Its simple yet not so simple. There are many techniques that essentially require individuals work together to solve problems either in shifting dyads, triads, or small groups. There are listening exercises, where individuals rephrase what another person has stated etc. What you may run into, however, are cultural differences and organizational roles - are the employees from different cultures and backgrounds? are they at the same or different levels on the hierarchical structure, etc. The more homogeneous the group the easier to improve the interpersonal relationships. The more heterogeneous the group, the more effort that is required and then it goes beyond communications, but also requires the participants understand diversity and that they build the skills needed to both tolerate and embrace differences.

It can be solved by using techniques soliderity. Hence, morale must be develope to maintain empathy.

An additional point to what replies before this pointed out is to check for ongoing or long lasting conflicts between group members. Sometimes it is easier and more successfull to open thes conflict themes in supervision sessions or with personal councelling to 'close' these gaps. Another point is that managers should work on interpersonal relationship too. If they don't like too much relationship between staff this will be a barrier anyway.

What about the use of coaching and mentoring as strategies to improve interpersonal relationships? I personally belief that the quality of interpersonal relationships is underpinned by the level of maturity of people. What about emotional intelligence or self mastery training?

When faced with the issue of supporting an organization that wants to build greater empathy within, I often encourage each member to undergo some personality assessment work. It is very helpful for people who wish to become more empathic to begin this process by taking a close look at themselves--what are their drivers, what are the obstacles they face as people in living and working every day that are embedded in their own personality. Choosing the right tools is a critical task in this process, as you want to be assured of the validity of the tools as well as making sure you are using tools that give you answers to questions that are actually meaningful. For some groups, it may be preferable to use a 360 degree instrument to get feedback on how one is perceived by workmates. For others, it may be more useful to start with tools based on their own self-reports, such as objective personality assessments. Once armed with this data, the process of understanding others is easier, because you can understand the filters and wellsprings that underly your own behavior.

During my graduate studies, I came across two concepts that might be able to work in tandem to promote empathy: Emotional Intelligence (EQ) and Appreciative Inquiry (AI). Regarding the latter, Hunter-Douglas was able to initiate a change process through creating a dialog that involved all company stakeholders. During this process, there was a greater amount of buy-in among employees and management (Whitney & Trosten-Bloom, 2010). According to Whitney and Trosten-Bloom (2010), AI involves eight principles that involve interpersonal processes such as the use of metaphor, positive momentum, and free-choice participation.

Regarding EQ, Friedman and Ghini (2010) have described the role that emotions--particularly fear--play in creating organizational change resistance. Retha makes a valid point about the need to engage employees at the emotional level, though one might wish to repudiate the use of fear-based tactics in an organizational setting. The use of an organizational vital signs assessment can measure the level of stakeholder involvement and responsibility as well as collaboration, leadership quality, openness to change, and the amount of trust inspired by its leaders (Friedman & Ghini, 2010).

Of course, the reality of organizational culture as described by Schien (2009) depends on the age of the company and the leadership philosophy that is tacitly communicated through organizational structure, publicly expressed mission statements, and the perceptions of stakeholders. Regarding the use of assessment tools, there is certainly a need to choose carefully. I agree with David Gerard on that point, since some assessments such as the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) were developed for the purpose of discovering behavioral illness in a clinical setting--companies such as Target (APA, 2012) and Rent-A-Center (CBIA Human Resources, 2010) that have used the MMPI have been sued over apparent discrimination via the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The use of standardized personality tests appears to be the type of efficiency measure that substitutes for personal engagement between HR and employees. In a large company, such efficiency is warranted due to the nature of organizational matrices. Before relying on a tool such as the 360 degree instrument, it is crucial to discern between honest evaluation and machiavellian motivation. Since the only way to 'get to know' someone is by initiating a conversation with the other party, the over-reliance on assessment tools could hamper that process and create a false perception of the individual through the use of stereotypes rather than actual personal qualities. I find that the Self-Assessment Library tool (Robbins, 2008) promoted by Pearson Education is one of the better options should one go that route as it contains four levels of assessments that measure different aspects of personality.

References

APA (2012). Soroka v. Dayton Hudson Corp., dba Target Stores. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/about/offices/ogc/amicus/soroka.aspx

CIBA Human Resources (2009). Psychological Test Violated ADA [Web log]. Retrieved from http://www5.cbia.com/hr/psychological-test-violated-ada/

Friedman, J. & Ghini, M. (2010). Inside Change: Transforming Your Organization with Emotional Intelligence. San Francisco, CA: Six Seconds.

Robbins, S. P. (2008). Self-assessment library (ver.3.4). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc. Retrieved from http://media.pearsoncmg.com/ph/bp/bp_robbins_sal3v4/index.html

Schien, E. (2009). The corporate culture survival guide (New and Revised Edition). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Whitney, D. & Trosten-Bloom, A. (2010). The Power of Appreciative Inquiry: A Practical Guide to Positive Change (Revised, Expanded). San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

I agree with Cynthia that Appreciative Inquiry could be a useful philosophy and methodology to foster a culture of care and concern (empathy). I stumbled upon AI when I was doing my Masters ( continued to use it as a philosohy and method as part of my PhD, as well as post doctorally). I was inspired by the language and practices of AI and am a strong believer in the value of celebrating the positive core of an organisation in order to generate energy to deal with negative realities.

AI and personality assessment tools are indeed, in my experience useful for helping build understanding and empathy.

To really build empathy I think two powerful constructs include Kofman's model of "Concious Business" and the Arbinger Institute materials expounded in the Anatomy of Peace and Leadership and self deception.

Both lay out a mental frame of fundamental respect for others, Inquiry and listening. They require empathy as a fundamental, but also respect for others, and an acknowledgement of others as human beings as worthy of respect as ourselves.

Both views provide a systemic description of how to build sound relationships, with empathy being one significant building block.

I recall working with Fred Kofman 20+ years ago and he advocated Humility, Empathy, Wonder and Love as the characteristics necessary for Organisational Learning or effectiveness. He added to Empathy:

Humility - recognising your view is not the only one, and may not be "right" - respecting and valuing others' ideas

Wonder - willingness to explore underlying nature of things - learning how the systems you participate in work

Love - fundamentally valuing and respecting others as people worthy and as valuable as yourself.

Very interesting question: this would have to become one of the dominant aspects of an organizational culture for it to be meaningful. If it is a new concept it would have to be introduced slowly and incrementally:

1) Identify the concepts that define empathy in the way you want it to apply to your company: visualize how it would work and isolate the benefits - make it clear in your mind.

2) Start talking about it at every opportunity, meetings, emails, bulletins, slogans, know the symbols and use them (displays, with caution)

3) Demonstrate the concepts at every opportunity

4) Demonstrates its value to the organization and communicate them tactfully

5) Encourage people to do the above in a way that encourages them to "buy-in", if people like what they see you will find allies - you will need them

6) Release a statement of vision and organizational values and incorporate the concepts (if it is within your ability)

7) Find ways to reinforce the behaviour: genuine rewards that appeal to empathic values

8) Recruitment: establish interview questions and recruitment techniques that seek out empathic values and combine them with current practices

9) The concepts should be introduced in a positive way during the onboarding process, particularly during orientation and training sessions.

10) Allow others to introduce their ideas regarding empathy and allow them to complement the overall vision - praise them for good ideas allow other to participate

Major cultural shifts such as this take time and leadership. Leadership can come from many places.....There will be victories and stumbling blocks along the way but if you believe it is in the best interests of your organization don't be discouraged. Lastly, know the limits of your influence and be careful not to overextend yourself.

Good luck.

It happens to work in a foreign languages institute too so my company may have similar characteristics with yours. There are many ways to improve interpersonal relationships and develop empathy. First of all, in our company we use to do job meetings where ideas and knowledge is exchanged, this is a way to appreciate others' opinions, learn one from another and show respect for colleagues' experience. There is a mediating role the director or manager can play at this point, ideally he can encourage empathy and promote development of listening skills. However, groups are rarely homogenous so team leaders also have to draw on diversity and benefit from it. Employees should be urged to learn from diverse experiences and insights and share theirs as well. This might improve stability and foster a democratic and fruitful organizational culture based on ideas and individuals' contribution to the organization. However, I think that the strongest impact is that made by the managers' behaviour and relationships with employees of any level. I mean they can work as role models fostering vicarious learning as sociocognitive theory states. The better they behave to others the better interpersonal relationships are expected. The more they tend to listen and realize others' problems related to career, tasks or personal life issues the more the employees will show empathic understanding and the more effectively they will communicate with each other.