Tag Archive for Seating Arrangement

Other Complex Seating Arrangements

by  • March 6, 2013 • 0 Comments

See text for explanation.

See text for explanation.

It is possible to create a highly influential seating arrangement when we wish to influence a particularly important, but as yet undecided individual. The first person or the main presenter (Pr) should sit head-on with the “object” in the face-to-face competitive position (Ob). This competitive position aligns the “object” with the person he most expects to object with. Next, we add an affiliate (Af) to the objects left or right, that is, at the casual corner position to act as a friend, or to their side in the cooperative position (Co). The subconscious effect can be powerful if the positions are matched with the outlooks they should hold. That is, the cooperative position should play the advocate against the competitive position in cooperation with the object, except (of course) showing a bias towards agreement with the competitive position.

The affiliate can also “bait” the competitive position and control the conversation by giving up relevant points without sounding pushy. This person can demonstrate ‘the other side of the coin’ and work through the dialogue saving the object from having to voice negative positions himself. This saves him from going through counterproductive mental reasoning that can prove a damaging exercise. Powerful negotiators can use the affiliate to blow the argument out of proportion thereby forcing the object to side with the competitor and bridge the original argument. Obviously this isn’t a simple strategy and requires some advanced preparation, but when it is an important matter it is justified, not to mention fun!

Square Tables

by  • March 6, 2013 • 0 Comments

In a square table seating arrangement, each person is in a competitive (head-to-head) position and a cooperative (kitty-corner) position. This can present an interesting situation.

In a square table seating arrangement, each person is in a competitive (head-to-head) position and a cooperative (kitty-corner) position. This can present an interesting situation.

Square tables present an interesting situation. If we draw on what we know about rectangular tables we know that people who sit face-to-face are in a competitive position and those to our rights and lefts are in cooperative positions. Thus, everyone is equally competing and cooperating with someone at the table completely leveling the playing field. Square tables are great for quick meetings because of this dichotomy.

Bridge is an interesting game played on a square table. In the game there are four players in two fixed partnerships. The partners sit facing each other. It is the tradition to name the players according to their position at the table. They are called North, East, South and West. North and South are partners playing against East and West. In this card game, partners are not allowed to convey information to each other by talking, gestures or facial expression. The intent of the game is to exchange information by the choice of bids or cards played, but how well does this bode with the information we know about seating arrangements? The game has done well to prevent partners sitting next to each other preventing close quarter exchanges that might go unnoticed. However, it does allow partners to face each other head-on exposing their full fronts to each other and also prevents opponents from gaining the same view. While partners aren’t permitted to use any language whatsoever to exchange cues, being students of body language and aware of it’s proficient and pervasiveness might expect something different from the game whether or not it’s ever detected. Naturally, you’ll draw your own conclusions!

Competitive Head-To-Head Position

by  • March 6, 2013 • 0 Comments

When people face-off against one another, they tend to sit head-on across the table.

When people face-off against one another, they tend to sit head-on across the table.

Legal television dramas popularize this head-to-head seating position. Here each party faces directly across from the other person usually with their allies to their left and right solidifying their flanks. Another words for this position is the “closed” seating arrangement because it isolates people with the use of the desk. In the “open” arrangement a desk is pushed up against a wall and presents no barrier to visitors since they can access every part of a person when meeting with them. Closed positions convey formality, distance and authority, defensiveness and even divisiveness whereas open orientations convey interest and comfort.

Even when competition isn’t directly encouraged, research finds that the closed position still becomes an issue because the table provides a clear boundary between each party. Despite this, studies show that it is a very common way to sit in for casual conversations and at restaurants. The reason expressed is because it easily permits the exchange of information, affords good eye contact by filling the other persons view, and turns each person into the centre of attention. Thus, while it can be a constructive casual position amongst friends and family, it doesn’t serve well with new associates or where there is a desire to break down existing boundaries.

Interestingly when larger groups meet in the competitive arrangement with many people facing one another across a rectangular table, it is most often the person to the front of the speaker directly across the table that talks next, and rarely the person to their side. This has been termed the “Steinzor effect” and was named after the researcher Dr. Bernard Steinzor in 1950 who first discovered the occurrence. The head-to-head position creates discourse and necessitates the person at their face to respond, moreso than any other at the table. This only adds to the negative data that stem from head-to-head orientations and why we should avoid it when we wish to accomplish something other than fight.

Research conducted in the mid 1970’s by psychologist Richard Zweigenhaft of Guildord College in North Carolina found that faculty that used their office desks as a barrier by placing it in between them and their students were rated less positively in general and where rated especially poorly as it related to student interaction. The study found that faculty that did this were also older and had a greater academic rank. Thus, it was likely their subconscious tendency was to protect and maintain their rank between themselves and their students. Therefore, when meeting with new clients or where competition is likely but undesirable, avoid sitting in the head-to-head position if possible and remove whatever barriers separate you and whomever it is you wish to build a relationship with. However, if the desire is to reprimand an employee or anyone else and the goal to set clear boundaries, the table-in-between-position can emphasis division, thereby enhancing the message further. It will be up to you to decide exactly what orientation will suite you best and this will be wholly dependant on the goal you wish to attain while meeting.

Independent And Opposite Position

by  • March 6, 2013 • 0 Comments

When people sit to do work but do not want to talk to each other, they will sit in the "independent and opposite" seating arrangement. We see this with strangers in a limited seating cafeteria or in a library when strangers share tables.

When people sit to do work but do not want to talk to each other, they will sit in the “independent and opposite” seating arrangement. We see this with strangers in a limited seating cafeteria or in a library when strangers share tables.

When the object is to show independence, than an opposite, yet diagonal seating position is recommended. We see this most often in cafeteria style arrangements when sitting by oneself isn’t possible and tables are filled with strangers but we still want the most amount of privacy possible. Students will choose this arrangement when studying separately in a library as it permits independent thought and separation avoids any direct eye contact should either party need a break from their work. When subjects were asked to sit and do work quietly in one study this was the most common seating arrangement. Usually the space between the parties will be evenly split and be occupied by handbags, books, papers and other belongings to reserve them from being taken up. Obviously this position should be avoided when cooperation and affiliation formation is has the reverse effect. The independent and opposite position when it is not expected creates hostility and shows indifference.

Cooperative Side-By-Side Position

by  • March 6, 2013 • 0 Comments

Chairs on the same side of the table is the "cooperative" seating arrangement as no barrier is present between the participants. It is the most open way of interacting.

Chairs on the same side of the table is the “cooperative” seating arrangement as no barrier is present between the participants. It is the most open way of interacting.

The cooperative position contrasts the casual corner position with a side-by-side orientation on the same side of the table rather than kitty-corner or cross-corner. There are two possible arrangements for the side-by-side and the variants determine the level of connectivity and interaction between two people. When the chairs are facing forward, or toward the table, it slightly inhibits eye contact decreasing the level of sharing. This orientation shows that there is some cooperation but that it’s not complete. When chairs are facing forward in this manner, it is usually because it is assumed that people are already a part of your team and the two of you are facing off against another party.

A second orientation happens when collaborating on a project. Here, the chairs will (and should) be turned at forty-five degrees toward each other. This arrangement represents intimacy since there is no barrier to interfere with the sharing of information. Working on a common goal, a project or presentation are a few examples of when it’s best to use this arrangement. Intimate couples will also choose this position at restaurants except where moving the chairs about is not permitted. Other couples fail to see this and instead choose competitive arrangements as if they are on job interviews, or are facing off against each other in twenty questions!

There are times when sitting on the same side of the table can appear too intimate, as if invading someone else’s space. One can begin by taking up positions across the table and then finding an excuse to pass documents across it. After some time, moving to the other side of the table and sitting down to clarify the information provides enough of a reason to bridge the gap between people and being fostering intimacy.

Casual Corner Position

by  • March 6, 2013 • 0 Comments

The "casual corner" seating arrangement is best in business as it the table provides are partial barrier, yet does not prevent people from interacting together effectively.

The “casual corner” seating arrangement is best in business as it the table provides are partial barrier, yet does not prevent people from interacting together effectively.

The casual corner position is most appropriate to preserve closeness between people, but at the same time offers a partial barrier. The barrier in this case, is the corner of the table. If chairs are directly facing the table, it avoids direct eye contact, but if preferred, the chairs can face one another across the corner of the table to make sharing of information easier. This seating position is unique because it neatly allows for independent thought, but the proximity still permits intimacy.

When presenting new information to a client or trying to “sell them”, this is the most preferred orientation. It is also a useful way to conduct an interview without coming off as aggressive or competitive. In studies when students were asked to choose a seating arrangement that permitted conversation, this was the most often chosen arrangement.