HABERMAS, GOFFMAN, AND COMMUNICATIVE ACTION - IMPLICATIONS FOR PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE

In his Theory of Communicative Action, Habermas (1984, 1987) argues that because Goffman's dramaturgy emphasizes the goal-oriented or strategic nature of actors' self-presentations, it fails to establish the conditions for noncoerced or reasoned communication After reviewing Habermas's negative reading of Goffman, 1 assess both Habermas's and Goffman's theories in the context of professional practice and organizational behavior I suggest that certain programs in the social psychology of organizations, such as Argyris and Schon's (1974) action research, share Habermas's one-sided view of Goffman's actor as an opportunistic, insincere manipulator. This misreading of Goffman results from a fundamental confusion over the ontology and epistemology of ''impression management.'' I conclude that if Habermas's theory of communicative action is to advance further that is, if it is ever to adequately link with the empirical social world it must come to move concrete terms with the nature of the presented self