Tag Archive for Head Position

Summary – Chapter 15

by  • March 6, 2013 • 0 Comments

Seating arrangements is one of the things we infrequently draw to conscious attention but at some level always understand its importance. In this chapter we looked at what seems on the outset to be a complicated matter, but in reality is fairly straight forward and like all body language, once it is know, common sense. We found that seating positions can indicate our reason for meeting, be it ‘affiliation’ – to build group cohesion, ‘achievement’ – to get things done, or ‘power’ – to emphasis control. We found that the meeting organizer typically dictates how meetings will transpire.

We learned that Sommer first began researching seating ecology and that patterns emerged based on the shape of the table and the proximity speakers had to one-another. We found that a casual corner position where speakers meet across the corners of a rectangular or square table preserve closeness between people, but still offers the security of a partial barrier. We found that when seated side-by-side cooperation is fostered, when facing across from one-another but not head-on, independent though is fostered, and when facing directly, competition. We found that leadership studies show us what we intuitively already know, that leaders take up the head position, that those at his or her flank receive trickle down leadership and that when seating is pre-determined, leadership is assigned to the head of the table. We found that square tables includes both competitive and cooperative seating positions, that circular tables had similar affects despite what King Arthur thought, and that strategically we can sway our “object” by taking up competitive and affiliative positions.

Next we looking at how to set up an office and found that desk placement and office artifacts are crucial and that chairs can make people uncomfortable or powerful depending on their height and location. We then looked at seating arrangements in larger auditoriums and saw that the center of lecture halls tended to be overlooked, and also how to use this to our advantage, and finally we concluded the chapter by pointing out that seating location affects participation; those in front participating most, but that it did not related to test scores.

Leadership Positions And The Head Of The Table

by  • March 6, 2013 • 0 Comments

When no leader is present, the group will attribute leadership to whomever is sitting at the head of the table.

When no leader is present, the group will attribute leadership to whomever is sitting at the head of the table.  Power trickles down from the head of the table toward the opposite end.  Thus #1 has the most power, #2 the next most and so forth.

Not surprisingly, in studies looking at leadership, it was found that the most dominant person chooses the head of rectangular tables. Interestingly though, when no leader was present, leadership was attributed to the person who sat at the head of the table. Researchers Fred Strodtbeck and Harmon Hook in the early 1960’s found that during jury deliberations people at head positions tended to participate more often and had a greater influence on the decision making process, than people at the sides. This study overlooked whether or not leaders took up the positions though, but this is a likely assumption. However, in other studies it was found that a person’s status played a part in who chooses the head of the table. Those considered high class were much more likely than lower classes to sit at the heads of tables. Who knew money had anything to do with where we sit at a table!

Researchers attribute visibility and the ability to make eye contact with everyone as key features turning heads of tables into leadership positions. For example, one person sitting opposite three others would be seen as the leader, since they would be able to make eye contact with him, but not to each other. He would also be able to indicate his intentions better and therefore control the floor much easier. It should however be noted, that central positions at tables are also important in discussions since it permits ease of conversation amongst all participants through proximity. In other words, it’s hard to talk with someone from across the table, just imagine a “cartoonishly large” corporate sized boardroom! The exception to the head position as leader is when it exposes the back to the doorway. When this happens the head seat is a disadvantage since it leaves whomever open to surprise and attack.

When one person faces three, the person sitting by themselves are seen as the leader. His gaze is focused forward while his companions must head-turn to see and speak with everyone.

When one person faces three, the person sitting by themselves are seen as the leader. His gaze is focused forward while his companions must head-turn to see and speak with everyone.  In this case, #1 has the most power while each of the #2s share power.

Leadership shows a trickle down affect too. If the head of table is deemed the leader, than the person to their immediate side holds the next most powerful position, and so forth. In ancient times, the leader held the head of the table, with his lieutenants at his sides. The person who sits opposite the head, even today, is usually the most task oriented, whereas those sitting in the middle are usually affiliators, normally woman, who wish to interact with the greatest number of people and create active participation with everyone. Another feature of the Steinzor effect states that when a strong leader is present, people will direct comments to the person adjacent the leader more often because it avoids direct eye contact and confrontation with them, which is especially intimidating due to close quarters. When leadership was shared amongst all members, no strong patterns emerge and conversation basically happens freely.

Early Research Into Seating Arrangements

by  • March 6, 2013 • 0 Comments

In a business setting people sitting kitty-corner (D and F) tend to talk 6 times as often as those sitting opposite (B and C). Those sitting next to each other (C and E) talk about half as often as kitty-corner but still 3 times as often as sitting on opposite sides of the table. The head position or leader position, tends to be spoken to the least.

In a business setting people sitting kitty-corner (D and F) tend to talk 6 times as often as those sitting opposite (B and C). Those sitting next to each other (C and E) talk about half as often as kitty-corner but still 3 times as often as sitting on opposite sides of the table. The head position or leader position, tends to be spoken to the least.

One of the

Boardrooms present an interesting power effect. In this case "A" is the head of the table because he benefits by seeing who might be entering through the door. "B" is also head of the table, but might be taken by surprise as the door is at his back. Power trickles down from the head of the table to "C" and "D" (flaking the head), "E" and "F" (flanking the flanks), and finally "G" and "H" who share the lowest rank..

Boardrooms present an interesting power effect. In this case “A” is the head of the table because he benefits by seeing who might be entering through the door. “B” is also head of the table, but might be taken by surprise as the door is at his back. Power trickles down from the head of the table to “C” and “D” (flaking the head), “E” and “F” (flanking the flanks), and finally “G” and “H” who share the lowest rank..

earliest research studies was done by American psychologist Robert Sommer of the University of California in the 1950’s. He examined the effects of extensive renovations done to an old age home. The ward received new colourful paint, new lighting was installed, new chairs brought in and several small rooms were converted into one large day room. The furniture was also re-arranged to make conversations more likely amongst the patients by creating more face-to-face encounters. This rearrangement was based on what he observed daily in the hallways just outside the ward. Here, every morning the chairs were placed into straight rows, shoulder to shoulder, against the wall to make mopping easier. But if you entered sometime later in the day, you’d find them re-arranged into groups. It was the patient’s family members who moved the chairs to speak with the patients, rather than what the patient actually preferred themselves. From this observation and the fact that any changes in the ward were met with resistance it was obvious that the patients would resist the ward remodel. In fact, it was common knowledge around the home that every piece of furniture and chair “had its place.” A lot of which had been there, regardless of any logical or functional reason. The conclusions drawn from the study were less than positive likely because the study involved mentally handicapped patients. In fact, it was concluded that modification of furniture arrangements was not enough in and of itself to adequately increasing social interactions. However, drawing on his initial observations from the hallway, where regular visitors rearranged furniture, Dr. Sommer felt he was onto something important.

His future studies examined visitors interacting in a hospital cafeteria, students in classrooms, children in public, and a myriad of other social situations. He found that when conversing over a rectangular table, patterns began to emerge as a function of the shape and proximity speakers had to one another. In all arrangements it is the nature of the meeting which dictated the spatial “ecology”, he concluded. He learned that eye contact and distance are the two fundamental concepts governing how we sit, which in turn affects our ability to exchange information, speak effectively, or even draw lines of division. The next few paragraphs covers the ecology of round, and rectangular seating arrangements with respect to reasons for meeting, be it a casual meeting with friends, cooperative sharing of information, independent working or leadership purposes.

Head Back And Peering Over Glasses

by  • March 5, 2013 • 0 Comments

You wouldn't mess with this chick. Head back spells confidence and authority.

You wouldn’t mess with this chick. Head back spells confidence and authority.

This head position prompts phrases such as “She looked down her nose at him in disapproval.” It is the classic eye-glass wearing domineering teacher or librarian look when a student has done something she does not approve of, so she stares him down. The gesture can be done by looking over the glasses or simply by looking down the bridge of the nose. The posture elicits a prey response in others because it puts them in an aggressive relationship with the predator peering down on them. Tilting the head back is a way to adjust the height levels between people because by doing so it raises the level of the eyes by a few inches. Looking down the nose is indicative of someone that is condescending or pushy and is an authoritarian posture but is also a gravity defying body language so shows confidence and positivity. It’s where the phrase “Keep your chin up” come from when we wish others to frame their outlook in a more constructive light. Conversely the chin down shows negativity and destructive thoughts such as judgement.

While the cue can be done without glasses, peering over them by slightly pulling them down as if to get a better view is even stronger. A friend of mine who is a photographer explained to me that he felt turned off by a client that habitually held this posture. For whatever reason, it was her natural tendency to tilt her head back and look down the bridge of her nose at the camera. Since the nose and chin move together they both signal the same sort of high confidence dominant signal. At the time he didn’t know why but was quick to have the model drop this posture because it didn’t feel right to him. I explained to him that he likely felt put off by the posture because it made her appear dominant and authoritative when he was likely looking for a coy pose instead. I was right after all. His reply “Why would anyone want to look at a domineering model peering down on her subjects?” He then explained that he wasn’t doing a stock photo for a fluff editorial, rather “She wanted to look attractive for her boyfriend!” We both found this amusing; he would have received an interesting surprise!