In their interactions with others, individuals often need to communicate. There are numerous factors that influence how one interacts and communicates with those in their circles. Identity is one of these factors (Lasorsa & Rodriguez, 2013). Identity can be regarded as one’s true self. It determines how one responds to various situations and the nature of one’s interactions with others. There are a number of theories that have been developed to shed light on how identities develop and the impacts that they have on the lives of individuals. Identity management theory is one of the many perspectives that offer insight into the nature of identity and the role that it plays in communication (Kurylo, 2012). This theory allows one to understand the factors that constitute identity and the forces that shape the development of identity. Identity management theory is the subject of this paper. The paper examines different forms of literature that explore this theory. Among other things, the paper offers a definition for the theory and explores key elements of the theory. A look at the practical application of the theory is also provided.
Definition
William Cupach and Todasu Imahori are credited with developing the identity management theory (Kurylo, 2012). Essentially, this theory holds that the perceptions that individuals hold regarding their identities vary from one place to another. Additionally, these perceptions change based on time (West & Turner, 2008). Therefore, it is possible for an individual’s sense of their identity when they are in position A at time A to change when they move to point B at time B. As they developed this theory, Cupach and Imahori relied on previous works that focused on the models that individuals use in their communication. Erving Goffman who penned an essay in which he explored how individuals conduct face-to-face interactions particularly inspired Cupach and Imahori (Imahori & Cupach, 2005). A significant portion of the insights that they share in their work regarding identity management theory is borrowed from Goffman’s essay.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
In developing this theory, Cupach and Imahori made a number of assumptions. An examination of these assumptions allows one to identify the situations where the theory applies perfectly. One of the assumptions that they make is that the parties involved in an exchange must possess cultural competence for effective inter-cultural exchanges to occur (Imahori & Cupach, 2005). They argue that while it is true that the dominant culture will define the direction of inter-cultural communication, one should identify ways of ensuring that all concerned cultures are visible and that communication yields benefits for all parties.
Fundamental principles
Cultural competence
There are several factors that serve as fundamental building blocks for the identity management theory. Culture is one of these factors. Culture plays an important role in determining how people communicate (Neuliep, 2014). As individuals exchange thoughts and ideas with others, they must be mindful of their own cultural backgrounds and the cultural practices of the people that they engage with. This is one of the fundamental principles that Cupach and Imahori based their theory on. They argued that culture determines to a great extent the nature of interactions among groups (Imahori & Cupach, 2005). For one to be able to engage with other appropriately and effectively, Cupach and Imahori advise that they should respect the cultures of others and understand their own cultural beliefs and practices. This is the essence of cultural competence. Imahori and Cupach hold further that inter-cultural communication occurs when synergetic interactions between different cultures occur (Imahori & Cupach, 2005). Essentially, this means that all the cultures involved in an interaction need to mesh well together for effective communication to occur. One must embrace their own cultural identity and respect the cultural beliefs of those that they are communicating with if the communication is to occur without any hitch (Sadri & Flammia, 2011). All forms of communication must deliver satisfaction to all concerned parties. This can only occur when all parties remain sensitive to the cultural identities of those that they engage with. There is therefore need for individuals to develop cultural competence which will allow them to consider cultural dimensions in their interactions.
Relational and cultural identities
Another principle that forms the foundation of the identity management theory is relational and cultural identity. As mentioned above, culture is a strong force that determines how communication occurs. Imahori and Cupach argue that effective inter-cultural communication is enhanced by a thorough understanding of one’s cultural identity (Imahori & Cupach, 2005). It is when one fully understands their culture that they are able to embrace it and exploit it for enriching interactions with others. There is also need for one to develop a clear understanding of their relationships. This allows for interactions that are characterized by mutual respect to take place (O’Toole, 2012). For instance, one needs to understand the sensitive issues that should stay out of all discussions. This way, one is able to ensure that the sensitive issues do not cause a communication breakdown. Merely understanding one’s cultural identity does not go far enough to prepare one for effective communication with others. One also needs to develop the skills that are needed to negotiate the different cultures that determine the health of interpersonal relationships (Novinger, 2013). In the discussion above, the concept of cultural competence has been introduced. Cultural competence combines with an understanding of one’s cultural identity to equip one with the insights needed for fruitful and mutually-satisfying interactions.
Relational identity has been identified as among the fundamental principles of identity management theory. According to this theory, in inter-cultural interactions, the focus shifts from the individual to the community (Imahori & Cupach, 2005). The common needs of the community are placed above the desires of individual members. Inter-cultural communication is not about ‘I’ or ‘Me’. Instead, it is about ‘We’. The individual is expected to give up their personal desires and wishes for the sake of the community. This means that an individual may have to sacrifice their cultural identity so as to ensure that their interactions with others is shielded from the conflicts that arise when each individual insists that things be done their way.
Face and face work
Today, technology has revolutionized how individuals communicate. Gadgets such as mobile phones have made it possible for individuals to communicate without necessarily needing a face-to-face meeting. Despite the gains that they present, these gadgets do not offer the rich and deep connections that individuals derive from face-to-face communication. Cupach and Imahori appear to suggest that individuals need to adopt the communication methods that were in place before face-to-face interactions were replaced by technology. They argue that the face offers access to one’s cultural identity (Imahori & Cupach, 2005). They hold that “face is the communicative reflection of people’s relational and cultural identities.” This argument can be taken to mean that face-to-face interactions allow one to gain deeper insights into the cultural identities of those that they are communicating with. In their discussion of the importance of face-to-face interactions, Cupach and Imahori do not neglect to mention the need for cultural competence. One is not able to gain the benefits that face-to-face communication offers if they lack cultural competence (Imahori & Cupach, 2005). Therefore, as individuals allow technology to rule their lives, they need to leave some room for face-to-face communication and develop cultural competence.
Imahori and Cupach extend their discussion of face work to the different faces that individuals present to the world. The first face is of the positive variety. Essentially, this face is used when an individual wishes to gain acceptance into a group (Imahori & Cupach, 2005). It is common for individuals to wear faces that correspond to societal expectations and standards. This allows them to fit in and be accepted. Caution needs to be exercised to ensure that as they present the positive face, an individual does not turn their back on their uniqueness and cultural identity. The other face that individuals show to the world is the negative kind. This face is usually displayed by individuals who desire autonomy and do not necessarily wish to belong to a particular group (Imahori & Cupach, 2005). These individuals are more likely to be genuine and honest. As one engages with others, they need to exercise care so as not to pose a threat to the face needs of others.
Identity management in communication
In the discussion above, the important purpose served by cultural identity has been explored. To better understand the identity management theory, it is important to examine the aims that individuals wish to attain as they communicate. According to this theory, individuals are driven by the desire to be viewed favorably by others (Littlejohn & Foss, 2008). This is why people wear the positive face in an effort to find acceptance and to be allowed into a group. Basically, individuals use communication so as to be regarded in a positive light by others. The need for one to be viewed favorably highlights the importance of cultural identity. One can only desire to be treated and considered in a certain light when they understand and have embraced their cultural identity. It is almost difficult for others to determine for themselves what the cultural identity of an individual is. It is for this reason that individuals need to voice their identities, thereby offering others insights into how best to interact with them.
The discussion of the role that identity management plays in communication would not be complete without a mention of the risk that is involved. Oftentimes, individuals need to engage with others who subscribe to a different culture. There is some risk that misunderstanding and conflict will arise as the individual attempts to navigate the different cultures (Liu, Volcic & Gallois, 2014). For the purpose of illustration, the case of a migrant can be considered. This migrant desires to remain true to his cultural identity. The community that is hosting the migrant demands that he adopts its cultural practices and abandon his own cultural identity. Each of these parties is right in their own right. The migrant wishes to retain his identity while the community desires to shield its culture from contamination by foreign practices. The identity management theory would allow the migrant and the community to coexist in harmony while still keeping their respective cultures. The key to harmonious relations can be found in cultural competence. One needs to remain true to their own cultural identity while respecting the cultural practices of others. One should also be willing to make compromises in situations where it is impossible for multiple cultures to interact seamlessly and without any conflict.
The evolution of identity
In the example of the migrant offered above, it has been mentioned that the migrant may be required to abandon his culture and adopt the cultural practices of the host community. The example of this migrant highlights the volatile nature of identity. Identity is fluid as it evolves. As one moves to a new place or as their situation changes, so does their identity. Cultural rigidity is the enemy of effective communication (Liu, Volcic & Gallois, 2014). The identity management theory posits that culture is fluid and that it evolves. Factors such as sex, age and one’s geographical location shape how one’s cultural identity evolves. The cultural identity of an adult is different from their identity when they were a child. The same can be said about an individual who has moved to a place whose inhabitants have subscribed to a different culture. To facilitate effective and harmonious interactions, people must be willing to turn their backs on some aspects of their culture and warm up to new cultural identities. For instance, when one moves to a region where certain practices that form part of their cultural identity are forbidden, they must honor the regulations and traditions of the region. For example, in certain French towns, restrictions have been placed on against Muslim women wearing clothing that cover the entire body in public places. While it can be argued that these restrictions amount to a violation of the cultural identity of the Muslims, it must be recognized that harmonious relationships can only be created when a standard culture is developed and adopted by everyone. Therefore, as individuals interact with others from different cultures, they must understand that cultural identity is versatile and they should be willing to let their identities undergo evolution.
The inter-cultural communication process
The identity management theory offers insights that have been used to draw up a process that individuals can refer to when communicating with individuals from different cultures. The first phase of this process involves trial and error (Littlejohn & Foss, 2009). At this phase, an individual examines the culture of the person they wish to speak with and compares this culture to their own. The aim of the comparison is to identify shared interests and common aspects of their cultures. This phase is followed by the second stage where an individual develops a framework that borrows from both cultures (Littlejohn & Foss, 2009). Through this framework, the individual is able to work out a standard that applies to both parties. All parties should find this standard to be acceptable and the standard must deliver benefits that are enjoyed by all. The third and final phase of the inter-cultural communication process involves transforming the original cultural identities (Littlejohn & Foss, 2009). This transformation is intended to reinforce and to strengthen the relational identities that are developed through inter-cultural interactions.
Application
Most theories are developed with the aim of providing individuals with insights that they may integrate into their lives. This is true for the identity management theory. I believe that this theory sheds light on various aspects of human interactions and that there are many benefits to be gained by those who adopt it in their social lives. I intend to embrace the principles of this theory in my interactions with friends and family. I believe that the theory will allow me to develop deeper ties with friends from different cultures. Most of my interactions with foreigners that I wish to become friends with have been damaged by confusion, prejudices and uninformed judgment. I hope that the application of this theory in future attempts at interacting with foreigners will allow me to create lasting relationships. I intend to be more mindful of the cultural identities of those from foreign lands. I also wish to avoid imposing my own cultural beliefs and practices on others. Thanks to the identity management theory, I now understand that the imposition of values and beliefs on others yields resentment and conflict. The key to deep and lasting relationships can be found in respect for the cultures of others. Overall, I find that the identity management theory sheds light on how to improve human interactions. Through this theory, I am confident that I will be able to fuse my own cultural identity with that of those that I engage with to create richer connections that are mutually-satisfying.
In conclusion, it is true that no individual is self-sufficient. One must turn to others for one need or another. Communication is the main tool that individuals use to engage with others in their efforts to meet their needs. The identity management theory identifies the principles that shape how inter-cultural communication occurs. Cultural and relational identities, face work and cultural competence are just some of these factors. It is particularly important for individuals to develop cultural competence since it enables them to understand the cultural identity and needs of others. This theory clearly offers deep insights that can be used to develop stronger inter-cultural ties. There is need for people to adopt the principles of the theory so as to reap the benefits and joys of inter-cultural interactions.
References
Imahori, T. T., & Cupach, W. R. (2005). Identity Management Theory. Facework in
Intercultural Relationships. In Godykunst, W. B. Theorizing about Intercultural
Communication. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Kurylo, A. (2012). Inter/Cultural Communication: Representation and Construction of Culture.
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Lasorsa, D., & Rodriguez, A. (2013). Identity and Communication: New Agendas in
Communication. London: Routledge.
Littlejohn, S. W., & Foss, K. A. (2008). Theories of Human Communication. Boston: Cengage
Learning.
Littlejohn, S. W. & Foss, K. A. (2009). Encyclopedia of Communication Theory. Volume 1.
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Liu, S., Volcic, Z., & Gallois, C. (2014). Introducing Intercultural Communication: Global
Cultures and Contexts. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Neuliep, J. W. (2014). Intercultural Communication: A Contextual Approach.
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Novinger, T. (2013). Intercultural Communication: A Practical Guide. Austin, TX: University
Of Texas Press.
O’Toole, G. (2012). Communication: Core Interpersonal Skills for Health Professionals.
Amsterdam: Elsevier Health Sciences.
Sadri, H. A., & Flammia, M. (2011). Intercultural Communication: A New Approach to
International Relations and Global Challenges. London: A&C Black.
West, R., & Turner, L. H. (2008). Understanding Interpersonal Communication: Making Choices
In Changing Times. Boston: Cengage Learning.
