There are also those people who are inclined to break through the door. Rather than knock and ask to be invited in, these bold (often extraverted) folks are likely to enter with a blaze of activity and a flurry of ideas (good and bad). They are inclined to join with Kurt Lewin in learning about the social system by observing how other people react to the way in which they are acting or the ideas they are presenting. Notes are taken about the level of acceptance (as well as the vitriol) that comes with their behavior and/or introduction of an idea. Is the resistance a matter of not liking the idea—or not liking someone new to the system getting so actively involved? Is someone entering a new relationship supposed to be “careful” about what they say and do? Are new members of a group supposed to sit back and observe for a while? Basically, as we are about to see, it is a matter of proactive and reactive inclusion. If we get it wrong about the accepted processes of inclusion than we are likely to be assigned for at least a short period of time to the “penalty box.” We might have some good ideas, but these ideas are likely to be met with stony silence or a few brief words of dismissal.
Proactive and Reactive Inclusion: An important decision must be made as to whether we are going to actively seek inclusion in the social system (proactive inclusion) or whether we are looking to others in the social system to invite us in (reactive inclusion). When we are motivated by a proactive need for inclusion then we are “inviting ourselves” into the relationship or group – and therefore are taking the risk of being rejected by the other person or group (informally or formally). The person with whom we are about to relate might find a “good” reason to make our initial meeting quite short. They might decline to meet for a second time or at least find multiple “excuses” for not finding time for the second meeting.
The “termination” of a brief relationship is rarely stated in an overt manner—however, the message soon becomes clear. “I don’t really want to establish a relationship with you.” Similarly, members of a group might directly or indirectly indicate one of the following: “who invited you in?” “Wait a minute, we have to decide if we want you to be a member of this group!” “I’m not sure you will want to be a member of this group.” “I think you should reconsider, since you obviously are not liked by most of us.” While these words are not usually stated directly to someone wanting to join a group, there are many ways that these exclusionary inclinations are expressed through nonverbal behavior, through communication patterns in the group, or through the assignment of roles and responsibilities in the group.
Of course, there is also the possibility that another person will welcome our active engagement with them upon first meeting. They are themselves a bit “shy” or “awkward” in meeting new people and appreciate the proactive initiative we have taken. Similarly, group members might welcome in one’s proactive gesture of inclusion. They might be guided by a focus on collaboration and/or advocacy of differences and community. There might be a sigh of relief that the matter of inclusion is being addressed by the person under consideration. There might also be appreciation for this “bold action” being taken (often leading to perspectives on the need for control in the group).
Download Article 1K Club
