Content and Function of Goals
Goals can be categorized according to their content (instrumental, relational, and self-presentation) and their function in an interaction (primary versus secondary goals). Clark and Delia (1979) present a now generally recognized categorization of goals based on content.
The three basic types are instrumental, relational, and self-presentation.Instrumental goals refer to getting resources or favors from someone else (Roloff, 1987). Another person’s resources can include money, material objects (such as clothes), expertise, social networks, and so forth. Favors refer to obtaining permission or effort (e.g., to borrow money from a roommate, to use a friend’s car, to get permission from your partner to have a party). U.S. college students pursue instrumental goals the most (Dillard et al., 1989). So they engage other people initially to obtain a resource and favor. This is not to say that U.S. citizens are clueless regarding other goals—only that instrumental goals are more often the primary source for action.
Relational goals involve achieving, maintaining, and de-escalating a relationship (Clark & Delia, 1979). When relational goals are strong, we focus on the relationship with our family, friends, and lovers, and want to act in ways to protect the relationship. The more people focus on relational issues during a conflict, the more likely they choose constructive communication behaviors (Sanderson & Karetsky, 2002).
Self-presentation goals involve presenting a particular image to the partner, and that image reflects who we are as people—our identity. Although they might lie beneath our recognition, self-presentation goals are critically vital to us; we want to manage interactions in ways that allow us to present our desired image and maintain a sense of self-worth (Clark & Delia, 1979). Common self-presentations include being perceived as knowledgeable, likeable, and relevant to some degree.
Other people might want to appear as powerful (to intimidate people to gain their compliance) or powerless (to get pity from other people and thereby gain their compliance).People tend to act very strongly when their self-presentation goals are challenged, such that people will forget what the conflict was initially about (Sch- lenker & Weigold, 1989; Schonbach, 1994). For instance, one of us recalls a situation where one couple agreed to sell their million-dollar home to another couple. However, the deal almost collapsed because of a $75 toaster that was attached to a kitchen shelf; both parties wanted it. The toaster became a pivotal issue and a “matter of principle” to both parties. After a few frustrating days, the realtor understood a very simple truth: the issue was that both sides wanted to be treated with respect, regardless of their goal to get the toaster. To resolve the conflict, the realtor purchased a similar toaster and installed it. Both clients then happily proceeded with the sale.
A few lessons about strategic conflict can be derived from this story: (1) people should be sensitive to each other’s self-presentation; (2) conflict escalates when one’s identity management is questioned; (3) the smallest of conflicts can be seen as criticism of one’s identity; (4) people can become quite antagonistic when their self-presentations are the source of conflict, and their identity is on the line; and (5) instrumental goals in conflict can morph into relational and self-presentation goals, without people recognizing the shift.
Self-presentation goals relate to the concept ofimpression management because people make choices about how to present themselves; and such choices reflect what the person believes is accurate about his/herself or what that person knows is inaccurate but needed. For instance, some teachers talk about how much money they could have made if they only had pursued a different career. Yet, much of the time that argument lacks any real evidence (O’Sullivan, 2000).
Impression management implies that people need to know the effects of pursuing their goals in social interaction. To do so, people should also assess the goals as represented in the other person’s behaviors (Pervin, 1989a). Most people give the impression that they are knowledgeable and likeable, respectable and socially interesting.Conclusion 11.1: People create plans to achieve their instrumental, relational, and self-presentation goals.
Suggestion 11.1: Be clear about three of your goals and create at least one plan of action.
Suggestion 11.2: Be mindful of other people's self-presentation goals.
A second view categorizes goals as either primary or secondary. That is, one goal represents what the person wants most and that primary goal is compatible or incompatible with less important secondary goals. Dillard et al. (1989) define primary goals as those that initiate an action and receive most attention. Wilson, Aleman, and Leatham (1998) add that primary goals help both parties in an interaction to understand what is going on.
One aspect of a primary goal is that it largely reflects the reason why two or more people communicate with each other (Samp & Solomon, 1999). Primary goals also signal expectations about both parties’ rights, identities, and obligations. However, the primary goal might not always be the most important goal for people in interaction. For instance, one might pursue a primary goal of getting a southeast Asian client to negotiate a contract, but in Southeast Asia the primary objective is not always instrumental: the primary goal there is to maintain face and get to know each other before the instrumental goal is pursued. People in the US can also become angry when the other person disagrees with their selfpresentation attempts. For example, a person telling a story to a group wants acceptance but another person sees him as egotistical and says, “Yeah, I’ve heard that before. It’s an old story.” The first person would publically “lose face,” become angry, and return the criticism with a put-down of the other person.
Primary goals also raise the issue of secondary goals. Secondary goals set boundaries for the behaviors people should use as they attempt to achieve their primary goals. In other words, secondary goals can constrain the behaviors in which people engage to pursue their primary goals (Dillard et al., 1989; Wilson et al., 1998). For example, DeTurck (1987) found that, when people are concerned about maintaining their valued relationship with their interaction partner, they are less likely to use coercive behaviors to get what they want. Secondary goals “derive directly from more general motivations that are recurrent in a person’s life” (p. 20). In essence, primary goals “are secondary goals which have become temporarily dominant” (Dillard et al., 1989, p. 21). For instance, some students want extra time to complete their papers and ask that the professor changes the deadline. Although getting extra time is their primary goal, the secondary goal of showing respect often trumps their primary goal; negative thoughts about the professor are not expressed to his or her face. Knowing your primary and secondary goals indicates you can adjust your communication to meet your goals as well as the other person’s goals.
Conclusion 11.2: Secondary goals can alter or complement people's primary goals.
Suggestion 11.3: Become mindful of your primary and secondary goals, to consider how secondary goals constrain or complement your primary goals.