Coaching at Work road-tests the Repertory Grid Interview
1 The tool
What is it?
Based on George Kelly’s Personal Construct Theory, developed and first published in 1955, the Repertory Grid Interview is a technique for identifying the ways that a person interprets or ‘construes’ and gives meaning to their experiences.
According to Kelly (1955), we use our construct systems to make the process of understanding and navigating the world easier. ‘Constructs’ are ways of making sense of our experiences and perceptions and are not necessarily conscious and articulated. They are a basis for making distinctions. Our construct systems develop as we struggle to make sense of our world.
How does it work?
The grid is based on the personal construct – for example, when you meet people for the first time, you might notice whether someone seems amicable, chatty and engaging, or you notice that they stand back and appear reserved or quiet. In your subconscious you might form a bi-polar construct of “friendly-distant” in evaluating someone’s character, an evaluative judgment you make about an attribute such as friendliness, which is important to you and one of a number of dimensions you use to evaluate people when you meet them. The bi-polar constructs formed in differentiating between the issues at hand can help in understanding not only the factors involved, but also the client’s internal value system.
l For more information on this tool read: G Kelly, A Theory of Personality: Psychology of Personal Constructs (1955; 1963).
2 The administrator
Using the tool
One of my favourite tools for investigating difficult problems (especially people-related), the grid interview lets you tune in to the language your client has developed to navigate their way around the world.
The process of eliciting the constructs is called triadic comparison. You need a set of blank cards or paper the size of a business card and a pad of paper to draw the grid outline. When the problem is being described, I ask the client to identify the different elements involved and write each on a separate card. The interview works best with between six and nine elements.
The cards are laid face down and shuffled around. Ask the client to pick up any three and turn them over and then ask, “In what ways are any two similar and different to the third in terms of how you feel about them?”
The answer produces a “construct” of two polar extremes, which are not necessarily opposites. The construct, comprising the similarity or emergent pole, and the difference, the contrast pole, is written onto the grid verbatim. The cards are laid face down again, another set of three drawn and the question asked. The process is repeated until the client can think of no more.
At this point, all constructs relating to the elements of concern will have been elicited. When the grid is complete, there are several ways of rating or ranking all of the elements against all the constructs, including the use of sophisticated software packages, which produce various statistical analyses.
My preference is to have a conversation about how some of the similarities and differences were arrived at and explore the client’s hierarchy of constructs and the values at the core of their construing.
Bert Buckley is an independent coach, supervisor, coaching and management development facilitator for LSN and a mental toughness practitioner
3 The client
The experience
Change is a constant in my work, but I am starting to look to the future and how the team will cope with a dramatic increase in workload. Although it is not something I had seen before, the repertory grid approach made me think about my problem in a way I hadn’t expected and it enabled me to voice concerns that had been sitting deep at the back of my mind.
I have thought about the skills, abilities, strengths and weaknesses in my team many times before, but when Bert asked me to make a distinction between team members in groups of three, it made me analyse their characteristics in a way I hadn’t done before. Picking up the cards at random, I found myself comparing and contrasting people and identifying similarities and differences on dimensions I hadn’t articulated before.
Application
It’s not a thinking process I am used to, but by comparing people in this way, I began to recognise how I can use some of the undiscovered potential within the team and to be honest with myself about the less positive attributes among team members.
I began to think about what people were really good at and what they enjoyed doing. I reflected on the flexibility that I needed and how I could utilise team members differently, including myself. I suddenly thought: “Do you know, this person would come in and help out if we were in difficulty and so would that person.”
I began thinking not only about potential, but how I would need to change my approach to release it.
When Bert asked which constructs were most important to me, I tried to think of the bigger picture and the wider changes needed for the future. When ranking each individual against the important constructs, I realised the enormity of the task ahead and began to rehearse some of the issues I need to raise with my line manager about roles, responsibilities and individuals.
I am keen to revisit the grid in the future after I have implemented changes I am now planning.
Verdict
The structure of the grid interview and the act of writing on the cards, picking them up in threes and comparing them, enabled me to focus on the individual differences within the team and align them to the work streams that we will require in the future.
The grid was formed using my words, and not influenced at all by Bert. I felt able to talk about issues that I had previously glossed over or ignored. More importantly, coaching using the repertory grid has given me the basis of a dialogue with everyone concerned, including myself.
Jacquie Pearcy is office manager at Parkstone Grammar School
The Repertory Grid Interview: pros and cons
UPSIDE
- Simple and easy to use
- Content free
- Designed to bypass a person’s cognitive defences and give access to their underlying construct system
- Can be revisited over time
- Widely researched and used in many business contexts, including marketing
- Good for tackling those “can’t quite put into words” issues
DOWNSIDE
- Needs a neutral, but encouraging style of questioning to avoid bias
- Constructs must be recorded in the client’s words, which can be lengthy
- Needs cards\paper, pen and a sheet of paper for the grid
- Can over-simplify the underlying theoretical basis of Personal Construct Psychology
Coaching at Work, Volume 6, Issue 6