Factor analysis of FERO-B data obtained from new software product teams has led to a reformulation of Schutz's ideas on team compatibility. The concept of Group-Warmth as a derivative of the FERO-B Inclusion and Affection scales was developed and shown to be related to the commercial effectiveness of teams. In a like manner, the FIRO-B constructs of Control-Expressed and Control-Wanted were explored through concurrent factor analysis of 16 PF data. A new interpretation has been given to both FIRO-B Control scales, namely, Assertive-Impulsive.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BarczakG.WilemonD. (1989) Leadership differences in new product development teams. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 6, 259–267.
2.
HafnerR. J.RossM. W. (1989) The FIRO model of family therapy: Implications of factor analysis. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 45, 974–979.
3.
HawleyE. H.HeinenS. (1979) Compatibility and task group performance. Human Relations, 32, 579–590.
4.
HillR. E. (1975) Interpersonal compatibility and workgroup performance. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 11, 210–219.
5.
HillR. E. (1977) Managing interpersonal conflict in project teams. Sloan Management Review, 18, 45–61.
6.
HurleyJ. R. (1989) Dubious support for FIRO-B's validity. Psychological Reports, 65, 929–930.
7.
HurleyJ. R. (1990) Does FIRO-B relate better to interpersonal or intrapersonal behavior?Journal of Clinical Psychology, 46, 454–460.
8.
HurleyJ. R. (1991) FIRO-B's dissociation from two central dimensions of interpersonal behavior. Psychological Reports, 68, 243–254.
9.
HurleyJ. R. (1992) Further evidence against the construct validity of the FIRO-B scales. Psychological Reports, 70, 639–640.
10.
KirtonM. (1976) Adaptors and innovators: A description and measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61, 622–629.
11.
KubesM. (1992) Cognitive style and interpersonal behaviour: The Kirton Adaption-Innovation and Schutz's FIRO-B inventories. Psychology: A Journal of Human Behavior, 29, 33–38.
12.
LiddellW. W.SlocumJ. W. (1976) The effect of individual-role compatibility upon group performance: An extension of Schutz's FIRO theory. Academy of Management Journal, 19, 413–426.
13.
MalloyT. E.CopelandE. P. (1980) FIRO-B Interpersonal compatibility: A suggested modification. Education and Psychological Measurement, 40, 961–967.
14.
McCraeR. R.CostaP. T. (1989) The structure of interpersonal traits: Wiggins's circumplex and the five factor modelJournal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 586–595.
15.
MoosR. H.SpeismanJ. C. (1962) Group compatibility and productivity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 65, 190–196.
16.
MullenB.CopperC. (1994) The relationship between cohesiveness and performance: An integration. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 210–227.
ReddyW. B.ByrnesA. (1972) Effects of interpersonal group composition on the problem-solving behavior of middle managers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 56, 516–517.
19.
SchutzW. C. (1955) What makes groups productive?Human Relations, 8, 429–465.
20.
SchutzW. C. (1958) FIRO: A three-dimensional theory of interpersonal behavior. New York: Reinhart. (Third printing, Mill Valley, CA: WSA, 1989) Also reprinted as Schutz, W. C. (1966) The interpersonal underworld. Palo Alto, CA, Science and Behavior Books.
SchutzW. C. (1984) The truth option. Berkeley, CA: Ten Speed.
23.
SchutzW. C. (1992) Beyond FIRO-B three new theory-derived measures—Element B: Behavior, Element F: Feelings, Element S: Self. Psychological Reports, 70, 915–937.
24.
WiedemannC.WaxenbergS. E.MoneL. C. (1979) Factor analysis of FIRO-B and FERO-F. Small Groups Behavior, 10, 49–61.
25.
WigginsJ. S. (1982) Circumplex models of interpersonal behaviour in clinical psychology. In KendallP. C.ButcherJ. N. (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in clinical psychology. New York: Wiley. Pp. 183–221.
