Communication research study focused on the role of face management and compliance-gaining during end-of-life planning meetings between estate planning attorneys and their clients.

1. A Face Management and
Compliance-Gaining Study of End-of-
Life Planning Meetings
Taylor Curtis

2. Purpose of Study
• To examine the communication experiences of
estate planning attorneys during end-of-life
planning meetings with clients.
• To provide recommendations for improving
communication between estate planning
attorneys and their clients.

3. Research Questions
Face Management
• RQ1: What face-threatening acts occur during end-of-
life planning meetings involving estate planning
attorneys and clients?
• RQ2: What facework strategies do estate planning
attorneys use to correct threats to their own face or
that of the client during end-of-life planning
meetings?

4. Research Questions
Compliance-Gaining
• RQ3: What circumstances arise that require estate
planning attorneys to use compliance-gaining
strategies during end-of-life planning meetings with
clients?
• RQ4: What compliance-gaining strategies do estate
planning attorneys use during end-of-life planning
meetings with clients?

5. Face Management
• Face is the favorable social impression that an
individual desires others to have of him/her (Goffman,
1967)
• Two types of face (Brown & Levinson, 1987)
– Positive: Desire to have one’s self-image appreciated,
approved, and supported by others
– Negative: Desire to have autonomy and be free from
imposition
• Attempts “to maintain, defend, or upgrade our own
self-image” or that of others is known as “facework”
(Ting-Toomey & Chung, 2005, p. 268).

6. Compliance-Gaining
• “The communicative behavior in which an
agent elicits from a target some agent-selected
behavior” (Wheeless, Barraclough, & Stewart,
1983, p. 111)
• Developed by Marwell and Schmitt in 1967.
• Demonstrates the different ways in which
people approach similar situations (Wilson,
2002)

7. Participants
• 14 Participants:
– Estate planning attorneys
• Age:
– 36 to 85 years (M = 52.1 years)
• Sex:
– Male = 10
– Female = 4

8. Participants
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
10 to 19 20 to 29 30 to 39 40 to 49 50 to 59
Number of Participants
Years of Legal Practice
M = 29.9 years

9. Participants
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Fewer than 10 10 to 19 20 to 29 30 to 39 40 to 49 50 or more
Number of Participants
Years of Estate Planning Practice
M = 27.9 years

10. Research Procedure
Type of Interview
• Length of Interviews:
– 16.6 to 33.8 minutes
– M = 21.4 minutes
Face-to-face n=13
Phone n=1

11. Research Analysis
• Constant Comparative Analysis (Glaser &
Strauss, 1967)
• Steps
–Transcribe interviews
– Become familiarized with data
– Identify initial categories
–Combine into larger themes

12. Research Findings
• RQ1: What face-threatening acts occur
during end-of-life planning meetings involving
estate planning attorneys and clients?
• Positive
– Questioning the
Character of Children
– Spousal Disagreements
– Questioning Attorney
Competence
• Negative
– Client Indecision
– Children Pressuring
Parents
– Having Impractical
Objectives

13. Research Findings
• RQ2: What facework strategies do estate planning
attorneys use to correct threats to their own face or
that of the client during end-of-life planning
meetings?
• Positive
– Emotionally Counsel
Clients
– Attorney-Client
Privilege
Negative
– Give the Client
Options
– Voice Objections

14. Research Findings
• RQ3: What circumstances arise that require estate
planning attorneys to use compliance-gaining
strategies during end-of-life planning meetings with
clients?
• Impractical Expectations
• Lack of Follow-Through
• Headstrong Clients

15. Research Findings
• RQ4: What compliance-gaining strategies do estate
planning attorneys use during end-of-life planning
meetings with clients?
• Offer Expertise
• Connect with the Client

16. Summary of Key Findings
• Largest positive face threat = discussion of
client’s children’s character
– Corrected by attorneys emotionally counseling clients
• Largest negative face threat = client indecision
– Addressed by giving the client options
• Client’s impractical expectations create need for
compliance-gaining strategies
– Attorneys offer expertise
– Final decision belongs to the client
– Struggle over compliance = largest obstacle

17. Recommendations
• Face Management
– Justify face-threatening
behavior
– Avoid drawing
attention to threats
against own face
– End attorney-client
relationships when
necessary
• Compliance-Gaining
– Utilize foot-in-the-door
techniques
– Demonstrate positive
self-feeling of the
client
– Appeal to positive
esteem of the client

18. A Face Management and
Compliance-Gaining Study of End-of-
Life Planning Meetings
Taylor Curtis