Open or open-ended questions, this type includes such inquiries

Types of Interview 'Questions

While one probably could generate an infinite list of types and sub-types of questions, we shall, begin by distinguishing only two; unrestricted and restricted. Unrestricted questions allow the respondent to discuss almost anything she or he pleases; resu'icted questions specify the limits of the desired answer. But the differences between the two go far beyond this, d we shall therefore consider each question type in turn.

Unrestricted Questions

Often termed open or open-ended questions, this type includes such inquiries as What's new? and Tell me about yourself. Questions of this sort provide definite advantages to the interviewer. One may learn how much the interviewee knows, the things she deems important or trivial, her beliefs and values, and how well she is able to express herself. Questions such as these convey a sense of warmth to the interviewee, implicitly telling her that she is interesting and that anything she has to say will be important and relevant. However, unresnicted questions
present potential problems. They may require a great deal of time, for often the interviewer. They require a great deal of skill on the part of the interviewee spends several minutes relating information of no use to the interviewer, who must know when and how to interrupt the respondent, to encourage her and to provide her with further questions. Finally, they produce unstructured, spontaneous answers which often are difficult to analyse. Nevertheless, for certain situations unrestricted questions "are remarkably effective tools for gathering information.

warmth; the interviewee has no opponunity to volunteer potentially valuable information. The advantages and shortcomings of restricted questions are thus the reverse of the benefits and drawbacks of unrestricted questions.

Which type of question should be employed?

Generally the answer is based largely on the situation. If the interview must obtain maximum amounts of information in minimum periods of time, and if the interview- is to be conducted by persons not particularly skilled in interviewing techniques, the restricted form seems most desirable. If, on the other hand, the interview involves personal matters (as in counselling or disciplinary interviews), seeks general kinds of information about the interviewee, is under no pressures of time, and will be conducted by a skilled interviewer, then the unrestricted form is preferable. Clearly the situations described here are extremes; most situations fall somewhere between the two, conidering some per,sonal matters, being conducted by adeqrlitely skilled interviewers, and so on. But the unrestricted- restricted dichotomy also represent as extremes; questions can be phrased that are somewhat restricted or somewbat unrestricted. Whether extremely restricted, extremely unrestricted, or some moderated forms of questions are chosen, the choice should reflect the situational factors we have considered.

Interviewing is a conversation directed to a definite purpose other than satisfaction in the conversation itself

The nature of interviews

Bingham, Moore, and Oustad suggest that "interviewing is a conversation directed to a definite purpose other than satisfaction in the conversation itself." Similarly, Kahn and Cannell argue that an interview is "a specialized pattern of verbal interaction initiated for specific purpose, and focused on some specific content area, with a subsequent elimination of extraneous material." Goyer, Reading, and Rickey term interviewing "a form of oral communication involving two parties, at least one of whom has a preconcei ved and serious purpose and both of whom speak and listen from time to time."

These definitions in turn suggest several differences between interviews and other forms of dyadic communication. First, while virtually all interpersonal communication has some underlying purpose, interview has a purpose which is more clearly defined-and more directly sought. Second, interviews typically involve careful preparation by the interviewer. Although we often "Ian" conversations we anticipate having with others, thinking. Now, if she says so-and-so, I'll say this, rarely is that planning as thorough as the planning preceding an interview. Third, the communication roles of the participants are predetermined to an extent not usually found in other types of interpersonal communication. Both participants realize that the interviewer will ask questions and the interviewee will respond, and both of them usually adhere to those role prescriptions. Finally, while the dominance dimension of an interpersonal relationship usually is determined by situational factors such as organizational role or status, dominance in the interview is determined solely by the communication roles of the paI1icipants. Since the interviewer directs the conversation through her or his use of questions, the intelviewer always is the dominant individual. While, the company president usually dominates a shop foreman, a foreman interviewer would dominate the president interviewee during the interview itself. Interviews therefore differ from other interpersonal interactions in that they have a specific purpose, are carefully planned, have predetermined communication roles, and generate situation-specific dominance.

Gordon lists several additional benefits of the interview.

First, it allows the information seeker greater opportunity to elicit complete and accurate information from the interviewee. The interviewer is able to assess immediately the respondent's answers and to seek further information or elaboration if necessary-things one cannot do when administering a questionnaire.

Second; the interviewer can Clarify the questions. If someone filling out a questionnaire misinterprets a question, the person collecting the information may wind up with elToneous information and incolTect conclusions; in the interview, however, the interviewer can determine immediately whether the interviewee has understood the question or seen the implications the question calTies. Should such comprehension not be present, the interviewer can remedy the situation immediately.

Third, most forms of interviews allow greater flexibility of questioning than does a questionnaire or other informatibn-gathering meihods. Interview forms occur along a continuum ranging from extremely su'uctured to extremely unstructured. Although flexibility is minimal in the structured situation, the interviewer still is able to restate or rephrase questions. In unsu'uctured interviews, flexibility is maximized; the interviewer can let the flow of conversation dictate what questions she or he will ask. Fourth, the interview situation allows careful control by the interviewer. Questionnaires may be complete anywhere and letters may be read and answered in any situation. In the interview, however, the interviewer is able to choose
and, to some degree, control the interview environment. If the interviewer chooses to speak with a respondent in the respondent's home, the interviewer's control of the situation will be minimal. If the respondent visit the interviewer, the latter's control is maximized. The interviewer can control interruptions, arrange the furniture, dictate the time of the interview, and so on. Finally, the interviewer may obtain more information about the interviewee in face-to-face encounters. By observing the respondent's non-verbal behaviours, the interviewer can evaluate his attitudes toward the questions, his answers, and even the interviewer himself-judgments not always possible with written responses. Thus the interview seems the most desirable means of gathering information; it maximizes immediacy and enhances the interviewer's abilities to obtain complete responses, to guide respondents' interpretations, to adapt to the situation, to control the situation, and to judge respondents' underlying feelings.

Suggestions to help improve the lecturer's technique

Spector devised an experiment
whereby the same poorly delivered lecture was given to different groups .of subjects. After 15 minutes the groups were asked to write down suggestions to help improve the lecturer's technique. One group was then told that their suggestions had been accepted, one that their suggestions had been seen but rejected, and another that the suggestions had not been read or accepted. The lecturer then carried on exactly as before-in the same poor style-to all groups. Beforeafter attitudinal questionnaires found that the group 'allowed' to feedback advice felt that the lecture had improved in style more than either of the other two groups.

Most writers on industry would argue that, in general, an open feedback system would result in a clearer picture of responsibilities. difficulties. and strong and weak points of both superior and subordinate. Prompt feedback on performance may be more important in changing behaviour than intensive discussions which only occur infrequently. Furthermore, a human need is satisfied when personnel are informed of their progress and the effectiveness of this satisfaction is governed by the clearness of the perfOlmance targets and the accuracy with

Dyadic or interpersonal communication involves face-toface exchanges between two individuals. Our model of communication and interpersonal relationships and our discussion of non-verbal communication, serial communication, communication networks, leadership and management, com-munication barriers, and methods of improving organizational communication all centre to some degree upon the one-to-one, face-to-face communrcation situation. In this chapter we shall consider a special form of interpersonal communication: the interview. Since organizational decisions concerning policy, procedures, and personnel often are made on the basis of information gained through interviews, effective interviewing techniques are crucial to organizational success. We shall therefore consider the nature of interviews, kinds of questions often employed during interviews, and specific types of interviews commonly used in organizations.

In examining the inspection section of a manufacturing firm

Co-ordination between related functions

Even when clearer performance goals have been established, however, co-ordination between related functions may be necessary. British researchers Thurley and Hamblin illustrate a case in point. In examining the inspection section of a manufacturing firm they found that the aims of the supervisors on the three shifts involved were different:

Shift A

raised production rates by cutting down on rejecting units. concentrated on quality by rejecting even border. line cases. Shift C was emissive and allowed individual foreman to follow their own inclinations.

The authors conclude that the overall result was one of erratic quality which could be stabilized by the establishing of overall objectives common to each shift.

Furthermore the introduction of clear but slack targets, with little incentive to improve on them, can produce additional problems as one manager grumbled: 'Those bright boys upstairs with their targets and deadlines! They sent a circular to all the customers saying orders for delivery the next quay should be in by 1.30 p.m. Now hardly anyone sends them in before that and we're going round like trying to cope with the last minute rush.

Shift B

Feedback

As has been continually emphasized in this book, communication is a two-way process: after passing a message a transmitter looks for some reaction in the receiver-some feedback. It is from this feedback that the transmitter decides how to frame or pitch his next communication act. Only through feedback can an individual build up a picture of the receiver's attitudes and from this picture predict future responses.

The effect of feedback on task performance has been ably dem)Ostrated by Leavitt and Mueller. In their laboratory study four groups of stUdents were required to assemble a design of rectangles from a verbal description given by the researchers. The four groups were differentiated by the degree of feedback they were allowed with the instructor. Summarizing their results, the following essentials were discovered:

(1) Increased feedback increased accuracy.

(2) Increased feedback increased the time involved initially, but eventually similar times to zero feedback trials were obtained.

(3) Zero feedback gives rise to hostility in the receiver.

(4) Zero feedback creates doubt in the receiver.

Similar results were recorded by Zajonc in a laboratory study of twenty groups with seven subjects in each. The experiment involved the reaction time in depressing a key after receiving a set stimulus. A red light would flash if failure occurred. Perfonnance was found to be best when feedback was at a maximum-in this case infOlmation could be fed back to the subject on his own performance, his group's performance, and the prformance of the other group members. The subjects wIth slow reaction times improved their perfonnance most quickly under conditions of maximum feedback
Not only does factual feedback have measurable effects but also perceptual feedback has been shown to change attitudes.

Point of decision-making and increase his sense of participation in the decision-making process

Delegation of authority

Communication accuracy was found to be greater at higher levels of the firm studied. Although this may have been due in part to the ability of the managers who have reached these higher levels, there were indications that. another factor may have been the greater authority and responsibilities found at these levels. This may bring the subordinate nearer to the point of decision-making and increase his sense of participation in the decision-making process. Even at lower levels, where subordinates believed the power or influence of their superior to be high, communication accuracy was improved. As companies grow it becomes more difficult for top managers to keep tabs on all phases of their operations: many executives in even moderately sized firms would have difficulty if asked to list all phases or products of their firm's activities-an ideal time for them to consider if they can adequately supervise all the functions under their control.One can, however, look upon bypassing as a type of feedback and self-corrective adjustment. Weiss and Jacobson loted in their study of the governmental agency mentioned earlier that if the supervisor of a work group failed to fulfil the needed liaison role for his group, some other member would often take over this necessary communication function.

To counteract this tendency and to bring the subordinate nearer the decision-making point, power commensurate with responsibilities could be delegated to lower levels of the organization. Good communication is as imp0l1ant at the bottom of an organization as at the top. By way of example an executive with Sears Roebuck may find he has as many as forty managers reporting to him-not so that he can supervise them properly but precisely because it avoids the necessity for very close supervision and allows the subordinates to take responsibility and speed up decision-making.

It is interesting to note that the firm which believes most su'ongly in this doctrine-and practises a form of management by objectives-has the highest average power and trust scores of all the firms involved in the study. At the other end of the scale, the firm with lowest trust and power ratings had a managing director who opened all mail before having it distributed to the respective heads of departments allowing them to scrutinize the mail of their juniors before it eventually anived on the desks of the addresses.

Performance targets

Once the details of an individual's responsibilities and duties have been defined it would seem a logical step to find some way of assessing the person's degree of success in carrying out his duties-in other words assessing his performance.

Many people believe that 'management for results' has often failed through the targets being imprecise, e.g. produce at minimum cost instead of a precise target reduce production costs by 5 per cent within 6 months. Precise standards, objective in the eyes of both superiors and subordinates, can reduce the amount of subjective criticism often occurring between superior-subordinate managers. At the same time at least some progress towards achieving objectives should be prompt. Some time ago- when in a longish period of introductory training with my firm one felt irrationally guilty and considerably frustrated by not contributing to the consultants' 'batting average' the activity or fee-reaming ratio.

Clarification of responsibility is directed to the person able to affect the outcome

spheres of delegated responsibilities

It would seen that this failure is quite common in British industry as a poll of works managers place 'frustration at all management levels, due to lack of clearly defined spheres of delegated responsibilities, fomth in a list of factors limiting productivity. This is also confmned by Management Consultants Blake and Mouton who suggest that many managers have the attitude to their new subordinates of 'throwing him into the thick of things'. One manager in the present study used almost the same words: 'I was just flung into the deep end. Mind you it is the quickest way to leam-ink or swim.

It is also important to ensme that any clarification of responsibility is directed to the person able to affect the outcome, for as another manager complained:

We have full responsibility to draw up the route cards for each lorry so the drivers don't check them at the start of their shift. If there's been a mistake, they'll come back at the end of the day, still half loaded, without a care in the world, and hand us back our mistakes. It is too late for us to do anything then.

More objective work was carried out by Michigan University's Dent and Mann when they studied the accounting section of an electric power company. In this study individual and group performance was found to be related to the individual's knowledge of his responsibilities. Similarly, industrial psychologists Rodgers and Harrison with fourteen superior-subordinate pairs in a laboratory study, and with fifty-nine similar pairs at overhaul shops in a naval air station respectively, found that subordinates who more accurately predicted what their superiors expected of them tended to be given high I ranking on job performance.

On the other hand, a similar study of fifty-one foreman-manager pairs found no such correlation, while yet another team of researchers from Michigan University found no improvements in agreement on the subordinate's 'job through the use of written job descriptions. They conclude: 'Job descriptions may be adequate for long term relatively permanent matters, but they are less than adequate for dealing with situations which are constantly changing. '

Many of these apparently conflicting findings may stem from the grouping of all types of communication together. Work in 1964 by Kahn and his associates have made the first step in separating work oriented communication from welfare oriented communication. In their study they found 38 per cent of their subjects received inadequate information on advancement training prospects. The more recent studies by Herzberg, Paul, Lawler and Porter, and Friedlander and Walton, are beginning to put these findings in a conceptual context by a similar separation of motivation nto positive and negative, making essential reading for any manager interested in motivating his work force.

Good deal about the general policies on which the operation of the company is based

Defining responsibilities

The now retired managing director of Glacier Metal, Wilfred Brown, writes in his best seller Exploration in Management.When a subordinate is newly appointed to a job, he should, if he has been adequately trained. know a good deal about the general policies on which the operation of the company is based, but he will not know the detailed polices of his new manager. He needs, at this stage, a rapid and decisive introduction to and familiarity with those detailed terms of reference which constitute much of the prescribed content of his new job.It is essential to give an explicit statement of the situation at the beginning if unnecessary problems are to be avoided. Newly appointed managers often tend to refrain, if possible, from asking many questions because they feel that, if they do, they will give the impression that they are not able to fill the position or because they want to make an immediate demonstration of their competence by doing the job without guidance.

Practitioners of 'management by objectives' would seem to agree in that they see the essence of management success as the achievement of results in an area of responsibility

The following is a typical example of the problems which can arise when responsibilities are not clearly defmed.

General foreman Jones considers foreman Smith responsible for certain maintenance functions in the department of which Smith is production foreman. These responsibilities include:...

(a) Reporting effective equipment promptly to maintenance.

(b) Investigating all breakdowns and reporting improper maintenance which leads to breakdown.

(c) Making the decision to release equipment for repair when requested by a mechanic.

(d) When a breakdown occurs, finding out the cause, how long it 'will take to repair the machine, and assign operators elsewhere if it is estimated to be over 15 minutes.

(e) Investigating every charge of operator negligence leading to machine down-time and to take corrective action to prevent a ,recurrence.

Foreman Smith reports, that he has no responsibility for maintenance. He does none of the above things. He feels no sense of short-coming since he does not believe that these are his responsibilities. Smith explains this shortcoming as follows: 'After all, the mechanics don't rep0l1 to me, they have their own boss.

If, as is often the case, general foreman Jones never actually gets around to discussing the specific aspects ,to the job but is guided in his appraisal of Smith by checklist of personality traits, the unfortunate subordinate may never loam what his job actually consists of.