· ‘Compensation’ is attempting to make good for the misdemeanour (Eg ‘Im sorry I broke your ornament, I’ll pay to have it replaced’).
· ‘Empathy’ is more to do with aligning yourself with how the other person is feeling (Eg ‘I’m sorry we went to the party without you, you must feel rejected right now’).
· ‘Acknowledgement of violated rules/norms’ makes explicit the nature of the transgression (Eg ‘I’m sorry I interrupted you just then as we had agreed that everyone should have their say in this meeting’).
What is interesting is that the researchers found that the effect of the apology made had more to do with how the ‘victim’ sees themselves rather than the size of the transgression. People who were more individualistic in nature preferred an apology based on compensation, whereas people who define themselves in terms of their relations to others preferred a more empathetic apology. Acknowlegement of violation of rules/norms was most effective with people who see themselves as part of a larger group or a collective. (It would be interesting to see if there are cultural differences, for example, between individualistic and collectivist cultures).
The message seems to be, then, that if you have to say ‘Sorry’ you need to consider the type of apology that the other person is looking for and then structure your response accordingly. And if you don’t know or you have to make an apology to more than one person? (Think about BP for a moment!) Then the suggestion is that you should make a carefully constructed, multi-faceted apology so that you cover all the possible preferences of those you have aggrieved.
Source:
A digest of the research can be found in ‘The Psychologist’, Oct 2010, Vol 33. No10. The research is published in the September issue of ‘Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes’. You can download it from:
http://www.ryanfehr.com/research.html
No comments:
Post a Comment