One's relationship with other human beings

HUMAN RELATIONS: Meaning : Meaning According to Keith Davis : human relations is an area of management practice which is concerned with the integration of people into a work situation in a way that motivates them to work productively , cooperatively & with economic , psychological & social satisfaction. Human Relations defined The way in which two people, groups and countries behave towards each other. An aggregation of all forms of interactions between/among persons or groups in a particular situation. Involves the content and quality of interactions among people and is defined by both the observable behaviour in the interaction and the feelings that are associated with it.

Characteristics of HR: Characteristics of HR Integrative process through which the goals of the organization & the interests of the people working in it are harmonized. The basic objective of the human relations is to ensure that both employee satisfaction & company productivity are simultaneously achieved. Human relations is an interdisciplinary field. It involves use of knowledge from sociology , psychology , anthropology & other sciences for the study of human behavior. Human relations is an action oriented approach to build human cooperation towards organizational goals. It is an action oriented approach to build human cooperation towards organizational goals .it seeks to make employees both happy & productive. Scope of human relation is wide.

Advantage of HR: Advantage of HR Higher performance Optimum use of resources Moral justification Understanding of human factor. Approaches of HR: Approaches of HR Negative Approach Natural Approach Positive Approach. Negative Approach: Negative Approach According to this people by nature are lazy & self centered. They can never be trusted into days work unless closely supervised. therefore this approach suggests that people need to be pushed & controlled regularly. Natural Approach: Natural Approach According to it people are adaptable i.e behavior is not result of human nature but it is through experience Different types of situation requires different type of behavior from people Therefore management should create & maintain a proper match between people & their settings. Positive Approach: Positive Approach According to this approach people strive for personal & social well being. They can be fully trusted to put in a good days work. They work sincerely without supervision provided they get intrinsic satisfaction with their job. there it is the task of management to see that the job of every employee is challenging. this approach requires democratic leadership & participative decision making. Essentials of HR: Essentials of HR Importance of person Recognition of differences among individuals Common interest Develop favorable conditions Encourage collective efforts Recognize inter- relationships

Human needs Recognition of work Workers participation in management Proper leadership & communication. Criticism of HR: Criticism of HR Invalid Anti individualistic Short sighted Conflict Group decision making Over concern with happiness. Main components of HR: Main components of HR Work group Leader Work environment. Problems in HR: Problems in HR Conflict between individual & organization Individual differences Interpersonal conflicts Incongruence between roles. Techniques of HR: Techniques of HR Integration Employee participation Congenial work environment Open communication Adaptive leadership Resolving conflicts Conditioning behavior Personnel counseling. Principles of HR: Principles of HR According to STAN KOSSEN : The six important words : I admit I made a mistake The five most important words: You did a good job The four important words: what is your opinion The three important words : if you please The two most important words: thank you The one most important word: we The least important word: I

About Human Relationships To be awaken, one needs to simplify one's life and realize that it is the ego (or the collective thought and emotional patterns) that create a world that separates you from the rest of the world... and thus the process of awakening can never be reached, since "life" then is based on a fabrication of your thoughts and emotions... this is because the ego hasn't yet integrated its real function, which is to SERVE the physical body and protect it... But the ego is also important to help us live in the world and develop interrelations with other things and human beings... So are there ways to help the sincere seeker to change the ego's mental and emotional patterns? Yes there is a very good way of bringing the necessary transformations... and this new way allows you to perceive others differently. Let me explain: In practical daily living, a human being hardly ever lives alone - awaken masters living alone are rare and scarce. In our ordinary lives we usually develop intimate relationships. Such relationships, which seemed perfect for a while, when the two are 'in love', somehow quickly turn into love-hate relationships as arguments and conflicts begin to occur with increasing frequency and intensity. The end result can usually be easily foreseen; divorce, or a break in partnership... Each partner may feel that the next relationship would certainly be better, ... and the same pattern appears with other partners and the ideal picture of what a partner should be evaporates as in a dream... and when this illusion is realized, the interactions amongst humans usually end up into frustration.So what are we to do to change this kind of unhealthy situations? The fact of the matter is that intimate human relationship is basically not any different from any relationship between 'me' and the 'other'. And avoiding any kind of relationship in life is just not feasible or practical, and is just not the answer. The answer is to be sought in seeking the basis of any and every relationship, intimate or otherwise. The basis of a relationship an office colleague, or a cat or a dog that visits you regularly, is truly not different from any intimate relationship. The basic reason for the relationship going unpleasant is the same: the 'other' does something that you do not like, and likes and dislikes must necessarily be different in different people. In other words, the only way a relationship - formal or intimate -can continue smoothly in peace and harmony is when both persons concerned are able to accept that the 'other person' and everyone else in the world has an ego, each with a different "inner

programming"... It is this inner programming that unfolds in one's life... it is this same psyche that dictates to the ego (or mind) how to behave, act and react in life... Hence, it is not the ego personality that lay down the rules of anything...it can only follow inner and outer conditioning and impulses... which are translated into mental thoughts and emotional reactions... the ego is a functioning of a body-mind and in reality it is, we repeat, restricted by the programming in the psyche [or body-mind organism].. By unfolding the inner programming in an individual, the psyche develops gradually an ego from childhood - this ego is also known as the ego personality,. What we have to understand therefore, is that as human beings we are not governed by the ego... but by other factors which are the psyche or inner programming - the persona or ego personality of an individual can only reflect whatever the inner programming allows (some call it karma) in addition to the genes and the conditioning in the body-mind organism... So why is it that we easily make judgment and condemn and criticize others, when we know that the ego reflects only the positive and negative aspects of the psyche and the genes of a person? The only way any relationship with the 'other' (whomever it might be) can function smoothly and harmoniously is for both the partners to understand the unavoidable limitations of the psyche, the genes and environmental conditioning in both body-mind organisms. In practical terms, what this means is that each 'me' must be able to accept that the 'other' truly has no control over what he or she seems to be 'doing'. His/her 'thinking' is based on the programming (psyche, plus genes, plus environmental conditioning) and his/her 'doing' is based only on his/her destiny, or the Will of God or the Source of Being, and this is done according to a conceptual eternal Cosmic Law, the basis of which no human being can ever possibly understand. When you accept that the 'other' has his/her own destiny to unfold and experience... you respect that destiny... you honor that life and let it be... and therefore as a result, you do not interfere... However, you might be asked to give an advice or, you might feel an impulse and a need to do so, and you should go ahead and say it... but will that advise be accepted and taken aboard,

will it be taken into account?... This is completely another matter and the outcome should not concerns you anymore... I have applied this philosophy in my life, because I know that it works for me and my husband... I am married and live a very happy and content life with my partner because we both understand and have realized that this Cosmic Law is true... I have a son, a daughter in law and two grandchildren... I know that these children will grow in a certain atmosphere with certain conditioning imposed upon them... will they later in life carry the same conditionings or will these be discarded to be replaced by more powerful conditioning? Or will they have a middle life crisis and decide that the real positive conditioning comes from within? When one reaches this point of no return... one simply enters the Path... that takes one to his/her divine ROOTS... called with different names: the Soul or Consciousness for some the Mind or the Self for others... whichever word you choose is the best one for you... and this is when your QUEST begins... which is to discover your true Self... your true Divine Origin...Painting by Alan Senior 1 - Observe and accept the needs of others... acknowledge that people need to have different experiences to express their inner programming 2 - Contemplate and meditate on the concept that there is a unique Energy that penetrates all creation. Call it what you will: Absolute CONSCIOUSNESS - the UNIVERSAL SOUL - the HIGHER SELF - GOD ... this Unique Energy makes your body-mind, your psyche and ego consciousness stay alive - without that absolute Energy there could be no creation...no universe... no world... no life - this knowledge and realization could be helpful to you in making you empathize with all sentient beings and with the whole of creation ... unfolding gradually in you a deep feeling of compassion and unconditional Love. 3 - Realize that individuals are different from each others because they each have a different inner programming that unfolds in their psyche and manifests in their ego or persona... Each sentient being is an expression of the Source of Being or of God - so can we condemn it...? Each object and sentient being has its place and role to play... be it grand or insignificant to you... Use your intuition and know that there are many truths and reasons for things to be as they are for reasons that are beyond the scope of our understanding.. be humble....

4 - If you meditate on these points you will soon come to feel very different and therefore you will notice that you are not stressed or frustrated anymore...or at least not as much as before... and this is because you have stopped judging and imposing your points of views and moral values on others and as a result you feel much more energetic - your thoughts and feelings give give you a sense of FREEDOM and You know that you are awake... So ask yourself this crucially important question, which is:

How do I perceive the ego now... and what is its role in my life?

Necessity of Human Relationships

Relationships are connection between persons. We share a relationship with our family, with friends and most important of all we share a relationship with God. Relationships can be personal, impersonal, close or distant. A personal relationship would be a relationship on your own personal time. An impersonal relationship would be a relationship with the public. A close relationship would be someone who lives close to you or a family member. A distant relationship would be a relationship you share with someone who you know who lives far away from you and you can only talk to them on the phone or through Internet.

At birth, we experience our first relationship with our mother and as we grow up we will have a whole web of relationships. In human life, relationships are very important for human survival and development. A beautiful union exists between 3 relationships: a relationship with others, a relationship with oneself and a relationship with God, our father. It is clear, God created us to live in relationship with others, so why not make the best of it. When a relationship is loving and intimate we experience God through these relationships.

If a friend of mine was going on his/her first date I would give him/her advice for this date. I would advise him/her to consider these rules. First don speak in a rough voice. Your language is really important so your date wont get upset and slap you across the face. Next, know where to draw the line and respect your date. Dont get physical on your first date. Make sure you take

your date in a public place where a lot of people are there. Dont take your date to a private room or closed places. Ask your date questions about her/his life and joke around a bit. Make sure you have money to cover expenses of a movie or something that you purchased in the mall. And do not ask your date to pay for it. You should let your date meet your parents when you are comfortable. Dont force your date to see your parents. And thats about it. This is all I would tell my friend. In conclusion, relationships are very important. Without human relationships a person cant go through life. A person needs to communicate with someone. The only reason God created Eve for Adam is because Adam was lonely. Loneliness can kill a person. And these are the reasons why relationships are important

Characteristics of human relationship with others

Hr integrative process through which the relationship of the people & the interests of the people working in it are harmonized. Human relations is an interdisciplinary field It involves use of knowledge from sociology , psychology , anthropology & other sciences for the study of human behavior. Human relations is an action oriented approach to build human cooperation towards other human beings. It is an action oriented approach to build human cooperation towards other human beings it seeks to make employees both happy & productive. Scope of human relation is wide

Human beings working together protecting each other from mistakes

Human beings they live, they learn, they grow. they take care of their families. and they work. and work is important to them because, well, beyond making a living, work is how they express themselves, how they express their values, and how they improve the world. and more often than not, these human beings work with other human beings, who work with other human beings, and so on all of them working together, like, well, a working family. so heres the catch all these human beings work together, but each one is still an individual. all of them are equal, but none of them are the same each one has different skills, different views, different talents, different ways of learning, different ways of working. But one thing they do have in common is mistakes. every one of them makes mistakes in fact, an average of five mistakes each hour. its part of being human. Now heres the kicker most of the time, human beings arent even aware that theyre making these mistakes. So if everyone makes mistakes all the time, how can we reduce the effects of mistakes? well, the human beings might be controlled or restricted, but after a certain point, they cant do their work. So how can people do their work and still reduce the effects of mistakes? What human beings can do is learn from the mistakes so they can predict future mistakes. So when mistakes happen, the human beings can report their mistakes, and share their mistakes, and then everyone learns from their mistakes. and once everyone starts learning from each others mistakes, then everyone can take care of each other, by building a system that predicts mistakes and protects people from their mistakes. So when mistakes do happen, the consequences are of little or no, well, consequence.

and the responsibility for this system lies with all of us where we work. because we all have the responsibility to take care of our working family. Bo how does management plug in? with management commitment supporting worker-driven Safety to always protect people while they work. But heres the other kicker. while people are working, they never work in total isolation. They are surrounded by many goals and many messages some official, some unofficial some spoken, some left unspoken. but all of them happening at the same time.

Principles of Relationship

RESPECT: This is defined as the feeling of admiration for people and polite behaviour resulting from this. APPRECIATION: Defined here as a full or sympathetic understanding of a person. RECIPROCITY: This is the principle or practice of mutual exchange in interactions. EMPATHY: This is the ability to imagine and share another persons feelings.

INTEGRITY: Always act in an honest and truthful way MANNERS: Never being selfish, boorish or undisciplined PERSONALITY: Always communicate your own values, attitudes and opinions APPEARANCE: Always present yourself to best advantage CONSIDERATION: Always see yourself from the other persons standpoint TACT: Think before you speak.

Negative Impact Factors in Relationships Perception challenges - stereotypes, biases, generalizations and assumptions Confusing judgement for objective evaluation Pretence and faking Poorly defined objectives, role/goal conflicts and ambiguities Pecking orders/transferred aggression Territorial defences suspicion, resentment and distrust

WORKPLACE RELATIONSHIP WITH SUPERIORS

If the more highly developed person refuses to undertake the appropriate spiritual duty to assume responsibility for the relationship and look for the core of dissension within, he or she willnever really understand the mutual interaction, how one problem affects the other. the relationship must then deteriorate, leaving both parties confused and less able to cope with the self and others.on the other hand, if the spiritually developed person accepts this responsibility, he or she will also help the other in a subtle way. if he or she can desist from the temptation to constantly belabor the obvious sour points of the other and look within, he or she will raise his or her own development considerably and spread peace and joy. the poison of friction will soon be eliminated. it will also become possible to find other partners for a truly mutual growth process. When two equals relate, both carry the full responsibility for the relationship. this is indeed a beautiful venture, a deeply satisfying state of mutuality. the slightest flaw in a mood will be recognized for its inner meaning and thus the growth process is kept up. both will recognize their co-creation of this momentary flaw -- whether it be an actual friction or a momentary deadness offeelings. the inner reality of the interaction will become increasingly more significant. this will largely prevent injury to the relationship.

Let me emphasize here that when i speak of being responsible for the less developed person,i do not mean that another human being can ever carry the burden for the actual difficulties of

others. this can never be. what i mean is that difficulties of interaction in a relationship are usually not explored in depth by the individual whose spiritual development is more primitive. he or she will render others responsible for his or her unhappiness and disharmony in a given interaction and is not able, or willing, to see the whole issue. thus that person is not in a position to eliminate the disharmony. only those who assume responsibility for finding the inner disturbance and mutuall effect can do so. hence the spiritually more primitive person always depends on the spiritually more evolved one.

A relationship between individuals in which the destructiveness of the less developed one makes growth, harmony, and good feelings impossible, or in which the contact is over whelm mingly negative, should be severed. as a rule, the more highly developed person should assume the initiative. if he or she does not, this indicates some unrecognized weakness and fear that needs to be faced. if a relationship is dissolved on this ground; namely, that it is more destructive and pain producing than constructive and harmonious, it should be done when the inner problems and mutual interactions are fully recognized by the one who takes the initiative to dissolve an old tie .this will prevent him or her from forming a new relationship with similar underlying currents and interactions. it also means that the decision to sever the connection has been made because of growth, rather than as a result of spite, fear, or escape.

To explore the underlying interaction and the various effects of a relationship where both Peoples difficulties are laid bare and accepted, is by no means easy. But nothing can be more Beautiful and rewarding. Anyone who comes into the state of enlightenment where this is possible Will no longer fear any kind of interaction. Difficulties and fears arise to the exact degree that you Still project on others your own problems in relating and still render others responsible for any thing that goes against your liking. This can take many subtle forms. you may constantly concentrate on the faults of others, because at first glance such concentration appears justified to you. you may subtly overemphasize one side of an interaction, or exclude another. such distortions indicate projection and denial of self-responsibility for the difficulties in relating.

Some are the important points are Be humble to learn Show faithfulness, loyalty & honesty Be truly committed to achieving organizational goals Be resolutely supportive of organizational ideals Ask for rights in a respectful way (be assertive) Be bold but not insolent Be courteous, but dont bootlick Cheerfully accept responsibilities

Workplace relationship with subordinates

Recognize the humanity in them Set high but reasonably achievable standards Be friendly and fair, yet firm Deal promptly with grievances Discipline but do not destroy Communicate clearly with empathy Delegate but do not abdicate Pay attention to their well being Set good examples and exhibit personal diligence

Stakeholder relations
Be trustworthy and reliable Be scrupulously ethical

Avoid deceitful and misleading information Be conscious of safety (if we are in production) Listen attentively to customer complaints and take immediate appropriate steps both to rectify and forestall future occurrences Apologize, if necessary, in cases of disputes At all times employ the principles of TQM

Non-profit leaders were strategic about the relationships they initiated. Participants talked about the importance of connecting with legislators on issues that have personal importance for the legislator. This connection between the legislator and the issue serves as a point of entry and a means of developing common ground upon which to initiate a relationship. One Greensboro focus group member advised that If there's an area that they're adama nt about then you know that's the one to go after. You don't give up on the others but that's the one that you stick with pretty much. She discussed this as a way of getting their ears on an issue.

Participants were careful to not use the personal issue of the policy maker as a means of exploitation, but instead as a strategy for determining where to focus attention. The idea was to spend resources on the policy makers who were most likely to become allies or champions for the specific cause. Understanding this aspect of the policy-makers motivations was a way to determine where to expend valuable resources. For instance a Charlotte executive director of a human service organisation told the group: I think if it is a legislator who has a personal connection to the issue, I think [legislator name] came out recently about mental health theres a mental health issue and how her family and her involvement in mental health was related to that. So I think if families of legislators have experienced something similar, then I think it can be effective in that sense, but there has to be that personal connection somehow.

Be truthful and knowledgeable

Like all interpersonal relationships, honesty and courtesy was deemed essential in the relationships developed with policy makers in the lobbying process. The participants suggested

that these aspects of relationship building, if ignored, can have dire consequences. A Triangle area housing executive cautioned: The other thing you have to do is to thank the people, and so thats always important to do. Dont just say, Give me. But when they help, you say thank you and give them good, solid information. Dont try to work them. Dont try to play the game because once you tell them some stuff thats not true, youre dead in the water. This honest, courteous interaction fosters the beginnings of the trust and networks required for political and social capital. More than one participant reported receiving calls from policy makers seeking information to support a bill or testimony on an issue. This level of trust and reciprocity was often deemed the cornerstone of the relationship. The status of trusted resources was valuable and often provided the foundation for subsequent interaction.

Other participants agreed with the importance of being available to provide accurate, trustworthy information. The following exchange between two administrators in the Charlotte area exemplified the premium on reliable information:

Administrator A: especially because we dont go with money it seems like you get places only if you spend a lot of time building the relationships so they know you when you come back and they know to trust your information. So then theres something that does kind of pull at their heart or something, and youve got the information and they trust it because you have the relationship, because that would be the only thing that we can use. We dont have money, just the effort. Administrator B: But sometimes, too, I think Ive seen it as the more and more you develop relationships, the more and more youre involved, then they start to actually use you as a source, and they call you and ask your opinion on certain things, or at least have their staff ask you about something, and I think that thats important because that really says at least you have more of an intimate contact with them.

Tell the story

Participants unanimously supported using stories to bring the message and mission to life as part of the lobbying process. Telling a story is not simply getting your message across for the lobbying effort; it also engages policy makers and provides a path for involvement (e.g., emotional attachment, volunteerism, etc.). Since relationships are based on trust and shared experiences, this provides the entry to more extensive interactions. One director from a youth services organization in Raleigh discussed how she is able to link the experiences of the legislator to the stories of her clients: The most powerful stuff is when they are back in their districts and theyre seeing what local folks are doing. Then when I can have a conversation with them they have a context and theyre telling me stories and I can relate it to that, and that to me is where the real relationship building happens. She went on to further discuss the impact, relaying success stories about her programmers clients They love to hear about the kid who went to college, or the kid who got his grades turned around who got expelled a year before. Thats not fluff, thats real stuff; thats why were doing what were doing.

Storytelling provides the context for interactions, requests and proposed policies. The participants often provided stories about the typical service recipient as a means of showing impact, consequences, and implications of action or inaction. Telling a story provided the basis for the openness, trust, and mutual understanding that is required for relationship building. These stories served as the proxy for interaction with the individuals of the organization. Many of the participants suggested that telling a few key stories was more effective in making a connection than other methods of interaction or lobbying. One executive director said, Id rather have those 10 folks than the thousand emails or phone calls which, by and large, piss off the legislators because it takes their time, and they would far rather have that real focused quiet [discussion]. These stories were deemed even more effective when they came directly from clients. While providing these stories in letters was a good strategy, many of the participants explicitly discussed the benefits of face-to-face interactions between the client and the policy maker. The

organisations staff generally saw themselves as coordinators of these interactions, as described by one executive from a housing and homelessness organisation: Again I'd say through what we do is provide a context, a structure for people to come together and understand these issues, for example, homelessness. So we've been experiencing people going out into the streets for a night and developing relationships with some of the clients at the [organisation name]. Through that relationship folks who then are moved to advocate more readily, more aggressively on behalf of people that they've gotten to know through relationship.

There will be an investment of time All of the participants agreed that the process of building trusting, honest relationships takes time and effort. When asked explicitly about the amount of time it takes to build a relationship, comments such as a long time were common responses. The participants unanimously agreed that it takes approximately three years to develop an enduring relationship with a policy maker. Another executive director added, I say that its quicker for you if you have some of the same philosophies or ideology; and I think that those who dont, you almost have to figure out a different way to get at them. Although having a relationship does not guarantee a favourable outcome, it makes the process easier and more pleasant. Participants in the Charlotte focus group discussed the time and lack of guaranteed outcome in the following terms, Administrator A: Youve got an intricate process already working. If they dont get re-elected, youre starting all over again. Administrator B: Well, yes. But with any luck, if theres someone that you were really working on that hard and they get ousted, then maybe it will be someone whos more sympathetic to our way of thinking [who gets the position]. Administrator C: Well, the other thing is you have to keep getting re-elected, so

One well-connected executive of a state-wide coalition discussed that it took several years to develop the relationships that she currently enjoys. When asked how she did it and how long it took, she responded Very slowly. It really was just going to as many things and there was a

period of time and still is, that I work a lot of hours. Because I'm out, I have to be out and have to be visible so I joined a million committees. She went on to discuss the committee leadership, networks, and partnerships that were essential in developing relationships. Specifically, she hired a consultant who provided introductions to decision-makers.

And I've *working with him+ for three years, and, and although it was a choice between hiring [the consultant or] an assistant so I wasn't typing my own letters and coming in and working 80 hours a week. What he's been able to do for me in the organisation is far more valuable in the long run; he can pick up the phone and call a senior vice president at [a large private university] and say we really, we need you.

The relationship has to be with the organization

Similarly, several organizations used paid lobbyists to make initial introductions and then went on to develop these relationships themselves. There was concern that the relationship would be made with the lobbyist and not the organization. Therefore, the follow-up was essential to the process and outcome of the lobbying effort. One director from the Triangle area said: Our lobbyist will periodically introduce me to different people, but a lot of them dont know who I am once our lobbyist walks out the door; I forget what that persons name is again. So I just tryTheres certain people that I know are really keen on our position, so I always send an email or send a personal letter with our newsletter, and just try to keep our name in front, as well as my name in front, because its going to make a hill of beans if our development person sends this person a letter; they dont know my development person, they know me. This was a common strategy and one way administrators engaged their boards of directors, advisory boards, and other friends of the organisation. Many of the administrators used board members to make introductions to policy makers and other people of influence. One administrator said: I feel like I've got four, five, six, seven, eight good relationships but it's through board members. It's through our state-wide organisation that provides the contacts that allowed me to build the relationships without making cold calls, somebody who just didn't know me at all. So, I think leverage just makes a tremendous difference.

Discussion and implications: Relationships and lobbying

There are many reasons that relationship building with policy makers is vital to effective lobbying. One of the stronger arguments for building relationships with government officials is the competition that individual organisations and interest groups face when trying to attract and maintain the officials attention (Teater, 2009). For instance, consistent with the findings above, Hoeffer (2005) found that by developing positive relationships with government officials, interest groups increased their level of access to representatives. Teater (2009) explains that through relationship building, interest groups may make their issue more personal to public officials while also increasing the organisations credibility. Relationshipbuilding activities that are effective for organisations include personal contact (i.e. face-to-face meetings) with public officials and an organisations presence in the policy arena (Jackson Elmoore, 2005; Rees, 2000). The study participants emphasized the benefits of making issues more personal by connecting the issues of the clients, the organizations mission, and the interests of the policy maker.

While developing relationships in general is an important tactic in non-profit lobbying, research has also shown that non-profit organizations are strategic in the relationships they cultivate and maintain. Kovacs (2001) study demonstrated that advocacy groups consider the time constraints of public officials when deciding on targets. The participants recognized the time and energy investment necessary to cultivate sustained relationships. Further, they discussed the level of risk that is involved. The participants fully understood that a cordial or even friendly relationship did not always translate into favorable outcomes and that the relationship was subject to the vagaries of the voting public. Additionally, the research findings are congruent with Smacker (1991) who highlights the importance of developing relationships with legislative staff, who are more accessible and may

lead to further relationship building. Non-profit organizations may also be strategic on how they contact public officials based on the officials preference on how they receive information (i.e. mail, email, telephone) (Teater, 2009). The relationships developed with gatekeepers (e.g., staffers, assistants) were deemed as valuable as, if not more valuable than, interactions with the policy maker. Often these relationships translated into thicker, more sustained, interactions than visits with the policy maker.

Ledingham and Bruning (1998) provide five dimensions of relationships between organisations and their publics: trust, openness, involvement, investment and commitment. The comments of the study participants echo these dimensions. The participants explicitly stress the importance of providing accurate information on policy issues (trust and openness); telling the story of clients (involvement); and researching and identifying the issues of the policy maker (investment). Understanding the utility of these dimensions within the lobbying context will provide a template from which organizations can plan and coordinate their lobbying efforts.

Although the sample of this study was too small to conduct a statistical analysis, trends in these data provide insight on relationship-building behaviors as they pertain to lobbying within the non-profit sector. However, there remains a general lack of understanding on relationship management and non-profit organizations, requiring further research. It is suggested that to contribute to the existing literature on organizational-public relationship (OPRs) within the nonprofit sector, researchers should explore how existing studies on OPR in the for-profit sector could be applicable to non-profit organizations. One example would be to replicate Burning, Castle & Schaefers (2004) study on public attitudes of OPRs. This quantitative study examined attitudes, such as specific organization, their confidence that the organization would improve the
community, and the attractiveness of the organization compared with others. Another example would be to perform a large quantitative study examining Ledingham and Burnings (1998) five dimensions of OPR dimensions as it pertains to non-profit organizations. While findings from such studies would be useful to all non-profit organizations interested in focusing on OPR management, it may provide particular insight for non-profit organizations engaging in grassroots organizing. Also, the quantitative nature of these studies would address the limitations in generalisability of the current studys findings given its focus group design

Conclusion
People are an important factor in successful domestic and corporate lives. In concluding, it will be nice for us to bear in mind the following tips on improving relationships generally:

Show appreciation and develop an attitude of gratitude Accept and trust people. You may need them pretty soon Be agreeable/approachable, so that good things of life dont pass you by Learn to remember names. A person's name is the most important sound he/she hears and it opens a lot of closed doors Avoid argument. It breeds unnecessary conflicts Do good always. Remember retribution Respect the ideas and view point of others Try to be polite even when stressed Be cheerful and accommodating In all things, be upright Be friendly but firm, fair and assertive Communicate and listen empathically. Be wary of non-verbal cues; i.e. be sure your actions support your communication.

In conclusion, relationships are very important. without human relationships a person cant go through life. a person needs to communicate with someone. the only reason god created eve for adam is because adam waslonely. loneliness can kill a person. and these are the reasons why relationships are important