1

TO UNDERSTAND THE APPLICATION OF FIRO-B

Aim: To assess the interpersonal needs of an individual using the psychological test of

FIRO-B by Eugene R. Schnell and Allen L. Hammer.

Basic Concepts

Personality is the unique set of characteristics, traits, and behaviors that make an individual

who they are. These traits are said to be relatively stable over time and can influence how

individuals interact with others and respond to various situations.

It significantly shapes interpersonal interactions as well as influences the formation and

maintenance of interpersonal relationships. It can be used to help people develop more

effective relationships, communicate more effectively, and work collaboratively with others.

Interpersonal Behavior

Interpersonal behavior can be seen as the way in which individuals behave or act in social as

well as professional settings. It encompasses the interactions between different personalities,

how they communicate, how often they influence and affect one another, and their behavioral

responses during interactions. Interpersonal behavior acts as an important aspect of human

interaction, and it shapes and leads to the formation of effective interpersonal relationships. It

is often the fundamental basis of an organization’s success, influencing its job satisfaction,

communication, conflict management and resolution, trust, leadership, and the organization's

work culture itself.

Interpersonal Behaviour in Organisations

Interpersonal behavior in organizations is the way individuals interact with each other within

a workplace setting. It encompasses a wide range of behaviors and interactions, including

communication, collaboration, conflict resolution, teamwork, leadership, and emotional

intelligence. Effective interpersonal behavior is crucial for building positive work

relationships, promoting a healthy work environment, and achieving organizational goals. As

 2

an employment aide, FIRO-B is a commonly used tood, serving the purpose of employee and

management development, team building, and training programs. FIRO-B stands for

Fundamental Interpersonal Relations Orientation- Behavior (FIRO-B), and is the second

iteration of a psychometric instrument that was created by William Schutz in 1958. It is a

personality instrument that is designed to assess behavior that stems from interpersonal

needs, determine how one interacts with others, and anticipate how others will treat them. It

is a short but powerful self report tool widely used in areas of personal development,

individual and couple counselling, management development, career and team development.

The FIRO-B can also be used in a wide range of research settings as an independent variable,

to measure individual differences and an outcome variable to study the effects of treatment or

training interventions.

This instrument helps people understand: -

● the difference between how they see themselves and how others see them

● why conflict develops between well-meaning people and identify potential sources of

conflict between two cultures.

● their own needs and how to manage them as they interact with others

● how to work more effectively with others, increase productivity of teams, identify the

contributions of individual team members, and design leadership developmental

programs

● a way to identify one’s set of interpersonal needs that is most comfortable for them.

Interpersonal Needs

The term interpersonal was used by Schutz to describe any interaction real and or imagined

occurring between people. For e.g. an individual communicating with others (in person or

not) is an interaction because it anticipates a reaction from others. Schutz used the term

“need” because it was congruent to the understanding of biological needs i.e. a physical or
 3

psychological condition which requires to be met in order to avoid discomfort or anxiety thus

motivating people to satisfy them. They can be further grouped into three categories -

● Inclusion - It is all about how much one generally includes others in one’s life. It

further highlights an individual's need for contact, recognition, and attention from

others. It describes the degree to which one wishes to establish contact and participate

in shared activities with others. Inclusion behaviors represent an attempt to establish

areas of mutual interest and common ground based on the recognition that everybody

is a unique individual. The need manifests itself through- the attempts of including

others in one’s activities and the want for being included in their activities. In groups,

it describes an individual’s need to belong and a desire to be noticed. Suggesting that

the extent of prominence a person seeks is also a component of Inclusion.

● Control - It reflects the degree to which one wishes to influence or direct other’s

behaviour, thus illustrating an individual’s behaviour with respect to responsibility,

power, influence and decision making. The interpersonal need for control is also

reflected in the degree of comfort one experiences in assuming the role of a leader or

as a follower, thus also is concerned with how much responsibility a person wants or

is willing to accept. The need for control also describes the extent to which a person

wants to be perceived as competent, decisive, and in charge So, it’s also related to the

degree to which people are willing to seek dominance in a group or interpersonal

settings often by wanting to plan the team activities and common agendas.

● Affection - This need indicates how close and warm one is with others and how close

and warm one wants others to be with them. It is the need to establish comfortable

one-on-one relationships. It describes a person’s behavior in forming close, personal

relationships with others. And determines the degree of openness, warmth, and

personal connection one seeks to establish with others. It also describes the extent to
 4

which people need to be liked and appreciated, and in some contexts, it can reflect the

desire to love or be loved. Further, another aspect of this need is the amount of

personal disclosure one wants and is comfortable with, either from oneself or from

others.

Table 1

Characteristics associated with the three interpersonal needs

Inclusion Control Affection

Association Power Being personal

Interaction Authority Closeness

Distinction Influence Openness

Prominence Responsibilty Supportiveness

Attention Leadership Being affirmed

Participation Consistency Warmth

Involvement Decisiveness Empathy

Contact Dominance Encouragement

Belonging Competitive Appreciativeness

Expressed and Wanted Needs

FIRO-B is said to measure the extent of an individual's interpersonal needs across two

dimensions: Expressed or Wanted needs. The Expressed dimensions of a need describe the
 5

degree to which a person behaves towards others in a way that is initiated by their need. It

indicates how much one prefers to initiate the behavior. It is about what one can actually do,

which is easily observed by others. On the other hand, the wanted dimensions of a need

describe the extent to which a person prefers to receive those behaviors from others. It is the

degree to which one wishes for others to behave in a certain way toward oneself and what

one openly wants from others. It is what one really wants from others- irrespective of whether

or not one shows or says it openly. Expressed and Wanted behaviors operate differently

between individuals. How individuals respond to Expressed behaviors from others depends

on how much they want that type of behavior.

Table 2

Behaviours associated with expressed and wanted dimensions of interpersonal needs

Dimension/Need Inclusion Control Affection

Expressed ● inviting others to ● assuming positions ● reassuring and

join in your of authority supporting others

activity ● managing ● showing concerns

● involving others in conversations about others lives

projects and ● trying to influence ● sharing your

meetings others opinions personal opinions

● involving ● establishing and feelings with

everyone’s ideas policies and others

and suggestions procedures

● taking personal

interest in others.
 6

Wanted ● getting involved ● deferring to the ● being flexible and

in high profile wishes, needs and accomodating

ctivities and request of others ● listening carefully

projects ● raising issues for to others

● doing things to get others to consider ● trying to please

noticed or decide others

● going laong with ● involving others ● making yourself

majority option in decision available to others

● wearing

distinctive

clothing.

Organisational Behaviour and Interpersonal Relationships

The FIRO-B model describes the interaction of the three interpersonal needs with the

expressed and wanted dimensions of those needs. The model is represented in the form of a

3X2 grid, where individuals can have a combination of high, medium, and low interpersonal

needs in the six categories defined by the model.

Compatibility theory- In FIRO-B terms, compatibility generally deals with the extent to

which people’s needs are satisfied in a relationship. Compatibility is said to be the dominant

factor in explaining the productivity of groups and once compatibility is established between

two people it easy to identify it in group settings. Further, Schutz discusses three kinds of

compatibility:

● Qriginator compatibility- Measures how much two people will come into conflict
 7

about who initiates and receives behaviours. For e.g. two people having high needs for

expressed control and low needs for wanted control, would want to originate the behaviours

associated with the control needs, and neither would want to receive those behaviours. Thus,

both persons will want to set the agenda, take responsibility, and direct and structure the

actions of others, similarly neither will feel comfortable taking direction. Therefore, having

such people in a group could lead to competition or even conflict.

● Reciprocal Compatibility- Measures how well each person can get what he or she

wants and can act in ways to meet his or her needs in a relationship. For e.g. if a person has

high need for expressed control and a low need for wanted control and a second person has

the opposite pattern, there is a degree of reciprocal compatibility because the individuals will

have their control needs met in the relationship. One will take charge; the other will be happy

to let him or her assume responsibility.

● Interchange Compatibility- Measure how much individuals share the same need

strengths. For e.g. two people with high needs for expressed and wanted affection will be

compatible because both will see affection behaviours as the basis of the relationship, and

they will engage each other around affection needs.

Group development- This is an extension of FIRO-B theory. In 1966, Schutz explained that

all groups must deal with the issues of Inclusion, control, and Affection, in that order; to

resolve issues and maintain the functionality of the group. However, these issues do not

necessarily represent distinct phases, as they are always present to some degree. These issues

can be understood throughout the process of group formation.

As group is forming, the first task at hand is to determine who is to be a member (“in” or

“out”) and how to recognize members and membership (Inclusion). The group then turns to

the issues of decision making, responsibility, and the distribution of power and influence
 8

(Control). Once these issues are resolved, Affection becomes an issue, as the group members

must then decide how close or personal, they want to be with one another.

Table 3

The FIRO-B model

Dimension/Need Inclusion Control Affection

Expressed The extent to which The extent to which The extent to which you

you make an effort to you make an effort to try to get close to people

include others in your control and influence and to engage them on a

activities, to join and others or situations, personal level; your

belong to groups, and to organize and degree of comfort in

to be with people direct others, and to being open with and

assume supportive of others

responsibility

Wanted The extent to which The extent to which The extent to which you

you want others to you are comfortable want others to act

include you in their working in well- warmly toward you and

activities and to invite defined situations to take a personal

you to join or belong with clear interest in you, the

to groups; the extent expectations and extent to which you

to which you want to instructions want others to share

be noticed things with you and to

encourage you
 9

Application Of Firo-B

Team Building and Culture

In order to accelerate the team formation process and allow members to overcome barriers

and progress to higher levels of performance. It is also used to ensure that employees get the

most out of working relationships by helping them understand how to meet the interpersonal

needs of customers and stakeholders. It can also be used to Identify existing communication

and interpersonal dynamics that affect team’s success.

Leadership development and coaching

It supports effective leadership development, one-on-one coaching, communication, and team

effectiveness and performance. It is used to identify leadership styles and help leaders unlock

greater team performance by meeting the interpersonal needs of managers, peers, and direct

reports. It also assists them to increase employees’ self-awareness for better understanding of

how their positive behavioural changes boost morale, productivity, and engagement; improve

skills for assessing different types of conflict; and apply emotionally intelligent strategy.

Relationship building

Since teams need to operate on trust and a solid foundation of good working relationships to

achieve high performance; FIRO-B instrument is useful in ensuring that employees get the

most out of working relationships by helping them understand how to meet the interpersonal

needs of customers and stakeholders. The tool can also help repair broken relationships and

take good, functional relationships to a higher level. It is the key that unlocks the potential in

workplace interactions.

Counseling

FIRO-B can be used to create opportunities to effect behavioral change quickly by providing

specific insights into people’s interpersonal needs. It can work as a stand-alone tool or be
 10

combined with other tools to provide a comprehensive view of personality, interpersonal

needs, and behavior. It also has application in the setting of couple counseling, where it is

viewed as a cooperative counselor-client procedure that aids both counselor and client in

conceptualizing interpersonal compatibility, specifying counseling goals, assessing behavior

change, and facilitating an action-oriented counseling process.

Review of Literature

A study by Mansfield et al. (2012) was initiated to give students an understanding of how to

manage the personalities within a team. Student groups were used to test the Fundamental

Interpersonal Relations Orientation-Behavior (FIRO-B) as a tool for improving writing

teams. The control group performed better on the team writing exercise and on certain

dimensions of the team climate questionnaire. The FIRO-B may be a useful tool for

strengthening team interaction and improving product quality; however, effective use of

FIRO-B results in team development may require a structured sharing process.

Gaur (2019) aimed to identify interpersonal needs of Arab business students by using

Fundamental Inter-personal Relations Orientation-Behaviour instrument (FIRO-B). The study

is based on the survey of 192 business students in the UAE. The results have also revealed

that the gender and academic level of participants had an influence on their interpersonal

needs. The study has shown that it is essential to have different approaches towards students

on the bases of their interpersonal needs and, by doing so, to try to enhance their

interpersonal and communication skills. Moreover, the gender and academic level of students

should be considered when organizing training in the improvement of students’ soft skills.

In her study, Amudhadevi, N.V. (2012) aimed to examine emotional intelligence in relation to

interpersonal relationships and role stress among school teachers. The sample in this study

included 50 female school teachers teaching in 10th, 11th and 12th classes in government
 11

aided schools. The instruments used in the study were the Emotional Competence Inventory

(ECI) by Daniel Goleman (1999), Fundamental Interpersonal Relations Orientation-Behavior

(FIRO-B) by Schutz (1978), and Organizational Role Stress Scale (ORS) by Udai Pareek

(1983). Mean, Standard Deviations and Pearson’s Product Moment Correlation were

calculated to identify the relationships between emotional intelligence, interpersonal

relationships, and role stress along with their various subscales. The findings of the study

revealed that the social awareness component of emotional intelligence is related to the

Expressed Affection component of interpersonal relationships and to the role expectation

conflict which is a component of role stress.

In a study by Sellick, K.J. (1991), the aim was to investigate the interpersonal behaviors of

general nurses and evaluate the effectiveness of a nine-week program in developing helping

skills. The sample consisted of 99 nurses and the majority of them were female with an age

range from 22 to 50 years. Interpersonal behaviors were assessed using the Fundamental

Interpersonal Relations Orientation-Behavior (FIRO-B) test. All students who participated in

the study completed a nine week interpersonal communication skills training program. The

FIRO-B test was administered to students by the group leaders during the first week of the

program and again during the last week of the program. Mean and Standard Deviations were

calculated for data analysis. The results of the study showed that nurses had less desire to

belong and a stronger need to influence or control interpersonal relationships.

In a study conducted by Mitra, D. & Chatterjee, I. (2016), the aim was to investigate the

significant difference between various interpersonal relationship needs of the employees of

private and public sector organizations. 437 employees were selected from 55 public and

private organizations. Fundamental Interpersonal Relations Orientation- Behavior (FIRO-B)

scale developed by William Schutz (1978) was administered to collect the data from the
 12

sample. For data analysis, descriptive statistics and one-way ANOVA were used. The

findings revealed that significant differences existed between private and public sector

employees in total Wanted needs, total behavior needs, as well as overall needs score. It was

seen that private sector employees held stronger interpersonal needs than public sector

employees. Employees from both the sectors fell in almost similar categories regarding

individual need score as well as total and behavioral need scores.

Method

Description of the tool

FIRO-B stands for Fundamental Interpersonal Relations Orientation- Behavior (FIRO-B). It

is the second iteration of a psychometric instrument that was created by William Schutz in

1958. It is a personality instrument that is designed to assess behavior that stems from

interpersonal needs, determine how one interacts with others, and anticipate how others will

treat them. It is a short but powerful self report tool widely used in areas of personal

development, individual and couple counselling, management development, career and team

development. The FIRO-B can also be used in a wide range of research settings as an

independent variable, to measure individual differences and an outcome variable to study the

effects of treatment or training interventions. As an employment aide, FIRO-B is used mainly

for purposes of employee and management development, team building, and training

programs.

The FIRO-B questionnaire is focused on three basic interpersonal needs: Inclusion, Control,

and Affection, as seen through the lens of Expressed behavior and Wanted behavior.

Inclusion involves openness to new relationships and to coming into contact with people. The

need for Control determines an individual’s comfort level with decision-making, persuasion,

and influence. The need for Affection determines a person’s emotional connection and the

level of personal sharing and closeness with others.

 13

Background

This instrument was created in the late 1950s by William Schutz, PhD. Schutz developed the

FIRO-B theory to aid in the understanding and predicting of how high-performance military

teams would work together. In 1952, as the head of the Team Performance Section of the

Navy Research Laboratory in Washington, D.C, he sought to improve the performance of the

shipboard Combat Information Centre (CIC). The resulting research from the above

assignment and a research contract resulted in a three-dimensional theory of interpersonal

behaviour (1958).

The six scales of the FIRO-B instrument were constructed using a measurement technique

known as Guttman Scaling (Guttman, 1974). When items are written to be consistent with

Guttman scaling procedures, the items reflect increasing intensity or difficulty of acceptance.

The technique was originally developed for use in the measurement of attitudes. He posited

that interpersonal needs could be grouped into three categories: Inclusion, Control, and

Affection. The FIRO-B model describes the interaction of these three categories of

interpersonal need along two dimensions: expressed and wanted.

Reliability

Because the FIRO-B instrument was constructed using Guttman scaling procedures, a more

appropriate index of internal consistency is reproducibility. It refers to the fact that for

Guttman scales, in which the items occur in a certain order, the item responses should be

predictable or reproducible from the knowledge of the scale scores. The reproducibility of the

FIRO-B scales based on the samples used by Schutz to develop the FIRO-B instrument,

which he describes as “mostly college students, plus a small population of Air Force

personnel” is very high and consistent, falling in the range of .93-.94 (Schutz, 1978).

The internal-consistency reliability of the FIRO-B scales based on coefficient alpha and the

data from the national sample is also good, falling in the range of .85-.96. The test-retest
 14

reliability coefficients in three samples of different ages: junior high school students

(Hutcherson, 1965), college students (Schutz, 1978), and adults (Gluck, 1983) demonstrate

that the FIRO-B scores are relatively stable over short periods of time, mostly falling in the

range of .71-.85.

Validity

A number of studies have shown the FIRO-B instrument to be related to measures of

leadership (e.g., Fiedler’s Least Preferred Co-Worker Scale), personal values such as

community service, and relationships/friendships (Hammer & Schnell, 2000). Additionally,

relationships are also found with instruments such as the MBTI Form M instrument and the

CPI instrument (Hammer & Schnell, 2000).

Norms

Norms for the FIRO-B instrument have been developed on the basis of gender, ethnic group,

education, age, culture, and organisational level.

Procedure

Material Required

FIRO-B manual, scoring sheet, pencil, and eraser

Preliminary Information

● Age: 20

● Sex: Female

● Education: Undergraduate

● Occupation: Student
 15

Rapport Formation

The participant was called in inside the lab and was made to sit comfortably. To ensure that

the participant was at ease, a casual conversation was conducted. Before administering the

tool, she was asked for her consent and was assured that her confidentiality would be valued.

Instructions

“For each statement below, decide which of the following answers best applies to you. Mark

an X in the appropriate circle. There are no right or wrong answers. There is no passing or

failing associated with the results. The results are non-judgmental and are to be used for

learning and development. The results may provide insights about how people interact with

others and how others may perceive them. Do not spend too much time thinking about any

particular statement. Please do not change an answer once you have circled your initial

response and be as honest as you can. If there is any sort of query, you can ask. Thank you for

participating!”

Introspective Report

"I thought it was very interesting. The statements were thought-provoking, so I had to think

of instances before responding. Some statements were more difficult than others; I had to

think harder. I had some doubts as well, which were cleared. Apart from that, I enjoyed the

entire experience."

Behavioral Report

The participant seemed to be really engrossed in the process. She took pauses before marking

anything on the sheet. She appeared apprehensive at first, but as time passed, she seemed

more at ease and quick to respond. She asked some doubts as well which were solved.
 16

Scoring

The FIRO-B instrument contains 54 items. The client is asked to respond to each item using

one of two six-point rating scales. One rating scale elicits the frequency with which the client

engages in the behavior described in the item. The options are never, rarely, occasionally,

sometimes, often, and usually. The other rating scale elicits selectivity, i.e. with how many

people the client engages in the behavior described in the item. The response options on this

scale are nobody, one or two people, a few people, some people, many people, and most

people. Although the respondent is asked to circle a number from 1 to 6 that best describes

his or her behavior, the scale scores are derived using a 0,1 key.

It is determined whether the client’s response for an item reached the necessary cutoff

established for that item. If the response reached the cutoff, one point is added to the scale to

which that item is keyed. If the response failed to reach the cutoff, nothing is added to the

scale. The item responses (number of items for which the threshold was reached) for each

scale are summed, yielding six scores: eI, wI, eC, wC, eA, and wA. These scores are placed

in the appropriate cells on the FIRO-B grid. 4. Total Need scores for Inclusion, Control, and

Affection are derived by summing across the Expressed and Wanted categories (down the

columns on the grid). 5. Total Expressed and Total Wanted scores are derived by summing

across the need scores (across the rows on the grid). 6. The Overall Need score is derived by

summing all six cell scores or, equivalently, by adding the Expressed and Wanted scores or

adding the thre three Total Need scores.

 17

Results and Data analysis

Table 4 -

Overall Needs score, i.e. total need for Inclusion, Control, and Affection with respect to

Expressed and Wanted behaviors.

Expressed Expressed Expressed Total Expressed

Inclusion (Ei) Control (Ec) Affection (Ea)

5 4 5 14

Wanted Wanted Wanted Total Wanted

Inclusion (Wi) Control (Wc) Affection (Wa)

1 7 7 15

Total Inclusion Total Control Total Affection Overall=eI+ wI+

eC+ wC+ eA+ wA

6 11 12

29
 18

Graph 1 :

Depicting overall need score (cumulative expressed and wanted scores across the three

interpersonal needs)

Table 5 -

Range, category and meaning of the Overall need score

Score Range Category Meaning

27-38 Medium-High ● Involvement is usually a source of

satisfaction

● May enjoy small group work settings.

● Tend to have a larger group of friends

and may contact them on a regular

basis.
 19

Graph 2 -

Depicting total interpersonal scores (Total inclusion, Total Control, Total Affection)

Table 6:

Showcasing meaning behind the interpersonal scores

Scores of Are considered And may mean that

6-12 Medium- and can be For inclusion: You usually prefer a balance

moderately or between time alone and time with others, no

sporadically important to matter who initiates it.

you; or more important For control: You generally like a moderate

concerning some people amount of structure and clarity around authority

and less important in order to accomplish tasks.

concerning others. For affection: You usually prefer a realistic

amount of warmth and closeness in one-to-one

relationships, no matter who initiates it.

 20

Graph3 :

Depicting Total Expressed and Total Wanted Scores

Table 7 :

Score ranges and the meaning behind Total expressed and wanted scores.

Score Range Category Total Expressed Total Wanted

8-19 Medium Are selective: reactivity Are selective: Reactivity varies

varies by person or by person or situation

situation
 21

Graph 4:

Depicting the basic six scores (Expressed and Wanted scores across the three interpersonal

needs)

Table 8 :

Showcasing meaning behind the Basic six scores

Scores of Are in this range And may mean that

0-2 Low Your preference for this behavior is very

selective

3-6 Medium Your preference for this behaviour is moderate

7-9 High You have a strong preference for this behaviour

 22

Interpretation and Discussion

An individual's personality is the unique set of relatively stable characteristics, traits, and

behaviors that make them who they are. It is said to significantly shape interpersonal

interactions as well as influence the formation and maintenance of interpersonal relationships.

Interpersonal behaviour encompasses the interactions between different personalities with

one another, how they communicate, how often they influence and affect one another, and

their behavioral responses during interactions. It acts as an important aspect of human

interaction and shapes and leads to the formation of effective interpersonal relationships. It is

often the fundamental basis of an organization’s success, influencing its job satisfaction,

communication, conflict management and resolution, trust, leadership, and the organization's

work culture itself. The aim was to assess the interpersonal needs of an individual using the

psychological test of FIRO-B. FIRO-B stands for Fundamental Interpersonal Relations

Orientation- Behavior (FIRO-B), which is a personality instrument that is designed to assess

behavior that stems from interpersonal needs, determine how one interacts with others, and

anticipate how others will treat them. It is a short but powerful self report tool widely used in

areas of personal development, individual and couple counseling, management development,

career and team development. The FIRO-B questionnaire is focused on three basic

interpersonal needs: Inclusion, Control, and Affection, as seen through the lens of Expressed

behavior and Wanted behavior. The participant was asked to attempt the tool after which the

scores were analyzed through tables and graphs.

The Overall Need score is the total of all six individual cell scores. This score represents the

overall strength of an individual’s interpersonal needs. It shows how much one believes that

other people and human interaction can be a source of goal attainment and personal

satisfaction. The participant's overall need score is 29, which falls between the range of 27

and 38 and denotes a medium-high score. Based on the results, it can be concluded that the
 23

participant finds satisfaction in interacting with others in all areas of inclusion, control, and

affection and that she believes that her interpersonal relationships help her achieve her goals.

Occasionally, the participant might run into situations where her relationships become

difficult and end up interfering with her work.

The participant seems to function best in small teams and with her regular contacts. She

values establishing warm one-on-one connections and enjoys working in teams. For her,

being around people could occasionally become too much, and she might need to go

somewhere by herself for a while. It is likely that the participant's work will present her with

occasions to solicit feedback from others; in these circumstances, she may choose to consult

them without actually delegating authority to them. While she prefers to collaborate with

others, there are times when she needs some alone time. She might see herself as more

extroverted than introverted.

The overall strength of each interpersonal need is reflected in the total need score. The degree

to which a person strives to meet their needs for inclusion, control, and affection in

interpersonal interactions is reflected in their level of strength. The participant obtained a

total need score of 6, 11, and 12, respectively, in the three categories of Total Inclusion, Total

Control, and Total Affection. This represents a medium score. The participant considers all

of the needs to be moderately or sporadically important to her, or more important for some

people and less important for others, based on the medium scores across all three. She is

likely to express or elicit the corresponding social behaviors to satisfy this need in her typical

ways. The participant's overall inclusion scores, regardless of who initiates it, can be

interpreted as an indication of how they typically prefer a balance between time alone and

time with others. According to her scores on the total control need scale, it can be concluded

that she prefers a moderate amount of structure and clarity surrounding authority in order to

complete tasks. Based on the total scores for affection, it can be concluded that regardless of
 24

who initiates a one-to-one relationship, the participant typically prefers a realistic amount of

warmth and closeness.

When the scores for all interpersonal needs are compared, the need for affection is found to

be relatively stronger. The participant, as a leader, is likely to focus on developing human

resources, increasing and maintaining employee satisfaction, minimizing conflict, and

inviting feedback. She is likely to be someone who encourages and supports others, as well as

someone who values open and honest communication. She might want to serve and nurture

while gaining legitimacy through her loyalty and commitment. And, given that the

participant's highest score is for Affection and her lowest score is for Inclusion, she may be

willing to forego the opportunity to work closely with a much smaller group that she can get

to know better in exchange for the opportunity to work closely with a much smaller group

that she can get to know better.

Total Expressed and Total Wanted scores are best interpreted in relation to one another

because they explain the general pattern of how people satisfy interpersonal needs. Your Total

Expressed score indicates how much you prefer to initiate action in relationships with others,

whereas your Total Wanted score indicates how much you prefer that others take the

initiative. The participant received a total expressed score of 14, indicating a medium score.

Based on the scores, it can be stated that the extent to which the participant initiates an action

or works proactively with others varies; it appears to depend on who it is and the context in

which she works. She may or may not initiate certain activities. The total wanted score is 15,

which is also a medium score, indicating that the extent to which she relies on others varies

depending on the context and who it is.

Because our participant's total wanted scores are higher than her expressed score, it is

possible that she will feel inhibited, dissatisfied that she is not getting what she wants from

others, or grow attached to people who give her what she wants. She is more likely to prefer
 25

that others take the initiative than that she does. It can be said that she is more at ease relying

on others; however, if their relative needs are not met by others, they may be dissatisfied.

The six-cell model is formed by combining the three interpersonal needs (Inclusion, Control,

and Affection) with the two dimensions (Expressed and Wanted). This combination is

represented by each individual cell score. The expressed and desired scores in inclusion were:

5 and 1, respectively. According to the expressed inclusion scores, this behavior has a

moderate preference. When it comes to initiating interactions with others, she is very picky.

She may be at ease in most social situations and take the initiative to converse with others.

She may participate in a few conversations while remaining isolated. The Wanted Inclusion

score is 1, which is a low score. Again, the participant is selective about who should initiate

Inclusion behaviors. In a social situation, she may be fine with being approached. She may

prefer to be a little witty while also being highly selective and keeping a low profile. Most

invitations may seem obligatory to her, being singled out as threatening, and group time as

wasteful. Such people are frequently very individualistic. They are not an active team

member, see meetings as unnecessary, and are easily distracted. They engage in side

conversations during meetings, and they may fail to follow through or cooperate with group

decisions.

The expressed and wanted Inclusion results indicate that she includes others in her activities

and has a diverse network of acquaintances. As a result, people are unlikely to notice her

strong desire for privacy. She is likely to have good social skills that will assist her in forming

the associations she desires. Her outgoing personality may lead others to believe that she

wishes to be included in situations more frequently than she actually does. When she fails to

follow through on her attention, they may become confused because they do not realize that

she is far more selective than appears. She may prefer to work in an environment that allows

for plenty of independent activities while also allowing you to use your social skills
 26

energetically--such as contributing to a group followed by enough privacy after the sessions.

She probably also enjoys working on a team because it allows for individual follow-through.

She may not want to participate in business-related social activities unless she believes it will

be beneficial.

There are two types of control: Expressed control and Wanted control. The expressed Control

score of the participant is 4, which is a medium score. When it comes to expressing control

while interacting with others, she is very selective. Her Wanted Control score is 7, which is a

high score. This shows a strong preference for this behavior. Based on her wanted score, any

structuring is insufficient for her. She is someone who considers standard procedures to be

important and sole responsibility to be burdensome. She can actively take on the role of a

questioner, someone who seeks orientation and clarification, is a constructive critic of the

team and its members, and may use questions to delay closure or decisions. Certain needs,

such as structure and goals, formal agendas, and the absence of opportunities for the

following, may be dissatisfying for her.

The control results of the participants indicate that she is willing to take the lead on many

occasions but not always. While she is likely to understand that she can make good decisions,

she is also likely to have a high tolerance for letting others set the rules and trends--and if she

has any doubts, she is likely to defer to experts or supervisors. Control results in this score

category frequently indicate a desire for a moderate amount of influential responsibility as

well as frequent opportunities to escape from it. Perhaps this is because she values her free

time and the ability to be ready to pursue a personal interest when the opportunity arises. Or it

could be that she simply prefers to divide her efforts between times when she is in command

and times when she can sit back and let someone else take over. She is likely to prefer

working in an environment where she can plan her own time but where expectations are clear

and adaptability is required. She probably prefers situations where she has a reasonable
 27

amount of responsibility but also has a lot of free time. In a fast-paced environment, her

desire to detach from responsibilities may be interpreted as frivolous or self-indulgent.

Because of tolerance rather than desire, the participant is more likely to let others take control

than they would like. When others express an interest in the responsibility she seeks, she may

pass it up. Alternatively, she may accept whatever amount of influence people give her all the

time and become frustrated as a result.

In Affection, there is Expressed Affection and Wanted Affection. The participant's Expressed

Affection score is 5, which is considered medium. Depending on the individual, situation,

and relative bond, she may choose to show her affection selectively. Her feelings for the same

person may not be consistent. The participant has a Wanted Affection score of 7, indicating a

strong need for affection from others. Based on the results, it is possible to conclude that, for

the participant Insensitivity is demonstrated by a lack of expressed concern, infrequent

feedback is frustrating, and she may perceive distance from others as a personal loss. She has

the potential to play the role of a listener, someone who maintains a participatory attitude and

interest nonverbally, is involved in group goals, and expresses interest through receptive

facial expressions and body language. In a team, she may be most satisfied when there are

opportunities for team consensus, the provision of personal guidance, encouragement, and

support for individual efforts, and frequent contact with other team members.

The affection results indicate that she is a genuinely warm and caring person who values the

sonal interest, encouragement, and friendship of others. People may notice her friendliness

but fail to recognize how desperately she requires reassurance and support. Even after she

has developed a close relationship with someone, she is likely to require a great deal of

reassurance that she is cared for. Her need for individual closeness may fall short of

fulfillment due to its depth and the fact that others rarely recognize how much she requires it.
 28

The participant may prefer working in an environment that encourages close relationships

and where support, appreciation, and encouragement are commonplace. Her ability to use her

natural warmth and consideration without encountering excessive indifference or coolness

from others is also likely to contribute to her job satisfaction and performance. The

participant did disclose that she has a sibling, so her scores can be supported by a study by

Parameswari (2015), which concluded that first-born children have a higher need for wanted

affection than later-born children. It was also discussed how parents tend to pay more

attention and care to their younger children than to their elder children, believing that the

elder child can care for himself. The elder child may feel left out at this stage, and their need

for affection may increase.

Conclusion

Interpersonal behaviour encompass the interactions between different personalities with one

another, how they communicate, how often they influence and affect one another, and their

behavioral responses during interactions. It is often the fundamental basis of an

organization’s success, influencing its job satisfaction, communication, conflict management

and resolution, trust, leadership, and the organization's work culture itself. The aim was to

assess the interpersonal needs of an individual using the psychological test of FIRO-B.

Based on the participants scores, we can conclude that she is someone often who seeks

initiation of interpersonal behaviour by others. Her expression of interpersonal needs varies

across the context as well as the people involved. The need for affection was the highest,

indicating she is a genuinely warm and caring person who values the sonal interest,

encouragement, and friendship of others. People may notice her friendliness but fail to

recognize how much she requires reassurance and support. The participant may prefer

working in an environment that encourages close relationships and where support,

appreciation, and encouragement are common. The need for inclusion had the lowest scores
 29

indicating, regardless of who initiates it, can be interpreted as an indication of how she

typically prefer a balance between time alone and time with others. Her need for control also

indicated her requiring a moderate amount of structure and clarity surrounding authority.

Overall, she has come across as someone who is likely to express or elicit corresponding

social behaviors to satisfy her needs in her typical ways. She finds satisfaction in interacting

with others in all areas of inclusion, control, and affection and that she believes that her

interpersonal relationships help her achieve her goals.

 30

References

Amudhadevi, N.V. (2012). A study on emotional intelligence in relation to interpersonal

relationship and role stress among school teachers. Indian Journal of Positive

Psychology. 3(3), 330-332. Retrieved from

https://www.proquest.com/openview/b6b3594051277769613b51e08fbbb736/

Gaur, D. (2020). Self-Leadership and interpersonal competences of future aspiring

professionals in the Arab Middle East:. . . ResearchGate.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/344111453_Self-Leadership_and_Interperso

nal_Competences_of_Future_Aspiring_Professionals_in_the_Arab_Middle_East_Ref

erence_to_FIRO-B

Mansfield, J., Winter, J. K., & Waner, K. K. (2012). A Study of Team Performance in

Business Communication: Can the FIRO-B Help? ABD Journal, 4(2).

http://www.ship.edu/assets/0/153/198023/198024/a535fb32-f37e-49c0-929d-0c31b91

a25af.pdf

Parameswari, J. (2015). Interpersonal Relationships among College Students: an Assessment.

International Journal of Indian Psychology. https://doi.org/10.25215/0202.046

Sellick, K. J. (1991). Nurses’ interpersonal behaviours and the development of helping skills.

International Journal of Nursing Studies, 28(1), 3–11.

https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-7489(91)90044-4
31