What to do with your FIRO-B Results.
First of all, if you’re reading this, you must have received your results, which means you have done four things:
Filled out one of the most tedious self-assessments I know of.
Been through a debriefing conversation (probably in a group) with a certified professional who has helped you understand it appropriately. (If this is not true, please—please!—get in touch with someone who knows what they’re talking about. This is not some magazine quiz. Misinterpreting this instrument can create some enduring challenges.
Spent enough time with your report and in your debriefing conversation to understand the basics of the instrument: what the three categories mean (Inclusion, Control, Affection), the difference between Expressed and Wanted, and at least a good idea of what your individual scores mean.
Seen enough potential value in it to wonder how you can put it to use.
Congratulations. I really love the FIRO-B, and I’m disappointed when I hear people say, “it was interesting, but I can’t really see any application.” Let’s fix that right now.
In my view, there are two powerful applications for the FIRO-B. The first takes your results in isolation and gives you a way of thinking about how you might be showing up—at home and at work. The second puts your results alongside others’, and gives you a way of thinking about how you like to interact with other people and why.
Moreover, the insights you gain and the language you learn through the instrument give you a better understanding of what might be going on with the people around you. That’s valuable as a teammate or leader, and as a friend and family member.
By the way, if you’re wondering why I’ve now twice specifically called out the distinction between home and work, it’s simply because we are situational creatures. We behave differently in different settings in ways large and small. You know that behavior that might be appropriate at a party might not be appropriate at a funeral. You probably act differently at a family holiday party than at a work holiday party. You might say things in one setting you wouldn’t say in another. For many people, this is a relevant issue when it comes to seeing themselves represented in their scores—they find that the numbers on the page are a good depiction of themselves in some settings but not in others. That’s perfectly normal and to be expected.
Showing Up
Asking how you show up is a short-hand way of asking, “How do you believe you are being perceived by others?” You may have noticed that I have qualified this question or issue both times it’s been raised: first I said that the instrument tells you how you “might be showing up,” then I phrased it as, “how you believe you are being perceived.” That’s an intentional, and I think important, qualification. Without asking, you can’t actually know how you’re being perceived. And even if you asked you might get different answers from different people. Perhaps most importantly, unless you want to live a very strange life, you can’t be asking people how you’re showing up every moment of the day. Therefore, your ability to have a reasonably accurate sense of how you might be showing up is important. One of the factors that influences how you show up is the set of preferences identified in your FIRO-B results.
I’ll use my own results as an illustration.
My personal scores are quite low. I’ve completed the instrument several times at different stages of my life and with different frames of mind. I once filled it out while mentally adding the words, “at work” to every question. The results have varied somewhat, but they always come out low, ranging from a total score of 2 to a total of about 13, if I remember correctly. Once, when I shared this information with a group I was debriefing, one of them asked, “are you sure you’re breathing?” We all had a good laugh, but it was a great example of what I want to emphasize here.
One thing I understand about myself—and which was illustrated by this playful question—is that, because I am typically content with very little interpersonal interaction, if I behave in a way that’s consistent with my preferences, I can come across to some people as isolated, stand-offish, distant or disinterested. At the same time, others may interpret those same behaviors as me being focused, driven or self-sufficient.
Given this inherent subjectivity, and my strong desire not to be perceived as distant or disinterested (at least most of the time), I have learned to do two things:
Tweak my behaviors at times to increase the chances of being perceived as focused, rather than isolated. For instance, I find that if I contribute and make good eye contact in meetings, it tilts the perception in the direction I prefer.
Interact with people more than, and in different ways than I might naturally prefer. I’ve gotten comfortable over the years with stopping and chatting with people. I demonstrate curiosity about them and their work. I try to build a certain level of personal rapport, rather than just “getting down to work.” And while it’s still not my “natural” tendency, it’s become like second nature, and I enjoy it. (And, I would probably benefit even more if I built the habit of reaching out more and staying connected to people more. But, one step at a time!)
With that example in place, have a look at your results. Assuming that you spend at least a good share of your time behaving in ways that are consistent with your scores, what are the “best” and “worst” versions of how people might be perceiving you? What adjustments might you need to make in order to make sure people are seeing you the way you want to be seen?
Interacting with Others
Anticipating who would get along together was the original purpose of the FIRO-B, and it does a good job of it. You’ve already learned about matching your Wanted scores against another person’s Expressed scores, and vice versa, to anticipate whether you are likely to meet one another’s needs. Let’s get right into the question of what to do with this information.
Putting a team together.
When the U.S. Navy commissioned the research that led to the creation of the FIRO-B, they had the luxury of using the findings of the research to build teams from the ground up (at least sometimes). This may not be the most common application for you, since few of us get to build teams from scratch. We tend to inherit teams and team members. But, on the off chance you get to build a new team, thinking about FIRO-B profiles might be valuable.
However, don’t make the mistake of thinking that this is the most important consideration for putting a team together. When assembling a team, your first priority should be to ensure they have the needed skills. Closely behind that, in my view, is selecting people who are willing and able to adapt their behaviors to help meet one another’s needs. Unless you can absolutely prove that specific FIRO-B profiles are directly linked to success in a job or role, it would be mistake to use the results of this (or similar) instruments to make hiring or firing decisions. (In fact, it might even be illegal.)
Here’s an example of what I think is a good use of the FIRO-B in assembling teams. Many years ago, I worked for a strategy consulting firm. The partners running the Chicago office of the firm decided to have all of the client-facing staff of the office complete the FIRO-B. When it came time to staff up a new consulting team they used three criteria to make the selection:
Who’s available?
Of those who are available, who has the right skills for this engagement?
Of those who are available and have the right skills, do their FIRO-B results tell us anything about who might get along well?
If you find yourself in the position of assembling a team, I think this is the right list in the right order.
Building an existing team.
This is a much more common, and therefore more applicable situation for most people. Chances are, you are now on a team, leading a team or both. In the case of an existing team, you have several great opportunities to put the FIRO-B to work.
The first thing you can do is share your results with your teammates (if your teammates have completed the instrument as well, you can all share them with each other). By making your results public, you achieve two valuable outcomes:
First, your colleagues will understand you better and will be more likely to interpret your behaviors the “best” way, simply because they understand that you are following natural preferences. This is especially beneficial when they might otherwise be more inclined to interpret your behaviors in the “worst” way.
Second, it’s almost automatic that sharing your results and explaining what they mean, will inspire your colleagues to share with you how they like to interact with others. Even if they didn’t complete the FIRO-B instrument itself, you will be teaching your teammates a new language for making sense of how you tend to interact with one another. You may even find that, by making people familiar with the FIRO terminology (Wanted Inclusion, etc.), you and your colleagues will see how differences in preferences help explain some of the tense relationship issues on your team. (Maybe he’s not a busy-body—maybe he just has high Wanted Affection scores!)
To have this kind of conversation, it’s helpful, but not necessary, for everyone to have filled out the profile. Most people will get the concepts quickly, at least well enough to discuss possible matches and mismatches. (You know, I think I might just be expressing more control than you want!)
When you identify good matches within the team, there’s really nothing you need to do (if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it), though you might consider whether there are ways for the well-matched people to work together more. It is generally easy and often rewarding to work with people whose profiles complement your own.
On the other hand, when you find a mismatch, you have some options for how to address it:
Experiment with New Behaviors. Discuss what experiments one or both mismatched colleagues could conduct to try to improve the relationship. For instance, imagine two team members who work together often. Chris has a score of 7 Expressed Control and Pat has a score of 2 Wanted Control. There’s a good chance that Pat views Chris as bossy and that Chris views Pat as stubborn (because they frequently bristle at the control Chris is expressing). The two might decide to conduct one of these experiments:
Chris will try to give opinions less forcefully and listen more carefully to Pat’s ideas.
Pat will ask Chris for directions or opinions from time to time.
Chris and Pat will work together to find consensus solutions.
Change Team Assignments. Maybe it’s possible for the mismatched teammates to work together a little less, either by working more with others, or by working more independently.
Create Opportunities to Meet Needs. Could you create situations in which people can more readily get their needs met, at least sometimes? For instance, maybe someone with a high wanted inclusion score could be invited to an extra meeting once in a while. Maybe someone with a low wanted inclusion score could be excused from a meeting once in a while. Maybe some meetings start with personal conversations for the sake of your teammates with higher affection scores and others get straight to business for the sake of your teammates with lower affection scores. Maybe that person who wants to express control but has no venue for it could be assigned to a key role on a cross-functional team.
Being a Better Teammate
There are almost countless ways you could use the insights from this instrument to make things better for your team. Here are just a few examples:
Be more open with people about your own preferences and encourage them to do the same.
Ask for feedback on how you’re showing up, then—when appropriate—act on the feedback in visible ways.
Ask colleagues what you can do to help them get their interpersonal needs met, and then try to act on their requests.
When someone acts in a way that inconveniences or bothers you, remind yourself that they aren’t a bad person—they’re just doing their best while following their natural preferences.
Put a discussion of personal preferences on the agenda of a team meeting.
When you sense a mismatch between yourself and a colleague, conduct an experiment to see if a small adjustment on your part helps smooth things between you.
Being a Better Leader
If you’re a team leader, the FIRO-B gives you another tool, another language, for understanding your people. And, because a leader’s primary responsibility is to bring out the best performance in their team members, the better you know your people, the more likely you are to help them do their best.
You can use your understanding of their FIRO profile to…
Motivate: offer them opportunities to work in ways that feel more satisfying.
Recognize: select forms of recognition aligned to their preferences.
Manage: tailor your approach to them based on their preferences.
Communicate: structure your communication strategy and select communication tools to take advantage of their preferences.
It’s an Investment
Finally, it’s only fair to acknowledge that applying the FIRO-B may have a cost, especially in terms of energy. It can be hard to consistently act in ways that feel unnatural to you. It might feel inauthentic. Particularly when you first begin to use new ways of working, you may find it exhausting.
Let me close by encouraging you to think of that cost in energy, focus or effort as an investment. Yes, you’ll have to be mindful and intentional, and yes, that takes consistent effort over time. But when you get it right—when you are able to make adjustments to your behavior that lead to enhanced rapport, trust, satisfaction and engagement, you will see the returns.