Fundamental interpersonal relations orientation

Fundamental Interpersonal Relations Orientation (FIRO) is a theory of interpersonal relations,

introduced by William Schutz in 1958. This theory mainly explains the interpersonal underworld of a
small group. The theory is based on the belief that when people get together in a group, there are
three main interpersonal needs they are looking to obtain affection/openness, control and
inclusion. Schutz developed a measuring instrument that contains six scales of nine-item questions
that he called FIRO-B. This technique was created to measure or control how group members feel
when it comes to inclusion, control, and affection/openness or to be able to get feedback from
people in a group. Unlike many instruments used to examine human interaction behaviors, and
needs, the FIRO-B is and was extremely valid internally and externally using inferential statistics.
Also, while no one knows exactly the "B" was thought to mean either behaviors, or it was version B.
It is greatly useful to utilize on future managers, and employees, and from their training, workshops,
and/or awareness can improve the individual, and groups of the organization. Lastly, college
students overall, test quite high in Control. The reason most people go to college is so that is more
likely the will have less bosses, or be one, thus satisfying their need for control.

Description[edit]
These categories measure how much interaction a person wants in the areas of socializing,
leadership and responsibilities, and more intimate personal relations. Element-B (former known as
'FIRO-B') was created, based on this theory, a measurement instrument with scales that assess the
behavioral aspects of the three dimensions. Scores are graded from 09 in scales
of expressed and wanted behavior, which define how much a person expresses to others, and how
much he wants from others. Schutz believed that FIRO scores in themselves were not terminal, and
can and do change, and did not encourage typology; however, the four temperaments were
eventually mapped to the Element-B (former known as 'FIRO-B') scales, which led to the creation of
a theory of five temperaments.
Schutz himself discussed the impact of extreme behavior in the areas of inclusion, control, and
openness as indicated by scores on the FIRO-B (and the later Element-B). For each area of
interpersonal need the following three types of behavior would be evident: (1) deficient, (2)
excessive, and (3) ideal. Deficient was defined as indicating that an individual was not trying to
directly satisfy the need. Excessive was defined as indicating that an individual was constantly trying
to satisfy the need. Ideal referred to satisfaction of the need. From this, he identified the following
types:

Schutz composed a "Matrix of Relevant Interpersonal Data", which he called "The Elephant". [1] Each
area consisted of a smaller matrix of "act" and "feel" by "Self to Other" (Action), "Other to Self"
(Reaction), and "Self to Self".
"Act" and "Feel" divided the rows, which were:
"Desired Interpersonal Relations (Needs)", which denoted "satisfactory relations" in each area;
"Ideal Interpersonal Relations" is what would correspond to "moderate" expressed and wanted
scores;
"Anxious Interpersonal Relations" was subdivided into rows of "Too much activity" (covering
high expressed scores) and "Too little activity" (covering low expressed scores); both being
divided into "Act" and "feel".
The last row was "Pathological Interpersonal relations", which was divided into "too much" and
"too little", yielding:
"Psychotic (Schizophrenia)" as Too Little/Inclusion; (There was no "Too Much/Inclusion")
"Obsessive-compulsive" as Too Much/Control and "Psychopath" as Too Little/Control; and
"Neurotic" as too much and too little Affection.
"Self-to other (action)" corresponded to the expressed dimension, and "Other to self (Reaction)" was
the basis for the wanted dimension (though it is phrased in terms of what people do, rather than
what we want them to do, which would be similar to the later Element B). We thus end up with the
six dimensions as follows:
Expressed Inclusion (eI): "I initiate interaction with others" (High: "oversocial"; low "undersocial")
Wanted Inclusion (wI): "I want to be Included" (High: "social-compliant"; low: "countersocial")
expressed Control (eC): "I try to control others" (High: "autocrat"; low: "abdicrat")
Wanted Control (wC): "I want to be controlled" (High: "submissive"; low: "rebellious")
Expressed Affection (eA): "I try to be close and personal" (High: "overpersonal"; low:
"underpersonal")
Wanted Affection (wA): "I want others to be close and personal with me" (High: "personalcompliant"; low: "counterpersonal")
Putting them together, Schutz came up with fifteen "Descriptive Schema and appropriate terminology
for each Interpersonal Need Area":[2]

Score

Low e and w

Inclusion

Undersocial

Control

Abdicrat

Affection

Underpersonal

High e, low w

high e and w

low e, high w

moderate e and w

Countersocial

Rebellious

Counterpersonal

Oversocial

Autocrat

Overpersonal

Countersocial

Rebellious

Counterpersonal

Oversocial

Autocrat

Overpersonal

Social-compliant

Submissive

Personal-compliant

Undersocial

Abdicrat

Underpersonal

Social-compliant

Submissive

Personal-compliant

Social

Democrat

Personal

In 1977, a clinical psychologist who worked with Element-B (former FIRO-B), Dr. Leo Ryan,
produced maps of the scores for each area, called "locator charts", and assigned names for all of the
score ranges in his Clinical Interpretation of Element-B:

Score

Low e
and w

moderate
e, low w

Inclusion

The Loner

Control

The Rebel

"Now You See

Him, Now You

Self-Confident

Now You See

low w

Him, Now You

Intimacy"
Tendency

Mission Impossible

Temperament by APS
(all 3 areas)

The Pessimist Melancholy

"Image of

Don't" Tendencies

High e,

Openness

Phlegmatic Melancholy
/ Phlegmatic Choleric

Image/(Mask) Choleric
of Intimacy

Don't

high e,
moderate
w

high e
and w

moderate
e, high w

The

"Mission Impossible"

Conversationalist

withNarcissistic Tendencies Expectations

People Gatherer
(formerly, "Where
are the People?")

Dependent-Independent
conflict

Living Up To

The Optimist

Cautious
Hidden Inhibitions Let's Take a Break

Lover In
Disguise

low e,

Inhibited

Openly Dependent Person; Cautious

high w

Individual

(w=6: Loyal Lieutenant)

low e,
moderate
w

moderate
e and w

Cautious
Expectation

The Checker

Lover

Sanguine Phlegmatic /
Choleric Phlegmatic

Sanguine

Phlegmatic Supine /
Phlegmatic Sanguine

Supine

Careful

Supine Phlegmatic /

Moderation

Melancholy Phlegmatic

Warm
Social Flexibility

The Matcher

Individual/The Phlegmatic
Golden Mean

However, to continue not to encourage typology, the names (which were for clinical interpretation
primarily) are generally not used, and Element-B test results usually total the E, W, I, C and O scores
individually. In the derivative "five temperament" system, the different scores are grouped into their
corresponding temperaments, and considered inborn types. One key difference is in the "high
wanted" scores in the area of Control. A distinction is made between men and women, with men
being "dependent", and women, rather than really being dependent, only being "tolerant" of control
by others. This is attributed to "the stereotypical role of women in Western Culture", where they were

often dependent, and have simply learned to tolerate control from others. This again, reflects FIRO's
belief that these scores reflect learned behavior. In five temperament theory, no such distinction
between the sexes is recognized, and high wanted scores in Control are seen as an
inborn dependency need in both sexes.

Compatibility Theory[edit]
Another part of the theory is "compatibility theory", which features the roles
of originator, reciprocal, and interchange.[3]
Originator compatibility, involves possible clashes between expressed and wanted behaviors. The
example given, is two people with high eC and low wC (aka "Mission Impossible" or "Autocrat
Rebellious"). They: "will both want to originate the behaviors associated with the Control needs, and
neither will want to receive those behaviors. Both persons will want to set the agenda, take
responsibility, and direct and structure the actions of others; neither will feel comfortable taking
direction. The result could be competition or even conflict."
Reciprocal compatibility is (from another example given from Control), where high eC with low wC
interacts with the opposite: low eC with high wC ("Openly Dependent", "Loyal Lieutenant", or
"Abdicrat Submissive").
"there is a high degree of reciprocal compatibility because... one will take charge; the other will be
happy to let him or her assume the responsibility."
Interchange compatibility measures how much individuals share the same need strengths. The
example is two people with both high eA and wA ("Optimist" or "Overpersonal Personal-compliant").
They "will be compatible because both will see Affection behaviors as the basis of the relationship,
and they will engage each other around Affection needs." (i.e. freely give and receive).

Further development[edit]
During the 1970s, Schutz revised and expanded FIRO theory and developed additional instruments
(Schutz 1994, 1992) for measuring the new aspects of the theory, including Element B: Behavior (an
improved version of FIRO-B); Element F: Feelings; Element S: Self; Element W: Work Relations;
Element C: Close Relations; Element P: Parental Relationships; and Element O: Organizational
Climate. Since 1984, these instruments have been known collectively as Elements of
Awareness. Element B differs in expanding the definitions of Inclusion, Control, and Affection
(renamed "Openness"), into an additional six scores to measure how much a person wants to
include, control, and be close to others, and how muchother people include, control, and like to be

close to the client. "Expressed" is renamed "See" (current behaviors) while "Want" remains desired
behaviors. Each of the three areas is split into "Do" (initiating interaction with others) and "Get"(the
level received from others). Differences between See and Want scores indicate levels of
dissatisfaction.[4]
The original FIRO-B was sold to CPP, Inc., which also publishes the MBTI assessment, and FIRO
Element B is owned by Business Consultants Network, Inc.
A third FIRO system, called FIRO-Space is being developed by Dr. Henry L. Thomspon who
developed the second one.[5]

Correlations with MBTI[edit]

In a 1976 survey of seventy-five of the most widely used training instruments, the FIRO-B was found
to be the most generally usable instrument in training.[citation needed] The popularity of the FIRO-B began to
wane as the MBTI became one of the instruments of choice in business. Since FIRO-B uses
completely different scales from MBTI, and was not designed to measure inborn "types," it is often
used together with the MBTI by workplaces. Now the two are offered together by CPP.[6]
Statistical correlation has been observed between FIRO-B and MBTI by John W. Olmstead, and also
Allen L. Hammer with Eugene R. Schnell; and between Element B and MBTI by Dr. Henry Dick
Thompson.

FIRO-B Scale

E-I

S-N

T-F

J-P

Expressed Inclusion

59***

04

11*

00

Wanted Inclusion

28***

11*

12*

12*

Expressed Control

23***

03

23***

01

04

09

16***

05

52***

06

22***

07

Wanted Control

Expressed Affection

Wanted Affection

Element B Scales

31***

02

17***

07

EI

SN

TF

I include people

-.48*

.18*

.16*

.08

I want to include people

-.33*

.21*

.08

People include me

-.43*

I want people to include me

-.28*

.09

I control people

-.30*

.14

.09

.14*

I want to control people

-.13*

.04

People control me

-.11

.00

I want people to control me

-.06

-.06

JP

-.02

.11

-.07

.01

-.13*

-.08

.17*

.12

.02

.05

.01

.03

I am open with people

-.13*

.19*

.29*

.07

I want to be open with people

-.20*

.22*

.28*

.02

People are open with me

-.23*

.44*

.16*

.12

I want people to be open with me

FIRO-B and MBTI Correlations

* p < .05
**p < .01
***p < .001
Negative correlations associated with E, S, T and J.
Positive correlations associated with I, N, F and P.

Element B and MBTI Correlations

*Indicates statistical significance

-.21*

.28*

.22*

.07