Some of the persuasive influences which operate in intrviews.

The Persuaslve Interview

Th persuasive interview is in many ways the most difficult to conduct successfully. This form most often occurs on sales situations that involve used car salesmen, encyclopaedia vendors, retail store clerks, real estate agent, and the like. But persuasive interviewing is by no means limited to the sales context; any one-to-one situation in which one member wants to produce a change. in the other involves persuasion. The purpose of the persuasive interview, then, is to change the interviewee's attitudes, values, or behaviours.

Many excellent works, such as that by Cronkhite, explore the process of persuasion, and we shall not attempt to duplicate their efforts. Rather shall simply review some of the persuasive influences which operate in intrviews.

Procedures

Planning: The first step in the preparation of a persuasive interview is an analysis of the individual to be persuaded. Typically this analysis must be done quickly and on the basis of relatively superficial characteristics. Research suggests, however, that even these characteristic can provide clues about the individual's persuasibility. Investigations of the relationship between sex and persuasibility have found that women are more interested in humanitarian issues than are men, are more susceptible to social pressure, and are more easily persuaded.

Educational attainment, often indicated by patterns of dress, also seems related to persuasibility. Well-educated individals have relatively more stable attitudes, but they too can be persuaded through provision of new infonnation. Studies of age and persuasibility have shown that willingness to take risks decreases with age and that this decrease produces inflexibility in buying habits, living style, and social and political attitudes. Older people tend to have more fixed religious beliefs and typically are less inclined and less able to evaluate complex persuasive appeals. Finally, studieds of persuasibility and socioeconomic status have shown people of higher status to be more conservative and resistant to persuasive appeals. Through a quick evaluation of the individual's characteristic, then we can make some judgments "about the types of appeals which might persuade her or him.

Beginning: The initial stage of the persuasive interview is the moment at which persuader and persuadee first meet. Burstein says this moment, for the interviewer, is the "point when his appearance, deineanour," and what he says will determine if he will have an opportunity to make an adequate presentation." Thus our concern here shall be the verbal strategies employed in the encoupter. Hatfield suggests two approaches which salespersons might adopt. The first, used when the customer seems not to be interested in a specific item, he terms the service approach, which is typified by the May I help you? opening. This approach, however, may convey disinterest on the part of the salesperson and tends to elicit a No, I'm just looking response, which stifles further interaction. To minimize these dangers, Hatfield suggests that somewhat unorthodox service openings be employedsuch as, Is anyone helping you? or Are you findirig what you need? On the other hand, the salesperson may employ the merchandise approach, in which some mention is made of the merchandise being examined by the customer.

We might begin by observing that, Pontiacs of that year are pretty hard to find, but this one's in great shape.

As interViews we probably would feel some compulsion to dwell

Typically the action will come as no surprise to the interviewee; he will have been warned Qefore, perhaps in similar disciplinary interviews. As interViews we probably would feel some compulsion to dwell upon any positive characteristics of the employee we can conjure up in an effort to make him feel better. Such efforts usually are wasted; all he wants is to get the information he needs and get out. We therefore should be prepared to explain the organization's termination procedures with regard to such matters as insurance plans and retirement benefIts. The employee may ask whether the company will references for him to aid in securing a new job. We should provide an honest answer, telling what we think can be said on his behalf. Situations such as these are unpleasant for both parties and should not be unnecessarily prolonged.

Closing. If the employee has not been fired, clear indication should be given at the end of the interview concerning her situation. If some action is to be taken, such as suspension, demotion, or a pay cut, she should be told about it. Moreover, if the employee has courses of action available to her, such as implementing an apal's procedure, that too should be described. Most important, it should be made clear to the employee what changes are expected in her behaviour and, perhaps, what consequences will follow should those changes not be made. The ultimate goal of the disciplinary interview is not to discipline but to produce behavioural improvements. Those improvements occur only when the worker knows exactly what she is expected to do.

Although disciplinary interviews usually occur in emotionally changed situations, emotions must be kept out of the interview as much as possible. If you are upset or angry, wait until some later time before speaking with the employee. When the interview takes place,' suspend judgmnt and be willing to listen carefully to what she has to say-it may change your entire perception of the situation. Take a flexible approach to each interview; while organizational rules may seem clear, specific situations may dictate different sorts of enforcement. Finally, deal with the employee only on the job level-do not attack her as a person. Becoming personal in your criticism can only engender hostility and will do little to change a worker's behaviour.

The organization can satisfy the workers' desire for feedback, aid them in improving their performance

The key to successful appraisal interviewing seems to be the ability to avoid producing defensive reactions on the part of the employee while at the same time providing an accurate assessment of performance. By allowing a maximum of participation by the interviewee, by demonstrating the organization's interest in the employee's achievement, and by showing her or his own concern for the employee's well-being, the interviewer can minimize threat and maximize motivation to improve. By u"eating appraisal as a daily responsibility and by providing feedback frequently rather than annually, the organization can satisfy the workers' desire for feedback, aid them in improving their performance, and prevent the actual interview from being a u"aumatic experience.The Disciplinary Interview Closely related to the appraisal interview is the interview in which disciplinary action is taken. Occasions arise in which management must attempt to correct a behaviour or an attitude of a worker; common instances involve habitual tardiness, time wasting, improper work procedures, or violation of organization policies. The disciplinary interview is designed first to determine the facts underlying the case and then to produce whatever reforms are needed.

Procedures

Beginning: The interviewer should immediately inform the employee of the situation. Although the employee probably has some idea about why she has been summoned for a conference, doubts may still remain that should be removed as quickly and objectively as possible.

. The interviewee then should be given an opportunity to explain the situation as she views it, for she may be able to provide information that completely changes the interviewer's perceptions of the problem. Implicit in this is a willingness on the part of the interviewer to listen and to be flexible. Often this is not easily achieved. A disciplinary interview usually is sUITounded by a climate of anger and frustration, with either or both of the participants feeling hostile or upset. This climate in tum creates the danger that the interview will become a confrontation in which the interviewer becomes the prosecutor and the employee the defendant or in which the interviewer delivers a sermon demanding that the employee mend her ways or get out. To overcome these tendencies, both participants should resolve to listen and maintain and open mind.
approach can range from extremely non-directive to extremely directive. If threats and ultimatums seem the only viable methods, we must use them and be willing to carry them out. If a gentle application of probing questions can pe used to lead the interviewee to selfreform, the non-directive approach is preferable. It allows participation by the employee, makes his opinion seem valued by the company, and increases his commitment to reform measures ultimately agreed upon. But only through a suspension of anger and application of careful listening can .this method be effective.

Perhaps the extreme form of disciplinary interview is the one in which the employee is to be fIred. If such is the case, this should be clearly stated early in the interview. .

Appraisal interview lies not in considering job-related performance but in dealing with the interviewee's interpersonal relationships

The employee is given a chance to air whatever grievances he may have, to present any suggestions which may have occurred to him, and generally to engage in some upward communication.

Perhaps the most difficult aspect of the appraisal interview lies not in considering job-related performance but in dealing with the interviewee's interpersonal relationships. Occasionally a worker may not get along well with her co-workers or may not respond well to her boss. Complaints may have been lodged against her by others, or she may have been observed violating company policies. Whatever the situation, these matters are even

more threatening than job performance issues, for they focus on the person herself, not just her work. Such matters should be handled directly, objectively, and with whatever evidence is available to support the complaint and minimized the rationalization that "somebody's out to get me" or "that's just somebody' opinion:" These matters should be considered only as they affect job performance;othr matters of a personal nature belong in a counselling.

interview. As with matters concerning performance, the interview's input should be sought; best results are obtained if she is able to devise and implement a solution of her own.

Closing: Like other interview forms, the appraisal interview should be closed on a positive note with an emphasis on future performance. The interviewer should express optimism about the employee's future perfonnance, indicate a willingness to meet again with the employee whenever he wishes, provide him with copies of any written perfonnance evaluations available, and give him the opportunity to suggest changes in any factual matters he believes incorrect. Most important, no matter how bad the appraisal has been, the interview should end positively. The interviewer should show that she or he values the employee as a person, feels positively toward him, and is willing to aid in promoting future improvements.

Inaccurate assumptions about the situation and typically is doomed to failure.

While the interviewee may go through the motions of "buying" the interviewer's suggestions the sales approach to appraisal is based upon inaccurate assumptions about the situation and typically is doomed to failure.

Procedures

Planning: Having seen the types of strategies to be avoided, we turn now to techniques for effective appraisal interviewing. When planning the interview, it often is useful to develop an outline of topic which the interview is to cover. According to Kindall and Gatza, a five-step structure should be employed:

1. agreement concerning job content and the relative

importance of the duties the employee performs

2. establishment of performance targets

3. discussion of the target programme

4. establishment of checkpoints for progress evaluation

5. discussion of the employee's efforts to meet target previously established.

While this approach, management by objectivesapplies to an ongoing evaluation process that may involve a'series of interviews the basic structure may serve" a framework for a single appraisal.

Beginning: Because the appraisal interview usually produces tension in the interviewee, it seems best to avoid initial small talk. As Kindall and Gatza indicate, one useful beginning is to reach agreement concerning the duties expected of the worker and how performance on those duties is to be measured. These matters should not be dictated by the manager to the interviewee; rather they should be arrived at cooperatively with input from both participants.

When agreement on these matters has been achieved, the interview should progress to the interviewee's performance record, considering specifically how well her work measures up to the established guidelines. Here the interviewee is presented with whatever information the manager has concerning her performane and is given the opportunity to respond with whatever comments, explanations, defenses, or questions she may have. If the threat presen in the situation seems to hinder the employee's responses, the interviewer shquld ask for them. The function of this portion of the interview is not only to provide the interviewee with information concrning management's judgments of her performance but to allow the employee to react to that information, "to assess its fairness and accuracy, and to explain any factors which may underlie the performance figures.

Since the ultimate goal of the appraisal interview is to improve future performance, most of the interviewer's attention should be devoted to finding methods for improvement. While we might be tempted simply todictate those methods, the best results are obtained by asking the intelviewee two questions: What do you think you can do to improve? And what can we do to help? These questions serve several important functions. First, they demonstrate that management respects the worker's intellect and recognizes his ability to make decisions for himself. Second, they provide the worker with an opportunity to determine his own future behaviours and to help establish guidelines by which his perfOlmances will be judged. Coch and French found that when employees are allowed to participate in policy-making they show high satisfaction with and commitment to the decisions made. Finally, these questions demonstrate that management is genuinely interested in the employee's progress and in

. helping him attain it.

A bungled interview consequently could mean disaster. Counselling interviews should not be conducted by amateurs

The client usually is emotionally distraught and often has turned to the counsellor as a last resort. A bungled interview consequently could mean disaster. Counselling interviews should not be conducted by amateurs: only after thorough training should one engage in this type of interview.

The Appraisal interview

In some ways the appraisal interview is the antithesis of the counselling form. While in counselling interviews valuation of the client usually is avoided, the entire functibn 'of the appraisal interview is to evaluate the individual's job performance. Davis points out that

management profits from appraisal interviews because they give ma.nagement the opportunity to allocate resources within the organization, reward employees, provide employees with feedback, and maintain fair integroup relations. Labour alo desires this type of communication; research by Howard and Berkowitz and Stolz and Tannenbaum demonstrates that while people prefer positive feedback, and while negative feedback creates anxiety, workers still prefer negative feedback to no feedback at all. These findings also illustrate the paradox attendant on the appraisal interview: the employee desires feedback concerning performance but is anxious about that feedback and likely to behave defensively when it is given. In the appraisal interview, then, the interviewer must provide feedback concerning the interview's performance while making the situation as non-threatening as possible.

Given the difficulty involved in conducting an appraisal interview, it is hardly starting to discover that such interviews often are mishandled in modern organizations. Lahiff reports that appraisal interviewers often tend to dwell upon the individual's negative characteristics-a highly destructive approach. Kay, Meyer, and French found that the more weaknesses the

manager mentioned during the interview, the poorer the

worker's performance became and the lower he rated the company's appraisal system. In part this tendency to focus on negative characteristics seems to stem from a general lack of daily feedback. Rather than pass problems along as

they occur, managers often store them up over a period of time and then unload the entire list during the appraisal. A day-to-day system of feedback would serve to minimize this sort of occurrence and thus avoid some of the tensions of the appraisal situation.A second misuse of the appraisal interview, Davis reports, is the manager's tendency to "sell" the employee on his need for improvement. This tendency ignores the fundamental differences between appraisal and sales interviews. In the latter, the buyer has the security of knowing that he ultimately will make the final decision, so he feels free to express his true feelings and has the power to say no. The individual being appraised has none of these benefits; the interviewer possesses the power, controls the situation, and has the ability to make final decisions.

Attentive look may exert pressure on the client to continue talking

The reflective or mirror statement

Several strategies are used by non-directive counsellors. Silence accompanied by an attentive look may exert pressure on the client to continue talking. So, too, does the non-committal Um-hmm, which shows interest and understanding but provides no input. The reflective or mirror statement, which paraphrases the last comment made by the interviewee, also encourages .one to continue. But the most imponant and most difficult su'ategy is to pose questions which provide the Client with some insight into her or his problem. Usually it takes training and a great deal of experience to become proficient at this son of probing questioning. The interviewer must have insight into the client's problem, and tluough her questioning she must lead the client to that same insight and to a solution for the problem-two very difficult tasks. When handled properly, this type of interview has been found extremely effective in handling employee problems.

Despite its advantages, the non-directive approach is not without restrictions. It is an expensive method in telms of the time it requires and the 'expensive of training competent counsellors. It places considerable responsibility upon the client, assuming him to be motivated to achieve a solution to his problem, to have the insight to ultimately understand his problem and find a solution, and to have the emotional capacity to deal with the problem. Still, the benefits of the non-directive method seem to greatly outweigh any drawbacks it may have.

Closing: The manner in which the counselling interview is closed is as important a determinant of its success as are each of the preceding stages. If the interviewee feels as though she is being rushed out the door, that the interviewer has given her all the time she is worth or that the interviewer's appearances of caring about the client has been an act, any progress made up to
that point may be lost. Moreover, if problems again arise, the client may be reluctant to return for further counselling. Thus the interview should close when boh client and interviewer feel psychologically comfortable 10 losing-it should be neither rushed nor drawn out by discussion of irrelevant topics. Although we all tend to seek a neatly tied package at the interview's close, that often is impossible; reorientation often does not occur until some later time. It may therefore be unrealistic and artificial to try to pull together all that has occurred; rather; we should encourage the client to continue grappling with the problem in light of our conservation' and to return whenever she or he feels the need. On this positive note the interview should end

The counselling interview is by no means a cure-all for employee problems. Counselling in many cases is' a rather indequate measure because .it 'returns the client to the environmet which may have caused her or his problems in the first place. In such cases lasting change may be attainable only through some changes in the environment, not through any advice we can offer. Often it is appropriate to discuss such cases with management and to suggest changes we feel might be helpful. In any case, the counselling interview must be handled with care.