performance, find solutions to problems and foster creativity in the business. A11 this could mean that the group solely is for the good, but groups can also be devastating to an individual by creating ostracism, exclusion and bullying. People have always been living in groups, playing in groups, spending free time in groups, working in groups, solving problems in groups and going through various life stages in groups. For most part of human history, this was done together with others who have been equals. People have lived in small communities or cultures in which everybody was familiar with one another and where strangers seldom appeared. Today, in a more variable and complex society, groups are made up people who no longer have common but different experiences, goals and values. The members of an ordinary and newly formed group normally don't know each other, they will no longer come from the same strata in society or from the same geographic area; they no longer have the same outlook on life or the same goals in life.

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

11

Leading group development

127

What is a group? A group represents something more than just the individuals included in it. What is happening at the group level is, of course, not separated from the individuals in the group. But there are processes that arise from what happens between and in the minds of the members, and that cannot be explained by studying anyone of them. We can in fact find the group in three places or positions: firstly inside the individuals' minds in the form of expectations, interpretations and intentions; secondly between them in their behaviour and interactions; and thirdly outside the group in the form of other groups' perceptions and behaviours directed against the group members. The most obvious or tangible — the interaction between individuals — is paradoxically the least important when it comes to the group's everyday communication. It is the group members' perceptions and experiences of the other members that to a great extent govern their behaviour. Examples of groups are a family, some friends, people around the coffee table, a team at work, a school class or a football team. When we're referring to, for example, all persons who are 150 cm tall, all Europeans or all women in the world, we can argue that these aren't groups but categories. Something that at first glance looks like a group need not be so; a school class may consist of several groups without it necessarily being a group in itself. A group can be defined as two or more people who influence each other through their behaviour. If we have two or more individuals present in a situation, it will always happen something within and between them, even if they should happen to sit silent and not moving at all. If there for example are strangers that sit at different tables in a cafe, it might arise thoughts, fantasies, or even a conversation between them, but there must be something more in order to be able to argue that they are a group. An important point is that the group is defined by a common activity and a common goal. This focus and content provides a framework which gives rise to interaction and relationships among the group members. When a group is formed, the members start to interact with each other, and that behaviour gives rise to what is called group structure and group processes, that is something that characterizes and distinguishes the interactions in each and every group. An important basis for this is that people in the group need to create an internal order in

128

11 Leading group development

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

the group. They need to know what is expected of them, what they can demand of the others, who makes the decisions and what might happen — all in order to be able to predict the consequences and find a coherent meaning in what is happening. The kinds of groups covered in this book are small groups, often consisting of five to ten members. It has been argued that an effective working group should be so small that its members can interact directly with each other, that is, face to face. There is a limit to how large groups can get before this characteristic disappears. If the number of participants increases to about fifteen or twenty individuals, it is impossible to observe everything that happens; therewith it will be difficult to keep a joint interaction going on. In such groups several subgroups are often formed. Now we can't always have so small groups in an organization, but a department that includes 20 or 30 individuals can of course be divided into smaller groups when discussing a change or a problem or when making important decisions.

Different kinds of groups We can distinguish between different kinds of groups: large and small, formal and informal, primary and secondary as well as reference groups. When a group becomes larger, it becomes more formal, more abstract and less intimate. Formal groups are clearly linked to goals and tasks, with a rather small weight on the "social" aspects of the group. The requirements for formal rules and roles are also more pronounced in larger groups, if order is to be maintained. This means that the organization of a group's structure, distribution of work and leadership also becomes more formal and more pronounced. Informal groups are to a greater extent characterized by relational needs and individual goals and to a lesser extent by needs in relation to the group task. Such groups are more spontaneously formed on the basis of solidarity or a common interest. The roles are not determined by formal rules, but more often by implicit norms; leadership is often unspoken and more diverse. A "normal" group frequently shows both formal and informal features. Primary groups are roughly equivalent to informal groups characterized by being together face to face. In these groups a "we", or a social identity, is important, as in a family or a group of friends. Secondary

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

11

Leading group development

129

groups are usually larger and more anonymous. They typically have a stated purpose and it isn't necessary to have a direct interaction between the members. The members have no clear picture of who the others in such a group are, as when you're working in a large office complex or is a member of an non-governmental organization. These latter groups often show a degree of voluntariness. It is easier to join and to leave an organization than a family. The reference group is a group you belong to or want to belong to. It's a group that you identify yourself with; you admire the members and want to have some of their prestige. Your perceived status often depends on what social groups you use as a comparison or reference in the assessment of yourself.

Group structure Small groups are both predictable and unpredictable. The foreseeable knowledge is based on us knowing that different things will happen when the group meet, but not knowing how or when this happens. In order to understand a group we need to have knowledge of the structure, that is its building blocks. Group structure can be described as a kind of script for what is done and it consists of group members, and what distinguishes them, and of their interactions and their culture or group climate. To understand how people are affected by the groups they belong to, we must also know something about the group processes, i.e. what happens in a group, what group members do and what the consequences of this will be. More specifically, group processes are about cooperation, communication, problem-solving, managing conflicts, and making decisions. Structure is about what exists, while the process is more related to how something is done, which sometimes can happen in seconds and sometimes lie below the surface and not being noticed by the group members. Structure is with a different metaphor the chessboard grid and the rules for how to move the chessmen, while the process is about the game design and what strategies the players use. The group processes leads to a constantly changing of the group, and structure is what makes the group stable for a longer time.

130

11 Leading group development

C

The authors and Studentlitteratur

We will start with a discussion about group structure with the help of the following figure:

Individuals

Needs, goals and identity Interaction

Norms and rules Roles and relationships Status and influence

Change

The individual level Personality, experience, expectations, goals and needs

The individuals or group members are the first and quite obvious structure factor — without individuals, no group! When an individual enters a group, he or she brings his or her personality and experiences, needs and personal goals. The personality does not change so easily. The concept of personality is usually defined as "that which makes us alike, independent of the fact that times are changing" and "that what makes us different from others". This is a fundamentally unpredictable factor that affects the group's development and makes it exciting to meet new individuals and new groups. The past experiences can be positive or negative, but they give rise to expectations that often are manifested in behaviour that may create self-fulfilling prophecies. The personal needs often have a focus on confirmation, safety, development and belongingness. If you get the feeling that the needs will not be met, you might leave the group or, if the membership is more or less compelling, start acting with a double agenda and initiate a power game hoping that the situation will change for the better. Confirmation is an important part of identity, which in many respects is social in its essence, and safety makes it possible to direct your activities to promote the group goals as you don't fear any attacks and don't have to resort to defensive reactions of various kinds.

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

11 Leading group development

131

You can therefore, when this need is met, devote your energy to the group's work. But the need for affiliation may also mean that you maybe must put up with a minor role, unpleasant group members and destructive processes.

The interaction level Needs, goals, identity and history

The next aspect of the group structure is the group's needs, goals, identity, and history — it is now that the group begins to form properly, the group factors that are discussed in the next paragraphs arise and develop in parallel to this aspect. There must be something that keeps the members together, and what unites them is primarily two aspects — group needs and group goals. In the group the members get benefits and a positive exchange, and in that way groups fulfil needs that usually can be satisfied only in conjunction with other people, such as affinity, being efficient, having fun and getting support during crises. If this is going to work, a clear group structure is often required and that is the basis for feeling psychologically safe in the group. The need for relationships with others enables the members to cope as well with individuals they might not like as with a lack of structure in the group — "people accept what they can get, when they don't get what they want". Additionally, there are a number of primary needs, such as food and shelter, which requires cooperation in order to be satisfied. Mutual needs create a joint aspiration for all members, a shared purpose. Goals and aims are the factors that align their mutual work efforts; it creates motivation and a desire to postpone the direct satisfaction of short-term needs for the benefit of long-term needs. An open discussion of the group goals is important in order to make these understandable and tangible. The common objectives and needs require an adjustment, the members get to know each other and create a certain pattern when it comes to the opinions and behaviour. A group identity will in this way come into existence that allows members to say "we" and "us" about themselves. After a while, for instance a day, a month or a year, a sense of a common history will appear, that is the notions the members have of what has occurred in the group. It is these notions, not how it really was, that become prominent in a conflict or when the group structure is changing. In a conflict, it is usually the group's history — what one or more members have said or done before — that is in focus for the members, not so much what is happening for the moment.

132

11 Leading group development

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

Norms and rules If a group has joint goals and meets regularly, there will arise a characteristic concerning this regularity. The group members will behave quite similarly from time to time and from one situation to another. This means that it has been created a set of norms and rules that governs what individuals say and do; and this is the basis of uniformity and predictability, and thus a feeling of safety, when it comes to what is happening in the group. Norms creates ideas of the normal and expected. Rules will stabilize the interaction in the group. This stability leads to safety and predictability in the interaction.

Roles and relationships

That there are rules that provide a similar behaviour for the whole group, or a part of it, they make it possible for roles to emerge, which means that members in different situations behave in an expected and regular pattern. When expectations for a particular person is shared and reinforced by several team members, we have a role. When roles in this way are allocated among the participants, a pattern or a structure of the group will occur. One member's behaviour matches the others'. The roles co-exist and presuppose each other — if we have a talkative role, we also have listening or silent roles. If a group member wants to be rather passive and not take on different tasks, someone else must take on a greater responsibility. The roles are thus complementary, they appear together and fit together like a glove. The roles are in this way a kind of label that we attach to ourselves and others, in order to get an explanation for what others do and a prediction of what they will do next — this will make the interaction to run smoothly in the group. If the group members don't feel comfortable in their roles, or if the work in the group is done less well, this may require a change in the role pattern. But even if an individual would like to have another role, he or she seldom manages to change it by his or her own efforts. It is not enough to change one's own behaviour — even if you change your own behaviour, the others' expectations and perceptions remain more or less the same — and these expectations form a group pressure. A change in role pattern thus requires that you make the group structure clear and conscious for the members. This change must therefore start in the other group members' views and expectations. These must be brought into the open in order to be observed. Then a role change can occur. Consciously pointing out and clarifying the group structure and the group processes also mean that the group members become more open, which is the basis for comfort and well-being.

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

11 Leading group development

133

Status and influence

These roles differ regarding their content, but they also differ in terms of dimensions such as influence, prestige and status. By such a differentiation, a relatively stable status hierarchy emerges, i.e. a distribution of power and influence ability. Status is the same as a position in the group, and with a status you also have a certain prestige and standing. You also get an idea of your own importance in relation to the others, what your abilities are worth for them, and whether your opinions are "good enough" or if they're inaccurate. The distribution of status in a group is quite stable, that's true, but it's not invariable. A new situation, a new task, any failure or a new member affect and change the patterns found, which requires a certain amount of adjustment.

Group climate The above-mentioned aspects lead to an interaction in the group that is characterized by what we can call a climate, a spirit or an atmosphere in the group. There are groups that are stiff, silent, reserved, and where the eye-contact is infrequent. In other groups, aggression, both in words and deeds, can be more direct, the members are hostile to proposals and changes, there is no consensus, there are competing subgroups and the members are calling one another in question, and they often are disparaging. There are, luckily enough, also groups who are open, supporting and challenging in a positive way; the climate is permissive and follows the members' needs. These examples show how different a climate may be, but why are groups so different, even when the same people are involved? In one group, they work very well, but in an other group, the same individuals behave negatively and in a destructive way. This has of course to do with the group's structure and group's functioning; the group can for instance have been stuck in an early developmental phase. A good climate is of great importance for job satisfaction, well-being and need satisfaction in a group. You can't get a good climate by command, or just by agreeing to have a good time — that will seldom work. The climate is a result of many factors — for instance leadership, organizational culture, group size and the rules and roles in the group. The benefits of a positive group climate are far-reaching. The members tend to take more responsibility, they are more often present, they show a greater commitment, they solve problems in a more creative way, their performance improves and they get on well in the group.

1 34

11 Leading group development

©

The authors and Studentlitteratur

Constructive and destructive groups

It is sometimes said that groups are the panacea for all bad things that are occurring in society, other times groups are regarded as the root of all evil; in the latter case, most people seem to refer to groups that are in a conflict phase. But both positions are oversimplified. Groups can act destructively or constructively, and that depends on leadership and how members work together. The better you understand how to build a team, what happens in groups and how the members relate to each other, the easier it is to use the group in a constructive way and the better control you can get over the group development. With knowledge of what forces that affects group processes, you can create a positive group, where the members work well together, grow and get their psychological and social needs fulfilled. Why one group tends to be negative and unsatisfactory depends upon the dynamics that arises when people work together, and we can find this dynamics both within and between group members. The immediate trigger factors often include the experiences of meaninglessness, coercion, domination of one or more members of the group, a leader that does not assume his or her obligations, an organizational change or some kind of external threats to the group. This often give rise to unconscious motivations that are expressed in behaviour and in personal needs, which in turn creates fantasies about that something in one way or another is wrong and that this should be resisted or avoided. It is a primitive and emotionally charged level of function that the participants act upon. The leader in such groups is often subjected to strong pressure from the members in the form of attacks, negative criticism and slander. It then becomes important not to avoid or back away from the role as a leader. He or she should maintain a certain distance to events, stay in role, not being too personal, and — perhaps most importantly - communicate in a clear way by asking about opinions and reactions, focusing on group goals and clarifying processes in the group.

Groups are changing! Most groups are constantly changing, because of new tasks and members; problems and crises arise and disappear. A group needs to be stabilized and have a structure before it can work effectively. This stabilization can often be described as different stages, steps or phases of a group's development; in this development both individual and group-related needs and goals are important.

C The authors and Studentlitteratur

11

Leading group development

135

Groups have according to the American psychologist Susan Wheelan a history and a development in much the same way as an individual does. And groups can just as individuals also get stuck in one or another developmental phase, they then need help to move forward. Individuals join groups with specific expectations. They have previous experiences of groups, and they have been shaped by their social culture. Managing a group's development in a positive way usually leads to high quality and efficiency.

1. Uncertainty, dependence and affiliation The first phase out of three stages in a group's development can be described in terms of uncertainty, dependence, and belongingness or affiliation. People are often insecure when they're new in a group, and when they don't know the other members. Will they be accepted? What will happen? Is there anyone in the group they will like? The members can put up with many strange behaviours due to the need for affiliation, and they stay relatively neutral in order not to stand out and thus risk to be questioned by the others. This initial dependence helps to create stability and make members more or less similar to one another. Since they have so little insight into how this group will be like, they have a tendency to rely on the leader, and they can behave as if the leader knows everything and is almost treated as an omniscient person. The participants want to be members of the group, but they're also a bit anxious about the others and the role they themselves will get. When you meet new people, you need to know who they are in order to be able to adjust your behaviour to others' behaviour. You need to know or guess what is required of you, and which rules and norms that will apply. The members therefore need to have an opportunity to discuss goals and mission and make these tangible. But it is difficult to get certain knowledge about such factors and you therefore have to rely on the guidance provided by others' reactions, and you are by way of introduction also very sensitive to others' opinions and behaviours. The need for affiliation means that the members show relatively acceptable aspects of themselves and that they accept the others in the group. They're thus willing to adjust, compromise and forgo their own needs. If these needs, however, are satisfied to a certain extent, the group will reach what is called a "honeymoon phase". Then everything feels all right, and a first but not very durable group structure has been developed. The members enjoy their work and communicate with ease, they most often like each other, and they are behaving

136

11 Leading group development

0 The authors and Studentlitteratur

in a nice way, and they tend to avoid conflicts. Responses to the other members are positive, even if the communication and relationships are relatively shallow. 2. Control and conflict The second phase of the group's development occurs after a while, when there might emerge a feeling that you're somewhat stuck in the role and role functions that you have gained or been allotted to. You have however found a place in the group, and thus your affiliation need is satisfied, which means that you feel proportionately safe. Then you might try to change your role and position in order to give a stronger expression of your personal views and ideas. When the other members do the same, the newly formed and somewhat fragile group structure is upset, and often issues of control and conflicts come to the fore. Questions about the status of and the trust in the manager also tend to become important. You strive to show independence, instead of being dependent. Then you require more from the group, and you show dissatisfaction with the others and the way that you all are functioning in the group. It can sometimes manifest itself in a failure to let others having their say; and the commitment is decreasing. The group is starting to feel sluggish and cumbersome, and communication is idling. This in turn leads to even more confrontations and not to the calm adjustments and compromises that existed before. A kind of "counter-dependency" emerges, where the members assume a more active role; different views and opinions will be clashing, and thus creating new conflicts. The conflicts in this phase are a necessity, otherwise you can't figure out what will apply regarding objectives, rules and roles. This may increase the disagreement, and is often necessary in order to produce a new and more sustainable structure in the group. Conflicts are of course a double-edged sword — they can lead to a consensus, but also to division, hostility and disintegration if the conflicts aren't properly worked through. Power and leadership roles are in focus. Who shall be allowed to decide and on what? As a leader it is important to realize that it is positive for the leadership to be questioned and criticized, more or less openly. Otherwise you risk a development of a hidden resistance and that the members go behind the leader's back with their discontent. In this power struggle, subgroups and cliques emerge, and the members often compete with each other. If the leader and the members are able to resolve the power struggles and reduce the uncertainties, you'll

0 The authors and Studentlitteratur

11

Leading group development

1 37

most probably will handle and resolve conflicts in a more constructive way. This will lead to a development of new and more sustainable rules and practices among the members. A partly new and stronger group structure comes into existence, and this involves a new sense of belonging, with greater group cohesion and effectiveness.

3. Affinity, solidarity and work The third phase is characterized by affinity and by questions about whom you are close to and whom you can work together with in a positive way. If the members have deliberately focused on sorting out misunderstandings and forming strategies to deal with discord and destructive group behaviour, then most of the basic conflicts have been resolved, and the members have acquired a capacity to deal with new conflicts in the future. The group is thus moving into a phase of increased understanding and trust and is working efficiently. The focus will be on interdependence and cooperation. The group may however face new situations or requirements, where the readiness to manage change may not yet be sufficient. Such change may lead to a new crisis in the group's life. You have to find some new patterns and new ways to deal with the situation. Unexpected events, when for instance a new member is added to the group or when an old member leaves, when a new manager with a different leadership style or when more strict or tighter productivity requirements are formulated — all this can result in a new conflict phase.

Leading a group's development From this description of group phases it is easy to conclude that all groups follow the same trend in the same way and that, once you have reached a performing phase, the members will work in harmony with each other. But groups are just as different as individuals, even if they in some ways are more predictable. The individuals in the group can be in different phases and thus move in different directions, and a group can get stuck in an early developmental phase. Nevertheless, it is always a good idea for both leaders and members to have a general idea of what can happen in a group, in order to develop the group in a positive direction.

138

11 Leading group development

©

The authors and Studentlitteratur

As a leader it is wise to learn to know the group and its members and to deal with group structure and group processes in a positive way. If you are aware of how your own group works, you can become more proficient when you try to meet the members' different needs; then you more effectively can lead the group activities towards its goals. The basis of this kind of leadership is the ability to discover and reflect upon the social processes and structures that occur in groups. What happens in groups can be divided into two aspects: those related to the task and objectives and those related to interaction and relationships. The task functions are based on group goals, which mean that these need to be defined and clarified, norms and rules need to be expressed — often in the group's initial phase, or when a challenge has emerged. A division of labour shall be designed, the activities must be coordinated and occasionally also evaluated. How to reach the goals should be discussed, and you should provide necessary information in order to be able to deal with the group tasks. A group leader focusing on the tasks is accordingly good at organizing, structuring, problem-solving, summarizing and coming up with new ideas. But even if you get the job done effectively, this is not enough in the long run. The members also ought to work smoothly together, being able to take breaks and fulfil other functions than those related to the tasks. The participants should feel that they get something personal out of the group, not only fulfilling the objectives. People want to be accepted and acknowledged, and they want to be relaxed and be able to make jokes. Tensions must be neutralized, a group spirit be created and conflicts be resolved. A recommended ratio between task and relationship in the work stage is that about four fifths of the group's activity shall be devoted to tasks and the remainder to relationships; in an introductory phase, it should be the other way around. Most group members seem to get on best with such a balance between task and relationship. But it also depends on the situation. If the group is working with routine tasks, they do not need a task leader. But working with more difficult assignments, they may need a leader who clarifies the task and structure the efforts. If the group is new and inexperienced, the leader shall structure the group's work, get the members to become acquainted, discuss goals and standards, support the development of a group identity and form functional roles. If the group is out of balance or have a conflict, the focus should be directed to the relations between the members.

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

11

Leading group development

1 39

Advice to a group leader There are a number of advices that a group leader and group members should reflect upon. You then can pay attention to what happens at the group level, while you at the same time pay attention to the individuals. • Don't consider the group processes and the group structure as something self-evident that you don't have to take notice of. Throughout our lives different groups have been a natural part of it, and it is easy to take a group for granted. • A second piece of advice is that you shouldn't equate the group with its members; the group is something more than the individuals included in it. You should also be aware of the fact that the group essentially is invisible. It is only the behaviour, an effect of the group structure and the group processes, which is concrete and can be seen — all other group factors are invisible. If you do not see the different factors at the group level, it is easy to blame one or more individuals if something goes wrong, and it's in that way easy to create a scapegoat mentality. • Another aspect to keep in mind is that most people in a group would like to have a good time. They want to feel comfortable, be acknowledged, work effectively, at least most of the time, have some fun, address challenges and develop. They definitely don't want to feel uncomfortable, be ridiculed, ineffective, afraid of being attacked or controlled against their own will. Now it's not always that the group develops in a way the members want; this is then due to unconscious or invisible forces in operation. The group members might not be aware of group processes, or don't have the skills needed to build an effective and positive group structure. • Be wary of the fact that people very often jump to conclusions about each other's traits and intentions. This might be necessary in a complex society where we so often meet unfamiliar people. You have to create an image of who another person is in order to behave in a proper manner towards him or her — you are then creating this image on something external — for instance behaviour, looks, age, gender, ethnic background, dress and style of expression. With more experiences of the other, you can form an image of the person's internal aspects, for instance personality, interests, friendliness and motivation; this will often differ from the conclusions you drew on the basis of external factors.

140

11 Leading group development

0 The authors and Studentlitteratur

• It is also important to note that individuals as well as groups are both similar and different. Some aspects are typical for all groups, but there also are many aspects that separate them from one another. You mustn't believe that an individual or group behaves the same way from time to time. In addition, just as individuals, groups function on both a conscious and an unconscious level. If there is a strong conflict in the group, you can expect a number of unconscious processes. • Finally, you should consider that you as a new leader for a group in essence meet an "old" group that now has a new leader. Also, don't believe that a new group is similar to a previous one that you've met — don't try to see the former group in the new one!

6) The authors and Studentlitteratur

11

Leading group development

141

Information, participation and influence are important factors in creating commitment and an emphasis on the future in times of change.

Leading change The contacts between different groups on the labour market during the recent decades have increased and have been intensified. You have to cooperate more closely with other people and have thus become more dependent on other individuals and groups. Workplaces with a climate of transparency and effective communication channels are a good basis for good cooperation between individuals and groups. But without these conditions, the increasingly closer contacts lead to increased tensions. And if an organization is subject to change, something that is becoming more and more common, there's a risk that trust and communication is hampered by insecurity, increased demands and the more or less temporary lack of structure caused by the change processes. Leading change is often considered a difficult management task — to sail in calm waters requires no special skills, but when it is storming leadership qualities are put to the test. Leadership is especially important in times of changes in order to enable people to stop doing what they are accustomed to. They are often requested to think and behave in new ways, sometimes also together with new colleagues. Organizational culture is very difficult to change; the culture basically consists of values and norms governing the ingrained patterns of behaviour. Although organizational change has become more common, many managers are not satisfied with the impact and consequences of change. The reason for this can be that their workload increases, the time for strategic planning and for competence development is reduced and the effects of the changes are difficult to predict.

Some models for organization change We will describe some relatively simple and transparent models for change in an organization.

Change as process A first model for organizational change was formulated by the social psychologist Kurt Lewin, and it describes three different stages of change: thawing, change and freezing. By default, most of the energy has focus on a mobilizing of forces in order to implement the change, and most of this energy can be consumed when the important work of stabilization should be done.

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

12 Leading change

143

The thawing phase is important; otherwise people will not have time to realize the meaning of the change, and the resistance can grow rapidly. This initial stage must take time; the change should be taken seriously, and be elucidated, discussed and ventilated. One can thus counteract undesired reactions or unexpected occurrences. Many changes can be more difficult because the employees don't understand and don't accept the change or aren't willing to get involved in them. During the actual phase of change, the habits and routines shall be altered. Maybe the employees shall get used to a new environment, new colleagues and new tasks. This means that the leader more or less simultaneously have to focus his or her efforts both on the group task — such as a new objective and task — and the group interaction, such as developing new relationships and reducing uncertainty about the new order. To make the change effective, the leader must also give employees the opportunity to influence the change process. This will reduce insecurity and irrational defences and make it easier to meet the new goals and needs of individuals, groups and organization. In the third phase — freezing — a new stability is to be produced. Change requires energy and adjustment, and during the stabilization phase, the new order therefore must be given time and support to take root in order to stop everything from imperceptibly gliding into the old way of doing things.

The structure culture of change A second model of organizational change is formulated by the organizational theorist John Kotter. It looks roughly like the following. CHANGE Rational

Av

Emotional

.114

Strategy

Vision

Structure

Culture

Plan

Values

Goals

Behaviour RESULTS

144

12 Leading change

The authors and Studentlitteratur

As it is difficult to change something that is invisible, for instance what is in the employees' minds, more extensive changes will take time. But the persons who initiated the change probably want to see rapid and sometimes radical effects. For the persons who initiate a change, the most important aspects are the rational and the structural, and the formulation of objectives; they often also believe that these factors are sufficient in order to change the organization. "You just have to tell people how it should be done, no funny business!" But if it is going to be a real change, and if the intentions shall be met, then it's the employees who must change their thinking and their values in order to change their behaviour. They may be worried about what the change can imply, and they're probably wondering if they shall get new colleagues, if they are to work with something new, or if they will have a new manager. The conclusion is that you should choose, so to speak, both the left road ("What is going to be changed?") and the right road ("How shall it be done?"). You should be aware of the fact that the right road takes time and that this road is a must, if the change shall be implemented. Those who initiate the change want fast results, and therefore they tend to pay attention only to the left road, but to change a culture is time consuming. The model or the plan for change cannot be applied in a mechanical way; it must be adapted to the existing organizational culture.

Leading change A third model, which we will use as a basis for the rest of the chapter, is called "Leading Change", and it works as follows: Vision Strategy

Implementation

[ Resistance

Objectives

Defences

Irrational behaviour

Doubts Resignation

Resources

Rumours "Dull" groups

Motivation Feedback Support Meaningfulness Responsibility

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

12 Leading change

145

Managers are the agents of change, and if the leaders at the operational level, the "first line", are not involved in the change process, it will most likely fail. That is something to consider for those who initiates the change, often managers higher up in the organization. Leading change is essentially about implementing the planned changes, and managing reactions and resistance among employees; at the same time the ordinary operations shall be led and developed. Prior to a change a vision shall be formulated, a number of change objectives shall be formulated and a strategy for how the change should be implemented shall be designed. The resources that are necessary and at hand shall be described. The vision is important. It shall not only be presented, but also communicated in the organization. The vision indicates the very idea of change; it works as a motive and a driving force that makes the changes comprehensible. The vision should ideally be simple, attractive and describe an image of a desired future that is so positive that you endure the change processes. The vision shall also be credible and challenging and be based on the core values of the organization. The vision should also be sufficiently focused to guide decisions and actions, but also sufficiently general to hold initiative and creativity. When the planning of the change is concluded, the objectives formulated and the resources analysed, then the actual process of change is about to start. This is largely a matter of psychological processes. There are human beings who shall implement the change by changing themselves — they must act in new ways, and you must take their attitudes, values and interpretations into account. It is not done in a jiff; the following is a basic rule in all change, and something that requires patience: CT7' — change takes time! Before and during the change, a number of counteracting factors are to be considered, as people sometimes resist change. The resistance manifests itself as, for instance, defence mechanisms, doubt, rumours, irrational behaviour, apathy and inertia in the workshops. These are best addressed by information, communication, discussions, motivation, feedback, support, and efforts to make the change meaningful and to strive for personal responsibility. It is the manager's responsibility to create conditions for the change process to be meaningful and the employees to be accountable. Change is to pretty much about a translation of the management's vision, objectives and strategies. Far from everyone in the organization

146

12 Leading change

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

is excited about the change, mostly because it might be indistinct and vague. This ambiguity can create anxiety and resistance, due to fear of an uncertain future. Change for an individual employee often means that he or she must give up something that has taken time to develop. Instead he or she maybe has to work with new tasks, with new people, in a new location and with other routines. For managers, the changes mean a duplication of effort: you should phase out parts of the old order and introduce something new. As a manager and leader you must be explicit in your communication, even if you don't have any new information to communicate, you shall be accessible, provide feedback and care about the employees' reactions. You might think that it is enough to deliver information once and then everyone has understood and embraced the information — but that is very rarely the case. It is easy for people to misunderstand, forget, select and add new messages in the information. You need to keep in mind that for the management the change (C1) is one thing, for an employee it's another (C2) and for yet another person it's something completely different (C3). Expectations, experiences and beliefs affect both what is included in the word "change" and how you feel and think about an upcoming change in a workplace. How accurate or inaccurate these interpretations are in an objective sense, the individual experience is always "right" for the person concerned. And it is on the basis of these experiences and interpretations that people then act, react and interact during the process of change.

Reactions to change Resistance Normally there are different kinds of resistance when it concerns both managers and employees. Some people may feel that a change is something positive, others want additional information about how things are supposed to work, and some are strongly negative throughout the whole change process. A good rule of thumb is to not take too much interest in the latter ones, but instead devote your energy to those who are positive and those who may become positive over time. Otherwise, it tends to be 80 per cent of energy that is used to manage the recalcitrant persons, and then only 20 per cent is left over to support those who accept or can be expected to accept the change.

0 The authors and Studentlitteratur

12 Leading change

147

There are many kinds of resistance in relation to organizational changes, such as angry and surly reactions, negative atmosphere, low involvement, protests, doing everything by rule, resignation, apathy, lack of trust, and a conviction that change is unnecessary. There's almost always an uncertainty about what the change really means, you might fear losing your job, suspect that you should be forced to work harder or have to work with colleagues you don't know or don't like. In a way, you then lose control, get confused, and maybe your present skills won't be enough. The greater the change, the stronger the resistance - that's -a common reaction when it comes to organizational change. The resistance can be described as being located at different levels: • Disinterest and indifference. You feel nothing special about the change, but rather think that "it'll soon blow over". You're waiting the situation out and hoping for everything to return to "normal". There may be a surrender to rearrangements, which manifests itself in views like "Oh yes, here we go again ...". • Passive resistance. Negative comments are expressed during informal talks between individual employees. There may be a lack of motivation to work, and important actions are delayed. There may also be irritation and resignation. People can start grumble and complain about most things together with a few chosen confidants, and discontent groups can give indications of shortcomings and incompetence among policy makers and management staff - instead of adding energy to the changing situation. • Active resistance. This means open criticism of the change, of the whole organization and of the management. Some people are calling the usefulness of this renewal into question. Rumours and protests will spread and maybe even wildcat strikes will appear. Regular effects of these kinds of resistance are that the trust in what a manager says is declining. You wonder for instance: "Is this really the whole truth?", "What is it that we don't get to know?" or "What's in the hidden agenda?" Another frequent comment, when the information can be perceived as flawed and incomplete, is that "We may never get to know anything, nobody never tells us anything" or "We are the last ones to hear any news, we'll probably read in the newspapers that we're out of jobs". You crouch and don't think any change is needed, "we have done all right in the past and this new order really is a bad thing". In addition, many tend to ignore the problems caused by past patterns, which usually are the cause of a change.

148

12 Leading change

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

You might be told that "This is impossible!" and "And it didn't work last time either". The employees therefore don't believe in the strategy behind the change. Another reaction pattern is a spirit of only doing what is ordered, nothing else, which means that everybody is waiting for orders and safeguarding themselves against possible errors — you always blame someone or something else if things don't work out as planned.

Threats and defences Change stands for something new, including new procedures and new tasks. A common reaction to that is fear and a perception of threat, which could stir up memories of similar past situations. Common threats that can be experienced at an organizational change are the new group members that you may not know, or that you might have to take on new tasks. In short, "less persons shall do more with fewer resources in a shorter time". A common effect of organizational change is also an increased control and visibility. It is a result of managers higher up the organization needing information on how the organizational change progresses. Before a new informal and functional structure has been designed, participation and personal influence will often worsen — at least people think so. Finally, both individuals and groups risk losing control or having their informal status reduced. People sometimes react to threats by using what is called defences. Psychological defences mechanisms are descriptions of our more or less normal way to react in situations that can hold uncertainty, threat and loss. Also memories of situations where these kinds of events have taken place can cause defence reactions. Basically, these defences are a kind of reinterpretation of the situation in order to diminish the threat that is raised. Here are some examples of defence reactions: • Denial and indifference. You avoid paying attention to threatening aspects of the surroundings. You maybe notice them, but consider them as unimportant. You shrug your shoulders and don't care because you don't really think anything at all will happen. • Repression. You simply forget the information or suppress threatening messages. • Rationalization. If redundancy might be a threat, you can say to yourself that the organization is worthless and that you can get something better somewhere else — "It's just sour berries, the fox said about the grapes, when he couldn't catch them".

8 The authors and Studentlitteratur

12 Leading change

1 49

• Regression. You respond in an infantile way, i.e. solve problems and face conflicts in an immature way. Examples of this are leaving a conflict situation and slamming the door behind you, appointing a scapegoat or unwarrantedly accusing your manager for something that you consider wrong. • Displacement. The anger and despair caused by a certain person is attributed to others. A manager can often become target for this mechanism. • Projection. You place responsibility for what happens onto others — scapegoating is an example — or letting your manager bear the brunt of the impacts of the organizational change. You need to let this frustration or anger out, and the manager might be the person who becomes the target for your indignation.

Rumours Rumours are difficult to avoid in organizations, and insufficient or inadequate information often triggers the spreading of rumours. They usually start in ambiguous situations — sometimes a misunderstanding concerning the information given, which easily can give rise to rumours. We can define rumours as improvised and unconfirmed "news" that is spread by a few persons or small groups talking to each other to obtain information or confirmation about what they believe is really happening. When questions are unanswered, the gap is often filled out with rumours that gradually grow and turn into truths. The source is rarely important, but those who are spreading a rumour do this without checking the veracity of what is said. Rumours are essentially a kind of backlash that exists in parallel with the information that is communicated from above and; the rumour claims that this information is incorrect. Rumours are sometimes a way of strengthening a group's status, "I've heard..." and "As a matter of fact, we know that ...". When people believe that the rumours are the "truth", they act on the basis of them, and this can become self-fulfilling prophecies. You should not dismiss rumours, assuming that they only stand for bullshit and malice; take instead the source of the rumours seriously. A rumour can be a signal of lack of information and insufficient communication between management and employees. Both the rumours' content and the mode of dissemination can provide valuable information about what needs to be concretized and improved in the change process.

150

12 Leading change

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

Irrational behaviour People are rational, or at least they have an ability to be rational, but they don't always act in a rational way. In collective situations, a behaviour that is rational for one individual can lead to irrational consequences for a whole group. A classic example is the "commonage", where a number of shepherds had their sheep grazing. The pasturage had always been enough, but when the demand for wool was increasing, one of the shepherds said to himself, "I extend my herd with a couple more sheep, that will make no difference and nobody will notice". But when all of the shepherds did so, there wasn't enough pasturage to feed all sheep, the soil was depleted and the sheep died of starvation. Another tragic example is when there is a fire in a large room and everyone is trying to get out as soon as possible — rational behaviour — and then acts as if they were alone. The result is that they get caught in the narrow exit — irrational result. Change is in many respects an emotional process, where rationality sometimes breaks down. An example from work is when one or more members of a group withholds information from other colleagues in order to take advantage of it themselves. Another example is a team that has been strongly criticized in a quality control and, instead of seeking causes and propose action plans, the members begin to question the qualifications of the evaluators, subcontractors, customers and management.

Motivation Motivation is an important part of any change process. It is the driving force of change; motivation is strengthened if the change is experienced as necessary. The words "motive" and "motivation" are indications of what consciously or unconsciously underlie all kinds of behaviour. We can propose this equation: Needs --0. motive —41- behavior As soon as people behave in one way or another, it's always a motive behind the behaviour, otherwise they would not do what they do. Very often, particularly in the case of a negative behaviour, an unfulfilled need is the cause of it. If you want to correct the unwanted behaviour, it may therefore be useful to consider some underlying factors that may be important, such as lack of confirmation, that you aren't counted upon in the group, insecurity and lack of opportunities for development.

0 The authors and Studentlitteratur

12 Leading change

151

External motivation is controlled by the consequences of the behaviour - tangible rewards or punishments - and that call for control. Inner motivation is usually what you aim for at work, and then the behaviour is governed by commitment and will. It provides better quality and efficiency and does not require a strict control of the employees' work results. How can you contribute to the intemal motivation of your staff? A first aspect is to create structure and order, even if the change in the situation is characterized by uncertainty. Structure provides predictability and thus also order and a belief that everything will be okay. In this way you may contribute to a safe situation that is free of insults and disrespect. It can also strengthen the employees' self-image and self-esteem by way of affirmation and encouragement, thereby increasing confidence in their own ability. Another measure is to provide feedback on performance from observed behaviour and activities, and on this basis allocate and enhance people's own responsibility, create empowerment and agency, i.e. opportunities to influence their situation. A two-way communication where the given information may be discussed is of importance in this context.

Advice for a person who is leading change Information, participation and influence are important factors in creating commitment and future-orientation in times of change. As a leader, a close contact and communication with employees is a foundation for effective work with the change process. • Create awareness of the change by providing information about what the change means in broad outline, and why it needs to be done. The main questions for the individuals during a change are "Why?" and "What's in it for me?" • Provide a basis for an understanding of the significance and consequences of change by means of a two-way communication, a dialogue. Managers and employees need to get an idea of what the change means to them. They should have an opportunity to discuss and air concerns and negative opinions. Formulating goals and objectives for their own work unit is important.

152

12 Leading change

0 The authors and Studentlitteratur

• Establish an acceptance of the change in both words and deeds. Try to get the employees involved. On the whole it's individuals who shall implement the change, and they need to have the opportunity to make it clear what they shall do in a new way. Resistance to change is always performed by individuals, but the power behind the resistance lies in the groups in the organization. Resistance may seem pointless and irrational by those who organize the change process, but however silly or idiotic a behaviour may seem to be, it is sensible and meaningful for those who are trying to avoid the consequences. • Leaders' confidence in the change is contagious. It's important not to lose heart as a leader, even if everything isn't working like clockwork. Therefore, you should be a good example and a role model — "actions speak louder than words" — not least in connection with unpleasant or controversial situations or news. • Who counteract, who can you count on? Who has the strongest informal power? Motivate, support and guide key persons. • Prepare employees for needed change adjustments. Those who are affected most strongly have to change the most. • Provide information continuously about how the change progresses. Discuss any problem that might arise.

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

12 Leading change

153

Conclusion In this book we have shed some light upon the concept of communication from various aspects, including what happens during a conversation, disturbances in the communication process, and how our attitude affects the perception of other people. In today's society and in organizations is communication between people central to both collaboration and a good performance quality. As leaders, we can make use of the positive forces created by an open climate and get individuals, groups and organizations to function better. Communication, however, is such a complex phenomenon that it cannot be described in a limited space, but our hope is still that you as a reader has get some help to a better understanding of how people communicate and interact in social situations.

154

Conclusion

c

The authors and Studentlitteratur

References Adler, R.B. & Rodman, G. (2008): Understanding Human Communication (10th edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press). Arnett, M. (2010): Adolescence and Emerging Adulthood (4th edition, New York: Prentice Hall). Clarke, S. & Myers, M. (2007): Managing Difficult Conversations at Work (Cirencester, England: Management Books). DeVito, J.A. (2009): The Interpersonal Communication Book (12th edition, New York: Harper & Row). Frey, L.R., red. (2002): New Directions in Group Communication (London: Sage). Goethals, G.R., Sorensen, G.J. & MacGregor Bums, J., red. (2004): Encyclopedia of Leadership, Volume 1-4 (London: Sage). Hargie, O. (2010): Skilled Interpersonal Communication — Research, Theory and Practice (5th edition., London: Taylor & Francis). Hayes, J. (2002): Interpersonal Skills at Work (2nd edition, New York: Routledge). Kotter, J.P. & Cohen, D.S. (2002): The Heart of Change (Boston: Harvard Business School Press). Levi, D. (2010): Group Dynamics for Teams (3rd edition., London: Sage). Remland, M.S. (2008): Nonverbal Communication in Everyday Life (3rd edition., Boston: Houghton Mifflin). Stone, D., Patton, B. & Heen, S. (2000): Difficult Conversations (London: Penguin Books). Surhone, L.M., Timpledon, M.T. & Marseken, S.F. (2010): Social Perception (Betascript Publ.). Triandis, H.C. (2004): Culture and Social Behavior (New York: McGrawHill). Tubbs, S.L. & Moss, S. (2008): Human Communication. Principles and Contexts. (11th edition, New York: McGraw-Hill). Wheelan, S.A. (2005): Group Processes. A Developmental Perspective (2nd edition, Pearson). Wilmot, W.W. & Hocker, J.L. (2010): Interpersonal Conflict (8th edition, London: McGraw-Hill).

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

References

155

•

t

•

•

•

,

,

•

.. 12. .p

:r

'

Z"

;•'it

r

• 2

•2

.

•)11,

»:

•

itr '' •

Index

A active listening 95-96 adjusting style 122 attention 82-83 awareness 15 avoiding style 121-122 B

being in role 59 being in the situation 59 being in yourself 59 Big Five 54

categories 128 categorizations 26,27 clarification 118 collaborative style 122 collectivistic cultures 70 communication models 10-14 communication styles 62-63 competing style 122 compromising style 122-123 conflict 111 conflict: cultural differences 116-117 conflict development 114-116 conflicts: kinds of 113-114 containing 86-87 content level 18,102-103 content messages 17-18 context 13 context-dependent cultures 117 context-independent cultures 116 conversation signals 45 crisis 83-84 culture 69-76

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

D

defences 84-85,149-150 defensive communication 85 difficult conversations 84-87 distance 40-41 double-bind message 103-104 double messages 18 E

emerging adulthood 64-66 emotions 85-86 empathy 94 escalation 114-116 ethnocentrism 70 expectations 27-28 expression 36-37 eyes 38-39

face 37-39 feedback 74,91-92,95-99 first impression 31-32 formal groups 129 fundamental attribution error 29-31 G

gender 61-64 generalizations 108 generation 64-66 gestures 39-40 glass ceiling 63-64 globalization 69 group climate 134-135 group: definition 128 group goals 132 group needs 132 group phases 135-138

Index

157

group processes 128 groups 127-139 group structure 128, 130-134 H

haptics 44-45 hinting 104-105 holding 86-87

0 organizational culture 75-76

identity 19-20 implementation 81-83 implicit theory of personality 29 impression 36-37 individualistic cultures 70 influence 134 informal groups 129 intentions 15 interaction 139 intergroup conflicts 113 interpretations 8-10 irony 104 irrational behaviour 151 I-statements 82, 118 K

Kierkegaard, Soren 16 L

leader 49 leadership 49, 63-64, 69-76 leadership styles 51-53 leading change 143-152 Lewin, Kurt 143 listening 91-95 M manager: leader 49-51 meaningfulness 24 mental map 81 message levels 17-18 meta-message 17 mind-reading 106-107 models for organizational change 143-147 motivation 151-152

1 58

N

non-sound 43 non-verbal communication 35-45, 75 norms and rules 133

Index

P

pause 74 personal conflicts 113 personality 54 positive thinking 28 primary groups 129-130 professional dialogue 79-80 proximity 40-41 psychological conflicts 113 psychological reactance 115 R

reactions to change 147-152 reality 23 recency effect 31-32 relation 54 relational conflict 113 relational level 18, 102-103 relational messages 17-18 relationships 133 resistance 84-85, 148 roles 133 rumours 150

schemes 25-26 self-esteem 19-20 self-fulfilling prophecy 27 self-image 19-20, 23 side-tracks 107 silence 62, 87-88 situational leadership 56 smoke screens 107 social conflicts 113 social perception 23 soft handgrenades 84 status 134 stereotypes 26-27

© The authors and Studentlitteratur

stress 83-84 structural conflicts 113 supporting dialogues 79-80

transformative and communicative leadership 57-59 turn 45

T tacit assumptions 106 task 139 task: relation 54 time awareness 72 touch 44-45 traits 25-27,53

U uncertainty 71-72 unclear messages 108

C The authors and Studentlitteratur

V voices 42-43

Index

159

Bjorn Nilsson is senior lecturer in social psychology and has published numerous books on social psychology, group psychology and developmental psychology. Anna-Karin Waldemarson is an educator with a focus on work and employeeship at the University of Skovde in Sweden. She has previously written books on communication and leadership.

Leadership and communication Communication is the human activity that we know best and have most experience of; actually, we ought to be experts on communication! Yet we sometimes end up in deadlock situations, realizing that what we are trying to say isn't getting through. It often happens in situations when emotions are involved, when there is a conflict going on or when we seem to have so different backgrounds that we can't quite understand one another. Leadership and communication is an introduction to basic communication theory, body language, leadership and group psychology as well as listening, professional conversations, conflict management and change processes. This book is intended for those who in their professions get in contact with e.g. managers, teachers and health professionals.

Art.nr 37350 ISBN 978-91-44-08892-1

www.studentlitteratur.se

9

1101,11111