Clearly Recognizing Our Goal Reactions

When we experience a reaction it indicates we have triggered an internal fear that we won’t be able to live up to the image others expect. We then create counter beliefs to offset these fears. Explore the following reactions primarily to identify our goal imprinting. In this section we are assuming all of the remaining compatibility factors are the same, so we can focus on the differences. We will first deal with the reactions we experience when one person with a Goal meets another individual with the same Goal:

1. Re-Evaluation with Re-Evaluation. Either individual could react to the other person because the scope of their interest is different and doesn’t overlap. Therefore, the priorities and willingness to connect would be compromised. One of the biggest issues that a person in Re-Evaluation comes up when they feel forced to do things in a way that others demand. This means a person in Re-Evaluation could be very reactive to another person with a Goal of Re-Evaluation.

2. Discrimination with Discrimination. These individuals could get along extremely well if they had common interests. This is because both are driven to find better ways to accomplish something and/or refine the process they use. When there is no common framework they are likely to test each other to determine if there is trust and acceptance. If not, it is common that they will seek to undermine the other.

3. Submission with Submission. Two individuals in Submission could find it extremely difficult to be with each other if there was not a pre-established common goal. This is because individuals in Submission seek out leadership in other people and, in this situation there would be a denial of leadership. On the other hand, if there was a common purpose, two individuals in Submission could work as a team extremely well because of the alignment they feel about the common endeavor they are engaged in together.

4. Growth with Growth. Two individuals in Growth could find it very easy to be with each other and work well together. The common process of writing down and clarifying what the goal is would help facilitate interactions if they agreed on the goal. They might experience conflict in the way it’s being approached, but this will not handicap them in their acceptance of each other.

5. Acceptance with Acceptance. Two individuals with a Goal of Acceptance would find it easy to be with each other but would find it difficult to accomplish anything specific or preplanned. This is because although both individuals would be naturally spontaneous and good with each other on a people level, there would not be any feedback and follow-up process as this is not what they naturally do.

6. Dominance with Dominance. Two individuals in Dominance might find it very difficult to work together because each would seek to impress their plan on the other. The likelihood is that they would respect each other, but would be unable to find agreement about how to proceed together. It likely would fall to the person who had the most expertise in the area of endeavor to direct the process so that others could organize themselves around this individual’s plan.

7. Relaxation with Relaxation. Two individuals in Relaxation would do very well together and feel capable of spontaneously working with each other as long as a plan wasn’t being followed. It is likely, though, that circumstances would separate them so that each one would continue doing what they do best. This is because individuals will be struck in the moment to do different types of things and, without a structure for following through on anything, they would tend toward independent activity.

8. Re-Evaluation with Growth. An individual with a Goal of Re-Evaluation would tend to be very selective about what they are willing to engage. If the individual in Growth is willing to accommodate the person in Re-Evaluation, the relationship will go well. This is because both of these energies are based on Inspiration and they share a common heritage. As the individual with the Goal of Growth is group-oriented, they may not feel as empowered when they’re interacting one-on-one with the person in Re-Evaluation. Since this example is based on one-on-one interaction, it would be easier for the person in Re-Evaluation to deal with the person in Growth. This, of course, would change if they were interacting in a group.

9. Discrimination with Acceptance. A person with a Goal of Discrimination could find it difficult to be with a person with a Goal of Acceptance. This is because the one-on-one Discrimination focus would conflict with the mass group-oriented Acceptance Goal. In other words, the person with Acceptance could be too easygoing and open in a way that the individual with a Goal of Discrimination finds repugnant. It comes down to an issue of inclusivity, which is the Acceptance Goal, and exclusivity, which is the Goal of Discrimination. Sometimes these two might feel they are working at odds, even though both are based on the quality of Expression.

10. Submission with Dominance. An individual with a Goal of Submission does very well with an individual with a Goal of Dominance. This is the favorite combination for both of these Goals because leaders and followers get along well. Since both are action modality, they do extremely well together. The individual with the Goal of Dominance would have more flexibility around many people because of their group orientation. The person with the Goal of Submission would not feel out of place in a group unless there were multiple leaders, which could then be very problematic.

11. Submission with Relaxation. An individual with Submission could be a little challenged by a person in a Goal of Relaxation. Both of the individuals do not demonstrate any strong leadership qualities. It is not just the leadership issue, but the lack of focus between these two that will cause the problem. The individual with the Goal of Relaxation is the more unpredictable, but the individual with the Goal of Submission is the more uncertain. The difference is individuals with a Goal of Submission have a plan, even though they’re not sure they will implement it, while the person with a Goal of Relaxation has no plan and wants none. The individual in Relaxation can consider the person in Submission as too idealistic, while the individual in Submission can consider the person in Relaxation as undefined.

12. Discrimination with Relaxation. This combination is very difficult because there is very little in common between Discrimination and Relaxation. The individual in Discrimination would be frustrated that the person in Relaxation has no interest in improving themselves. The individual in Relaxation would be very upset because the person in Discrimination is so up-tight and, from their perspective, inhuman. Out of all the Goals, an individual in Relaxation would have the most difficulty with Discrimination, to the point that they would believe this individual is prejudiced against them. The Relaxation person wouldn’t last long because they’d feel the sense of judgment and it would create more and more stress to the point that they would leave.

13. Re-Evaluation with Relaxation. An individual with a Goal of Relaxation operating with a person with a Goal of Re-Evaluation can be an interesting experience. As long as an individual in a Goal of Relaxation accepts the self-imposed limits of a person in Re-Evaluation, everything will work out. Both allow things to occur, but the person in Re-Evaluation ignores it if it doesn’t fit their criteria for something they engage. This will leave the person more open to exploring options and reacting to the person in Re-Evaluation if they feel they’re trying to discount options. The person doing Re-Evaluation may also feel very isolated from the person doing Relaxation because the person doing Relaxation will tend to wander off on their own and not re-engage like most other Goals would.

14. Growth and Relaxation. An individual with a Goal of Growth can be frightening to a person in Relaxation because of the structure and focus that come with being in Growth. Individuals in a Goal of Growth talk about things and usually try to get agreement with others about what is important, which would be terribly frustrating for a person with a Goal of Relaxation. Individuals in a Goal of Relaxation 6 'tend to be more spontaneous and do not want to calibrate their activities in terms of a long-term goal. This means they will tend to view the person in Growth as an overachiever or, at the least, a person who is not willing to explore things as they come up. The individual with a Goal of Growth will find the Goal of Relaxation difficult to comprehend, not only because there is no time framework, but also because there is a negation of the importance of having goals.

15. Acceptance and Relaxation. An individual with a Goal of Acceptance can do very well with an individual with a Goal of Relaxation. While the individual with a Goal of Acceptance will be more people-oriented, neither one of these Goals is comfortable with advance planning. They would enjoy letting things occur and accept circumstances as they are and not try to change each other. The major challenge would be the desire for the person in Acceptance to get seen in a personable way, which would not be easy for the person in Relaxation. They could be interpreted by the person in Acceptance as not caring, which would stimulate that person to try to do more to get valued which would create stress in the relationship.

16. Dominance with Relaxation. This combination would be extremely difficult because both individuals would likely not calibrate or connect to each other. One of the primary reasons for this is they both define themselves in terms their immediate activities which would be challenging because both have a different perspective about what they’re doing at each moment than what is obvious from the outside. The person in Relaxation would believe that the person in Dominance to be demanding and having too many self-opinions. The individual with a Goal of Dominance would believe that the individual in Relaxation is lazy and doesn’t not apply themselves to the circumstances around them.

17. Discrimination and Submission. An individual with a Goal of Discrimination would find it tough to be around someone with a Goal of Submission. The only common ground they would experience is the desire to improve things. The challenge with this would be trying to find any degree of alignment in terms of what they’re interested in accomplishing. Assuming there is some alignment, it could be a good match if the person in Submission is not put off by the critical nature of the person in Discrimination. If the person in Discrimination does not judge the person in Submission in any way, a longer-term relationship would be possible. Otherwise, the judgments of a person in Discrimination could wipe out the self-esteem of a person doing Submission.

18. Acceptance and Dominance. An individual in a Goal of Acceptance would find it very difficult to be around a person in Dominance on a personal level. In a business context, it may be possible to make this situation work if there are clear roles to play or boundaries that were established. The challenge would be that a person in Dominance could get a lot of negative feedback about their plans from the person in Acceptance, particularly when it comes to assigning or selecting people to do certain activities. This is because a person with a goal of Acceptance likes to make sure that people enjoy what they’re doing, while an individual in a Goal of Dominance is more task-oriented and doesn’t care as much if others like what they’re doing. A person in Dominance wants his directions carried out immediately and without question. A person in Acceptance likes to have a discussion about everything and reach agreement. This causes conflicts to arise when there is no agreement. Of course, the person in Dominance assumes that what they say is the final word -- though it usually isn’t. Unfortunately, people in Acceptance usually believe they have the final word about people.

19. Re-Evaluation with Discrimination. Individuals in a Goal of Re-Evaluation may or may not feel comfortable with a Goal of Discrimination. This is because while both are interested in focusing themselves to make breakthroughs, individuals with a Goal of Discrimination act more exclusively and likely need to feel right in the end. This will irritate enormously people with a Goal of Re-Evaluation because they won’t feel heard, valued, or seen for their own truth. This is because individuals in a Goal of Discrimination are used to being arbiters of what’s best for others. It’s ironic that Discriminators can get out-classed by individuals in Re-Evaluation, but that is what it amounts to because individuals in Re-Evaluation know what they know and accept it over anybody else’s truth. This is the secret weapon of people doing Re-Evaluation -- whenever others tell them things that don’t work for them, they simply don’t listen.

20. Growth with Acceptance. An individual with a Goal of Growth can do very well with an individual with a Goal of Acceptance as long as they remember not to make the person in Acceptance accept their goals. While it is the nature of people in Acceptance to try to accommodate others, it is not possible for individuals in Acceptance to become as active and task-oriented as an individual with a Goal of Growth. On the other hand, individuals with a Goal of Acceptance like to schedule time just to hang out with no goals in mind. When this occurs, it is very regenerating for a person in Acceptance. If this can never occur, it becomes an area of friction where the person in Acceptance makes a judgment that the person in Growth is either a workaholic or doing things in a way that is crazy and difficult to comprehend.

21. Re-Evaluation with Submission. The relationship between a person in Re-Evaluation and a person in Submission can be a good, but uneasy one. This is because neither will try to dominate the other and each has areas in which they excel that the other respects. It is also extremely easy for a person in Submission to imagine themselves in the other person’s place, provoking considering compassion. The person in Re-Evaluation, in some ways, will be Inspirational to the person in Submission, while the person in Submission will likely be an action hero of the person in Re-Evaluation. The means they can complement each other very nicely.

22. Growth and Dominance. Individuals with a Goal of Growth can find ways to work effectively with individuals in Dominance, if they don’t take things personally. In fact, this combination can be extremely powerful as it combines Inspiration and Action. The challenge is that they’re both used to defining things in their own terms. This means that both can act as chiefs and they have no Indians. Ironically, it is the ability of the individual in Growth to see the bigger picture of the person in Dominance that likely creates the breakthrough. This is because most individuals in Growth have learned more people-management skills than individuals with a Goal of Dominance. When the person in dominance is respected for their task activity skills, they get softer and more amenable to cooperating with the person in growth. Individuals with a goal of dominance can be very easygoing in situations where they have people who are not followers, but co-creators on some level. In fact, they may be tired of having to take care of everyone and learn to enjoy more equal interactions with a person in growth.

23. Acceptance with Submission. An individual in a Goal of Acceptance will do extremely well with an individual in a Goal of Submission. This combination is much more similar than any other Goal for each of these energies. Individuals with a Goal of Acceptance care about taking care of the people around of them, which is usually what a person in Submission is interested in as well. Individuals with a Goal of Acceptance like the heroic stand that a person in Submission takes to accomplish things in the world. While an individual with a Goal of Submission appreciates the people-sensitivity and their desire to do what’s best for others. One reason why this combination tends to work more for Acceptance than any other is because the way an individual does Submission is based, like the person in Acceptance, on a heartful knowing of what to do.

24. Discrimination with Dominance. Discrimination and Dominance also do well together, not just because they’re both focused on task management processes, but because both want to see things happen in the smartest, most effective way. If both of these individuals are fluid to some degree, a great bond can occur between them such that working together is a great joy. If they are too rigid, then this combination can start WWIII, because both are stubborn and neither will back down under threat of adversity. This is because both of them have to be right and believe this must mean the other person is wrong. Dominance, being an Action polarity, knows how to attack those in Discrimination by challenging their implementation ideas. Discrimination, being an Expression Goal, believes they have the higher ground because they understand what is going on intellectually more than those in Dominance. For example, George W. Bush is in Growth with Discrimination, Acceptance, and Dominance imprinting. George’s mother, as we know, is in a Goal of Dominance with Acceptance imprinting. George’s father is in Discrimination with Growth and Dominance imprinting. When we compare the interaction of these two Bushes as President with Saddam Hussein who has a Goal of Dominance, we can see how what the father didn’t complete is now being re-enacted by the son.

25. Growth and Submission. In a situation between Growth and Submission, such as I mentioned in a previous example with my mother, it is important that individuals in a Goal of Growth don’t impose their ideals on a person in Submission, for this would do damage to the relationship. It is also important that a person in a goal of Submission does not define themselves in terms of people, but in terms of a theme they want to manifest. This non-personalization process for both individuals allows there to be a greater understanding and conscious alignment with each other. When we are unconscious of these issues, the relationship can be very poor. The more we are conscious and don’t project these issues on each other, the more effective it can be.

26. Re-Evaluation with Dominance. This combination is also a very challenging one when the individuals involved aren’t conscious. The more conscious an individual in Dominance is, the more they tend to impact a person in Re-Evaluation because a person in Re-Evaluation, in their attempt to connect, may take on some of the ideas of a person in Dominance. Again, it is an issue of boundaries. The more a person in Re-Evaluation can keep open a connection with an individual in Dominance without defining themselves or accommodating the person in Dominance, the better the relationship is likely to be. This is because, when a person in Dominance respects a person, they do not try to fix or change them as much. In this situation, it is probably impossible for them to fix or change anything about a person in Re-Evaluation anyway, which could frustrate them enormously. As a result, people in Dominance may believe a person in Re-Evaluation is discounting and denying their input, when in fact, they just can’t hear it.

27. Re-Evaluation and Acceptance. Re-Evaluation and Acceptance can link up in a nice way if the person in Acceptance doesn’t expect much. The more a person in Acceptance wants to improve the situation, the more likely the relationship will become overwhelming to the person in Re-Evaluation. If the pressure is neutralized and neither individuals thinks they have to perform for the other, then the lack of expectation creates the possibility for a great relationship. Again, it is important to remember a person in Re-Evaluation does what they do because it’s what they need to do. It is not effective to expect more from them or to try to change them.

28. Growth and Discrimination. The individual with a Goal of Growth can be somewhat effective in being with an individual with a Goal of Discrimination if they understand the exclusive nature of an individual with a Goal of Discrimination. The more an individual in Growth treats and respects the person in Discrimination in a one-to-one way, the more likely the relationship is to mature and develop. The more open and engaging a person in Growth is with everyone, the more their inclusive nature can set up repulsions in the person with Discrimination because of their lack of selectivity in their moment-to-moment expression. This means that a person in Discrimination will likely withdraw and distance themselves to keep from being overwhelmed by all the possibilities that a person in Growth takes for granted.

All twenty-eight of these interactions reflect perspectives that we think are legitimate. Many times, we’ve had experiences where we feel right, which means that the other person must be wrong. It is time now to start to see that these are just perspectives that reflect value differences in individuals and do not make a person better or worse. While in the past, we may have associated certain of these characteristics as bad or difficult and believed it reflected on a person in a negative way, we can now see that this type of judgment does not serve anyone at any time. Each of these judgments is precipitated by our own fear of differences. What we don’t understand, we are making wrong. When we start to see the larger picture that any one of these seven Goals are equal in their contribution and beauty, we can begin to open ourselves up to seeing the greatness of people rather than being the observers of their folly.

It is also important to distinguish authentic expression of Goals versus the imprinting. The more unconscious and reactionary we are about people, the more likely it is about their imprinting where they become strong, rigid, and forceful, rather than their natural expression of a real goal. This is why it is important for us to discover the source of some of our reactive behavior so we can clear it out and understand its source. In most situations, we will discover that it is the fearful caretaker or parent acting out of their imprinting that has polarized us away from the expression of certain Goals and therefore biased us in our ability to see the world clearly. The more we neutralize these reactions by (1) not acting them out, (2) engaging people when in the past we would have had the most difficulty seeing their greatness, and (3) talk about our experiences so we can get clear the deeper truth of the situation, the freer we will be to be ourselves. This is because the more we heal and forgive ourselves in the past, the less we will take on the reactions of others in the future.

The key point to remember is that when we judge others, we open ourselves up to their judgments of us. Only by ceasing to judge others will we be able to cease judging ourselves. If, we honor those individuals who hurt us in the past by implementing goals in inappropriate ways, we will heal ourselves enough to deal with people easily that are doing the same thing to us today. Otherwise, we are doomed to repeat our patterns and get involved with others repeating their patterns and we never experience the freedom to be ourselves. In this way, we have to learn to accept ourselves and be who we are so that others can learn how to be who they are and so that we don’t take on their incomplete stuff. This, of course, reminds us that it is only when we honor our own lessons that we really make progress in the world. The more we are reacting to others by doing the imprinting of our parents, the more we are allowing our parents to define our lives. It is time now to put these old parental lessons aside.

Page Author: 
© Copyright 2016, Larry Byram. All Rights Reserved.

Newsletter Subscription

Sign up now to get updates and event notifications, and you will immediately receive a Higher Alignment Mini Creative Assessment that summarizes the seven most important Compatibility Factors.

Go to top