Trans-acting in the Workplace Skills That Enhance Workplace Interaction ©Dr. Peter R. Maida 2008 Washington, DC 20015 202-285-2510 Not to be copied without express permission of the author. Trans-acting in the Workplace Interest and information about workplace interaction is can be found in the following: Team building literature and research Organizational systems theory Leadership studies Exchange theory Organization development Human resources literature and research Conflict studies Clinical practice and research Executive coaching and counseling Workplace systems analysis Communication studies Trans-acting Trans-acting refers to the interaction taking place between two or more people. utilizes specific skills and abilities referred to as the “building blocks” of interaction, regardless of the context of interaction. Trans-acting Every trans-action results in an outcome whether the focus is the individual or the individual trans-acting in a specific context, e.g., community, workplace, family. These outcomes are used to judge the effectiveness of the trans-acting. Trans-acting can be fluid in that it is in constant evolution or can be static, i.e., stopped at a particular point in the interaction. Background Assumptions People trans-act with one another based on the skills, and abilities they value and are able to use in interaction with others. These are the “building blocks” of interpersonal interaction. Most employment relies on employees using certain well-established skills and abilities to achieve the mission’s objectives. Objectives of Assessing Trans-action discover the building blocks that enhance transaction; that is, those human behaviors and attitudes that facilitate positive and constructive interaction with others. to understand the workplace dynamics that lead to successful and productive interaction, necessary for any group to accomplish its goals; that is, for agencies to successfully carry out their missions. Select Building Blocks Select building blocks believed to be related to positive trans-acting in the workplace are: Trust Collaboration skills Communication skills Risk-taking behaviors vs. certitude Adaptability vs. inflexibility Emotion vs. rationality Individuality vs. group Ego strength Future vs. past thinking Background Assumptions People vary in the degree to which they can act using these building blocks; some manifest strengths, others, weaknesses. Assessing trans-acting focusing on the building blocks will reveal how well one is in sync with others regardless of the context. (workplace, family, community). Difficult interactions, lack of communication, conflict, low morale, dysfunctional behavior, inaction, passive-aggressive behavior, leadership deficits, job dissatisfaction, express the most commonly used descriptions when differences between people vary to a significant degree. “Problem behaviors” become a pattern of trans-acting that requires interventions if they are to change so that trans-acting takes on a more constructive or positive character. Purpose of the Analysis of Trans-acting To help employers and employees identify what building blocks are valued and utilized and how they are related to: Individual success at the job Trans-acting with colleagues Communication between managers and supervisors Workplace success in helping the organization accomplish its mission Employee Typology Typology of employees: Trans-acting optimizer Aware underperformer Pressured employee Situationally-limited trans-acting optimizer In-sync performer Low-level underoptimizer Outward-looking employee High criticizer In-sync underoptimizer How Employees Can Be Helped Understanding Interpreting Planning patterns of trans-acting with other employees work evaluations how to improve job performance Working with supervisors to reach a mutual understanding about how they communicate with one another Thinking about whether to switch to another job or workplace How Employers Can be Helped Understanding Analyzing the basis of communication with reports office trans-action dynamics Rehearsing for periodic meetings with reports in preparation for evaluations Self-understanding Analyzing of trans-actional style trans-actional interaction with supervisors in addition to reports Coaching and Counseling Individual and group behavioral assessment will aid efforts to coach and counsel individuals with respect to what they may choose to do to develop or reinforce the positive building blocks for trans-action. Attitude and behavioral changes resulting from coaching and counseling, in turn, form the basis for positive and constructive trans-acting. The Question to Ask Before Coaching and Counseling What are the strengths and weaknesses of the individual? “Qualifying Markers” – What to Look For Transacting Optimizer and workplace are “in sync” High achiever High job satisfaction Satisfaction with fellow employees Helps meet goals of organization Recognition of high quality work May be looking outside current job for career advancement May be the object of a “raid” Individual “Qualifying Markers” – What to Look For (cont.) Aware Underperformer Person with average skills Doesn’t live up to the workplace demands evaluations reveal concern that potential is not reached At times sub-optimum trans-actions with fellow employees Thinks of leaving for a more promising job Periodic “Qualifying Markers” – What to Look For (cont.) Pressured High employee level of dissatisfaction with job Have positive attitude toward workplace They don’t seem to be going anywhere in job Evaluations are “satisfactory” or below Don’t have positive interactions with others Resigned to stay in job if they have seniority Are identified as “problems” by managers Would benefit from further training “Qualifying Markers” – What to Look For (cont.) Situationally-limited Optimal trans-acting optimizer trans-actional skills Believe the workplace is out of sync with them and look to the workplace to change Believe their potential is not fulfilled Try to achieve their potential in spite of the workplace Try to change the workplace Most critical of managers and fellow employees A move may not be out of the question “Qualifying Markers” – What to Look For (cont.) In-sync Staff performer and workplace are in sync Neither staff nor workplace operate at the highest level of achievement however Workplace may reach some goals but success is lack-luster No one excels even though in sync Are comfortable in their jobs May not be totally satisfied with their achievement “Qualifying Markers” – What to Look For (cont.) Low-level Similar underperformer to, but differs from, aware underperformer in that underachieving is greater and the workplace is to blame Trans-acting with peers and supers is unsatisfactory Thinks of leaving job but has skill deficits Periodic evaluations are the basis for dissatisfaction and grievances Level and support for retraining is limited or lacking “Qualifying Markers” – What to Look For (cont.) Outward-looking Most employee dissatisfying work situation Employees see themselves as highly competent Possess the skills for successful trans-acting The workplace is viewed as stultifying Not committed to work at a high performance level They are the most out-ward looking of employees “Qualifying Markers” – What to Look For (cont.) High criticizer Average level of dissatisfaction with job Employer doesn’t set high goals Thinks that the work environment is under-performing Work environment doesn’t support positive trans-action and skill development Critical of agency’s work output Critical of agency’s leadership Have plans to leave the organization “Qualifying Markers” – What to Look For (cont.) In-sync underperformer Organization is the most dysfunctional Employee identifies his or her skills as low level and has a negative opinion about the work place Employee and leadership are resigned to low-level performance and not aware of skills necessary to increase success Not aware of the skills necessary for successful trans-acting nor how these skills are related to organizational success Level of dissatisfaction is high and motivation to leave job, including retirement, is low Interventions Trust Use of questions that try to uncover lack of trust or find out who can’t be trusted. What can be done to encourage trust if it is valued? What happens that affects trust in the workplace? Strategies: Traded assurances Use of focus group and action plan Discuss “betrayal” hot spots Baby steps to build trust activities Interventions (cont.) Collaboration Finding common interests Put positions aside for a while Assessing recognition of the interests of others Developing common principles Strategies: Planning future activities Working together on a detail Generating joint expectations Interventions (cont.) Communication What type of communicator? (Verbal, auditory, e-mail.) How are attempts to communicate received? Does the decision-making structure impede communication? What about intractable differences? Strategies: Active listening Opening channels of communication Periodic meetings to facilitate communication Coaching and counseling Interventions (cont.) Risk v. Certitude What types of risks are taken in the workplace? Is the workplace a “risky” place to be and why? How are risk and certitude balanced? How does the workplace respond to mistakes in judgment? Strategies: Practice risk taking and certitude – increase comfort level Locate fear “hot spots” Construct list of workplace activities and rank them based on risk and certitude for the employee Interventions (cont.) Adaptability v. Inflexibility How willing to change is the employee? When is the employee adaptive and inflexible? (New tasks; old routines?) What kind of job do you think the employee does at balancing these two extremes? Who is the employee adaptable and inflexible with? Strategies: Try switching hats: when inflexible try adaptability, etc.. Generate examples pushing adaptability and inflexibility to the extreme – paradox. Try realistic approach, i.e. does it make sense? Interventions (cont.) Emotion v. Rationality How does the employee balance these two? Is one relied on more than another when interacting with others in the workplace? How does the employee describe him/herself as far as emotion and rationality? How do others characterize the employee on this continuum? (Does the employee know the answer to this question?) Is there any evidence of inappropriate responses? Strategies: Paradox Searching for appropriate balance using real life examples. Switch hats to illustrate the inappropriateness of responding to any situation using only one. Interventions (cont.) Autonomy v. Group How does the individual test taker balance autonomy and group demands? Does the test taker believe that he or she is valued for individual thinking? How do others in the workplace respond to individual thinking? How strong is the commitment to “group think”? Strategies: Facilitate a discussion exploring when individual behavior is appropriate and when the group’s wishes are more important. Discuss topics in which the employee believes others demand too much conformity Explore what the employee believes should occur in an ideal workplace. Interventions (cont.) Ego Strength Do circumstances exist when one is asked to “back down” from a position? Does the employee have a high regard for him/herself? Is it important for the employee to prevail in an argument? Does the employee believe that others have a positive or negative opinion about his/her strong ego? Strategies: Probe as to whether others in the workplace appreciate the strong ego of the employee. Discuss when a strong ego is helpful or harmful in the workplace. Discuss whether the employee ever is unsure of him/herself. Interventions (cont.) Future v. Past How does the employee seem balance thinking about the importance of the past and importance of the future? When does the employee rely on the past and when is the future relied upon? Is the workplace, according to the employee, rooted in the past or forward thinking? Strategies: Given a series of tasks or topics, how does an employee balance the past and the future? Discuss people in the workplace and whether they are inclined to base their actions on the past or future and why. Considering the mission of the organization how is the past and future balanced by those in the workplace? For more information, contact: Dr. Peter R. Maida dr.petermaida@comcast.net mailto:dr.petermaida@comcast.net Cell: 202-285-2510 Office: 202-730-0864, 0864 Fax: 202-730-1826 SKYPE: peter.maida89