We can not discuss about communication without involving the nature of the roles that are simultaneously engaged.There is no expresions of someone uniqueness, of someone manner of being, there is no way to express someone’s intentions, desires, fears, without human interaction. Communication by words is less significant, while gestures and body attitudes bring a lot of sense and signify the truth of what a person says, also the authenticity of a person that suggested congruence between these two levels of communication.
Regardless of the communicating formula, all persons play certain roles referring to the position or status they have. By instance, there is the initiator and the person who answer his queries, the person who has authority and the obedient person, the wise person or the expert and the ignorant. On the other hand, communication where roles are not complementary shows such a situation where players keep equality between their positions. In this case, each person reflects like in a mirror the other person. Both situation reveal that communication is influenced by what before happened. Each participant contributes to designate what features a relation has. In order to consider objectively a communication process, we must include everything: the relationship history, the context and iterations without letting alone all speakers’ intentions.
Of course, individuals have inner states that play an important role. We refer to emotions, moods, intentions, purposes. They can be explained in the context of interaction, roles assuming, history of relations. On the premise that each act of communication has a purpose – the same purpose or a different purpose for those persons - they will try to reach a consensus if they have equal positions. If they have different posisions (complementary positions) of discussing, they will communicate to keep the possibility of maintaining their statuses. If they do not reach a consense, that demonstrate that they do not want or do not have leverages of negotiating. Normally, as an agent of communication, negotiating must be constructive, so that it won’t disturbs any communications level, won’t impedes the role of any person without his willingness, won’t implies the falling of communication and won’t open any way to emotional outbursts.
As a conclusion, we say that roles, the context and the history of communication, together with internal conditions referring to purposes, intentions, emotional states, character, negotiation capacity, represent leverages of communication between people, the manner of establishing and perpetuating relationships.