|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PCP
IN BUSINESS: A
SPECTRUM OF EXPERIENCE |
|
|
Sean Brophy
|
|
|
Dublin, Ireland
|
|
|
|
|
|
My introduction to
PCP
occurred in 1986
through my attendance at a seminar organised by George
O’Connor ACX of
Aer
Rianta, the Irish Airports Authority, and facilitated by Fay Fransella
from the
PCP Centre in London, in the lovely city of Kilkenny
in Ireland.
I was researching for my PhD at Trinity College (TCD) at the time. My
supervisor and I had become fixated on the subject of how organisations
dealt
with the topic of quality of service. A lot of threshing around led us
eventually to search for a robust model of how managers could blend
ideas from
organisation theory with psychology to make progress in this area. I
was
fortunate to discover PCP, in my search for a methodology for measuring
perceptions of quality of service. Though he knew nothing about PCP, my
supervisor had no hesitation in urging me to deepen my understanding of
the
subject, and to present work in progress to seminars organised under
the aegis
of the European Group for Organisation Studies. That resulted in my
studying
for a Diploma in PCP at the Centre for Personal Construct Psychology in
London while
finalising my Doctoral Thesis at TCD.
Looking back over my
experience as a
consultant over the last twenty years, often collaborating with Fay or
seeking
her advice, I can see how the scope for using PCP in business
organisations is
enormous. As a professional community we have only scratched the
surface in
this vast domain. Business organisations are merely aggregates of
individuals
making sense of streams of events in particular contexts and in
relation to
particular others. Personal Construct Psychology is the science of
human sense
making. So how might PCP be used to intervene constructively within a
particular organisation?
PCP is principally used in
the Therapy,
Health Care, and Education contexts. Over the last twenty years,
however, a
small group of practitioners led by Fay Fransella as a consultant and
George
O’Connor as a line manager has extended its use into the
domain of
business
organisations. Entry to this domain has been expanded by people like
Helen
Jones, Devi Jankowicz, John Porter and Shenaz Kelly Rawat. This brief
paper
offers a non-exhaustive range of possible interventions initially
developed in
my paper to the EPCA conference in Florence
in 2002
(Brophy, 2002). The paper summarises some of my experiences as a PCP
facilitator and shows the diverse possibilities for applying PCP in
organisations, and partly meets Fay’s intentions for this
conference.
SUMMARY OF PCP
APPLICATIONS
PCP is a very flexible
psychology. One
can
see this by observing a range of possible interventions in the life of
a
business organisation. The foci of these interventions are arrayed in
table one
below as a spectrum of Organisation Development (O.D.) interventions
from one
single individual to the culture of large groups of people.
Table 1: A spectrum of
O.D.
interventions using PCP
|
INDIVIDUAL
- Coaching and
Counselling
- Training and
Development
- Interpersonal
Relationships
- Group and Team
Development
- Goal Setting
- Role Clarification
- Organisational
Structure
- Management
Processes
- Functional
Processes
- Planning
- Marketing
- Customer Service
- Human Resources
- Organisational
Culture / Values
ORGANISATION |
COACHING AND COUNSELLING
At this level one is
closest to the
well-developed use of PCP in therapy. Coaching and Counselling are at
opposite
ends of a spectrum of interventions with individuals in contexts that
might be
described as ‘Opportunistic’
through Coaching and ‘Distress’ through
Counselling.
Opportunistic: An example could be of coaching individuals to
improve
their
efficiency as managers. One way to do this could be to help individuals
to turn
their desired management competencies, like ‘communicating
well’ into a
series
of dichotomous constructs on a repertory grid. They would be asked to
rate
themselves on two elements- ‘me in my job now’ and
‘me in my job as I’d
like to
be’, say in six months time. Through a process of
‘laddering and
pyramiding’
questions, the person being coached is helped to understand his or her
own
construing and to design experiments (Dalton & Dunnett, 2005).
He
or she
then carries out experiments, to test a desired view of himself or
herself
manifesting the particular competencies, and is helped to reflect on
the
results.
Distress: An example could be counselling individuals to
adapt to
changes in
their lives. One way to do this could be to use PCP to help an
individual to
cope with the loss of a particular job through demotion or a failure to
be
promoted. In these contexts the counsellor helps the individual to
re-construe
the events in question. The aim is to help the client to regain a sense
of
control and autonomy in their life, through new interpretations,
alternative
perspectives and careful experimentation, sometimes using fixed role
therapy in
which I have collaborated from time to time with Franz Epting.
TRAINING AND
DEVELOPMENT
An
example could be training in
leadership
skills. One way to do this is to take a generic list of the attributes
of a
good leader in the particular context of the business unit. Questions
are used
to elicit dichotomous constructs that could be arrayed on a repertory
grid.
Clients on a training workshop could be invited to rate themselves on a
number
of elements on this grid, e.g. ‘myself as a leader
now’, ‘a good leader
in my business’,
and ‘how I would like to be as a leader in 12 months
time’. The ratings
could
then be pooled anonymously to reveal a pattern for the group to allow
individuals to see the degree to which they share experiences with
their
colleagues. Each client is then helped to find insights from the
ratings and to
consider actions whereby they could act on their own initiative through
experimentation to reach the desired ratings over the time period
agreed.
Similarly they could be helped to figure out ways in which a change in
the
context of their jobs could be negotiated to facilitate the desired
movement.
INTERPERSONAL
RELATIONSHIPS
An example could be a form
of mediation
between two persons perhaps as a prelude to some form of team
development in
which they would participate. One way to do this is to meet the
individuals
separately to allow for catharsis of the feelings associated with the
breakdown
of the relationship. Then one could elicit constructs to do with each
client’s
expectations from the other and reciprocally their notion of what the
other
expects of him or her. These expectations are then converted into
dichotomous
constructs in conversation with each client to reveal what they wish to
achieve
and to avoid. The couple is then brought together against the
background of
ground rules for a fair process, like e.g. separating the person from
the
problem, focussing on interests rather than on positions, and no
monopolies on
the truth, or of being hurt (Fisher & Brown, 1991). Sometimes
the
cathartic
experience has to be continued through one or more meetings with the
facilitator inviting each person to achieve sociality with the other by
paraphrasing what the other has just said so that each one can get a
sense of having
been heard. The constructs based upon expectations of each other can
then be
tested with the two persons for clarity of understanding and acceptance
of the
various terms can be negotiated. This can take up several sessions and
the
process can be helped by inviting the individuals to work on the
relationship
separate from the substantive issues that divide them. Fisher and Brown
have
evolved also a series of principles for what they call an
‘unconditionally
constructive strategy for collaboration’ (Fisher &
Brown, 1989).
This
series of principles can be converted into dichotomous constructs by
the
participants, to reveal what they want, and what they wish to avoid.
Further
they can be helped to consider the implications of adopting the
principles and
of accepting each other’s expectations as valid within the
relationship. Later
sessions can be focussed on reviewing their experiences.
GROUP AND TEAM
DEVELOPMENT
An example could be to
design and
facilitate a process that would serve to improve the cohesion and
functioning
of intact work teams. This could be based on generic aspects of intact
groups,
e.g. clear goals and roles, and processes for dealing with the world
outside
the group and with relationships inside the group (Schein, 1985).
Initially
each member of the group could be asked to elaborate their
understanding of
their responsibilities and their sense of the expectations of critical
stakeholders to their role. These statements could then be tested in
plenary
session with the team members for clarity of understanding of and
negotiation
of changes to their responsibilities and expectations of each other.
The
facilitator can then elicit their construing of a range of elements
consisting
of the network of stakeholders external and internal to the group who
are
making demands on them, in terms of processes to deal with these
demands. The
resultant set of constructs can be arrayed on a repertory grid and
rated by
individuals on a number of elements, e.g. ‘how I see my team
now’ and
‘how I
see my team in six months time’. The ratings can be pooled
anonymously
and
displayed to allow for a group discussion. In the discussion the
pattern of
ratings can be examined on each construct in turn to search for the
meaning
behind the clustering of ratings or otherwise. Laddering and pyramiding
questions can be used to deepen their collective understanding of why
the
ratings are as they are and how they can be illustrated in terms of
observable
behaviours. The scope for and desirability of change on various
constructs can
be examined and ideas elicited for practical experimentation by
individuals or
through negotiation by stakeholders.
GOAL SETTING
An example here would be to
use PCP, as
in
the previous example, to elicit a group’s constructs of the
demands
made on
them by a network of stakeholders by treating the group as an
‘open
system’
(Beckhard, 1977). They are then invited to indicate how they are
meeting those
demands at present. This discussion is followed by a collective
construing of
trends likely to impact on the life of the group on such elements as Economics, Technology, Politics, Demography and
the behaviour of Consumers, Competitors and
New Entrants
into the group’s markets. This analysis allows for a
construing by the
group of
demands from stakeholders in, say, five years time followed by a debate
as to
how those demands can be met. Options can be tested using Implications
Grids
and then ranked in terms of effectiveness and viability using
Resistance to
Change Grids (Hinkle, 1965). This final process allows the team to
select goals
and related action plans over the time period in question.
ROLE CLARIFICATION
An example could be similar
to the first
part of the process outlined above for using PCP in a Team Development
intervention. In this case the people involved need not be members of
an intact
work team but persons in the same organisation that have some degree of
interdependence. The process would be confined to eliciting from
individuals
their responsibilities and their sense of the expectations of their
role set.
The resultant documents would then be tested for clarification and a
negotiated
agreement by a PCP facilitator using appropriate questions to assist
the group’s
elaboration of their collective construing of their roles.
ORGANISATION
STRUCTURE
Structure is an arrangement
of roles
used
in organisations to focus power, responsibility and accountability.
Usually
when complaints are made about one or another structural feature, the
underlying cause is a problem of power or lack of it. Personal
construct
psychology can be used to make explicit the construing of personnel
about a
problem inherent in a particular structure. That may be about
inadequate
decentralisation of decision-making, overly long lines of
communication,
inadequate personal discretion and autonomy. Moreover when allied to a
personal
construct understanding of resistance to change in those centres of
power under
threat, the process of change can be rendered less painful and
traumatic for
those concerned.
MANAGEMENT
PROCESSES
Management processes such
as meeting
schedules, reporting formats, and various policy guidelines for action
can be
rationalised using PCP. Personal construct research focussed on a range
of
management processes as elements can highlight areas of dissatisfaction
and
mal-functioning. Feedback of the results of this research can lead to
changes
that allow organisation members to function more effectively with their
time
more optimally focussed on the core mission, such as service to clients
as
opposed to meeting internal bureaucratic needs that are often wasteful
of
effort.
FUNCTIONAL
PROCESSES
The possibilities here are
as eclectic
as
the diversity of functions found in modern organisations. The examples
below
offer a mere hint of the range of possible applications of personal
construct
psychology.
Planning: One possibility is to identify several
planning
scenarios as
elements e.g. Enter industry ‘A’, Exit industry
‘B’, take over Business
‘C’,
Merge with Business ‘D’ and so on. These can be
construed by
representative
groups of different layers of management. Further they can be rated in
terms of
the probability of their occurrence and attractiveness to the
respondents. The
results are a best guess of the future by the groups, allowing a
planning team
to pursue from an evidential point of view the hypothesis set out by
the
respondents.
Marketing: The construing of customers’ needs
for products and
services and
perceptions of those products currently on offer from an organisation
and its
competitors can be elicited. Another use is for a group of product
designers to
construe their level of innovation as perceived by their major
stakeholders –
for instance, the sales personnel in an organisation. Further the group
could
construe the climate for innovation within which they operate to
highlight
contextual factors that could inhibit their innovation and responses to
the
dynamics of their marketplace.
Customer
Service: Customer
service values
espoused for a
particular brand can be transformed into bipolar constructs in
conversation
with service personnel. They could then be asked to rate themselves as
service
providers ‘now and as they ‘would like to
be’, say, in three months
time. Other
elements rated could be, ‘my unit or department’,
‘my organisation’,
‘how I
think the customer sees me’ and so on. The resultant analysis
can form
the
basis for related interventions designed to remove factors that inhibit
good
service e.g. a clash between lived and espoused values. Training, based
on the
data, can be facilitated to provide good service and promotional
programs to
highlight service features to customers. New constructs can be derived
from a
pyramiding process where concrete examples of the espoused values
authentically
lived can be identified and the implications of choosing them can be
explored
Human
Resources: The
remit of the H.R.
department spans
the spectrum of the entire set of relationships between a person and
the
organisation. Consequently it is in this area that PCP can be used most
eclectically. We have seen above how PCP can be used within individuals
and
groups. Further PCP interventions can be concerned with selection and
promotion
processes, assessment centres, performance appraisal, personal
development,
industrial relations, grievance resolution and mediation, inter
personal and
inter group peacemaking say after an industrial dispute and with
succession
planning.
ORGANISATION
CULTURE / VALUES
An example could be when
two
organisations
are merging and the cultures of both are studied, using the methods
pioneered
by the Diagnostic Research Unit of the PCP Centre in the
1980’s in the
case of
the British Airways cabin crews. This method allows a comparison of the
construing of common elements and of each of the constituencies
represented by
groups in each organisation. During feedback sessions the sense of
difference
and commonality could be explored together with Kelly’s
diagnostic
constructs
of anxiety, fear and threat to legitimise those feelings and to
facilitate
sociality between the proponents of both cultures. A great example of
this type
of intervention is the pioneering work of George O’Connor and
his
colleagues at
Aer Rianta, the Irish Airport authority, in seeking to reconcile the
different
cultures of unions
and management in a State enterprise.
In recent years it has
become popular
for chief
executives to seek to have their organisation’s values
clarified and
embraced
by the majority of organisation members. PCP is the best intellectual
framework
for intervening in this cause. PCP interventions follow a three-stage
process:
Values clarification, Values communication and finally Values
implementation or
sustainment. Examples of interventions in this area can be found in the
International Handbook of PCP edited by Fay Fransella, (Fransella,
2003,
pp.367-375), and in a presentation to the 8th
EPCA
conference in Sweden
this year (Brophy, 2006)
SUMMARY
The interventions described
briefly
above
give a flavour of the possibilities for using PCP in organisations. An
important feature of PCP is that the theory allows the practitioner to
relate
understanding gained at different levels and with different people in
different
contexts within the same frame of reference. The use of PCP with its
focus on
both the uniqueness of a person’s construing and the
possibilities for
commonality and sociality serves to engender trust in the authenticity
of an
intervention. It also provides a framework for creative thinking and
action and
engenders confidence in the guidance of the facilitator in helping
individuals
or groups to become more effective at solving their own problems at
work.
All of the interventions
above described
out of my own experience would not have been possible without the
initial
guidance of Fay Fransella and her ongoing support for my work over the
past
twenty years. It is said that if you give a man a fish you may feed him
for a
day but if you give him a fishing rod you feed him for life. PCP has
been my
fishing rod since Fay put it into my hands twenty years ago. I hope my
catch
over that period has been worthy of her trust and inspiration. |
|
|
|
|
|
REFERENCES
|
|
|
Beckhard, R.
& Harris, R. (1977). Organisation
transitions: Managing complex
change. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.
Brophy, S. (2002). Organisation
development interventions using PCP. Paper
presented to the 6th
Bi-Annual Conference of the European Personal Construct Association at Florence, Italy 24th to 27th March. 2002.
Brophy,
S. (2006). Implementing corporate values:
a PCP approach. Slide presentation to
8th Bi-annual
conference of the European Personal Construct Association, at Kristianstad, Sweden, 11th April, 2006.
Dalton P. & Dunnett, G.
(2005). A psychology
for living (2nd ed.). London: Whurr.
Fisher, R. & Ury,
W. (1991). Getting to yes: Negotiating
agreement
without giving in (2nd ed.). London:
Penguin.
Fisher. R, & Brown,
S. (1989). Getting together: Building a
relationship
that gets to yes. London: Business Books.
Fransella, F. (ed.) (2003).
International
handbook of personal construct psychology. London:Wiley.
Fransella, F., Bell R.
&
Bannister, D. (2004).
Manual
for repertory grid technique (2nd ed.).
London:
Wiley.
Hinkle, D. (1965). The
change of personal constructs from the viewpoint of a theory of
construct implications.
Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Ohio State University.
Schein, E.H. (1985). Organisational
culture and leadership, San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass. |
|
|
|
|
|
The article is based
on a talk given at the conference on “PCP: a story”
organised by
the Centre for Personal Construct at the University of Hertfordshire, UK,
on September 29, 2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
ABOUT
THE
AUTHOR
Sean
Brophy, Ph.D.,
is a management consultant
and
author in private practice in Dublin, Ireland. He specialises in educating clients to make
sense of
their lives
so that they can be more effective at solving their own problems
particularly
in the context of personal or organisational change. He is a leading
practitioner in the application of Personal Construct Psychology, the
psychology of the whole person or the psychology of change to the
context of
life in organisations. Originally he worked as an engineer and manager
in
industry for 20 years. For the last 20 years he has acted as a
consultant in
Personal Construct Psychology to a variety of organisations in Ireland,
the UK and the United States. He is the
author of The Strategic Management of
Irish Enterprise and several books of poetry.
Email: seanbrophy@eircom.net
|
|
|
|
|
|
REFERENCE
Brophy,
S. (2007). PCP in business: A spectrum of experience. Personal
Construct Theory & Practice, 4, 57-62.
(Retrieved
from http://www.pcp-net.org/journal/pctp07/brophy07.html)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Received: 16 January 2007
– Accepted: 20 January
2007 –
Published: 31 January 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|