In Promana's Transactions assessment, we've defined two groups of factors that, when taken together, depict the interpersonal transactional approaches people tend to take. We recognise six "decision process" factors, five "communicating modes", plus one final factor that explores the effectiveness with which we use theses decision processes and communication modes.
Transactions Part I: Six Decision Processes
We make decisions to choose between two or more alternatives. We could decide on a whim or the toss of a coin, or we might think things through step by step and take everything into account. In fact, we can identify six levels of thinking that define the quality of decision making. The situation, the nature of the decision, and what we have to work with will influence which of these six levels we use.
This hierarchy of decision processes descends from reasoning at the top to magic at the bottom. Reasoning gives us our best answers because we combine step-by-step thinking with insights and opinions. When we have thought things through, we can retrace the process to look for flaws and areas for improvement. That doesn't mean that we'll always get it right, but at least we can know where we went wrong. Magic, at the other end of the scale, gives us none of these benefits, as all causes are hidden from us or are at best obscure. We see just the outcome and can only wonder how or why things happen as they do. In between the extremes of reasoning and magic we have, as degrees of decision effectiveness, logic, intuition, assertion and fate, again in descending order.
Let's dive into the first six "decision process" factors!
Transactional factor #1: Reasoning
Reasoning is an open-ended, conscious process that weighs and combines facts, assumptions and insights. There is no specific point in reasoning at which a decision must be made – we don’t necessarily reach a logical conclusion – but this ‘endless’ process may be stopped at any stage when a decision is required, then resumed if and when needed. Reasoning accepts that there may be no definitive answer. This decision mode rates high among effective people. Reasoning becomes more useful when combined with logic and intuition, the next two decision processes in the hierarchy. Reasoning is closely linked to problem solving in the chapter on Preferred Interests.
Reasoning people examine every aspect of an issue and think of the possibilities. They keep an open mind, picturing the way it could be and wondering what might result. They let their minds roam over the problem, looking for new approaches until they find the answer by reasoning. They avoid prejudging issues and defer judgment until they understand all the implications. They sleep on a problem when no answer is immediately apparent, but they cut short their thinking to make the best decision they can at the time. People who fail to use reasoning have to make do with less effective methods of decision making.
Transactional factor #2: Logic
Logic is the structured, conscious, step-by-step decision process that uses facts almost solely. Assumptions, opinions and insights are kept separate and tested carefully before being admitted. They are given less weight than proven facts in reaching an outcome. However, we need to recognize as fact the opinions people do hold and that alone may change the course of our thinking. The mechanical, step-by-step logical method can limit creativity but effective people rate logic alongside reasoning as a useful decision mode. Logic is closely linked to problem solving in the chapter on Preferred Interests.
Logical people define the problem first to make sure they understand the problem. They think issues through step-by-step, collecting facts and other information as they go. They examine all the facts and put them together to draw valid conclusions at each step. They test each conclusion they draw and one conclusion leads them to another step forward. They formulate and examine alternative solutions. When they have proof that one course is more likely effective than the others, they decide what to do. Without logical thought people’s thinking is haphazard and may lead nowhere.
Transactional factor #3:
Intuition is the unconscious equivalent of conscious reasoning. Without knowing it, we process thoughts that then emerge as insights, hunches and guesses. The critical crosscheck, having come to an answer intuitively, is to check it out through reasoning and logic, otherwise we simply choose on a whim. When intuition connects with reasoning and logic, the decision process is greatly enhanced. But when intuition overrides reasoning and logic we run the risk of getting it wrong with no substantive means of finding out why. Intuition relates to the ideator in Team Roles and to intuitive in Leading People.
Intuitive people see right to the heart of the problem, ‘putting two and two together’ to get the answer in a flash, or they take a guess. They 'read' what people are thinking. Their hunches are often right and solutions come to them from nowhere. They have bright ideas, suddenly 'seeing' the solution. They put their finger right on the cause of a problem, finding an answer without even thinking. Without intuition, people who want to be creative or innovative have to rely on conscious thinking.
Transactional factor #4: Assertion
Assertions are declarations of held beliefs, statements based on experience but not rechecked for current validity, or judgments based on untested perceptions. They are not the same as ‘being assertive’, although they may contribute to that behaviour. They can be useful where the situation is well understood and a known response is needed, such as on routine work with little room to deviate from procedures, or when safety is threatened. Assertions can also be useful in support of reasoning and logic, provided what is said is well tested to examine its truth. Occasionally we meet people who are strong on assertion but weak on reasoning and logic and that relationship is limiting. Effective people rank assertions lower than reasoning and logic. But it has its use in some functions, such as sales where people are expected to push the merits of a product or service in very positive terms.
This post for example, is a series of assertions that are only as good as their ability to stand being tested against reality. The statements may look good and sound right, but are they true?
People who make assertions ‘know’ why things happen as they do, and what to do about them. They have an answer to suit each situation, using their experience and assumptions as a basis for choosing. Because of this, some of their mistakes are unavoidable. They give their opinion and say what they think will happen, and then decide the issues as they see them. By not using assertions, people are open to examine situations before deciding as they do not assume they 'know' the answer.
Transactional factor #5: Fate
Fate is used here to mean passive acceptance that situations and issues will manage and resolve themselves as they are largely beyond our control. In an educated population, few people are fatalistic about their everyday choices. But among those who are, many have deeply held religious or other beliefs that give them faith in the future and its outcomes. Que sera, sera.
Fatalistic people allow most things to work out as they will, letting their problems fix themselves by leaving them alone. They go with the flow of events, leaving issues to sort themselves out and, in the end, fate does decide for them thus proving that they are right. They accept that there's no apparent reason for the way things turn out and all their effort won't change the outcome. They accept things as they are and let issues work out the way fate intends. They trust that many things are beyond anyone's control and events will take their own course, regardless of what they do or don’t do to alter the chain. Non-fatalistic people, by contrast, take action to influence the train of events and seek rational answers to questions.
Transactional factor #6: Magic
In magic, cause-and-effect relationships are hidden from us. This approach to decision making includes acceptance by some people of the ‘spirit world’, with its séances and mediums and the answers that come to us in this way. It also includes sincere cultural beliefs based, for example, on ancestor worship, primitive god-beliefs or acceptance of paranormal phenomena. Or ‘magic’ may be simple mystification about the way things happen, as with smart computers, ‘guru’ consultants and stage magicians.
People who are confused by magic generally can't figure some things out as they puzzle over how and why things happen. While some things may defy understanding by anyone, the way most things confounds these people. They can't explain how things happen or see how it is done. Try as they do, they don't see cause and effect relationships or sequences. The way things happen is hidden from them and they are amazed how easily others solve problems. People who reject magic as a way of making decisions look behind issues and events for cause-and-effect relationships to discover practical explanations.
Transactions Part II: Communication modes
The communicating modes explored in Promana's Transactions assessment are drawn from the ego states of Transactional Analysis (TA), which we define as judgmental, supportive, objective, natural and adaptive behaviours.
People with supportive behaviours watch over others, set an example and show them what to do, but they can become a problem when they take over responsibility for others people’s issues and choices. Objective people think things through and choose how they will respond, remaining detached from issues and testing what they see and hear to make sense of it. Adaptive people fit in with others’ wishes and ways, concerned for acceptance and wanting to know what is expected of them.
Think of each of these modes as a kind of built-in, interactive streaming service that holds all our responses, including body language, expressions and tones of voice each of us has experienced. We experience playback when one or another communicating mode is triggered and the service searches its content to find a response that is mostly automatic and unconscious. As we listen to the stream, we can notice the types of phrase, content, tone, delivery and meaning one person gives to another as he or she communicates. Differences in tone, delivery and intent all affect relations at that moment. And over the longer term, as constructive or destructive transactions take place, so the relationship grows, stagnates or dies.
Let's dive into these communicating modes on more depth.
Transactional factor #7: Judgemental
Judgmental transactions are useful where authority and order are required, especially when a firm, parental style is needed. Judgemental behaviour can be likened to that of a stern father or mother. Of the five modes this is one of the least productive in relationships, but it has its place when it is used by choice, not as an auto-reaction, and at appropriate times. Judgmental transactions limit openness and impair relationships.
Judgmental people try to keep firm control over others to prevent mistakes. They want others to stick to the rules and they keep watch to ensure the others stay within limits. They get annoyed if people don't do as they should and upset when they apparently don't think. At these times they say exactly what's on their mind. They have strong self-discipline and they keep others away from trouble. They sometimes get angry with 'weak' people, wanting to see that others get what they ‘deserve’. Non-judgmental people expect others to discipline themselves, preferring not to apply pressure. They can feel uncomfortable enforcing rules or 'telling people off'.
Transctional factor #8: Supportive
Supportive transactions convey our care and concern for others, a useful input for developing relationships. But overly supportive people can bring problems with them when they are overprotective and controlling. Their ‘fussing around’ may create irritation and antagonism. They can stifle initiative by taking over other people's problems, instead of helping them grow through solving these themselves. People without supportive behaviours may not accept responsibility for others’ wellbeing, as distinct from responsibility for their productivity. This factor links to the supporter in Team Roles and supporting in Team Building.
Supportive people watch over others and try to take care of them. They always set an example and try to put people on the ‘right’ path. Others look to them for guidance and bring them their problems. They give helpful advice to others and get people to do what is good for them. They caution others about possible problems and help them to decide. They overlook other people’s mistakes and take control when they think that is best for everyone. People without these behaviours will not be seen as warm and supportive, however, and they can be thought uncaring because of this - but that is not necessarily how they feel.
Transactional factor #9: Objective
Objective people remain emotionally detached from what goes on around them and, at the same time, choose how and when to respond. That detachment may be mistaken for indifference, but the objective mode enables us to counter that impression by choosing any other communicating mode that suits the situation. We could, for example, choose respond to another person’s parental style through the natural or adaptive modes to be rebellious or submissive, or counter with a parental response of their own. Or we could take a factual approach and ignore any emotions that might be part of the transaction. The objective mode is the key to effective behaviour and communication, as it preserves choice. Effective people normally have these behaviours in strength. But not all managers transact objectively, yet they still succeed due to the content, quality and effectiveness of their other modes.
The objective mode relates to reasoning and logic, above, to rational in Leading People and to problem solving in Preferred Activities.
Objective people think things through, preferring to work with sound information, and they look for rational solutions to problems and issues. They sometimes get the wrong idea or don't see the joke, because of their factual approach. They remain detached from the issues to do their own thinking and they check their answers for mistakes. They test other people's statements and actions consciously before deciding what is meant and how to respond. They remain calm when others are upset, but they disclose their feelings when they choose to do so. Non-objective people are influenced by the situation, the people around them or their own feelings. They become involved and lose their sense of perspective and objectivity.
Transactional factor #10: Natural
Natural transactions use the responses and reactions we are born with, such as feelings of happiness, anger, love, envy, caring, spite. In this mode we behave ‘ourselves’, self-centered and self-indulgent at one time, then genuinely caring and sharing at another. Natural people express themselves as they see things and show how they feel about them. People who are strong in natural behaviours may be an energizing force or they may be some kind of problem when their feelings get in the way. They may give way to temptation, especially when they have low self-discipline or self-control, or there is little chance of their being ‘caught out’.
Naturally, they may want their own way when they want it and to do exciting things, unable to resist things they enjoy. They relax and have fun although sometimes they feel quite sad. They have warm feelings for people when they feel good about them. They act on impulse without feeling self-conscious. They draw attention to themselves when they feel neglected and feel angry when they are frustrated in what they want to do. People without these behaviours tend to discipline themselves, consciously or otherwise, even to the point of self-denial. In the workplace, their self-restraint may limit spontaneity and ‘fun’. They keep their natural feelings in check, not showing enthusiasm or excitement easily nor 'negative' feelings such as anger.
Transactional factor #11: Adaptive
Adaptive transactions reflect long-term pressure to meet other people's expectations, to get what we want in return for conformity. In our early life, we conform to family standards, then to teacher and peers and, later still, in working life we adapt again (sometimes again and again) to gain acceptance in each new environment. Our need to adapt can become so ingrained that we stop making conscious choices about what is or is not appropriate, and simply conform. That is observable in many ways, as people give in to peer pressure. For example, we see people going along with other’s wishes and plans, or doing what others do. This conformity includes behaviours such as selecting the same food as others in a cafeteria, going along with the latest fad, or supporting majority decisions even when these are actually inappropriate. But the adaptive person brings the benefits of easy cooperation, courtesy and team spirit. The follower in Team Roles is closely related to the adaptive mode, as is the pleaser in Activating People.
Adaptive people fit in with others' ideas. They want to know where they stand and they follow their leader. They do things to please other people and they keep away from people who might be negative toward them. They do what is necessary to suit others and what it takes to be included with them and accepted. They are polite to other people, trying to find out what they want so they can do what is expected of them. Non-adaptive people think and act independently of pressure others might put on them.
Dynamic modes
These five communicating modes interact dynamically, so that in the space of moments all five may be observed as the person’s behaviour switches from one "stream" to another. Over a period of time some modes will be more observable than others will because of their frequency and intensity, thus giving us an idea of the general balance for any one person. But they are influenced by the whole situation, that is, by who is involved and what passes between them.
These modes are the key to effective communicating. In the literature on TA, you can read about complementary and crossed transactions and how these communicating modes (known as ego states) support each other or clash:
-
Complementary transactions are exchanges between two or more people that bring an intended outcome, which may have a positive or negative effect. A positive result would come from the complementary matching of objective modes by two or more people in their transactions, as they seek common ground and use joint reasoning to reach a conclusion. But transactions between people who match judgmental and adaptive modes are likely to have negative outcomes. These modes may be complementary but they perpetuate one-up one-down relationships.
-
Crossed transactions are those that do not bring a complementary response. They also may be negative or positive. By conscious choice they can be put to very positive use to reduce or eliminate negative complementary transactions. An unproductive crossed transaction occurs, for example, when use of the objective mode brings an adaptive instead of objective response. That transaction can either continue out of kilter as it is or switch modes to become complementary. In another case, a judgmental initiative countered by an objective response results in a crossed transaction – but that can lead to a positive outcome as the objective mode crosses and switches the judgmental.
The negative nature of complementary and crossed transactions enables people to play psychological ‘games’ – we discuss these under wasted time in Handling Time. By limiting negative transactions, communication and relationships are improved. This is a useful area for behavioural skills development at a team level.
The final factor
Transactional factor #12: Effective
The last factor in Promana's Transactions assessment deals with effective transactions. These depend on effective decision processes combining with effective communicating modes. Strength in this combination is generally associated with strength in reasoning and logic as decision processes and objective communicating but, in different environments, other combinations can work well. What actually works will depend on each person's range of learned and creative responses, the content of their CD. Effective transactions link to deciding in Team Building, to evaluate results in Operating Style and to headway in Activating People.
Effective people allow for the unknown and leave room to maneuver. They look for simple solutions, deciding at the right time and place, then acting on their decision. They avoid hasty judgments, balancing all factors before deciding. They connect their choices to each other so that their decisions lead to one common end. They review decisions as each situation changes and they find ways to improve their judgments. People without these behaviours decide the immediate issue, then hold firmly to that decision until events dictate a need to change their minds. Their decisions may not be integrated by an overall goal or objective.