Variations in the Use of Advocacy and Inquiry

Introduction

Accomplishing tasks in the workplace depends upon relationships, both formal and informal (McHenry, 2008). Advocacy and inquiry are the “give and take” of relationships, whereby one tells the other what one knows or finds out from the other what one does not know.

Managers generally have been given training in being "forceful, articulate advocates and problem solvers - they know how to present and argue strongly for their views” (Roberts, 2008 p.24). They also must remember they are people interacting with other people to accomplish their goals.

Variations in the Use of Advocacy and Inquiry

While it is traditional to stress high advocacy in management training, interpersonal communication research suggests this approach may not always be the best method for team-based decision making, particularly if it is not balanced with inquiry. Recognizing the uses of the various combinations of advocacy and inquiry can help managers be more successful in the newer team-based workplace.

In general, there are few settings where “just telling” or “just asking” is appropriate to individual role players, such as a trial or a hearing. Giving orders in a crisis may be appropriate for high advocacy, low inquiry. High inquiry, low advocacy would be appropriate for objective gathering of data.

However, in an average business meeting, a leader who uses a high advocacy, low inquiry style is likely to generate a “yes men” scenario -- with its potential for serious mistakes -- while a leader that utilizes a high inquiry, low advocacy style is likely to generate paralysis if conflicting “answers” are not resolved and consensus cannot be obtained.

When pushed to extremes, sole use of advocacy and inquiry are like two sides of the same coin. Extreme advocates would rather be right. Extreme inquirers would rather not be wrong. In the first case, the person