Describe various determinants of interpersonal behavior.

Describe various determinants of interpersonal behavior.
Explain the Johari window as a conceptual model for studying interpersonal awareness and discuss its relevance in an organizational setup.

Determinants of interpersonal behavior:

Self concept: Every person has an attitude towards himself or herself and this attitude comprises the self or self concept. The belief component represents the content of self. EX: “I’m intelligent, sincere etc”. The feeling components about oneself are reflected in feeling of self worth or in general as I’m ok or not ok.
Finally the behavioral component is the tendency to act towards oneself in a self deprecating or self enhancing manner. In order to maintain interpersonal environment and maximize congruence or harmony use certain mechanisms to stabilize interaction.
Misperception: when the actual expectations of others are not congruent with the self concept or behavior we may simply misperceive how others see us.

Selective interaction: we may choose to interact with those persons with whom we can most readily establish a congruence state.

Selective evaluation of the other person: we maximize congruence by favorably evaluating those who behave congruently towards us and evaluate those who do not.

Selective evaluation of self: We maximize congruence by altering the values placed on various aspects of our self concept so that the aspects those are in agreement with the perception of our own behavior and those of others are moist highly evaluated.

Interpersonal needs: There are 3 interpersonal needs:- Inclusion, control and affection that cause one to establish and maintain relations with others. These needs are defined as follows:
Inclusion- Need for interaction and association.
Control- A need for control and power.
Affection- the need for love and affection.

Compatibility is a property of relationship between 2 or more persons that leads to the mutual satisfaction of interpersonal needs and harmonious coexistence. If what is wanted and what is expressed is equal for both interacting persons mutual needs are satisfied.

Interpersonal orientations: three basic types of persons have been identified – tough battler, friendly helper and objective thinker. The interpersonal orientations are in terms of extremes but they are typical descriptions of familiar behavior. Many people are more oriented to one style than other and feel more comfortable with its associated behaviors.
The tough battler would relate better to others is he or she was more sensitive to others, could accept his or her own inevitable dependence on others and recognizes that some situations will not yield to pressure. The friendly helper would be more satisfied if he or she could stand up of his or her own interest and face conflict.
Like wise the objective thinker could relate to others more effectively, if he or she were more aware and accepting of his or her own feelings and those of others.

Interpersonal attraction: By choosing persons as friends an important and durable source of harmonious interactions is created. People interact more frequently with those who are perceived as confirming their self concept to great extent. The greater the importance and common consequences of an objective to 2 people, the greater the attraction between both persons. An object may refer to any focus of perception including physical objects, symbol. Other persons self concept or ones own self concept.

Johari window:

The Johari Window model is a simple and useful tool for illustrating and improving self-awareness, and mutual understanding between individuals within a group. The Johari Window tool can also be used to assess and improve a group's relationship with other groups. The Johari Window model was developed by American psychologists Joseph Luft and Harry Ingham in the 1950s, while researching group dynamics. Today the Johari Window model is especially relevant due to modern emphasis on, and influence of, 'soft' skills, behaviour, empathy, cooperation, inter-group development and interpersonal development.

The four Johari Window perspectives are called 'regions' or 'areas' or 'quadrants'. Each of these regions contains and represents the information - feelings, motivation, etc - known about the person, in terms of whether the information is known or unknown by the person, and whether the information is known or unknown by others in the group.
The Johari Window's four regions, (areas, quadrants, or perspectives) are as follows, showing the quadrant numbers and commonly used names:


Johari window four regions
1. what is known by the person about him/herself and is also known by others - open area, open self, free area, free self, or 'the arena'
2. what is unknown by the person about him/herself but which others know - blind area, blind self, or 'blindspot'
3. what the person knows about him/herself that others do not know - hidden area, hidden self, avoided area, avoided self or 'facade'
4. what is unknown by the person about him/herself and is also unknown by others - unknown area or unknown self

Johari quadrant 1 - 'open self/area' or 'free area' or 'public area', or 'arena'
Johari region 1 is also known as the 'area of free activity'. This is the information about the person - behaviour, attitude, feelings, emotion, knowledge, experience, skills, views, etc - known by the person ('the self') and known by the group ('others').
The aim in any group should always be to develop the 'open area' for every person, because when we work in this area with others we are at our most effective and productive, and the group is at its most productive too. The open free area, or 'the arena', can be seen as the space where good communications and cooperation occur, free from distractions, mistrust, confusion, conflict and misunderstanding.
Johari quadrant 2 - 'blind self' or 'blind area' or 'blindspot'
Johari region 2 is what is known about a person by others in the group, but is unknown by the person him/herself. By seeking or soliciting feedback from others, the aim should be to reduce this area and thereby to increase the open , ie, to increase self-awareness. This blind area is not an effective or productive space for individuals or groups. This blind area could also be referred to as ignorance about oneself, or issues in which one is deluded. A blind area could also include issues that others are deliberately withholding from a person. We all know how difficult it is to work well when kept in the dark. No-one works well when subject to 'mushroom management'. People who are 'thick-skinned' tend to have a large 'blind area'.
Johari quadrant 3 - 'hidden self' or 'hidden area' or 'avoided self/area' or 'facade'
Johari region 3 is what is known to ourselves but kept hidden from, and therefore unknown, to others. This hidden or avoided self represents information, feelings, etc, anything that a person knows about him/self, but which is not revealed or is kept hidden from others. The hidden area could also include sensitivities, fears, hidden agendas, manipulative intentions, secrets - anything that a person knows but does not reveal, for whatever reason. It's natural for very personal and private information and feelings to remain hidden, indeed, certain information, feelings and experiences have no bearing on work, and so can and should remain hidden. However, typically, a lot of hidden information is not very personal, it is work- or performance-related, and so is better positioned in the open area.
Johari quadrant 4 - 'unknown self' or 'area of unknown activity' or 'unknown area'
Johari region 4 contains information, feelings, latent abilities, aptitudes, experiences etc, that are unknown to the person him/herself and unknown to others in the group. These unknown issues take a variety of forms: they can be feelings, behaviours, attitudes, capabilities, aptitudes, which can be quite close to the surface, and which can be positive and useful, or they can be deeper aspects of a person's personality, influencing his/her behaviour to various degrees. Large unknown areas would typically be expected in younger people, and people who lack experience or self-belief.
Examples of unknown factors are as follows, and the first example is particularly relevant and common, especially in typical organizations and teams:
• an ability that is under-estimated or un-tried through lack of opportunity, encouragement, confidence or training
• a natural ability or aptitude that a person doesn't realise they possess
• a fear or aversion that a person does not know they have
• an unknown illness
• repressed or subconscious feelings
• conditioned behaviour or attitudes from childhood





Johari window example - increasing open area through feedback solicitation

This Johari Window model diagram is an example of increasing the open area , by reduction of the blind area, which would normally be achieved through the process of asking for and then receiving feedback.

Feedback develops the open area by reducing the blind area.

The open area can also be developed through the process of disclosure, which reduces the hidden area.

The unknown area can be reduced in different ways: by others' observation (which increases the blind area); by self-discovery (which increases the hidden area), or by mutual enlightenment - typically via group experiences and discussion - which increases the open area as the unknown area reduces.






Johari window model - example for new team member or member within a new team

This Johari Window model diagram is an example of a member of a new team or a person who is new to an existing team.
The open free region is small because others know little about the new person.
Similarly the blind area is small because others know little about the new person.
The hidden or avoided issues and feelings are a relatively large area.
In this particular example the unknown area is the largest, which might be because the person is young, or lacking in self-knowledge or belief.
Johari window example - established team member example

This Johari Window model diagram is an example of an established member of a team.
The open free region is large because others know a lot about the person that the person also knows.
Through the processes of disclosure and receiving feedback the open area has expanded and at the same time reduced the sizes of the hidden, blind and unknown areas.

Continue Reading ...

Explain the concept of Johari window citing suitable organizational instances.

Explain the concept of Johari window citing suitable organizational instances. Briefly describe the organization you are referring to.


Answer. The Johari Window is a communication model that can be used to improve understanding between individuals within a team or in a group setting. Based on disclosure, self-disclosure and feedback, the Johari Window can also be used to improve a group's relationship with other groups.

Developed by Joseph Luft and Harry Ingham (the word “Johari” comes from Joseph Luft and Harry Ingham), there are two key ideas behind the tool:
 That individuals can build trust between themselves by disclosing information about themselves; and
 That they can learn about themselves and come to terms with personal issues with the help of feedback from others.

The Johari Window model consists of a foursquare grid (think of taking a piece of paper and dividing it into four parts by drawing one line down the middle of the paper from top to bottom, and another line through the middle of the paper from side-to-side). This is shown in the diagram below:



Using the Johari model, each person is represented by their own four-quadrant, or four-pane, window. Each of these contains and represents personal information - feelings, motivation - about the person, and shows whether the information is known or not known by themselves or other people. The four quadrants are:

Quadrant 1: Open Area
What is known by the person about him/herself and is also known by others.

Quadrant 2: Blind Area, or "Blind Spot"
What is unknown by the person about him/herself but which others know. This can be simple information, or can involve deep issues (for example, feelings of inadequacy, incompetence, unworthiness, rejection) which are difficult for individuals to face directly, and yet can be seen by others.

Quadrant 3: Hidden or Avoided Area
What the person knows about him/herself that others do not.

Quadrant 4: Unknown Area
What is unknown by the person about him/herself and is also unknown by others.



The process of enlarging the open quadrant vertically is called self-disclosure, a give and take process between the person and the people he/she interacts with. As information is shared, the boundary with the hidden quadrant moves downwards. And as other people reciprocate, trust tends to build between them.

EXAMPLE: CRM THROUGH JOHARI WINDOW

Customer relationship management (CRM) is one of the most widely implemented management concepts of the decade, yet after hundreds of millions of dollars in systems and process investment, most companies are still waiting to see its vaunted benefits realized — in customer understanding, customer satisfaction, and financial returns. Why aren’t firms achieving the customer intimacy they desire?

One answer is that companies have yet to apply some relatively simple lessons that derive from several decades of social science research into the dynamics of human relationships. Like the Prisoner’s Dilemma and the Nash Equilibrium, an element of game theory known as the Johari Window can help illuminate rules that guide the behavior of people involved in transactions with each other. Looking at CRM through the Johari Window can assist organizations that are reliant on customer interactions — which is to say, most organizations — in building more open, transparent, trust-based, satisfying, and mutually profitable relationships with their customers.

Customer Strategy
A CRM program should build on a well-formed customer strategy to improve penetration into a customer or a market segment, increase sales force effectiveness, and help a company build loyalty with its most valuable customers. However, successful CRM implementation depends critically on how the relationship challenge is framed.

Too often, CRM technology is focused on capturing customer information and distributing it within the company. By observing customers and annotating their activities at all interaction points with what amounts to a hidden camera, a typical CRM system grabs information for later playback, which may take the form of cross-selling suggestions and, sometimes, relationship “health checks,” such as the dinnertime “courtesy calls” placed by one’s bank or telephone company. From this perspective, the primary role of CRM is to capture relevant customer information, economically extract the most cogent meaning, and deliver this insight to the widest possible set of potential users in the organization.

To customers, this kind of CRM system is a black box: They are aware that information is being captured and recorded, but they are unable to see how it is used and may be only dimly aware of when and how it is being played back to them. If information is power, then the power in this relationship is with the supplier. Used without sensitivity, “black box” CRM can prompt customer concerns about privacy and lead to distrust.

An alternative approach is to take a broader view of CRM — to look at it not as an unseen, exploitative eye on customer activities, but as an opportunity to create and expand relationships between an institution and its customers. The challenges for companies are to create an open and transparent environment that encourages customers to contribute more, and to improve the accuracy of information that is shared. If this greater level of information-sharing demonstrably leads to improved service, trust will be enhanced, which in turn will reinforce the benefits and likelihood of future sharing and interaction.

Beyond the Black Box
The Johari model of information exchange offers an opportunity to go beyond the black-box approach to data capture, to improve the health of customer–supplier relationships. The window encourages people and institutions to consider the information available in a relationship, and the actions that each member can take to improve mutual understanding and build trust.

In a customer–supplier relationship, there are two central opportunities: (1) Create an environment where both parties can share information more readily; increasing levels of trust and reciprocity will encourage increased sharing of the “private self,” just as is true in interpersonal relations. And (2) Give customers information that can improve their position — feedback, education, and other information currently unknown to them that might enable them to increase their self-awareness.

Take the relationship between a retail customer and a bank. Information readily maps to the four quadrants of the Johari Window. Open Self information — data shared and known by both parties — includes account numbers, transaction histories, and balances. Both the customer and the bank put information into this domain through transactions, statements, and other actions. The relationship also has a set of private or hidden information that is not revealed to the other party. This closely held Hidden Self information might include the customer’s other banking relationships, life events, or aspirations.

Within the relationship there is also a Blind Self, consisting of information known to the bank but not to the customer. Examples include customer profitability, credit history, and the bank’s view of the customer’s needs. In some cases, banks might have better knowledge than the customer of, for example, the customer’s financial potential or opportunities for improving the customer’s use of banking services.

The final quadrant, the Unknown Self, might include the optimal product solution set for the customer or the customer’s own as-yet-undiscovered needs and desires.

Characterizing the information available within the relationship in the four Johari categories allows bank executives to analyze the professional relationship the way they would a personal relationship. The benefits of this simple, human approach become evident when one contrasts it to the ways financial institutions have typically used CRM systems, which have focused on capturing information from the customer’s Hidden Self. In the course of service or sales interactions, customers are encouraged to reveal information, which is logged and stored by the system for later use. Typically, information goes through a complex set of inference algorithms, with the objective of adding meaning. These processes are hidden from the customer, and the resulting output — assumptions about the customer’s value and needs — is not directly shared with the customer. It also may be incorrect. Customers have even become conditioned to expect that their own bank won’t know or remember them.

Compare this with interpersonal relationships, in which trust is built over time, and in which parties come to expect mutual sharing and retention of knowledge over the course of the relationship. When viewed through the Johari Window, the CRM challenge is no longer so much persuading or tricking a customer into revealing his or her Hidden Self; it is, rather, expanding the Open Self — increasing the amount of shared information that is valuable to both parties. For example, many banks conduct initial needs analyses when a customer first opens an account. Instead of filing the results of these interviews in a drawer, the bank could share them and make them available for continuous updating (e.g., through an Internet channel) throughout the bank–customer relationship — quite the opposite of hiding information away to be used (at best) in internal bank processes. Qantas Airways Ltd. has successfully implemented user-updatable profiles, which are mailed and e-mailed to customers. The open approach both improves information quality and reduces the privacy concerns that are increasingly voiced in response to more hidden CRM data collection.

Companies can also seek to reduce the customer’s Blind Self. The strength of a personal relationship depends in no small part on the degree to which individuals can sensitively offer one another feedback that increases self-awareness and deepens the feeling of sharing between them. The same is true in customer–supplier relationships.

In banking, for example, the organization can help shrink the customer’s Blind Self by sharing information (such as amount of home equity available), creating a simple personal balance sheet for the customer, or suggesting ways to improve returns or decrease fees. As in personal relationships, the bank’s role in throwing light on the blind quadrant needs to be approached with sensitivity, in a context sympathetic to the overall relationship. Successfully done, this type of feedback has the potential to allow the bank’s data to be available and open to its customers and allow its CRM processes to become integrated with individuals’ personal budgeting and financial management approach.

Continue Reading ...