Group Work Tension

CHAPTER 4Introduction

Effective communication

starts with listening. —Robert Gately

Chapter Outline

4.1 The Complexities of Interpersonal Communication The Centrality of the Dyad The Implicit Contracts That Guide Interpersonal Relationships

4.2 Relationship Initiation, Development, and Maintenance Relationship Initiation: Self-Disclosure and Reciprocity

Relationship Development and Maintenance Complementary and Parallel Relationships

4.3 Key Relational Communication Skills Active Listening Self-Disclosure Skills Affection, Control, and Inclusion Co-Orientation Interpersonal Conflict Management Skills

4.4 Ethical Relational Communication in Organizational Life

Introduction In the previous chapter, we described intrapersonal communication as the foundational pro- cess that underlies all other levels of organizational communication. Interpersonal commu- nication is the next level of organizational communication. It involves interaction between two (or more) individuals who each have their own unique meanings and intrapersonal processes for making sense of the world. In interpersonal communication, we are challenged to negotiate these different individual perspectives to encourage shared understanding.

Interpersonal relationships and relationship development are the basic building blocks for establishing effective, cooperative, and ethical organizations. It is through interpersonal communication that we develop and maintain the relationships with other organizational participants that we depend on to achieve our organizational goals. We also use interper- sonal communication to facilitate coordination between organizational participants and to encourage others to cooperate with us. Yet communicating effectively interpersonally and actually motivating others in organizational life to work cooperatively with us is not easy.

In this chapter we will focus on the centrality of interpersonal relationships and relation- ship development as the basic building blocks in establishing effective, cooperative, and ethical organizations. We will explore the process of relationship initiation, development, and maintenance, and describe key relational communication skills that will help you communicate effectively and strategically with relational partners. Along the way, we will examine strategies for using communication to effectively manage relationships. Finally, the chapter case study will illustrate the need to develop cooperative and trusting inter- personal relationships for effective organizing. This chapter is therefore designed to help you understand the complexities of interpersonal communication and to develop strate- gic interpersonal communication skills to enable you to elicit social organization.

Kre66464_04_ch04_p071-094.indd 72 11/3/11 2:41 PM

CHAPTER 4Section 4.1 The Complexities of Interpersonal Communication

4.1 The Complexities of Interpersonal Communication

It is exceedingly difficult, if not impossible, for any one person to get anything of conse-quence accomplished in organizational life all alone. We depend on others to work with us to accomplish organizational goals. For example, if you worked as a sales representa- tive for a custom home window manufacturing company, it would be essential for you to use strategic interpersonal communication to elicit cooperation from many different organizational participants. You could not do your job well and achieve your professional goals all by yourself. Let’s look at a few of the people with whom you would need to use strategic interpersonal communication:

1. Customers. You would depend on strategic interpersonal communication with potential customers to convince them to buy custom window products and ser- vices from your company. As a good salesperson, you would have to adapt your interpersonal sales and information messages to different customers to meet their unique needs and orientations. You would need to provide them with credible and persuasive information about how the different products and services your company offers would fill their needs and budgets.

2. Other Organizational Participants. If you are effective at convincing a customer to order windows from your company, you would then need to coordinate efforts with other organizational participants: • You would need to get window installers to measure the windows in the cus-

tomer’s home to establish specifications for building the new windows. • You would have to share these specifications with representatives from the

production department to get them to build the windows. • You would have to coordinate efforts with shipping department personnel to

deliver the windows. • You would need to interact with technicians to get the windows installed in

the customer’s home.

There are likely others you would need to interact with to coordinate this sale, including representatives from the billing department, the inventory control department, the qual- ity control department, and more. It is clear that we depend on many others to work with us in organizational life.

Yet cooperation is not always easy to achieve. Most people are not eager, without good reasons and some convincing, to adopt others’ ideas and goals in favor of their own. The individuals you are likely to interact with in organizational settings are typically more familiar with and attached to their own unique versions of reality and personal strategies for addressing organizational issues than they are with your perspectives on these issues. (Recall our discussion in the previous chapter about the individualistic nature of intrap- ersonal sense-making and meaning creation.) It may take some work (or interpersonal influence and persuasion) to get the people we need to coordinate with to accept our ideas and suggestions, especially if they are comfortable with their own strategic approaches. Interpersonal communication is the medium for explaining our ideas to others and con- vincing them to accept our recommendations.

Let’s be careful not to oversimplify this process. Interpersonal influence occurs in multiple directions simultaneously. While we are trying to persuade others to accept our ideas,

Kre66464_04_ch04_p071-094.indd 73 11/3/11 2:41 PM

CHAPTER 4Section 4.1 The Complexities of Interpersonal Communication

these same people are likely using interpersonal communication to explain their ideas to us in an attempt to convince us to follow their recommendations. This ongoing interper- sonal exchange of ideas and suggestions is healthy for organization members. It provides them with new information about how other organizational participants perceive orga- nizational reality and how they would solve organizational problems. These exchanges often result in the synergistic (collaborative) sharing of ideas and strategies that can lead to productive compromises and innovations.

For example, imagine that you are a military leader working on a multinational peace- keeping mission to ensure fair elections in a foreign country that does not have a history of open elections. You want the other multinational military leaders to follow your recom- mendations for using your joint military presence to promote open access by voters to the polls, and you lay out your plans to accomplish this goal in a briefing meeting. A military leader from a partner country responds to your suggestions with new credible intelli- gence information that there is an emerging plot by insurgents to use violence to block access to voting booths and to influence the outcome of the election. Based on the new information gained from this interpersonal exchange, you and the other military leaders are able to develop a new responsive plan that incorporates both your recommendations and new strategies to thwart the threats of violence and achieve the multinational peace- keeping goals.

The Centrality of the Dyad

Interpersonal communication involves interactive and reciprocal exchanges of messages between two individuals. This basic two-person unit for interpersonal interaction is known as the dyad. Dyadic communication involves two people exchanging messages, sharing relevant information, and adapting to one another. Scholars of interpersonal com- munication have argued that this two-person unit, the dyad, is the central unit for all larger levels of communication. For instance, Joseph DeVito (2007), borrowing from inter- personal theorist William Wilmot, calls this phenomenon “dyadic primacy” and argues that dyads are always central to interpersonal relationships. In that sense, all other orga- nizational units are composed of multiple dyads, and to understand the communication dynamics of these units you have to understand the unique characteristics of the different dyads within the unit. Regardless of whether we are examining triads (three-person units of interaction), larger small groups, or even multiple groups of interactants, the basic rela- tional component that comprises each of these units is the dyad. For example, within a triad (a three-person social system), there are three different possible dyads. There is one dyad between person A and person B, another between person A and person C, and a third dyad between person B and person C.

Imagine you work within a strong, friendly, and cohesive work group, where all group members get along well. This work group is composed of multiple dyads, and there are inevitable differences in the unique dyadic relationships within the group that influence group interaction. For example, you may be friends with two of your coworkers, Andy and Brad. Although you have good relationships with both, each relationship is unique. You probably communicate differently with Andy than you do with Brad. At different points in time, you are likely to feel more intimate, trusting, or friendly toward either Andy or Brad. Andy may at times confide in you about something he does not tell to

Kre66464_04_ch04_p071-094.indd 74 11/3/11 2:41 PM

CHAPTER 4Section 4.1 The Complexities of Interpersonal Communication

Brad, and you may share things with one and not the other. Sometimes you and Brad talk about Andy. Sometimes Andy and Brad talk about you. There may be times when you and Andy agree about something that Brad does not agree with you about. There may be times when you and Brad disagree with Andy. So even while you have similar relation- ships with Andy and Brad, these relationships are also different. These different dyadic relationships strongly influence communication within the work group. Because each dyad has, to some degree, its own history, norms, and unwritten rules, no two dyads are identical. If you tell a sarcastic joke about the boss to Andy, Andy might be amused—but the same joke told to Brad might be met with a response that it’s inappropriate to make fun of someone else in such a manner.

Think about the different dyads you are a part of in the organizations you belong to, such as your classes, your job, and social and religious organizations in which you participate. Why are these dyads important to you? Why are they important to the organizations of which you are a part? How are they different from one another? How do the communica- tion patterns you engage in with these dyadic partners differ within each of these dyads? What could you do to make these dyads more satisfying and productive?

Organizations in Action A Dyadic Relationship at the Heart of Microsoft

When you’re the chair and former CEO of a corporation with 90,000 employees and $70 billion in revenue, you have relationships with many groups of people in that firm, right? Well, certainly—but in this case, when the chair is Bill Gates and the company is Microsoft, you still need to develop and maintain special relationships with particular individuals.

As discussed in this chapter, dyadic/one-on-one relationships are the foundation of just about any organization—even a giant like Microsoft. And in Gates’s case, that key individual relationship is with Steve Ballmer, the current Microsoft CEO and a personal friend of Gates for more than 30 years.

Ballmer has revealed that his partnership with Gates is not unlike that of a husband and wife. In an interview with the Daily Telegraph, cited on Gizmodo.com,

Ballmer described “the husband-wife-brother thing” he has with Gates. He even took the family analogy one step further: “We participated together in giving birth to this amazing thing called Microsoft. We happen to have two children [Windows and Office] that are a little older, and they are great kids [who] are still developing. They are in high school, they are wonderful [and] have their whole future in front of them. Then we have these two young kids: online and devices. They are four or five, really at a formative stage, and they are building their muscles.”(Romano, 2008) For Ballmer, he and Gates are like proud parents trying to raise and nurture good kids.

As discussed in this chapter, some dyadic relationships are more “parallel” and others are more “complementary.” Although both characteristics are evident to some degree in any dyad, Ballmer thinks that a key to his relationship with Gates is complementary. In a Seattle Times

Why has Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer’s dyadic relationship been so important to Microsoft?

(continued)

Kre66464_04_ch04_p071-094.indd 75 11/3/11 2:41 PM

CHAPTER 4Section 4.1 The Complexities of Interpersonal Communication

The Implicit Contracts That Guide Interpersonal Relationships

Each dyad within a work group is unique due to the distinct relationships that develop between dyadic partners. Recall some of the distinctions that exist between the dyads you are a part of. Each relationship you establish is unique and changes over time. In fact, every time you communicate with another person, you exert some influence on your relationship. That is why every interpersonal communication exchange in organizational life is so important. These exchanges can be beneficial, helping to build the relationship and increase cooperation and mutual support. However, if you are not careful about how you communicate, your interactions can also undermine your relationships, reducing the potential for eliciting full cooperation and effective coordination. For example, if you make frequent references to your degree from a prestigious Ivy League school, others may regard you as a little pompous, and it will get in the way of a cooperative working relationship.

Relationships are built on a series of general agreements, like social norms, that we estab- lish with others about how we are going to interact with them. The strongest relation- ships develop very comprehensive and well-established agreements or norms that both partners abide by. Such relational agreements are typically established subtly, with mini- mal overt discussion. We often learn about relational expectations by noticing nonverbal

interview, Ballmer said, “You know, Bill is a wild ride. He’s a roller coaster. We tend to balance each other off nicely . . . He’s up and down, and there’s a lot of excitement that goes with that. Bill’s got a lot of energy, which mostly you can feed off of.” But, “sometimes he’s got negative energy, and I’ve got to bring positive, or vice versa. We tend to figure out how to do that.” (Romano, 2008) In other words, Ballmer believes he is a steadying influence whereas Gates is more emotionally volatile—a sure sign of complementarity.

Like any married couple, Ballmer believes that all these years of interaction with Gates have made their relationship work. As he puts it, “For me personally, I know what I know about Bill. And when he says something, I can mostly know where he’s going, complete his sentence. I may not have the insight, but when he starts, I say, ‘Oh, yeah, got it,’ and I have so much context.” (Romano, 2008)

Don’t be fooled by their size and appearance: even large companies are comprised of hundreds of little offices and cubicles where just two people are trying to develop a personal relationship that works.

Critical Thinking Questions

1. Do you think it is absolutely necessary for people in organizations to have close personal relationships with coworkers, or can organizations function just fine without them?

2. To the extent that self-disclosure is a part of relational development, how much and what types of self-disclosure are appropriate in the workplace?

3. Do you see any ethical issues connected to developing close personal relationships on the job?

Sources

Romano, B. (2008, June 29). Steve Ballmer talks about his buddy Bill, his golf game and basketball. The Seattle Times. Retrieved from http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/ 2008023282_ballmerqa29.html

Organizations in Action (continued)

Kre66464_04_ch04_p071-094.indd 76 11/3/11 2:41 PM

CHAPTER 4Section 4.1 The Complexities of Interpersonal Communication

cues about how others react (positively or neg- atively) to behaviors we engage in with them. These responses to our behavior suggest that we should engage in certain behaviors and avoid others. Sometimes, however, relational agree- ments are established more explicitly, especially when the agreements cover important or sensi- tive subjects. For example, violations of relational rules concerning acceptable interpersonal touch- ing may be established quite formally. Since the implementation of laws and policies regarding sexual harassment in the workplace, even subtle invasions of personal space can be construed as creating a “hostile work environment” subject to potential litigation.

Still, most of these interpersonal agreements are similar to informal contracts we establish with each other. These agreements are referred to as implicit contracts (as opposed to formal legal contracts), and they encourage relational partners to behave in certain ways with each other. As our relationships grow, we develop numerous implicit contracts that guide the ways we interact with our coworkers. These implicit contracts become expectations we have for how our relational partners will treat us and work with us.

When both relational partners abide by the implicit contracts that have been established, they tend to improve their relationships. By consistently fulfilling relational expectations, they gradually develop trust in one another and mutual confidence that they will fulfill each other’s expectations. However, when we violate an implicit contract, even once, it can build distrust and sometimes result in anger, frustration, and disappointment. It takes a long time to build relational trust, but that trust can be shattered very quickly. Once seri- ous implicit contracts are violated and trust is broken, it can take a long time to repair the relationship, if it can be repaired at all. If there is an implicit agreement of confidentiality between two employees, then leaking any “secrets” to others—for example, that your coworker is interviewing for positions at other firms—can result in a sense of betrayal that may taint the relationship for some time to come.

Let’s look at an example. In a work organization, if a trusted employee is found to be embezzling funds from the company, it violates a central relational expectation between the employer and the employee of fiscal responsibility and loyalty to the company. This behavior will clearly result in serious and unhappy relational deterioration and other repercussions for the employee. Even minor relational violations, such as telling an embar- rassing story about a coworker to other coworkers, can cause serious harm to a relation- ship. It is wise to consider carefully the demands on your behavior set by the different implicit contracts you have established with others in organizational life. What are the relational expectations others have for you? What relational expectations do you expect others to live up to? What could be the likely relational implications of violating any of these expectations?

What implicit contracts did Bernie Madoff violate?

Kre66464_04_ch04_p071-094.indd 77 11/3/11 2:42 PM

CHAPTER 4Section 4.2 Relationship Initiation, Development, and Maintenance

4.2 Relationship Initiation, Development, and Maintenance

So relationships develop incrementally and reciprocally over time as members of dyads exchange messages, develop implicit contracts, and fulfill relational expectations with one another. Sometimes these relationships develop slowly. At other times, when there is a good deal of interaction between dyadic partners, the relationships develop quickly. Recall that every time you send another organizational member a message, you are influencing the development of your relationship. You may be facilitating the growth of the relationship by fulfilling expectations and building new robust implicit contracts, or you may be fostering the decline of the relationship by breaking implicit contracts and degrading relational coordination. It is important for you to be aware of the dif- ferent ways that your message exchanges can influence relational development. In this section, we’ll look at some of the ways in which we can initiate, develop, and maintain our relationships in order to enhance interpersonal communication. We’ll start with self- disclosure and reciprocity.

Relationship Initiation: Self-Disclosure and Reciprocity

Self-disclosure—providing others with relevant, revealing, personal, and/or private infor- mation—is an important aspect of relationship development, even in workplace settings. Part of establishing strong relationships with other people is getting to know them and helping them get to know you. By sharing relevant, personal, revealing, and/or private information with others, you are making a personal investment in them. You are telling them that you trust them and are willing to share important informational resources with them. You are also taking a calculated risk that the person who you disclose the information to will respond appropriately, maintain your privacy, and reciprocate by disclosing relevant personal information to you. Sometimes the information disclosed is about personal back- grounds, goals, and experiences. Other times, as is the case in many workplace interactions, the information is more task-oriented and may concern business strategies, inside infor- mation, or tricks to accomplishing organizational activities. The value of self-disclosure is ultimately in how useful that information is in helping relational partners get to know each other and learn about how they can work together to accomplish organizational goals.

As noted previously, for self-disclosure to be truly beneficial, the partners typically have to engage in reciprocal self-disclosure.

When only one partner discloses personal information and the other fails to recipro- cate, the relationship becomes unbalanced. The lack of reciprocity demonstrates a lack of relational trust between both parties. Luckily, there is a powerful social norm of reciprocity that encourages individuals to treat relational partners similarly to the ways the partners treat them. For exam- ple, when a coworker greets you warmly and asks if you want to go out to lunch

What role does self-disclosure play in relation- ship building?

Kre66464_04_ch04_p071-094.indd 78 11/3/11 2:42 PM

CHAPTER 4Section 4.2 Relationship Initiation, Development, and Maintenance

today, it is expected you will respond with warmth and consider inviting them to lunch next week. And if, at lunch, your colleague wants to share something that happened to her in her performance appraisal meeting, you will feel an urge to do the same. This is not to suggest that everyone always honors the norm of reciprocity, but more often than not, the social pressure to reciprocate is powerful.

When both members of a dyad share relevant and revealing personal information, they will have shared demands to treat the information provided to them responsibly. The future growth and development of the relationship will depend on the relational partners both abiding by these demands for appropriate use of disclosed information. For exam- ple, if you tell a coworker that you have identified ways to accomplish organizational goals without following cumbersome bureaucratic regulations, you probably expect this colleague to keep this information private. If the person keeps the information you shared private, he or she will establish a bond with you. However, there is also a risk that the person you confided in will not respect your privacy expectations and will divulge this information to others. If this happens, it does not bode well for the development of a coop- erative and trusting relationship. The shared vulnerability of holding personal information about the other person is what helps to make relationships work. There is a mutual invest- ment and liability in the relationship.

Relationship Development and Maintenance

As long as mutual expectations are fulfilled and new implicit contracts are developed, relationships will grow and prosper. This is known as the process of relationship devel- opment. We can view the relationship development process as one that spirals up or down. When relational expectations are met and new implicit contracts are established, the relationship spirals up to higher levels of cooperation. However, when implicit con- tracts are violated, the relationship will inevitably spiral down to lower levels of coopera- tion. Relationships evolve over time to either higher or lower levels of cooperation based on message exchanges between partners. These message exchanges can take many forms: swapping email, stories over coffee, working on the same committee, carpooling together, or sharing jokes at the annual company picnic, for example. Generally, for a relationship to develop meaningfully, a long history of such interaction becomes a necessary invest- ment in the relationship.

Often, in the early stages of relationship development, when everything about the rela- tionship is new and interesting, people spend a great deal of time learning about their part- ners and are most attentive to identifying and fulfilling relational expectations. This early stage of relationship development is sometimes referred to as the honeymoon period. However, it is difficult to maintain this honeymoon period level of relational attention, and partners often become lazy and inattentive to one another. They often fail to recognize when old implicit contracts that once worked well are no longer meeting their partner’s needs. In these cases, relationships inevitably suffer. They spiral down to lower levels of coordination.

Continuing to build strong and cooperative relationships—the process of relationship maintenance—takes a great deal of effort and strategic communication. When less attention is spent on fulfilling relational expectations, relationship development will

Kre66464_04_ch04_p071-094.indd 79 11/3/11 2:42 PM

CHAPTER 4Section 4.2 Relationship Initiation, Development, and Maintenance

invariably suffer. This is especially evident as our relational needs evolve. As organiza- tional participants grow and change over time, they develop new relational needs and expectations. It is therefore important to vigilantly monitor these changing relational needs and expectations and to adjust our interpersonal communication accordingly. Efforts have to be taken to reinvigorate spiraling down relationships to get them back on track and to spiral them up to higher levels of coordination. These relational reinvigo- ration efforts include actively communicating with relational partners about their chang- ing relational needs, sharing feelings with them about the relative effectiveness of the relationship, and recommitting with relational partners to mutually update and meet new implicit contracts.

We most commonly associate all of these realities with friendships and romantic relation- ships, but they are also germane to the workplace. This is why, for example, many orga- nizations send their employees to “retreat centers” from time to time, in order to provide a place where employees can reestablish and/or enhance their personal and professional relationships with each other. In short, organizations are not comprised only of tasks, but of people—and people need to develop meaningful connections with their colleagues as a key element of their organizational experience.

It is a good idea for each of us to consider the effectiveness of the key interpersonal rela- tionships we have established with other organizational participants. How well are you meeting the relational expectations of your organizational colleagues? How have your colleagues’ relational expectations changed over time? Are there new relational expecta- tions that they have for you? Is your relationship in the process of spiraling up or spiraling down? What can you do to move your relationship to higher levels of cooperation and coordination? How might you help to promote relational development within the organi- zations you participate in?

Complementary and Parallel Relationships

As we have seen, relationships develop uniquely to serve the unique needs of members. Some relationships are complementary relationships, in which members perform dif- ferent roles and have different responsibilities to fulfill different relational needs. In such complementary relationships, one partner often has more power than the other, serving as the leader within the relationship, while the other partner serves as a follower. Although such complementary relationships are often very efficient, with each partner performing different roles and having different responsibilities, they are often also taxing on relation- ship members. The member of the relationship who has less power may feel dominated and disrespected in the relationship. The member of the relationship who has more power may feel the stress of being responsible for making most of the decisions and handling a great deal of the difficult tasks within the relationship. It is therefore important in such complementary relationships to maintain a semblance of equity between the partners so that one partner does not feel totally overwhelmed by the other.

Let’s look at an example. The doctor-patient relationship can often develop as a comple- mentary relationship, with the doctor taking on a lot of the decision-making responsibili- ties for the patient’s care due to the doctor’s higher level of specialized knowledge. Patients

Kre66464_04_ch04_p071-094.indd 80 11/3/11 2:42 PM

CHAPTER 4Section 4.2 Relationship Initiation, Development, and Maintenance

often defer to doctors with regard to health care decisions. Yet research has shown that patients who participate more actively in health care decision-making often do bet- ter and have better health outcomes than patients who defer to the doctor to direct their care. It is therefore important for physicians to encourage their patients to actively participate in directing their own health care and to provide them with rel- evant health information and support. In other complementary relationships, it is important for the higher-powered rela- tional partner to provide the lower-pow- ered partner with opportunities to exert control and to participate in relational decision making. Although we commonly associate health care with medical pro- cedures, those procedures begin with a mutual agreement regarding what needs to be done and how both parties can help ensure the best outcome. That won’t happen without some degree of “buy-in” by all concerned.

Not all relationships are complementary relationships. In parallel relationships, there is a high level of equity between relational partners. In such relationships, partners often perform many of the same activities, make shared decisions, and sometimes compete with each other. For example, two partners with the same level of seniority in a law firm may have very similar job responsibilities and make decisions together about the activities of the firm. They may serve some of the same clients or even compete for cli- ents. These law partners are likely to have a parallel relationship. The competitive nature of parallel relationships can sometimes become a source of conflict and frustration for relational partners. It may be more difficult in these relationships to make quick decisions because both parties have to weigh in on these decisions. There is high potential for indi- vidual growth for relational partners within parallel relationships, but there is also high potential for relational competition and conflict. Care must therefore be taken to preserve cooperation between them.

Interestingly, some relationships begin as complementary relationships, with one rela- tional partner exerting greater relational control than the other, and then change into parallel relationships as the partners grow in terms of expertise, confidence, and ability. For instance, when you first start a job, your relationship with your supervisor may be more complementary—she might talk more and you might listen more, simply because you’re new and she’s the “boss.” But over time, that relationship might evolve into more like a “peer” relationship, where both of you see each other as basically “equals”—simply coworkers who talk to each other about pretty much anything. Sometimes the evolution of relationships from complementary to parallel can put a strain on relational partners, who struggle to redefine implicit contracts about relational expectations and have to learn how to cooperate on making decisions together. This is all part of relational growth and development.

What effect do power dynamics have on the doctor-patient relationship? What effect do power dynamics have on your organizational relationships?

Kre66464_04_ch04_p071-094.indd 81 11/3/11 2:42 PM

CHAPTER 4Section 4.3 Key Relational Communication Skills

4.3 Key Relational Communication Skills

Developing and maintaining effective interpersonal relationships demands strategic communication skills and competencies. In this section, we’ll look at some key rela- tional communication skills, starting with active listening.

Active Listening

One of the most important interpersonal communication competencies is active listening. Active listening means being fully engaged in paying attention to your relational part- ner’s communication with you. It is not just hearing skills. It involves paying close atten- tion to your partner’s verbal and nonverbal behaviors, taking into consideration the full extent of what they are trying to communicate to you as well as what they may be com- municating to you inadvertently. It also means doing your best to take the other person’s personal perspective into consideration when interpreting the messages he or she sends. What is your relational partner’s point of view on the issues you are communicating about? As an active listener, you do your best to evaluate the relational implications of the messages your partner provides to you. You also let the other person know you are hear- ing and thinking about what they are saying to you. For example, if a coworker wants to

tell you about feeling frustrated by a boss who does too much “micromanaging” of her work, then you will need to “be pres- ent” for her. That means things like clos- ing the office door, not seeming to be in a rush, ignoring your vibrating cell phone, summarizing for her what she seems to be saying, and working alongside her to think about ways to manage the situation. Being a really good active listener takes time, energy, motivation, and skill.

Unfortunately, organizational partici- pants often do not engage in active lis- tening or pay close attention to others’ messages. They are often too busy think- ing about their own needs and planning what they want to say instead of focus-

ing on what their relational partners have to say. Active listening enables you to gather relevant information about your relational partners and about their insights into orga- nizational life. There is a lot we can learn from others, especially since they may have a different vantage point and different organizational experiences than us. Active lis- tening is a critical factor in developing effective interpersonal relationships because it enables us to pick up on the relational expectations others have for us so we can identify new and effective implicit contracts to establish with other organizational participants. The use of active listening can also initiate the norm of reciprocity, encouraging our relational partners to pay close attention to what we have to say and to adapt to our relational needs.

Why is active listening important to relation- ship building? Are you an active listener?

Kre66464_04_ch04_p071-094.indd 82 11/3/11 2:42 PM

CHAPTER 4Section 4.3 Key Relational Communication Skills

Self-Disclosure Skills

Earlier in this chapter, we discussed how developing reciprocal self-disclosure skills is an important strategic interpersonal communication competency that helps to develop and maintain effective relationships. It is important for us to determine the right time, topic, and level for appropriate self-disclosure with potential relational partners. The informa- tion we share should not be too personal or revealing, or it may make the other person feel overwhelmed or uncomfortable. The information we share also must be appropriate to the organizational situation we are in and to the nature of the organizational relation- ship. For example, it most likely would not be appropriate in the midst of a department meeting to announce that you are having relational problems at home. This is too much information, provided to the wrong people, at an inopportune time. We must be judicious about what information is appropriate to share and whether that information is relevant for our relational partners.

Typically, information is disclosed gradually over time. It is often best to provide a little bit of appropriate, relevant, and revealing information to a colleague who may need to know the information to accomplish specific goals. If, for example, you are going through a divorce at home, you may want to spare everyone the gory details, but you may want others to know that working overtime for the next few months could be a problem. Rather than providing too much information at one time, it is wise to wait for some reciprocal disclosure from relational partners before providing additional revealing information. Reciprocal self-disclosure is like a series of interconnected steps shared between relational partners, where one step leads to the next. It takes good judgment and patience to engage in appropriate and reciprocal self-disclosure with others. With self-disclosure, there are almost always potential risks, but there are also potential rewards. Thinking carefully and intentionally about your self-disclosure behavior—rather than just “shooting from the hip”—and maybe even consulting with a trusted third party can help ensure that your self-disclosure will reap the rewards that it can indeed provide while minimizing any risks.

Strategic interpersonal communicators learn how to manage the disclosure process, treat the information they learn about others confidentially, and develop trusting interpersonal relationships. Consider the ways you have shared information with your coworkers or other organizational team members. What have you learned about them? Have you estab- lished a productive relational balance in the information you have disclosed to relational partners and the information you have gathered from them?

Affection, Control, and Inclusion

Human relations theorist Will Schutz (1958) has suggested a model of interpersonal rela- tional needs that suggests that three primary interrelated interpersonal needs govern the development of effective interpersonal relationships. The three relational needs he describes are affection, control, and inclusion. Schutz argues that to develop and maintain good relationships, relational partners need to both give and get affection from the relation- ships, exert some control over relational partners and allow their partners to exert reciprocal control over them, and to include relational others in activities while also allowing relational others to include them. Let’s look at each of these three factors in a bit more detail.

Kre66464_04_ch04_p071-094.indd 83 11/3/11 2:42 PM

CHAPTER 4Section 4.3 Key Relational Communication Skills

Affection In organizational life, communicators need to show each other affection—to express car- ing, concern, and friendship to others—in order to develop effective relationships. We also need to have our relational partners show affection to us. These messages can be com- municated both verbally and nonverbally. Verbally, you can express affection by telling others that you like them, that you appre- ciate them, and that you are concerned about their welfare. Nonverbally, you can express affection by smiling at people, nodding at them while they are speaking, leaning toward them, and touching them appropriately (such as shaking hands with them).

Showing affection toward others may be difficult to do within some formal and bureaucratic organizational contexts that stress impersonal and professional behav- ior. Yet caring is a very powerful message to send in organizational life. When you let others know you care about them and that you appreciate them, it encourages them to reciprocally demonstrate caring and appreciation for you. A little caring goes a long way in organizations. It can encourage the development of a supportive organizational climate where organizational members feel good about participating in the organization and feel a commitment to each other. In their well-known book The One Minute Manager, Kenneth Blanchard and Spencer Johnson (1982) discuss the need to “catch people doing things right” and to provide “one-minute praisings” for one’s subordinates. They believe that we spend too much time and effort catching people doing things wrong. They also think that the prevailing management style in most organizations is “leave alone—zap,” meaning that we basically ignore subordinates unless they “screw up,” and then we pun- ish them. Blanchard and Johnson believe that people need a different type of message— one that is specific and supportive and recognizes people for their individual talents and accomplishments. In short, “caring” is more than a general pat on the back; and it requires sincere, positive, proactive communication.

Control Relational partners also need to have opportunities to exert some control in organiza- tional life. Depending on your formal position within the organizational hierarchy, you may be more likely to be controlled (especially if you are positioned on the lower rungs of the organizational hierarchy) or to exert control over others (especially if you are posi- tioned at the top of the organizational hierarchy). Too often in organizations, employees feel like their managers control them and that they do not have opportunities to exert any control themselves. In effective organizational relationships—even between manag- ers and employees—there should be some reciprocity between the amount of control one person exerts over another. For example, a manager may tell her employee what jobs to do and how to perform these jobs. The employee might in turn provide his manager

Is this display of affection appropriate in a work setting? Why or why not?

Kre66464_04_ch04_p071-094.indd 84 11/3/11 2:42 PM

CHAPTER 4Section 4.3 Key Relational Communication Skills

with feedback about new strategies for addressing unforeseen issues or constraints expe- rienced in handling the job. In this way, both the manager and the employee are sharing control and working together cooperatively.

The need to share or even abandon control is especially important in organizations with skilled and motivated employees. For instance, the Fortune 500 company 3M has institu- tionalized what it calls “bootlegging,” which not only allows but requires certain employ- ees to spend 10 to 15 percent of their time working on their own pet projects, away from any corporate control. Such employee empowerment is largely responsible for a product developed by 3M in the 1970s that we all know and use today, the Post-it note, which was developed by 3M employee Art Fry, who wanted to figure out a way to mark the songs in his church hymn book.

Note, however, that this sharing of control is not always easy to accomplish. Some orga- nization members may have high needs for control, power, and authority. Others may not be fully invested in making decisions, preferring to be told what to do. Yet to develop good interpersonal relationships, it is important to maintain a balance between exerting control and being controlled. Think about your organizational relationships. How much control do you exert over your relational partners, and how much control do they exert over you? Is there a balance between situations where you are in charge and other situ- ations where they are in charge? If there is an imbalance in control, it is likely that either you or your relational partner may feel slighted within the relationship. It may be wise for you to find ways to balance interpersonal influence and control within your organi- zational relationships if they are to develop effectively. Like most anything else, control is communicated by one’s words and actions, and that gives us the opportunity to set a tone and create mutual satisfaction and understanding.

Inclusion Relational partners also need to feel a sense of inclusion within the relationship. It is impor- tant for each relational partner to let the other partners know they are interconnected and welcomed to participate in formal and informal activities. These messages of inclusion

help establish a bond between relational partners, helping them to see themselves as interconnected and fostering coopera- tion. Verbal messages that convey inclu- sion include inviting relational partners to attend social events, participating in meetings, and seeking input from others concerning organizational decisions. Non- verbally, you can communicate inclusion by spending time with the other person. You can also include them by making eye contact and facing them when you are interacting.

It is disconcerting how often in organiza- tional life we fail to communicate inclusion

How do you establish a sense of inclusion, both verbally and nonverbally, with your orga- nizational partners?

Kre66464_04_ch04_p071-094.indd 85 11/3/11 2:42 PM

CHAPTER 4Section 4.3 Key Relational Communication Skills

to others, especially since we depend so much on working with others to accomplish our organizational goals. Do you go out of your way to include others, let them know you are partners, and show them they are important to you? Messages of inclusion can go a long way in organizational life to encourage cooperation and coordination. As with control, it is a mistake to assume that everyone in an organization feels automatically included. Inclusion is an action, not merely an idea, and it must be supported by messages that truly promote and evoke a feeling of being included.

Organizations in Action What Happens When Needs for Inclusion, Affection, and Control Are Ignored?

If there is one dyadic relationship of critical importance in organizational life, it’s the relationship you have with your boss. And if there is one thing that differentiates the boss/subordinate dyads from others, it’s that the two people involved have different levels of power and authority. Unfortunately, power and authority can be abused, and the needs for inclusion, affection, and control discussed in this chapter can be blatantly ignored.

Ample evidence of such problems can be found on the Working America website affiliated with the AFL-CIO. Working America sponsored a “My Bad Boss” contest, and readers submitted more than 700 stories. The following were among the “winners”:

• A woman just returned to work at a corporate coffee shop after having heart surgery. Back at work, she felt chest pains again and called for an ambulance. While in the ambulance, her boss called her several times “threatening to fire me because I was unable to do my job,” and saying that her health problems “were causing scheduling problems for the business.”

• A woman worked in the online sales division of a nonprofit. Feeling pride because she and her group had met their sales goal, the boss nonetheless told her that “it wasn’t enough,” so to “teach us a lesson, the boss took away all of our chairs . . . FOREVER!” One of her employees was disabled and wasn’t able to stand, and since it was now a “standing only” position, the woman was required to fire her for not being able to stand at her desk.

• A man went into his (highly paid) boss’s office and mentioned that he couldn’t afford his commute because gas was costing him one-fourth of his weekly pay. The boss replied: “I know— when I take my Porsche out of storage for the summer, it’s going to cost a lot to gas it up.”

You might say, “These are extreme cases—this couldn’t happen to me!” And you’re probably right. But many relationships between individual bosses and employees are just as hurtful and toxic; they are simply more subtle and less dramatic, but every bit as real. Relationships at work—like any other relationships—can be fragile and painful when people’s needs for inclusion, affection, and control are ignored.

Critical Thinking Questions

1. What types of dysfunctional relationships have you witnessed or experienced in organizational life? 2. In what ways did these situations threaten needs for inclusion, affection, and control? 3. What is the most ethical and humane way for a boss to deal with poorly performing employees?

Source

My Bad Boss Contest. (n.d.). In WorkingAmerica.com. Retrieved from http://www.workingamerica.org/ badboss/winners.cfm

Kre66464_04_ch04_p071-094.indd 86 11/3/11 2:42 PM

CHAPTER 4Section 4.3 Key Relational Communication Skills

Co-Orientation

Another key strategic interpersonal communication skill to develop is co-orientation, the ability to appropriately match the kinds of messages that others send to us with our mes- sages to them. It can be disconcerting to say something to someone only to have that per- son respond to you with a message that seems disconnected to what you were saying. For example, you might say to a coworker, “I hate these double shifts we have been assigned to work.” In turn, this person might respond, “I’m ready for lunch.” This response makes you wonder whether your coworker heard what you had to say about the double shifts, whether he thinks what you had to say was important, or whether he cares at all about your concerns. On a larger scale, a group of employees might be worried about possible layoffs, but management responds by promoting certain members of the group at a cor- porate event, leaving everyone else still confused about their status.

Developing good co-orientation skills can provide benefits to organizational participants. When you respond appropriately to others, you demonstrate your interest in them and show them that you take their point of view seriously. You also provide an opportunity to help address the issues they have raised. Organizational theorist Karl Weick (1979) suggests that there are three parts to organizational interactions that help to solve prob- lems: act, response, and adjustment. He calls this three-part message process the double inter- act. Double interacts enable organizational participants to raise an issue (that is, act), get a reaction (or response) to the issue that informs the original statement, and enables an adjustment to the issue that reflects the new information. (We will discuss Weick’s theories in more detail in Chapter 9.)

Weick argues that such double interacts are the basis for social organizing, yet without co-orientation, these double interacts do not work well. Think about how you can adjust your interpersonal interactions with other organizational participants to increase co-ori- entation. By increasing co-orientation, how can you enhance organizational learning and coordination?

Interpersonal Conflict Management Skills

Conflict is an unavoidable part of interpersonal relations and organizational life because each relational partner has different goals, ideas, and strategies for addressing organi- zational issues. Poorly managed interpersonal conflicts can hurt feelings, cause anger and hostility, and degrade interpersonal relationships. Conflict management skills are therefore an essential part of strategic interpersonal communication. Effective interper- sonal conflict management involves mediating these differences and disagreements between individuals to develop solutions to problems. Unfortunately, such skills are often in short supply, and the ways in which many organizational participants engage in conflict can cause more problems and increase disagreements. Conflict management skills can help avoid these problems and make conflicts productive forums for solving organizational issues.

Kre66464_04_ch04_p071-094.indd 87 11/3/11 2:42 PM

CHAPTER 4Section 4.3 Key Relational Communication Skills

Interpersonal conflict, if handled effec- tively, is an opportunity to build relation- ships and to learn more about relational partners. We can learn about the different ways others see organizational life and about their unique strategies for solv- ing organizational problems. We can also learn about our shared interests and build common ground for working together. When we use effective conflict manage- ment skills, we are setting a precedent for future cooperation. Let’s look at the steps involved in effective interpersonal conflict management.

Step 1: Focus on the Other Person’s Point of View A first step toward effective interpersonal conflict management is to focus on the other person’s point of view. Too often in conflict situations, we become focused only on our own positions, perspectives, and goals and fail to hear the other person’s point of view. Active listening is a crucial part of this step. Not only do you need to hear the other person’s perspective on the conflict, you need to let the other person know you understand their point of view.

Step 2: Avoid the Hostility Trap and Stay Focused on the Issues at Hand Many conflicts become angry and emotional rather than staying focused on the ideational issues of disagreement. Effective conflict communicators avoid the hostility trap and stay focused on the issues at hand. Even if the person you are in a conflict with reacts angrily, you can help keep the discussion on topic by defusing the anger and focusing on sharing information about your areas of disagreement and agreement. For example, say you are arguing with a coworker about the best way to solve a problem. You suggest solution A and your coworker suggests solution B. Your coworker reacts angrily to you, completely disregarding your solution. It would be easy to fall into the hostility trap by reciprocating with an angry response. However, this response will do little to resolve the conflict. In fact, it will probably escalate the conflict and polarize the conflicting parties. Instead of an angry response, you might say something like, “Please tell me why you prefer solution B, and explain why you think it will work. I really want to understand your perspective.” This response will encourage an exchange of relevant information.

Step 3: Look for Commonalities between Your Perspectives Once you have shown receptivity to hearing the other person’s perspective, you will encourage them to reciprocate (via the norm of reciprocity) to hear your point of view. To move the conflict forward, it is wise to look for commonalities between your perspective and the other person’s perspective. How do they overlap? Are there ways that the two perspectives are complementary and can be merged? Are there areas for compromise between the two different points of view? The more you focus on such compromises, the more likely the other person will be to work with you to solve the problem. It may take a while to work through the issues, but by focusing on the issues, encouraging compromise, and showing

Do you know how to effectively manage inter- personal conflict?

Kre66464_04_ch04_p071-094.indd 88 11/3/11 2:42 PM

CHAPTER 4Section 4.4 Ethical Relational Communication in Organizational Life

respect for the other person, you can encourage conflict resolution and set the stage for increased cooperation. In the next chapter, we’ll discuss conflict management as it pertains to groups, since conflict is an important part of group process and group decision making.

4.4 Ethical Relational Communication in Organizational Life

Over the course of this chapter, we have discussed the importance of working coopera-tively with others in organizational life. One of the best ways to promote this kind of cooperation is by treating others with respect, deference, and empathy. The best interpersonal relationships demonstrate genuine concern by relational partners for each other. This con- cern, respect, deference, and empathy is engendered by ethical relational communication.

There are many instances in which interpersonal relationships are abused in organiza- tional life. Personal information may be shared and is not kept private. Relational part- ners intimidate their partners into complying with their wishes. Relational partners are dishonest and manipulative. Ultimately, these unethical communication behaviors will undermine interpersonal relationships, destroy trust between relational partners, and decrease cooperation and coordination. Unethical interpersonal communication may provide short-term benefits to organizational participants who coerce their partners into doing what they want, but the long-term effect of these unethical behaviors reduces orga- nizational effectiveness and decreases personal satisfaction in organizational life.

Several guidelines for ethical interpersonal communication can enhance the development of effective relationships and increase organizational satisfaction:

1. Honesty is a primary ethical standard for effective relational communication. 2. Fairness and equity within relationships is needed to promote long-term relational

success. 3. Sensitivity to the unique needs of others is critically important to developing trust. 4. Adaptation to changing interpersonal needs is also important for helping rela-

tionships grow over time. 5. Communicating with empathy, demonstrating understanding and concern for

the perspectives of others, is a major factor in demonstrating caring and respect in interpersonal relationships.

By engaging in ethical interpersonal communication with others, you are setting a stan- dard for reciprocal ethical interpersonal communication from them. You are also raising the quality of communication in organizational life.

However, all of these issues can get quite complicated. For example, complete honesty is a dubious guideline for anyone concerned about ethical behavior; such a stance is simply not possible nor wise. Similarly, concepts such as “fairness” and “equity” sound good, but they mean different things to different people—what is “fair” to one person might very well be perceived as “unfair” by another. Nonetheless, organizations must be actively mindful of their ethical standards—not simply because they want to do the “right thing,” but because it’s usually in their best interests. Sometimes the consequences of unethical interpersonal behavior will lead to costly lawsuits or bad “PR,” both of which can have serious economic consequences.

Kre66464_04_ch04_p071-094.indd 89 11/3/11 2:42 PM

CHAPTER 4Section 4.4 Ethical Relational Communication in Organizational Life

Case Study The New Product

Bob Craft was a mid-level software programmer for a well-established business software development firm, Empire Software Services (ESS), which specialized in developing human resource management systems for regional insurance companies. In his spare time, Bob developed computer games as a hobby. While he enjoyed programming, he found his day job at ESS pretty boring. There wasn’t much opportunity for innovation at ESS, and he didn’t feel that there was much interest in his ideas and creative talent. The software systems he developed for ESS were fairly standard products for the insurance industry. They basically collected and cataloged personnel record information such as benefits accrued and used. He longed to find more fulfilling work, somehow merging his interests in computer gaming with his regular work at ESS.

One of the companies that employed ESS, Apex Insurance, was encountering a unique human resource challenge that it needed to resolve. The company had been introducing new computer systems to use in its insurance offices that proved to be difficult for its employees to learn how to use. Because of these difficulties, many errors were cropping up in the insurance offices, efficiency was decreasing, and customer satisfaction was waning. The CEO of Apex Insurance, Otto Bendix, came to ESS with a request for ESS to develop new training software to help the company prepare its employees to use the new computer systems effectively. Otto wanted the new software program to be easy to use and engaging for his employees.

Bob had an idea. What about developing a computer game-based training program to help employees learn about the new computer system? He could make the training system interactive, exciting, and fun to use. However, this was a novel idea that did not fit the expectations of his boss at ESS, Jane White, who did not think computer games were very professional and appropriate for use in an insurance company like Apex. When Bob told his boss about his new idea, Jane was not very interested. She told Bob to continue doing his regular software design work and to do computer gaming on his own time.

Bob was disappointed by Jane’s response to his proposal. He decided to go directly to Otto Bendix with his new idea for a game-based training system. Otto was interested in Bob’s ideas. He liked the prospect of developing an innovative, engaging, game-based training program that would be fun for his employees, many of whom were young gamers themselves. He told Bob how much he liked his ideas and offered him a job working directly for Apex to develop this new training software. Bob accepted the offer, hired a number of his computer game designer friends to join him at Apex, and began building the new training software. This was an exciting venture for Bob and his friends. They were given a lot of freedom to develop their new product to meet the training needs at Apex. Bob also felt encouraged by Otto’s confidence in him and support to develop the new software product.

Bob and his colleagues threw themselves into the development of the new software. They worked closely with the personnel at Apex who would be using the new software to make sure the program fit their needs and was comfortable for them to use. He conducted a number of usability tests with the Apex personnel to help refine the training software. Eventually, the company implemented the new software with the help of Sue Fogarty, the personnel director at Apex, who had good relationships with many of the employees in the insurance offices who would be using the software. Together they introduced the new training program, encouraged the workers to use it, and before long the new training program was working exceedingly well. Bob was promoted to Director of Software Development at Apex, where he was given license to develop more innovative computer programs for the company. Apex decided not to renew its contract with ESS and instead gave all the software services business it had been contracting to ESS to Bob to handle within his new division at Apex. (continued)

Kre66464_04_ch04_p071-094.indd 90 11/3/11 2:42 PM

CHAPTER 4Summary

Summary

Dyadic, one-on-one relationships are at the heart of organizational life, even in the larg-est of organizations. Such relationships involve people from within organizations as well as important stakeholders on the “outside,” such as vendors and customers. All of these relationships are guided by implicit contracts that define the norms and expecta- tions within the relationship. Relationships develop incrementally and reciprocally within these implicit contracts. Reciprocal self-disclosure is one important way that relationships evolve and grow.

Some relationships are built on similarities and equality; they are considered parallel rela- tionships. Other relationships are characterized by differences and some forms of inequal- ity; those are referred to as complementary. Whatever the relationship, conflict can and will occur; when it does, active listening, co-orientation, and conflict management skills can be helpful. Finally, any relationship brings with it various ethical issues involving such things as honesty, fairness, and trust that are important to address but not always easy to resolve.

Critical Questions

1. How does this case illustrate the importance of interpersonal relationships in organizational life? What are some of the effective and ineffective interpersonal relationships in this case?

2. How does Bob’s relationship with his boss Jane influence his decision to leave ESS? How did Jane’s interpersonal communication with Bob lead to Bob leaving the company? What could Jane have done differently?

3. How does Otto’s relationship with Bob influence Bob’s decision to leave ESS? How did Otto’s interpersonal communication with Bob lead to Bob leaving ESS and joining Apex?

4. How well did Jane illustrate effective or ineffective conflict-management skills in the way she responded to Bob’s idea about developing the new game-based software? What could Jane have done differently in her interactions with Bob about the new idea?

5. Describe instances of ethical and unethical interpersonal communication in this case. What were the implications of these ethical and unethical uses of interpersonal communication for these organizations?

6. There are a number of different relationships described within this case, such as the relationship between Bob and Jane, the relationship between Bob and Otto, the relationship between Bob and Sue, and the relationships between Bob and the other programmers. How effective are each of these different organizational relationships? What changes would you suggest in the use of interpersonal communication to make each of these relationships more effective? Which of these relationships are more complementary and which are more parallel?

7. Which of the individuals within this case demonstrate the best strategic interpersonal communication skills? Why?

Case Study (continued)

Kre66464_04_ch04_p071-094.indd 91 11/3/11 2:42 PM

CHAPTER 4Summary

Discussion Questions

1. What dyadic relationships are at the center of your organizational life? What particular one-on-one relationships are the most important to you in the workplace?

2. Considering these relationships, what “implicit contracts” are a part of them? What would be specific examples?

3. With respect to self-disclosure, what topics would you generally regard as being “off-limits” in an organizational setting?

4. Which of your relationships in organizations are more “complementary” and which are more “parallel”? In what ways?

5. If employees have human needs for inclusion, affection, and control, how specifically can organizations help people meet those needs?

6. How is conflict managed—or not managed—where you work? What unwritten rules and norms seem to govern how conflict is handled?

7. Ethical issues in communication can be analyzed from a number of perspectives. One of those perspectives involves whether one’s ethical standards should be more “absolute” (unyielding and uncompromising) or more “relative” (based on the specific details of the situation and thus more “malleable”). Are your standards more absolute or more relative, and why?

Key Terms

Active listening Being fully engaged in paying attention to your relational part- ner’s communication with you.

Affection To express caring, concern, and friendship to others. In organizational life, communicators need to show each other affection in order to develop effective relationships.

Complementary relationships Relation- ships in which members perform different roles and have different responsibilities to fulfill varying relational needs.

Conflict management skills An essential part of strategic interpersonal commu- nication. Poorly managed interpersonal conflicts can hurt feelings, cause anger and hostility, and degrade interpersonal relationships.

Co-orientation A key strategic interpersonal communication skill; the ability to appropri- ately match the kinds of messages that oth- ers send to us with our messages to them.

Dyad The basic two-person unit for inter- personal interaction.

Dyadic communication Communication that involves two people exchanging mes- sages, sharing relevant information, and adapting to one another.

Ethical relational communication Respect, deference, and empathy. A key component of the best interpersonal rela- tionships demonstrate genuine concern by relational partners for each other.

Honeymoon period Early stages of rela- tionship development, when everything about the relationship is new and interest- ing, partners spend a great deal of time learning about their partners and are most attentive to identifying and fulfilling rela- tional expectations.

Implicit contracts Interpersonal agreements or informal contracts we establish with each other that encourage relational partners to behave in certain ways with each other.

Kre66464_04_ch04_p071-094.indd 92 11/3/11 2:42 PM

CHAPTER 4Summary

Inclusion Acts of each relational partner letting the other partners know they are interconnected and welcomed to partici- pate in formal and informal activities.

Interpersonal communication The inter- action between two different individuals who use communication to establish inter- personal relationships.

Model of interpersonal relational needs Theoretical model that suggests that three primary interrelated interper- sonal needs—affection, control, and inclu- sion—govern the development of effective interpersonal relationships.

Parallel relationships Relationships with a high level of equity between relational partners.

Relationship development Process in which mutual expectations are fulfilled and new implicit contracts are developed that allows relationships to grow and prosper.

Relationship maintenance A process of building strong and cooperative relation- ships that requires a great deal of effort and strategic communication.

Self-disclosure Providing others with relevant, revealing, personal, and/or pri- vate information to help foster relationship development.

Kre66464_04_ch04_p071-094.indd 93 11/3/11 2:42 PM