On The Range Of Convenience Of Constructs

Range of Convenience

The ‘range of convenience’ is a term which gives expression to the fact that not all elements in the world can be rated on all constructs in the world. Few people could rate the element FALSE TEETH on the construct ‘religious - atheist’, for example. For a Grid interview to be useful, all or most of the elements should be able to be rated on all or most of the constructs.

The rating process is the means by which the interviewee gives expression to how the elements are judged, and then in the analysis you are able to see the deeper relationships between the elements and the constructs. So if you find that a construct which has emerged from consideration of one triad of elements is difficult to apply to the other elements, you and the interviewee have to work out whether it is a useful construct in its own right, and/or whether it could be made more useful by adjusting it in some way. (You may also need to consider whether you have a ‘rogue’ triad of elements).

Problem Constructs

Generally speaking, the constructs which are most likely to give you problems with their range of convenience are propositional, situational, or in some other way closer to the periphery of the construct system. Core constructs, almost by definition, are likely to be applicable to all the elements in your chosen domain. For example, if you were interviewing someone about key relationships, you might elicit a construct ‘bullied me as a child - protected me as a child’ and this wouldn’t apply to relationships which the person had formed after they became adult; but it’s not difficult to imagine that this person might have a core construct about the use of power in relationships which would apply to all the elements.

This gives a clue as to one approach you can adopt when you find a construct with a limited range of convenience: that is, ladder it up until you get closer to a core construct with which the interviewee feels comfortable.

Try Splitting the Construct Into Two

Another common problem can happen when the construct which emerges quite legitimately from one triad proves, on closer inspection, to be better expressed as two. For example, in an interview about colleagues at work, you may get a construct ‘plays office politics badly - plays office politics skillfully’ and what you really have is two - ‘plays office politics badly - doesn’t play office politics’ and ‘plays office politics skillfully - doesn’t play office politics’. You’ll probably be alerted to this at the rating stage, because it will become apparent that a rating in the middle of the scale doesn’t feel right: it feels middling, neutral, not giving enough emphasis to the importance to the client of the judgement ‘doesn’t play politics.’ In some circumstances the apparently simple construct ‘male - female’ might be better expressed as ‘male - bisexual’ and ‘female - bisexual.’ In these circumstances the answer is simple - rewrite the construct as two. The interviewer just needs the skill to recognise the client’s discomfort at the rating stage. Enquire Within allows you to rewrite a construct from the rating dialog box, so this option is always available.

If There Are Still Problems

And if after all this you’re still having problems, then it’s back to the fundamentals: have you got a coherent element set, does it address your purpose, is the domain you’re exploring one which makes sense to the interviewee? And - never forgetting that Grid is a conversation - it’s time to ask the interviewee for help in putting the process back on track.

Prepared by Dr Valerie Stewart

Search this Site

---

Suggestions

• Download a free evaluation copy of Enquire Within here
• Email this page to a colleague.
• Post this page to: del.icio.us
• Want to know more? Join the experts at the RepGrid User Group.
• Want to keep in touch? Join our mailing list.
• A detailed log of developments at Enquire Within is at http://twitter.com/EnquireWithin. Join us there.
• Translate this page to your language? Try Google Toolbar.

Back to Hints Index