Goals in Conflict

Wilmot and Hocker have stated in the Seventh Edition of Interpersonal Conflict that “[c]onflict is more than a disagreement; it is when people believe that another interferes with their interests and goals” (p. 62). When considering conflict, interests and goals are considered the same thing. There are four general types of interests and goals which are topic or content, relational, identity (or facework), and process; these together are easily remembered by using the acronym TRIP(Wilmot, 2007. p.63). To better describe and explain these types of goals, the following personal conflict will be used.

The Crossen Family consists of five members, the mother (myself), the husband (William), and the three female children (Brittney, Kerra, and Morgan). Over the past few weeks, the family has endured a constant conflict regarding what seemed to be household chores. The parents wanted more help from the children; the children didn’t want to do the chores. What seems as a simple issue of not doing chores actually holds a set of shifting goals by each participant in the conflict.

Topic goals are the easiest goals to identify in a conflict, as well as the easiest to communicate to others. Perhaps the number one thing to question in a conflict is what each person wants in the situation. In the conflict above, each person has a goal that is easily heard from the participants of the conflict. The mother wants help with the chores, as she is busy. The father wants the arguments over with, and the chores done. The two girls mainly in the argument (the third is a toddler) want the yelling to stop and to have free time of their own. The struggles regarding content or topics usually come from either people wanting two different things (the parents want the chores done and the children want free time instead), or the people want the same thing (there is one chore everyone wants to do, or does not want to do). When it seems that the same thing is sought after and is scarce (time), the struggle intensifies (Wilmot, 2007. p.65).

Relationship goals define how each parts wishes to be treated by the other parties, the amount of interdependence they wish for, and the amount of influence that each person has with the other (Wilmot, 2007. p.65). In conflicts relational goals need to be realized and managed because they are the center of all conflicts (Wilmot, 2007. p.67) but they are not easily recognized internally or externally, and they are interpreted differently by each party (Wilmot, 2007. p.67). In the reviewed conflict, the parents feel that the children are becoming more independent, and do not care what the parents think or need. The children believe that the parents do not consider the things that are important to the children to be important. Basically, each seems to seek the respect from the other units. The way that each will react throughout the conflict will express how that person believes the other is thinking about them. They will react to an image that they have created of the other person that probably is not accurate (Wilmot, 2007. p.69). Because relationship goals are not easily determined, these goals will escalate.

Identity or face-saving goals consider who a person is in the interaction. The focus includes how identity of self is protected or repaired throughout the conflict. Although this goal continues throughout the conflict, it will be more prominent at certain times of conflicts (Wilmot, 2007. p.69). Maintaining self-identity and face-saving can be very open and obvious. In the described conflict I told the family that “I just want to be fair when it comes to household responsibilities.” This statement shows how I wish to be identified in the conflict, fair. It is possible that protecting loss of face can become the center of a conflict, so much that the other issues can be lost or forgotten, which can slow progress towards agreement in the conflict. Saving, losing, or damaging face will occur in each conflict. In the conflict, one child mentions how she was consistent with her chores, but her sister did not do some of the chores given to her. This type of face saving does good for one child, but damages face for the other, which leaves open the opportunity for the second child to try to balance the issue by getting back at the sister later, or getting out of the relationship (not speaking to her).

Finally, process goals determine what communication process will work in a conflict (Wilmot, 2007. p.74). The communication process that is used can affect the content, identity and relational goals (Wilmot, 2007. p.74). Some