Type Of Interview

For my assignment I chose to examine an interview I was a party to at my

place of employment with the local Association For Community Living. It was an
orientation meeting for a new client moving into a group home where I currently
work as a Direct Care Worker. Under the classification of interviews, my analy
sis focuses on an Information Giving type of interview.
As outlined in class, information giving interviews are used to obtain f
acts, opinions, feelings, attitudes, reasons for actions, trends or beliefs. My
specific interview was to inform, organize and assist the staff team, of which
I am a member, in supporting a new individual moving into the house.
Purpose Of The Interview
The purpose of this interview was to instruct the staff team on current
programs and supports surrounding this individual, as well as to train and coach
staff on handling techniques used through stressful periods. Lastly, this inte
rview was to clarify all procedures to be used with this individual.
Setting
The setting for our meeting, which is of importance, was a meeting room
at our local Head Office. The meeting took place at 1900 on January 9, 1996. Th
e meeting included the supervisor and three staff team members.
A physical description of the environment is as follows: a large wooden
rectangular table sits in the centre of the room with 12 chairs around it, there
are 2 cluttered bookcases along one wall and a large white board along another
wall. There are no pictures on the walls and no telephone. The meeting took pl
ace after business hours so the building was quiet, empty and very dark.
Opening
The opening of this interview began with cordial greetings and small tal
k, as we are all well-acquainted with each other. The purpose of the interview
was established and we moved quickly into the body of the interview.
Body
The supervisor, as the interviewer, was in the information giving positi
on. The staff team were informed of relevant background information and a brief
history of the individual. We began to develop new perspectives as a team by r
eviewing current procedures, handling techniques, supports and activities all th
e while trying to improve on them if possible. Problem solving was undertaken t
o determine strategies to support this individual with the move and any changes
or adjustments. Confrontation was used by staff to identify discrepancies and d
istortions in the information. After much brainstorming, responsibilities were
designated to each staff member for implementation. As a staff team we set goal
s for ourselves.
Closing
As the supervisor shifted the conversation towards questions or concerns
surrounding the new client, I began to feel things drawing to a close. All new
information was reviewed and summarized to ensure understanding. The staff's n
ew role was clarified and the next steps were identified. After a final round o
f clearinghouse questions, we agreed to meet again to review and evaluate our pr
ogress after a trial period (one month).
Inclusion
Inclusion refers to how much a party is willing and able to take part in
an interview. The staff team were willing and able to learn. The supervisor w
as able but seemed somewhat closed to offering specific information. For exampl
e, the supervisor was evasive to questions regarding specific amounts of support
required for the new client.
As the interview progressed, the unwillingness on the supervisor's part
to exchange information caused defensiveness in the staff members. The supervis
or continued this throughout and staff became noticeably upset and frustrated.
Control
Control refers to the degree of power each party in the interview has to
influence the nature and/or outcome of that interview. The supervisor, from my
point of view, had more control due to job position/status, as well as having t
he information that staff was seeking. Control was exercised by the supervisor
by limiting the amount of information shared. This had a negative effect on sta
ff and the interview as a whole.
The power struggle between staff and supervisor seemed to increase as th
e interview progressed. The staff became agitated to receive further informatio
n and the supervisor became less inclined to offer any.
Affection
Affection refers to the degree of warmth between the parties in the inte
rview. This is completely a personal perception on my part. The supervisor app
eared hostile towards two staff members in particular. I base this judgement on
complete lack of eye contact and verbal bluntness with these particular staff.
The supervisor was seemingly speaking to one staff only. I felt negative feeli
ngs from staff towards the supervisor intensifying as the interview progressed (
body language, verbal cues). Everyone became questioning of each other and leer
y of the information being shared.
Level Of Interaction
There are three main levels of interaction. Level 1 being Action-Reacti
on. Interviews often start at this level, which exhibits the least degree of co
mmunication. Interactions deal with non-threatening questions and responses are
usually superficial. Level 2 is Interaction. This level deals with more intim
ate or controversial areas. Nothing more is revealed than need be. Level 3 is
Transaction. This level is the highest degree of interpersonal involvement, for
med through trust and positive rapport. All parties are actively listening and
responding with a high degree of intimacy and honesty.
In my opinion, this interview would very much be considered within Level
2, Interaction. The interview began at Level 1 during the opening phase and en
try into the body of the interview (superficial small talk to pass time). It th
en progressed to Level 2 as we entered further into the body of the interview.
We began to discuss more intimate details of an individual's life and ideas for
support were shared. Personal feelings were briefly touched upon. Both staff a
nd supervisor were asking and answering questions of each other without offering
too much information. I don't believe that this interview ever attained Level
3.
Verbal & Non-Verbal Communication
Verbal and non-verbal communication signals are presented by every indiv
idual. These signals are very important because they alter our responses. Nine
ty percent of any message we convey is non-verbal, even when talking. It has be
en shown through research that the non-verbal messages tend to outweigh the verb
al messages.
My perception of the verbal communication from the supervisor would be d
escribed as: abrupt, fluctuating high-pitched voice, incomplete phrases, jerky s
peed of speech, very repetitious with many hesitations throughout the interview.
My perception of the staff member's verbal communication could be best describ
ed as: quiet, tense, frequent hesitations, many irregular pauses in speech, repe
titious questions with a varied inflection in voice.
The non-verbal communication I perceived from the supervisor could be be
st described as follows: eyes cast downward, sighing frequently, often having ra
ised eyebrows, rapid breathing, infrequent smiling at selected participants, sti
ff and shifting posture with some head nodding noted. I perceived the non-verba
l communication from the staff to be: shoulders shrugged, leaning back in seats,
sideways eye glancing, crossed legs, folded arms, sighing, slouched posture, cl
asped hands and some head nodding.
Questioning & Interviewing Techniques
The placement and types of questions used during an interview can be ver
y important to providing framework and encouraging desired topics. Closed quest
ions, which are used to get specific facts and limit information shared, were us
ed very frequently by the supervisor during this interview ("Do you agree?"). O
pen-ended questions, which allow more sharing of information and control, were u
sed very infrequently and mostly by staff members rather than the supervisor ("H
ow do we proceed from here?"). Indirect questions, which are less threatening q
uestions in the form of statements, were infrequently used during the interview
("You seem confused.").
Focusing on the interviewing techniques used by the supervisor during th
is interview, I noted that minimal encouragers (head nodding) and accenting (rep
eating key words) were used. Paraphrasing and summarizing were also used by bot
h staff and supervisor to convey and assure understanding of relevant informatio
n to the other party.
Effectiveness Of The Interview
This interview was effective in sharing only some of the relevant inform
ation. I would say it was not as effective as it could have been due to the bre
akdown in communication as the interview progressed. The staff's perceived evas
iveness of the supervisor caused further tension and frustration. The ineffecti
veness of the interview to alleviate staff's concerns regarding the new client w
as evident to me after speaking with co-workers following the closing of the int
erview.
The Interviewer's Strengths & Weaknesses
I feel bias in surveying the strengths and weaknesses of my supervisor.
Under strengths, I would say that my supervisor ensured that there would be no
distractions, allowed each individual opportunity to share feelings or ideas and
arrived on time and well organized with a detailed agenda. I would say that my
supervisor was ineffective in responding to questions, closed minded to suggest
ed alternatives and unsupportive of the staff team.
How Might The Interview Have Been Improved?
I feel more knowledgeable due to my class studies to be able to suggest
viable alternatives to improve on the outcome of this interview. I believe that
each party should be more open to others' ideas and be aware of mental arguing
with others. Each party must try to keep personal feelings out of professional
settings by being aware of biases and putting them aside if possible. I also be
lieve that honesty amongst all parties (complete and accurate information, shari
ng of true feelings) is vital to developing a successful helping relationship.
Each party must concentrate and listen to what the other is saying to be able to
gain a true understanding of one another.