26.10.2014 Views

„‚ CONDITIONS THAT HINDER EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION

„‚ CONDITIONS THAT HINDER EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION

„‚ CONDITIONS THAT HINDER EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

create an imbalance of power in which the two positions may mix or even change<br />

positions with each other. The nonassertive responder creates a power imbalance by<br />

according everyone else more rights than himself or herself, while the aggressive<br />

responder creates a power imbalance by according himself or herself more rights than<br />

everyone else.<br />

Figure 1. Functional and Dysfunctional Assertive 1<br />

This power imbalance is unstable. The restricted nonassertive responder may<br />

accumulate guilt, resentment, or fear until he or she becomes the aggressive responder in<br />

a burst of rage; or this person may mix a nonassertive “front” with a subversive “behindthe-scenes”<br />

attempt to “get back” at another. 2<br />

The assertive responder seeks a solution that equalizes the balance of power and<br />

permits all concerned to maintain their basic human rights. Thus, an imbalance of<br />

power, caused by a failure to respect the rights of all people and perpetuated by the use<br />

of indirect methods, creates a very vulnerable position for both the nonassertive and the<br />

aggressive responders, while the more functional assertive responder respects all human<br />

rights, uses direct methods, and seeks a balance of power.<br />

COMPONENTS OF AN ASSERTIVE SITUATION<br />

Assertion theory can be helpful in situations in which a person is anxious about standing<br />

up for his or her basic human rights. These situations include saying yes and no with<br />

conviction, giving and receiving criticism, initiating conversations, resisting interruptions,<br />

receiving compliments, demanding a fair deal as a consumer, dealing with<br />

1<br />

Adapted from J. William Pfeiffer and John E. Jones, 1972, “Openness, Collusion and Feedback,” in J. William Pfeiffer and John E.<br />

Jones (Eds.), The 1972 Annual Handbook for Group Facilitators (p. 199), San Diego, CA: Pfeiffer & Company.<br />

2<br />

The mixed or indirect response can range from guilt induction to subversion in style and is represented in Figure 1 by the broken-line<br />

area.<br />

The Pfeiffer Library Volume 6, 2nd Edition. Copyright ©1998 Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer ❚❘ 315

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!