Discussion: View Thread

Dear List,

Reading the responses regarding Assertiveness Training raises many
questions for me.

1. Is there a difference between Assertive and Aggressive? Sounds
to me that the concern is that some women are not considered
AGGRESSIVE enough, because their male counterparts are not
ASSERTIVE. Who is really broken and needs fixed here?

2. If a female need 'assertiveness' training to 'compete' in the
board room, then it seems to me that no 'facilitating' is going
on. I would think that if the management team were truly
facilitative they would all practice listening skills, inclusion,
consesus, presentation skills, cooperation, conflict resolution,
focus and using data and experience to make decisions. Even a
shy, quiet, backward person would have an avenue for input,
because the team would be sensitive to the needs and variations
within personalities of their comrades. This looks to me to be
total team training, not the isolation of a particular group.

Whattya think?
Thanks,
Rick Corcoran, Continuous Improvement Manager
Mark I, Excel Industries
Internet:"corcoranre@excelinc.com"

RICK CORCORAN <CORCORANRE@EXCELINC.COM> wrote:

(Hi Rick)

>>... 1. Is there a difference between Assertive and Aggressive? ...<<

Yes, we should be assertive if the situation requires assertiveness but not
be aggressive. Aggressive behavior is characterized by an attack of some
sort where as assertiveness is not an attack at all.

>>... Sounds to me that the concern is that some women are not considered
AGGRESSIVE enough, because their male counterparts are not ASSERTIVE...<<

I think that is almost correct. An aggressive person may see assertive
behavior as lacking the sting of aggressiveness. The aggressive person has
the problem, not the assertive person.

>>... Who is really broken and needs fixed here? ...<<

Aggressive people need to change their aggressive behavior whereas
assertive people do not. Assertive people may need to learn that their
assertiveness, although natural, may not always be called for or necessary.
Non-assertive people may need to learn how to assert themselves when the
situation requires it.

We are all different. For instance, I am more assertive than 92.5% of the
general working population and less assertive than 2.5%.

>>... 2. If a female need 'assertiveness' training to 'compete' in the
board room, then it seems to me that no 'facilitating' is going
on...<<

Very good point. Aggressive people may not want to facilitate the
participation of the non-assertive people since the aggressive people may
enjoy winning the arguments.

>>... if the management team were truly facilitative they would all
practice listening skills, inclusion, consensus, presentation skills,
cooperation, conflict resolution, focus and using data and experience to
make decisions...<<

So true, but all too uncommon.

>>... Even a shy, quiet, backward person would have an avenue for input,
because the team would be sensitive to the needs and variations within
personalities of their comrades...<<

Another great point. An engineering manager I know reviews each staff
member's personal profile before each staff meeting so that he remembers
which employees need to be asked their opinions, i.e., the submissive
employees. Like he said, "the submissive employees often have the best
answers." Insensitive managers seldom ever know enough to even ask.

Bob

+---------------------------+------------------------+
| Robert F. Gately, PE, MBA | gately@compuserve.com |
+---------------------------+------------------------+
| GATELY CONSULTING (508) 473-0955 |
| 115 Dutcher Street Fax (508) 634-0670 |
| Hopedale, MA 01747-1006 Toll Free (800) 478-8117 |
| http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/gately/ |
| KNOWledge is POWER, self-KNOWledge is emPOWERing |
+----------------------------------------------------+




This looks to me to be
total team training, not the isolation of a particular group.

Whattya think?
Thanks,

Bob, You may already be familiar with some of the work on this issue of
assertiveness. There is one good source that I use: Donald Bowen
"Assertiveness: Authentic Interpersonal Communication" In D.T. Hall
(Ed.) "Experiences in management and org. behavior" 1982, 2nd edition.
Rao
N. Rao Kowtha
Department of Organisational Behavior
Faculty of Business Administration
National University of Singapore
10 Kent Ridge Crescent
Singapore 119260, Singapore
Tel: (65) 8743049
Fax: (65) 775 5571



-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Gately [SMTP:gately@COMPUSERVE.COM]
Sent: Thursday, October 09, 1997 2:34 AM
Subject: Assertiveness

RICK CORCORAN <CORCORANRE@EXCELINC.COM> wrote:

(Hi Rick)

>>... 1. Is there a difference between Assertive and Aggressive?
...<<

Yes, we should be assertive if the situation requires
assertiveness but not
be aggressive. Aggressive behavior is characterized by an attack
of some
sort where as assertiveness is not an attack at all.

>>... Sounds to me that the concern is that some women are not
considered
AGGRESSIVE enough, because their male counterparts are not
ASSERTIVE...<<

I think that is almost correct. An aggressive person may see
assertive
behavior as lacking the sting of aggressiveness. The aggressive
person has
the problem, not the assertive person.

>>... Who is really broken and needs fixed here? ...<<

Aggressive people need to change their aggressive behavior
whereas
assertive people do not. Assertive people may need to learn that
their
assertiveness, although natural, may not always be called for or
necessary.
Non-assertive people may need to learn how to assert themselves
when the
situation requires it.

We are all different. For instance, I am more assertive than
92.5% of the
general working population and less assertive than 2.5%.

>>... 2. If a female need 'assertiveness' training to 'compete'
in the
board room, then it seems to me that no 'facilitating' is going
on...<<

Very good point. Aggressive people may not want to facilitate
the
participation of the non-assertive people since the aggressive
people may
enjoy winning the arguments.

>>... if the management team were truly facilitative they would
all
practice listening skills, inclusion, consensus, presentation
skills,
cooperation, conflict resolution, focus and using data and
experience to
make decisions...<<

So true, but all too uncommon.

>>... Even a shy, quiet, backward person would have an avenue
for input,
because the team would be sensitive to the needs and variations
within
personalities of their comrades...<<

Another great point. An engineering manager I know reviews each
staff
member's personal profile before each staff meeting so that he
remembers
which employees need to be asked their opinions, i.e., the
submissive
employees. Like he said, "the submissive employees often have
the best
answers." Insensitive managers seldom ever know enough to even
ask.

Bob

+---------------------------+------------------------+
| Robert F. Gately, PE, MBA | gately@compuserve.com |
+---------------------------+------------------------+
| GATELY CONSULTING (508) 473-0955 |
| 115 Dutcher Street Fax (508) 634-0670 |
| Hopedale, MA 01747-1006 Toll Free (800) 478-8117 |
| http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/gately/ |
| KNOWledge is POWER, self-KNOWledge is emPOWERing |
+----------------------------------------------------+




This looks to me to be
total team training, not the isolation of a particular group.

Whattya think?
Thanks,

In addition to the source noted earlier, Glaser's work (1990) presents a
4 window model with aggressiveness, assertivenes, covert aggressiveness
and passivity. There are clear differences as described. It is cited in
Andres Huczynski's Influencing Organization (1996) and elsewhere.

Good Luck!
--
T.J. Elliott
Cavanaugh Leahy
http://idt.net/~tjell
914 366-7499

The request for educational information is reasonable, and conveys information
that is not dichotomous (credible or not) but rather which follows a continuum.
Reframe the problem: If a person were going to submit an illegitimate commercial
post to the internet, would they be more likely to go to the trouble of seeking
a doctorate from a traditional program? or some other route? Thus, this
information does have value in drawing some assessment of educational
legitimacy. This has nothing to do with how it relates to personal interest,
nor to the validity of information contained. However, that was not the
question raised by Rhonda.

Was her inquiry into legitimacy fair? I believe the answer is "yes". I have
certainly witnessed several examples of illegitimate uses of our listservs.

Are there examples of people seeking artificial legitimacy by getting
pseudo-doctorates from mail-in non-accredited programs? Yes, many. (See Women
are from Venus, Men are from Mars for just one of many examples of this
behavior).

My question had nothing to do with, nor did it imply a role of "elitist
hierarchy" and any such reading is erroneous. It simply sought the training of
the person. Nothing more, nothing less.

I would argue that if the offer were illegitimate (the contr-question, and the
relevant question to Rhonda's original query) then it would also be far more
probable that the person would have sought alternative sources of titular
legitimacy. This is a probablistic statement----- NOT a deterministic
statement.

Bruce