Fundamental

interpersonal
relations orientation

This article includes a list of references, but its

sources remain unclear because it hasLearn more

Fundamental Interpersonal Relations

Orientation (FIRO) is a theory of
interpersonal relations, introduced by
William Schutz in 1958. This theory mainly
explains the interpersonal interactions of a
local group of people. 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, and this became
version B (for "Behavior"). This technique
was created to measure 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.

Description
These categories measure how much
interaction a person wants in the areas of
socializing, leadership and responsibilities,
and more intimate personal relations.
FIRO-B was created, based on this theory,
as a measurement instrument with scales
that assess the behavioral aspects of the
three dimensions. Scores are graded from
0–9 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 scales of the scoring system, 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:
"outstanding"; low "shy")
Wanted Inclusion (wI): "I want to be
Included" (High: "friendly"; low: "aloof")
expressed Control (eC): "I try to control
others" (High: "authoritarian"; low: "absent-
minded")
Wanted Control (wC): "I want to be
controlled" (High: "submissive"; low:
"rebellious")
Expressed Affection (eA): "I try to be close
and personal" (High: "empathetic"; low:
"cold")
Wanted Affection (wA): "I want others to
be close and personal with me" (High:
"needy"; low: "defensive")

Putting them together, Schutz came up

with fifteen "Descriptive Schema and
appropriate terminology for each
Interpersonal Need Area":[2]

Score Inclusion Control Affection

Shy Absent-minded Cold

Low e and w
Aloof Rebellious Defensive

Outstanding Authoritarian Empathetic

high e and w
Friendly Submissive Needy

Outstanding Authoritarian Empathetic

High e but low w
Aloof Rebellious Defensive

Shy Absent-minded Cold

low e but high w
Friendly Submissive Needy

moderate e and w Social Democrat Personal

In 1977, a clinical psychologist who

worked with 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 The FIRO-B:
 Temperament by
Score Inclusion Control Affection
APS (all 3 areas)

Low e
The Loner The Rebel The Pessimist Melancholy
and w

"Now You See Him, "Image of Phlegmatic

moderate
Now You Don't" Self-Confident Intimacy" Melancholy /
e, low w
Tendencies Tendency Phlegmatic Choleric

High e, Now You See Him, Image/(Mask)

Mission Impossible Choleric
low w Now You Don't of Intimacy

high e, "Mission Impossible" Sanguine

Living Up To
moderate The Conversationalist with Narcissistic Phlegmatic /
Expectations
w Tendencies Choleric Phlegmatic

People Gatherer
high e Dependent-
(formerly, "Where are The Optimist Sanguine
and w Independent conflict
the People?")

Phlegmatic Supine /
moderate Cautious Lover
Hidden Inhibitions Let's Take a Break Phlegmatic
e, high w In Disguise
Sanguine

Openly Dependent
low e,
Inhibited Individual Person; (w=6: Loyal Cautious Lover Supine
high w
Lieutenant)

low e, Supine Phlegmatic /

Careful
moderate Cautious Expectation The Checker Melancholy
Moderation
w Phlegmatic

Warm
moderate
Social Flexibility The Matcher Individual/The Phlegmatic
e and w
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 …

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
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 much other 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.

(now The Myers-Briggs Company[5]), 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. Thompson
who developed the second one.[6]

Correlations with MBTI

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. 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 The Myers-Briggs
Company[7].

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

Wanted Control 04 −09 16*** −05

Expressed Affection −52*** 06 22*** 07

Wanted Affection −31*** 02 17*** 07

 Element B Scales EI SN TF JP

I include people -.48* .18* .16* .08

I want to include people -.33* .09 .21* .08

People include me -.43* .14* -.02 .11

I want people to include me -.28* .09 -.07 .01

I control people -.30* .14 -.13* .02

I want to control people -.13* .04 -.08 .05

People control me -.11 .00 .17* .01

I want people to control me -.06 -.06 .12 .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 -.21* .28* .22* .07

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

References
1. Schutz (1958) p19
2. Schutz (1958) p60
3. Hammer, Schnell (2000) p.6
4. http://www.hpsys.com/PDFs/EB%20M
atrix%20Sample.pdf
http://www.mikebeitler.com/freestuff/
articles/Element-B.pdf
5. https://www.themyersbriggs.com/en-
US/Products-and-Services/FIRO
6. http://www.hpsys.com/firo.htm
7. "FIRO and MBTI Instruments" . The
Myers-Briggs Company. 2020-05-05.
Schutz, W.C. (1958). FIRO: A Three
Dimensional Theory of Interpersonal
Behavior. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, &
Winston.
Schnell, E.; Hammer, A. (2000). FIRO-B®
Technical Guide. Mountain View, CA:
CPP, Inc.
Ryan, Leo R. (1977). Clinical
Interpretation of the FIRO-B. Mountain
View, CA: CPP, Inc.
Schnell, E.; Hammer, A. (1997).
"Integrating the FIRO-B with the MBTI:
Relationships, case examples, and
interpretation strategies". Developing
Leaders. Palo Alto, CA: Davies-Black
Publishing.
Thompson, H (2000). "FIRO Element B
and Myers-Briggs Type Indicator
correlations" . Watkinsville, GA: High
Performing Systems, Inc.
Olmstead, John W. (July 1999). "An
Exploratory Approach for Addressing
Leadership Characteristics in Law Firms
Using the Case of a Voluntary Bar
Association" (PDF). Century University.
Archived from the original (PDF) on
2004-07-19.
 Owen, William. "Interpersonal Needs"
(PDF). Archived from the original (PDF)
on 2007-01-27.

Retrieved from
"https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?
title=Fundamental_interpersonal_relations_orientati
on&oldid=955076651"

Last edited 3 months ago by 92.23.178.207

Content is available under CC BY-SA 3.0 unless

otherwise noted.