Aptitude Interpersonal and Communication Skills

Interpersonal Relations at Work

Interpersonal skills for CGPSC CSAT: empathy, emotional intelligence, Johari window, transactional analysis, assertiveness, conflict styles and teamwork.

13 min read Updated Oct 2026 #interpersonal skills#emotional intelligence#conflict management

Prerequisites

The Hook: Two Tehsildars, One Problem

Connect

In two tehsils of the same district, the revenue staff are overloaded during the kharif girdawari (गिरदावरी, crop inspection) season. In the first tehsil, the tehsildar circulates a sharp memo threatening action against “lazy patwaris”; within a week, two patwaris apply for leave and the rest do the bare minimum. In the second, the tehsildar calls the patwaris together, listens to why villages are being missed (no transport, app glitches), arranges shared vehicles, and publicly thanks the team that finishes first.

Same rules, same workload, very different results. The difference is interpersonal skill.

The question this page answers: what are the core interpersonal skills, which frameworks describe them, and how do they decide the “best response” in a CSAT situation?

Why it matters for CGPSC: Paper II situation questions are built on these ideas even when they do not name them — the right option is usually the one that is empathetic, assertive (not aggressive or passive) and collaborative. The frameworks below give you the vocabulary to justify a choice and to spot the trap options.

What Interpersonal Skills Are

Interpersonal skills (अंतर्वैयक्तिक कौशल) are the abilities that let a person work effectively with others: understanding them, being understood, influencing without coercion, resolving disagreement and building trust. They are sometimes called “people skills” or “soft skills”.

SkillIn one lineIn a district office
EmpathyUnderstanding another’s feelings and point of viewSeeing why an applicant is angry after his fifth visit
Active listeningFull attention to words and feelingsLetting a complainant finish before responding
AssertivenessStating your view firmly and respectfullyDeclining an improper request politely but clearly
Conflict resolutionTurning disagreement into a workable solutionMediating between two departments over a camp
TeamworkWorking towards a shared goalRevenue, health and panchayat staff running one camp
NegotiationReaching agreement where interests differSettling a road-alignment dispute with villagers
Giving and receiving feedbackHelping others improve; accepting criticismReviewing a subordinate’s report constructively
Trust-buildingBeing consistent, honest and reliableKeeping promises made at a jan chaupal

Empathy vs sympathy

Sympathy (सहानुभूति)Empathy (समानुभूति)
Feeling sorry for someoneUnderstanding the feeling from their side
“I feel bad for you”“I can see why this delay has hurt your family’s plans”
Can create distance or pityBuilds connection and problem-solving

Empathy does not mean agreeing or breaking rules. An officer can fully understand a farmer’s distress and still follow the procedure — while explaining it, and helping him through it.

Emotional Intelligence

Emotional intelligence (EI, भावनात्मक बुद्धिमत्ता) is the ability to recognise, understand and manage one’s own emotions and those of others. The term was used in academic work by Peter Salovey and John Mayer (1990) and popularised by Daniel Goleman’s book Emotional Intelligence (1995). Goleman’s widely taught framework has five components:

ComponentFacesMeaningExample
Self-awarenessSelfKnowing your emotions, strengths and limitsNoticing you are irritated before a tense meeting
Self-regulationSelfControlling impulses, staying calmNot shouting back at an abusive visitor
MotivationSelfInner drive beyond money or statusWorking on a difficult scheme because it matters
EmpathyOthersUnderstanding others’ emotionsSensing a junior’s anxiety about a transfer
Social skillsOthersManaging relationships, influencing, resolving conflictGetting two rival groups to agree on a water-sharing plan

The Johari Window

Proposed by Joseph Luft and Harrington Ingham (1955) — the name joins their first names. It maps self-awareness and openness in relationships.

Known to selfNot known to self
Known to othersOpen (arena)Blind spot
Not known to othersHidden (façade)Unknown
  • Feedback from others shrinks the blind area.
  • Self-disclosure shrinks the hidden area.
  • Both together enlarge the open area — the zone where trust and effective work happen.

Transactional Analysis

Developed by psychiatrist Eric Berne (1950s; Games People Play, 1964). Every person has three ego states:

Ego stateBehaves likeTypical words
ParentCritical (rules, judging) or nurturing (caring, protective)“You should always…”, “Don’t worry, I’ll help”
AdultRational, factual, problem-solving“What are the facts? What are the options?”
ChildNatural (spontaneous, emotional) or adapted (complying, rebellious)“This is unfair!”, “Whatever you say, sir”
  • A complementary transaction gets the response the sender expected (Adult → Adult, Adult ← Adult); communication flows.
  • A crossed transaction gets an unexpected ego-state response (an Adult question met with a Critical-Parent reply); communication breaks down.
  • Life positions were popularised by Thomas Harris’s I’m OK — You’re OK (1967). The healthy position is “I’m OK — You’re OK”.
The CSAT translation
In situation questions, the best option is almost always the Adult response — calm, factual, respectful, focused on solving the problem. Options that scold (Critical Parent), give in to pressure (Adapted Child) or react emotionally (Natural Child) are the distractors.

Assertiveness — the Middle Path

StyleBehaviourMessageExample (a senior asks you to skip a verification)
PassiveAvoids conflict, gives in, hides own view“Your needs matter, mine don’t”Skips the verification silently
AggressiveDominates, blames, threatens“My needs matter, yours don’t”Accuses the senior of corruption in front of staff
Passive-aggressiveAgrees outwardly, resists indirectlyHidden hostilityAgrees, then deliberately delays the file
AssertiveFirm, honest, respectful“Both our needs matter”Politely explains the rule, offers the fastest lawful route, and records it on file

Assertive statements usually use “I” language (“I am unable to sign this without the field report”) rather than blaming “you” language (“You are trying to bend the rules”).

Conflict-Handling Styles

The Thomas–Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (Kenneth Thomas and Ralph Kilmann, 1974) places five styles on two axes: assertiveness (concern for own goals) and cooperativeness (concern for others’ goals).

StyleAssertiveCooperativeOutcomeWhen it fits
CompetingHighLowWin–loseEmergencies, enforcing law and safety
CollaboratingHighHighWin–winImportant issues where both sides’ needs can be met
CompromisingMediumMediumPartial win–partial winTime pressure, equal power, temporary settlement
AvoidingLowLowLose–lose (issue stays)Trivial issues, or a cooling-off period
AccommodatingLowHighLose–winIssue matters more to the other side; preserving goodwill
graph TD
    A[Conflict arises] --> B{Is law, safety or ethics at stake?}
    B -->|Yes| C[Firm: enforce rules, explain reasons]
    B -->|No| D{Is the issue important to both sides?}
    D -->|Yes| E[Collaborate: listen, find a win-win]
    D -->|No, minor| F[Compromise or accommodate]
    E --> G[Record the agreement and follow up]
    C --> G
Default answer: collaborate, but never on legality
In most CSAT situations, collaboration (joint problem-solving) is the best option. The exception is when law, safety or integrity is involved — then the officer must be firm (competing on the rule) while staying polite and explaining reasons. “Compromising” on a legal requirement is never the right answer.

Teams and Group Dynamics

Bruce Tuckman (1965) described four stages of team development; a fifth, adjourning, was added with Mary Ann Jensen in 1977.

StageWhat happensLeader’s role
FormingPolite, uncertain, roles unclearGive direction and clear roles
StormingDisagreements, power strugglesMediate, keep focus on the goal
NormingRules and trust settleEncourage, delegate
PerformingTeam works smoothly and independentlySupport, step back
AdjourningTask ends, team disbandsRecognise contributions, close formally

Good team behaviour in an office: share credit publicly, take responsibility for failures, praise in public and correct in private, distribute work fairly, and keep everyone informed.

Negotiation

  • Distributive (win–lose): a fixed pie is split; one side’s gain is the other’s loss.
  • Integrative (win–win): the parties look for options that enlarge the pie.
  • Getting to Yes (Roger Fisher and William Ury, 1981) gave the principled-negotiation rules: separate the people from the problem, focus on interests, not positions, invent options for mutual gain, and use objective criteria. It also popularised BATNA — Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement.
Worked example: interests vs positions
Villagers block a road-widening project (position: “No widening here”). On listening, the interest turns out to be that the widening would cut off access to the village pond and the devgudi (देवगुड़ी, village deity shrine). Shifting the alignment a few metres, or adding an access path, meets the interest — and the project proceeds. Arguing about the position would have produced a stand-off.

Memory Tricks

Anchor these
  • Goleman’s five: “SSM-ES” — Self-awareness, Self-regulation, Motivation (the three “self” skills), then Empathy, Social skills (the two “others” skills).
  • Johari = Joe + Harry (Joseph Luft + Harrington Ingham). Feedback fixes the blind spot; disclosure opens the hidden box.
  • TA = “PAC” — Parent, Adult, Child. CSAT answers live in the A.
  • Thomas–Kilmann “CCCAA” — Competing, Collaborating, Compromising, Avoiding, Accommodating. Only Collaborating is high–high.
  • Tuckman rhymes: Forming, Storming, Norming, Performing — then Adjourning.

Don’t Confuse

ThisvsThat
Empathy — understanding from their sideSympathy — feeling sorry for them
Assertive — firm and respectfulAggressive — firm and disrespectful
Collaborating — both win fully (high–high)Compromising — both give up something (medium–medium)
Avoiding — neither side’s concern addressedAccommodating — other side’s concern addressed, own given up
Johari blind area — known to others, not to selfJohari hidden area — known to self, not to others
Complementary transaction — expected responseCrossed transaction — unexpected ego state, breakdown
Positions — what people say they wantInterests — why they want it

Common Mistakes

Trap 1: Mistaking empathy for leniency
“Being empathetic, the officer waived the required document” is not empathy — it is a rule violation. Empathy changes how you apply the rule (explaining, helping, speeding up), not whether you apply it.
Trap 2: Picking avoidance because it sounds peaceful
Options like “ignore the issue, it will settle on its own” look calm but leave the conflict alive. Avoidance is right only for trivial matters or as a short cooling-off step.
Trap 3: Confusing assertive with aggressive
Saying no to an improper order is assertive; publicly accusing the senior is aggressive. The best option holds the line and preserves the relationship.

Practice

Level 1: Foundation

  1. In the Johari window, which area is reduced by receiving feedback from others?
  2. Which ego state in transactional analysis is rational and fact-based?
  3. Which Thomas–Kilmann style is high on both assertiveness and cooperativeness?
  4. Name Tuckman’s stage marked by disagreements and power struggles.
Answers
  1. The blind area.
  2. Adult.
  3. Collaborating.
  4. Storming.

Level 2: Prelims MCQs

All situations are hypothetical practice items, not real CGPSC questions.

Q1. Two section officers in your district office keep arguing over who should prepare the monthly review report, and the report is now late. As the head of office, you should:

(a) Prepare the report yourself to avoid the conflict (b) Call both, hear each side, clarify responsibilities in writing and fix a timeline (c) Issue a show-cause notice to both for the delay (d) Ask the senior of the two to decide, since seniority settles such matters

Answer: (b)
This is collaboration with clarity: both are heard, the root cause (unclear roles) is fixed in writing, and the deadline is restored. (a) is avoidance and burdens the head of office; (c) punishes before diagnosing; (d) passes the problem on and can breed resentment.

Q2. Consider the following statements:

  1. In Goleman’s framework, empathy and social skills relate to managing relationships with others.
  2. In the Johari window, self-disclosure reduces the hidden area.
  3. A crossed transaction in transactional analysis usually improves communication.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

(a) 1 only (b) 2 and 3 only (c) 1 and 2 only (d) 1, 2 and 3

Answer: (c) 1 and 2 only
Statements 1 and 2 are correct. Statement 3 is wrong: in a crossed transaction the reply comes from an unexpected ego state (for example, a factual Adult question met with a scolding Parent reply), which usually breaks down communication.

Q3. Match List I (conflict style) with List II (situation):

List IList II
A. Competing1. Two departments jointly redesign a camp so both meet their targets
B. Collaborating2. Officer firmly stops an unsafe gathering near a flooded bridge
C. Avoiding3. Each side gives up part of its demand to reach a quick settlement
D. Compromising4. A minor dispute over seating is left alone to cool down

(a) A-1, B-2, C-4, D-3 (b) A-2, B-1, C-3, D-4 (c) A-2, B-1, C-4, D-3 (d) A-3, B-1, C-4, D-2

Answer: (c) A-2, B-1, C-4, D-3
Firm action on safety is competing (appropriate in emergencies); a joint redesign meeting both sides’ needs is collaborating; leaving a trivial matter alone is avoiding; mutual concessions are compromising.

Q4. A senior colleague asks you to clear a beneficiary list without completing the mandatory field verification, saying “it is just a formality”. The most appropriate response is:

(a) Clear the list, since the senior takes responsibility (b) Refuse sharply and complain to the Collector at once (c) Politely explain that verification is mandatory, offer to complete it quickly with extra staff, and note the position on file (d) Agree verbally but quietly keep the file pending

Answer: (c)
This is the assertive response: firm on the rule, respectful to the colleague, solution-oriented (speeding up the lawful route) and documented. (a) is passive and unlawful; (b) is aggressive and escalates before trying to resolve; (d) is passive-aggressive.

Q5. A newly formed block-level task force for a nutrition drive is marked by disputes over roles and who reports to whom. According to Tuckman, the team is in the ______ stage, and the leader should ______.

(a) Forming; step back and let members settle (b) Storming; mediate and clarify roles and goals (c) Norming; delegate more tasks (d) Performing; reduce supervision

Answer: (b)
Disputes over roles and authority mark the storming stage. The leader’s job is to mediate and clarify roles so that the team can move to norming.

Level 3: Speed Drill — Decide in 60 Seconds

Name the skill, style or framework. Under 60 seconds each.

  1. “I understand this delay has cost you two trips; let me check the status right now.” — which skill?
  2. An officer gives up a minor point so that a large meeting can move on. Conflict style?
  3. A subordinate says, “Whatever you say, sir,” and never raises problems. TA ego state?
  4. Your colleague tells you that you interrupt people in meetings, which you never noticed. Johari area reduced?
  5. “Praise in public, ______ in private.”
  6. Villagers demand “no tower here”; on listening, they fear radiation near the school. Position or interest?
Answers
  1. Empathy (with action).
  2. Accommodating.
  3. Adapted Child.
  4. Blind area.
  5. Correct / criticise.
  6. “No tower here” is the position; safety of children is the interest — address it with facts and, if possible, siting options.

Quick Revision Table

IdeaFact
Emotional intelligenceSalovey and Mayer (1990); popularised by Goleman (1995)
Goleman’s fiveSelf-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy, social skills
Johari windowLuft and Ingham (1955); open, blind, hidden, unknown
Transactional analysisEric Berne; Parent, Adult, Child; complementary vs crossed
Life position (healthy)I’m OK — You’re OK (Thomas Harris, 1967)
Thomas–Kilmann (1974)Competing, collaborating, compromising, avoiding, accommodating
Tuckman (1965; adjourning 1977)Forming, storming, norming, performing, adjourning
Getting to Yes (1981)People vs problem, interests not positions, mutual-gain options, objective criteria, BATNA
Assertive vs aggressiveFirm + respectful vs firm + disrespectful

Key Takeaways

Key Takeaways
  1. Interpersonal skill = understanding others, being understood, and solving problems with people rather than against them.
  2. Empathy shapes how a rule is applied, never whether it is applied.
  3. The best CSAT option is usually the Adult, assertive, collaborative one.
  4. Be firm (competing) only where law, safety or integrity is at stake — and stay polite while doing it.
  5. Look beneath positions to interests; that is where win–win solutions live.

What’s Next

Advertisement