Topic 3.1 social conflict. ways to resolve conflict situations

To answer the question of what methods of conflict resolution exist, you need to understand what types of conflict situations exist. After all, what is the best way to resolve conflict in a family may not be suitable for resolving collective disputes. Let us first consider general, universal techniques and move on to the specifics of individual types of conflict resolution methods.

Forms of conflict resolution and opponents' behavior strategies

Dynamics of conflict

• Stages of conflict development:
• Development of the pre-conflict situation
• Development of the conflict itself
• Development of the post-conflict situation

Development of the pre-conflict situation

• the emergence of an objective problematic situation of social interaction;
• its awareness by the subjects of problematic interaction;
• attempts to resolve in non-conflict ways;
• the beginning of a pre-conflict situation.

Development of the conflict itself

• incident;
• transition of a pre-conflict situation into an open conflict;
• conflict interaction;
• attempts to end the conflict;
• ending the conflict
• Development of the post-conflict situation
• partial normalization of interaction between parties to the conflict;
• complete normalization of interaction.

Development of the conflict

Any conflict is a process. The development of the conflict is as follows:

• The pre-conflict stage is characterized by the emergence of conditions as a result of which conflict may arise.
• The conflict stage at which the existence of a conflict is recognized by the parties.
• The conflict resolution stage is characterized by an objective change in the situation and psychological restructuring of the parties.
• The productive stage is characterized by the fact that the intentions of the parties to the conflict acquire specific forms of behavior.
• The final stage of the conflict is characterized by what consequences occur after the conflict is resolved.

Basic methods of conflict resolution

Psychologists define 4 groups of conflict resolution methods. We invite you to get to know each of them.

1. Administrative methods of conflict resolution.

This method involves analyzing a conflict situation and making a decision on how to get out of it at a meeting of the workforce. The decision of the general meeting is binding. Another option is no less effective - “mechanical destruction” of the conflict. In this case, one of the participants is fired or transferred to another department or job. This method can hardly be called humane, so its use is resorted to in extreme cases. As a rule, it is used in relation to one of the leaders when resolving conflicts between groups.

Read our article “Blue Ocean Strategy: What it is and how to apply it in your business.”

2. Pedagogical methods of conflict resolution

This group includes a larger number of options for solving the problem:

• belief;
• mutual reconciliation of conflicting parties;
• admission of guilt by one party;
• free speech;
• mediation by a disinterested person;
• increasing the distance between conflicting parties;
• method of norms (introduction of certain social norms aimed at resolving conflict, for example, correct behavior);
• implementation of the “divide and conquer” principle. In case of group conflict, subgroups are created, each of which has its own goal. If possible, the subgroups are separated from each other and influence each of them separately, selecting the necessary “motives” and forming the correct behavior;
• the “scapegoat search” method (an object is found to which all the negativity of the conflict is transferred);
• “two evils” method (if it is impossible to resolve the conflict in a way that satisfies both parties, the lesser evil is chosen).

3. Structural methods of conflict resolution

This includes clarifying work requirements, defining powers and establishing a hierarchy, using mechanisms that coordinate and integrate the actions of the parties to the conflict, establishing goals that promote the unification of the parties, and implementing a motivation system (encouraging unconstructive behavior of the group or its individual members is not allowed).

This group of methods is used to solve problems in organizations and is aimed at reducing the intensity of conflict.

Structural methods of conflict resolution are:

• use of official position (the manager acts by issuing an order, directive, resolution, etc.);
• “separation” of the organizational parts involved in the conflict (“separation” according to goals, resources, means, etc. or the creation of conditions that reduce the dependence of the conflicting parties on each other);
• introduction of a special integration mechanism for conflicting groups (common supervisor, coordinator or leader);
• unification of departments based on solving a common problem (for example, the labor and wages department and the personnel department should be combined into an employee development department, the purpose of which, in addition to settlement and accounting functions, is the development and growth of each employee).

4. Interpersonal methods of conflict resolution

R. Blake and J. Mouton proposed a fairly effective model of conflict management, including concepts whose names resemble strategic ways out of conflict situations: retreat, smoothing, imposition, alternative and compromise. The authors believe that the greatest value for management is the ability to compromise, as this helps to minimize hostile attitudes and quickly resolve conflict situations, satisfying both opposing sides.

Smoothing means that team members are a single team. Blake and Mouton say in this regard that the conflict can be extinguished by repeating the following phrase: “It doesn’t matter. Remember all the good things that happened today.”

There are other effective conflict resolution strategies:

• victory - defeat;
• victory - victory;
• defeat - defeat;
• defeat is victory.

Sometimes, when entering into a conflict, the parties expect victory at the expense of the defeat of the opposing side. Usually both of them lose. The most favorable way out of an interpersonal conflict situation is victory, in which the interests of both parties are taken into account.

Ways to resolve conflict can be

And so, a conflict has arisen, what ways to resolve a conflict situation can be:

• direct or indirect impact directly on the opponent or his defense;
• changing the balance of forces, for example, increasing one’s own resources for victory;
• false or true information from the enemy about their intentions;
• assessment of the enemy's capabilities.

The listed methods are interconnected. For example, in order to decide which method of resolving a controversial situation to use, you will first need to assess the enemy’s capabilities and whether there is a likelihood of attracting other resources from his side. And only after this can you begin to change the balance of forces and influence your opponent.

Methods for resolving contradictions can be creative or destructive. The former take into account the interests of the warring parties, and the latter include options when in the end someone will remain a loser.

Conflict resolution methods:

1. NEGATIVE - methods of struggle, the goal of which is to achieve victory at any cost for only one of the parties.
2. POSITIVE - contribute to maintaining unity between opponents, that is, they are aimed at preserving the interests of both parties, these include constructive rivalry, negotiations, etc.

Negative methods:

1. Competition is defending one’s interests to the detriment of the needs of the enemy.
2. Achieving victory due to obtaining the necessary freedom of action - creating freedom of action for yourself and limiting the enemy in this.
3. Using your opponent's reserves for your own benefit.
4. Discrediting leaders is incapacitating the enemy’s main management unit.
5. The method of delay - delaying the matter, is used to select a suitable field of action and create a favorable balance of forces.
6. Avoiding the fight - in order to gain time, change the situation to a more advantageous one.
7. Submission is forcing the opposing side to sacrifice its interests.

Positive methods:

1. Negotiations imply partial satisfaction of the interests of both parties.
2. Compromise is the achievement of a mutual voluntary agreement, with the satisfaction of the demands of both parties or partial rejection of them.
3. Cooperation is mutually beneficial interaction to achieve common goals.
4. Mutual concessions are partial satisfaction of the interests of both parties through mutual partial renunciation of their positions.
5. Mediation is the use of a third party to resolve disputes.

It is impossible to say unambiguously which option will be the most optimal way to resolve the conflict. For example, if we are talking about an organization, then experts note that subordination is the best way to resolve a controversial issue. But if we apply it to the family, it will not be the most advantageous.

Thus, the psychology of conflict implies a lack of agreement between two or more parties, and suggests various ways to resolve it.

Table of ways to resolve conflicts

Negotiations as a way to resolve conflict

Methods of conflict resolution include negotiations and mediation. We will consider the second option later, but for now let’s talk about the negotiation process as a way to resolve contradictions.

Negotiations as a way to resolve a conflict represent an interaction between the parties, in which each of them puts forward its own demands, but at the same time is ready to make concessions and compromise.

Distinctive features of negotiations:

• assume equality and direct interaction between the parties;
• exclude options for resolving the situation by force and legal proceedings;
• participants have the opportunity to control the procedure, change the conditions by mutual agreement, and determine the time frame;
• are conducted on the basis of certain rules with which the participants in the process agree;
• The decision taken is informal.

But the goal of negotiations is not always to make a specific decision. This method of interaction can also perform other functions.

Negotiation functions:

• solution to the problem;
• informational - obtaining information from participants in the process about factors that are important to them regarding the settlement of a controversial issue, but sometimes the technique is used to misinform opponents;
• communicative – establishing connections between participants in the process;
• regulatory – regulation and control of the parties’ actions;
• propaganda - influencing public opinion in order to attract allies.

Depending on the purpose of interaction, the parties can choose one of the negotiation strategies :

1. Positional bargaining is a confrontational type of behavior in which participants strive to realize their own goals to the fullest extent possible, without taking into account the interests of the opponent.
2. Negotiations based on interests - involving a partner type of behavior, taking into account mutual interests.

How does the process itself work? Having decided on the functions and strategy, the parties begin negotiations.

Stages of negotiations:

• announcing the positions of the parties, defining goals and interests;
• joint discussion of controversial issues;
• reaching an agreement on a conflict situation.

Thus, we can conclude that in most cases negotiations are aimed at satisfying the requirements (in whole or in part) of all participants in the process. But in some cases they can also act as a negative method of conflict resolution.

A way to resolve conflict through mutual concessions

There are other ways to resolve conflicts. Compromise - achieving a common goal through mutual concessions . In the literature, these two definitions are used as identical, since the principle of action in both cases is the same.

The method of resolving the conflict through mutual concessions of the parties suggests that opponents must take a number of steps towards each other, taking into account the result that will satisfy everyone. In this case, a mutual renunciation of ambitions and interests will be required in order to achieve maximum mutual benefit.

This method has its pros and cons:

Strategies and methods may differ within the same group. This can be said about mutual concessions.

Types of compromise:

1. Voluntary mutual concessions, when an agreement is reached without putting pressure on one of the parties.
2. Forced compromise - conditions that participants in the process are forced to accept under the influence of various factors.

The ability to make mutual concessions is a sign of realism and a high culture of communication. Should compromise be used as a way to resolve conflict or not? Before resorting to this option, you should try others that can achieve maximum satisfaction of interests.

Mediation as a way to resolve conflicts

Another way to resolve the conflict may be mediation during negotiations. This method of interaction involves the participation of a third party in resolving a controversial issue.

So why is there a need to attract independent participants, why is it impossible to independently come to a mutual agreement?

In what cases is it advisable to involve an intermediary?:

1. The parties are ready to make concessions and seek a compromise, but cannot come to a common opinion.
2. It is impossible to organize direct communication between the parties to the conflict.
3. Monitoring the implementation of the decision is required.
4. The role of an authoritative mediator is necessary to preserve the image of both parties.
5. Confidentiality is required when dealing with disagreements.

Thus, the role of the intermediary is reduced to performing the following functions :

• organization of communication between the parties;
• offering options for solving the situation;
• providing assistance in preparing final documents;
• monitoring compliance with accepted agreements.

All that remains is to choose the right intermediary. To do this, you should pay attention to the following criteria for an independent expert :

• competence, possession of mediation skills;
• impartiality - the third party must remain neutral in relation to opposition participants;
• authority – having a certain authority in society, the mediator is able to influence opponents to accept an agreement.

The best result of a mediator is to resolve the dispute and reach an agreement. But the parties do not always come to this conclusion.

Cooperation as the best way to resolve conflict

The most constructive way to resolve conflicts is cooperation . This type of interaction involves immersing all participants in a problematic situation in order to reach an agreement that satisfies the interests of all parties.

Distinctive features of cooperation:

1. The opposition parties are not enemies, but allies who are trying to find an optimal solution for everyone.
2. Involvement of the parties in the process of resolving a controversial issue.
3. Mutual interest of the parties in finding beneficial ways to solve the problem.
4. The overall benefit of using this method of conflict resolution.
5. Requires more time.
6. Allows you to see the hidden causes of the conflict of all participants, thereby contributing to an effective solution to the problem.

But it is important to understand when exactly it is advisable to use cooperation as a way to resolve conflict:

• reaching an agreement is important for both parties;
• the presence of strong ties and prospects for further interaction with the opponent;
• there is time to work through the problem and select suitable solutions;
• the parties are able to present their version of what is happening and listen to each other;
• Opposition participants have equal rights or are ready to ignore the difference in position in order to resolve the situation that has arisen

Cooperation can be classified as a friendly method of conflict resolution, but at the same time it is the most difficult, since a decision must be made taking into account not only one’s needs, but also the interests of the opposite party. With this method of interaction, opponents are ready to listen to each other and come to a common agreement that will suit everyone as much as possible.

Other methods of conflict resolution and resolution

Other methods of conflict resolution and resolution depend on the characteristics of each problem situation and should be used based on this situation.

Intrapersonal methods. They have an impact on an individual and imply adequate organization of his behavior.

EXAMPLE: The ability to justify one’s position, express an opinion or point of view without provoking a negative or aggressive reaction from another person or group of people, etc.

Structural methods. They influence the subjects of conflicts that arise due to incorrect distribution of responsibilities, rights or functions, as well as improper organization of work or an unfair remuneration system.

EXAMPLE: Clear explanation to the parties to the conflict of their functions and tasks; a specific table of rights and responsibilities; principle of unity of command, etc.

Interpersonal methods. They are considered in two aspects: external and internal. External implies the competent activity of a third party to resolve the conflict. Internal – the use of effective techniques in the process of conflict interaction and everyday communication by the subjects themselves.

EXAMPLE: Coercion, compromise, cooperation, confrontation, evasion, compliance, accommodation, empathy, etc.

Retaliatory aggression. Responsive destructive actions of one subject of the conflict in relation to another when a conflict situation arises.

EXAMPLE: Counterattack, bickering, unwillingness to make concessions, argument, etc.

Avoiding conflict. It is used when the conflict is unnecessary for one of the subjects or the problematic situation is completely banal, as well as in cases where it is necessary to solve more important problems, gain time, or collect missing information.

EXAMPLE: Smoothing, accommodation, inaction, procrastination, concessions, taking the opposite position.

Conflict suppression. It is used in cases where circumstances do not allow entering into an open conflict, it is impossible to involve the opposite party in the situation, or there is a risk of losing authority, image, etc.

EXAMPLE: Divide and conquer method, quick conflict resolution, hidden actions, etc.

This should also include a very interesting tool for conflict resolution. As such, it does not represent a method of resolution, but it serves as an indispensable assistant for any person faced with unfavorable circumstances within the framework of the topic we are considering. This tool is called a conflict resolution matrix. You can remember the matrix, write it down on a piece of paper and always keep it nearby, or you can simply understand its features. In any case, this will be useful, because... can be useful anytime, anywhere.

So, the matrix:

To understand the essence of the presented matrix, you just need to refer to the description of conflict resolution methods that we talked about at the end of the lesson. Evaluate their advantages and disadvantages, remember how they differ from each other. And in order to more accurately understand the probability with which a particular conflict is most often resolved, in brackets for each of the matrix methods there is a scheme (“win-lose”, “win-win”, etc.), which means the prospect of resolving the conflict for the party applying the method (first indicator) and for the party to whom this method is directed (second indicator). The matrix is ​​extremely easy to use, so mastering it will not pose any difficulties for you.

In conclusion, it remains only to note that the considered methods of resolving and resolving conflicts are not exhaustive or the only one of their kind. The most important thing is to come to the understanding that absolutely anything that helps ensure and maintain normal relations between people can serve as such methods; everything that strengthens their respect and trust in each other.

In our next lesson we will talk in detail about a topic that is one of the most relevant in conflictology and worries many people - intrapersonal conflict.

Conflict external to the organization.

From the point of view of the openness of conflict manifestations, conflicts can be open and hidden.

Open conflicts are characterized by the fact that the parties do not hide their confrontation and all employees of the organization are aware of the existing conflict. From the point of view of management and subsequent extinguishing, open conflicts are more preferable, but at the same time, due to their severity, they can be destructive and spread to other structural units of the organization.

Hidden conflicts make up the bulk of conflict interactions. These conflicts are not directly observable as rivals attempt to suppress or impose their will on the other by exploiting the elements of surprise or the unknown.

Causes of conflicts:

• Resource shortage. This is the main cause of conflicts, since resources are limited even in the largest and most prosperous organization, and, consequently, employees fight for human resources, finances, materials, equipment, etc.;
• Conservatism (the desire to maintain the status quo). Its main characteristic is the consolidation of the existing situation. From the point of view of functional conflicts, conservatism is resistance to change;
• Unfulfilled expectations;
• Task interdependence. In any organization, there is high interdependence among employees in terms of completing tasks. Employees do not work autonomously, so their effectiveness largely depends on successful collaboration with colleagues;
• Differences in goals. As an organization develops and becomes structured, the potential for conflict increases as multiple departments set individual goals and direct their efforts toward achieving those goals rather than the goals of the entire organization;
• Differences in ideas and values;
• Differences in behavior and life experiences;
• Poor communications. Poor communication of information can be not only a cause, but also a consequence of conflict.

Types of conflict situations

Resolving conflicts specifically in work communities is the task of management, as well as the employees themselves

It is important to understand that conflict situations are different. The following main four types are distinguished:

Intrapersonal

These are serious contradictions that “tear apart from within” one particular person. The reason may be something dating back to childhood, a breakup with a loved one, financial problems, betrayal of a friend, and so on. In fact, such a conflict has a rather mediocre relation to the work collective, because a person “cooks” himself in his internal discord.

But the problem is that he does not exist in isolation from others, and his internal problems will inevitably have some external manifestations. And this, in turn, can provoke all other types of conflicts, as well as cause a decrease in employee productivity. Therefore, if an employee is going through difficult times, it may be useful to offer him support, help (possibly psychological) in order to prevent more serious problems for the team in the future.

Interpersonal

Usually this is a conflict between two people, and its essence lies in the fact that the parties’ opinions on any issue differ radically. Moreover, this issue does not have to be a working one - it can be literally anything that seemed quite important to the conflicting parties at that particular moment.

For example, an unceremonious invasion of personal space; using a coffee machine; fashion style; the meaning of a word; leaving for lunch break; manner of raising children and much, much more. Sometimes it can be a fundamental clash of different points of view, sometimes it can be a conflict situation based on personal hostility, sometimes someone simply falls under the “hot hand” of an already irritated person.

Between the individual and the group

Here we can talk about the fact that one person demonstrates obvious dissatisfaction with the entire team or some part of it, or vice versa - the team or part of it is dissatisfied with one specific employee. The reasons can be both objective (for example, lack of professionalism or unwillingness to make efforts to cope with work responsibilities) and completely devoid of objectivity (for example, personal antipathy due to family ties with superiors or the lack thereof).

Intergroup

This is an even larger-scale version of the conflict, when two groups participate in the “confrontation”. In working conditions, these can be either parts of one department or two different ones (for example, developers and technical support, designers and accountants, and so on). The cause of the problem can, again, be completely reasonable (most often, dissatisfaction with the quality of work), or completely subjective (for example, the requirement that employees with a flexible schedule come to the office at eight in the morning, like everyone else).

Knowing these types of conflict situations is very important in the context of their successful resolution. After all, if, for example, a quarrel arose between two groups, and you try to reconcile only two of its participants (the most prominent activists of each of the warring parties), then the results of such a settlement will not last long

It's another matter if you talk to these participants as representatives of the corresponding parts of the team.

Article on conflictology “Methods of conflict resolution in an organization”

Methods for resolving conflicts in an organization

The modern course and rhythm of people's lives is unimaginable without clashes of thoughts, attitudes, goals, as individuals, small and large groups and other communities. Differences and contradictions between opposing sides appear every day, often developing into conflicts. It is necessary to correctly manage the process, the task of which is to prevent the emergence of unnecessary, unfavorable conflicts, and to give inevitable conflict situations a constructive nature.

The modern approach to conflict management is that conflict can be resolved in a fairly constructive way.

According to E. A. Zamedlina, E. G. Zhulina: “Conflict management is a targeted impact on eliminating (minimizing) the causes of the conflict or correcting the behavior of the participants in the conflict, changing their goals” [2].

There are effective techniques for managing conflict situations. They can be divided into two categories: structural and interpersonal. A simple difference in characters cannot be considered as the root cause of the conflict, but it, naturally, may be the only prerequisite for a conflict situation, but in general this is only one of the moments.

Structural methods involve mainly members of organizational conflicts that arise due to incorrect distribution of functions, obligations, poor work organization, unfair remuneration system, motivation, incentives, etc. These methods include: clarification of job requirements, introduction of coordination mechanisms, development or clarification corporate goals, creating a meaningful remuneration system.

Clarifying job requirements is considered an effective way to prevent and resolve conflicts. Any employee must clearly understand what his direct responsibilities and rights are. The method works by developing appropriate job descriptions, regulations, documents regulating the distribution of functions, rights and obligations.

In this method, you need to specify what results are expected from a particular employee and the entire department. Parameters that should be mentioned include the degree of results achieved, who sends and who receives different information, the system of opportunities and responsibilities, and clear specific strategies, procedures and criteria. And the leader clarifies these issues not only for himself, but brings them to his subordinates, so that they are aware of what is expected of them in a given situation.

The introduction of coordination mechanisms consists of selecting officials or structural departments of the organization that have every chance of getting involved in the current conflict situation and helping to remove the preconditions for the emergence of a dispute between the conflicting parties. One of the most popular mechanisms is the hierarchy of power. It regulates human interaction, decision making, and information flows out of an organization. If employees disagree on any issue, the conflict can be avoided by contacting the general director with a proposal to make an important decision. The principle of unity of command simplifies the implementation of hierarchy to manage conflict situations because subordinates must carry out the decisions of their own superior.

The implementation of corporate internal goals requires significant joint efforts of two or more employees, departments, subdepartments, and groups of different sizes. The main idea of ​​this methodology is to direct the efforts of all members to achieve a common goal.

Rewards and incentives can be used as a way to manage conflicts, influencing people in order to avoid unnecessary consequences that interfere with the well-being of the organization.

People who contribute to corporate goals, help other groups in the organization, and try to approach a task holistically should be rewarded with gratitude, rewards, recognition, or promotion.

It is important that the reward system does not reward unacceptable behavior by individuals or groups. Consistently implementing a reward system to recognize those who contribute to corporate goals can help people understand how to overcome conflict in a way that is consistent with management's wishes.[4]

Structural and interpersonal methods of conflict management are no less relevant.

Interpersonal methods rely on the choice of behavior of members of a conflict situation in order to minimize damage to their principles and interests.

In conflictology, there are five styles of conflict resolution:

• evasion;
• device;
• rivalry;
• compromise;
• cooperation.

Avoidance is the avoidance of conflict. As a rule, this method is used if the conflict does not affect the specific interests of the parties or the problem is not so fundamental for the parties and they do not need to protect their own rights and waste time on solving it. The style is also used when working with a conflicted personality. The conflicting party uses the evasion style if it:

• believes that the key of disagreement is not of great importance when compared with other more pressing tasks;
• understands, in fact, that he does not have the opportunity or does not want to resolve the issue in his favor;
• does not have enough power to resolve the issue in his favor; wants to gain time in order to analyze the situation and obtain supporting information before making any decision;
• believes that it is unsafe to resolve the problem immediately, since open confrontation can only aggravate the situation;
• subordinates can resolve the conflict themselves;
• when difficult, from a communication point of view, people - rude people, complainers, bores, etc. - take part in the conflict.

Accommodation is behavior in which there is no need to be irritated. The accommodation style means that one party does not try to protect personal interests in order to smooth the atmosphere and resume a normal work environment. The most common situations in which this method is applicable are the following:

• the key task is to restore peace and stability, rather than resolve the conflict;
• the subject of disagreement is not important for one of the participants;
• a good attitude is more important than his personal point of view;
• the participant does not have enough strength or chances to win.
• In this case, by “forgetting” about the problem underlying the conflict, peace and tranquility may come, but the problem remains, and the end result may be an “explosion”.

Rivalry is the introduction of legitimate power or pressure to impose one’s own point of view. This is the most typical style. Statistics say that 70% of all cases of conflict are the desire for one-sided gain, the satisfaction of personal interests in the first place. This gives rise to the desire to put pressure on the enemy, to impose one’s own interests, using power through coercion. This style can be effective if the manager has strong power over subordinates, is forced to take an unpopular decision and has enough authority to choose this step; interacts with subordinates who adopt an authoritarian leadership style. However, employees may not accept this style. This strategy rarely produces long-term results, since the losing side may not support a decision made against its will, or may even try to sabotage it.

Compromise - a concession is considered an effective measure, but may not lead to a suitable solution. The essence of the compromise style is that the parties try to resolve differences by mutual concessions. The ability to compromise is highly valued in management situations, as it reduces ill will to a minimum, which often makes it possible to quickly resolve the conflict and leads to the satisfaction of both parties. However, introducing a compromise at an early stage of a conflict that arises on an important issue can reduce the exploration of alternatives, which in turn increases the possibility of making the wrong decision. The disadvantage of this style is that one side has the opportunity to exaggerate its own requests, in order to then appear generous or give in to the other.

The compromise style can be used in the following situations:

• both sides have equally binding arguments and have equal power;
• satisfying the desires of one of the parties is not very important for the other;
• a temporary solution is quite possible due to the fact that there is no time to develop another; or other approaches to the problem turned out to be ineffective;
• compromise will allow you to gain at least something rather than lose everything.

Collaboration is considered an appropriate style in situations requiring contrasting views and data, and is characterized by the open recognition of differences in views and the conflict of these views in order to find a solution applicable to both parties. This is the most complex of all styles, but at the same time the most effective in resolving conflict situations. This is a joint development of a solution that satisfies the interests of both parties. In the process of work, cooperative experience and broad information for subsequent integration are acquired, and a spirit of cooperation is formed. The parties acknowledge differences in views and are ready to understand from different points of view in order to understand the background to the conflict and find a course of action acceptable to everyone. The one who uses this style does not achieve his own goal at the expense of others, but quickly finds the desired solution.

It has been found that where both parties benefit, they are more willing to implement the decisions made because they apply to them, and both parties participate in the entire conflict resolution process.

To resolve a conflict, this style can be used in the following cases:

• in the event that each of the approaches to the problem is important and does not allow compromise solutions, but it is necessary to find a common solution;
• the main goal is to gain general experience;
• the parties can listen to each other and formulate the essence of their own interests;
• there are long-term, strong and interdependent interests with the party to the conflict;
• it is necessary to integrate opportunities and increase employees’ own involvement in work [2].

Domestic conflict expert Anatoly Shepilov warns that, unfortunately, not all incidents are resolved. The data he subsequently acquired from a study of 3,000 real conflicts in various fields of activity demonstrate that only 62% of conflicts were resolved to one degree or another[1].

Today, two methods of conflict resolution have been developed:

• opponents solve problems themselves;
• if it is impossible to solve problems on their own, they invite a third party - a mediator (intermediary).

Unfortunately, a skilled mediation business in the Russian Federation is not developed. Research by world scientists shows that the majority of conflicts in organizations are resolved with the help of a third party. A higher percentage of such participation in conflicts of state structures. Third parties include not only psychological experts, but also friends, relatives and simply random eyewitnesses to the conflict.

Unfortunately, 16% of conflicts turn into another conflict. Having failed to reach an agreement, the opponents enter a new stage of the conflict. And it happens that the intervention of third parties only aggravates the conflict.

This situation often appears when a conflict arises between a manager and an ordinary employee, but the manager is higher than the mediator.

There are also organizations in which the conflict is simply ignored. The conflict dies out on its own until a new object of conflict of interest appears. There are several reasons for this. For starters, the resources of its members are being depleted. The second reason for the fading of the conflict is the loss of interest in fighting the enemy. The third is a reorientation of interests: a new extremely important problem appears and there is simply no time for conflict. But after some time, the conflict resumes because its cause has not been eliminated.

There is an option with a third party influencing the conflict. How often does this happen in practice? At times, the manager does not have the opportunity or does not want to directly deal with the conflict, and he simply fires one or both participants in the conflict. Another option is to transfer one of the conflicting parties to another unit; he may be sent on vacation or on a long-term business trip. There is another way - the object that caused the conflict is confiscated. Naturally, all these options are unsuccessful. But in cases where there is a real danger of brutal violence from one of the opponents, they are absolutely acceptable.

There are three more known ways to resolve conflict. This is a concession by one of the parties, a compromise, and the search for a third (alternative) option.

The most significant way to resolve conflict is compromise. Working in various organizations, considering various conflict situations, especially vertical conflicts, scientists came to the conclusion that in these situations cooperation does not take root, due to the fact that the leader does not want to make virtually any changes to his own fundamental position if he considers himself to be right.

The question immediately arises: what mental circumstances have the best chance of facilitating a constructive solution to the problem?

The first condition is the search for the closest or cumulative points of contact in the system of interests of each of the parties. As a rule, either party to the conflict defends its own position, as a result of which it seems that they are incompatible. But when a joint search begins, then, while negotiating, we are obliged to try to find points of their unification. Finding them is quite difficult; you need to study the interests of both parties.

The second is an impartial analysis of the problem, looking at it from the outside.

The third is a decrease in negative emotions. It is very important not to solve a problem in a state of emotional arousal. First you need to calm down.

Fourth – reducing the negative emotions of the other party. How to do it? If one side demonstrates that it is calm, this will already reduce the overall outburst of emotions. In addition, it must be stated that this side is ready to make some concessions in order to solve the problem. If your opponent notices that you are ready to solve the problem, this will further reduce his negative emotions. You can still express a positive thought about your opponent to a third party, a person who has the opportunity to convey your words to him. This will further help solve the problem constructively. And naturally it is necessary to take into account the status of the other party (age, gender, official position). You are not obligated to solve a problem with a person who is under the influence of negative emotions. We must find a way to end the interaction, because emotions provide virtually no chance for a constructive solution to the problem. This is not avoiding the conflict, but only postponing its resolution [4].

There are several important points that influence problem solving. The first is a moment in time. The less time it takes to resolve a conflict, the greater the likelihood of a forceful solution and the less hope for a constructive settlement. The second factor is timeliness, that is, when you entered into conflict. If the conflict is short, then the chances of a favorable resolution are greater than when it becomes protracted. The third factor is relationships. If before the conflict there were good, trusting relationships between the parties, then the chances of their reconciliation are higher.

However, it is not always possible to reconcile the conflicting parties. In cases where this is not possible, their interaction must be reduced. Typically, it is more difficult to resolve an incident between a manager and a subordinate. Experience shows that in these situations the leader simply wins due to his own status.

Literature

1.

Antsupov A.Ya. Conflictology: textbook for universities / A.Ya. Antsupov, A.I. Shipilov. – 4th ed., rev. and additional – M., 2009. – 512 p.

2. Zamedlina E.A., Zhulina E.G., “Crib on the basics of management”. M.: Allel, 2011. – 54 p.

3. Karnaukh I., Tanaev V., “Practical psychology of management (Typology at work and at home). 3rd ed., revised. And additional - Series Psychology of Management", Rostov-on-Don: "Phoenix", 2010 - 476 p.

4. Kibanov A.Ya., Vorozheikin I.E., Zakharov D.K., Konovalova V.G. Conflictology: Textbook / Ed. AND I. Kibanova. -2nd ed., revised. and additional - M.: INFRA-M, 2010.

5. Svetlov, V. A., “Introduction to a unified theory of analysis and conflict resolution,” KD Librocom, 2013 – 303p. – (Textbooks and educational aids for higher schools (universities)).

11

Rules for managing conflict situations in a team

All leaders can manage conflict, although sometimes it is very difficult to do so. There are no identical conflicts, so it is impossible to define universal methods of conflict resolution, examples of which would be suitable for all situations.

However, there are a number of key activities:

1. Providing the conflicting parties with the necessary information, excluding deliberately false information, rumors and gossip.
2. Organizing fruitful communication between conflicting parties with the involvement of people who support them in the process.
3. Conducting work to strengthen corporate spirit with mini-groups and informal leaders.
4. Solving personnel issues by applying incentives and punishments, changing the conditions of interaction between people. In this case, methods of administrative influence are suitable, implying personnel changes, dismissal, transfer to another department, etc.

In the event of an interpersonal conflict, it is necessary to start with a conversation with the opponent, give him the opportunity to speak out and listen carefully to his position, without interrupting or showing negative emotions. This is the only way to understand the concerns of the other side and identify the true cause of the conflict.

When people give in to emotions, most words will go unheard. Therefore, it is better to wait until passions boil over and then return to discussing the causes of the conflict.

Read our article “Organizational structure of an enterprise: main types, their pros and cons.”

Often people talk about something completely different from what really irritates them. Sometimes the most trivial occasion can cause a real emotional storm. This is explained by the fact that conflict resolution methods are not effective enough, since the essence of the problem is not identified.

As a rule, a person gets involved in a conflict if his emotionally significant interests are affected, such as betrayal, disappointment, disappointment, jealousy and others. Of course, these are quite personal feelings that people try to hide from strangers

Therefore, it is very important to identify the true reason in order to be able to quickly resolve the relationship. It happens that a person himself is not able to understand himself, to understand the true cause of anger or dissatisfaction, because unpleasant sensations are not always amenable to awareness.

Remember: no matter what the conflict is, it is just a small episode of your life. Therefore, you shouldn’t attach great importance to it, but you also shouldn’t let it take its course.

About complex relationships and partnerships! Misunderstandings, disagreements. How to proceed? Video from Business Youth:

Create a suitable environment for conflict resolution

It is better to deal with conflicts in a specially designated place. And not right away - let the participants cool down a little so that they evaluate what is happening not only with emotions.

• Find a neutral place where you can meet with the parties involved. It is better if this is a personal meeting rather than communication via instant messengers and video conferences.
• Set rules: Let people know how long the meeting will last, how it will be structured. Such restrictions will help the parties to the conflict communicate more productively and rationally, and not turn to emotions.
• Before negotiations, try to talk with each participant in the conflict separately. Find out what rational and emotional reasons led to the disagreement.

Decide in advance what you want from the meeting as a moderator. For example, for the parties to come to a compromise, one of the parties to the conflict realizes he was wrong, or there is some other goal. To do this, prepare, collect information, and work out your behavior strategy.

Conflict Prevention

Conflict prevention is mainly about predicting them, for example, the severity of the consequences or the time of onset. Carrying out conflict prevention activities is only possible using methods such as expert surveys, experimental and mathematical modeling, extrapolation, etc. In addition, prevention should be carried out at all levels: personal level, micro level, average level and macro level.

Conflict prevention measures should be related to the elimination of conditions conducive to the emergence of conflicts. The basis here is such measures as eliminating the deformation of social relations, dividing society into social strata, social psychohygiene and social protection of the population, psychotherapy (individual, group, mass), psychoprophylaxis, as well as training in social interaction, education, education, etc.

All these nuances must be taken into account, because It is much easier to eliminate a problem in its bud than to deal with it later, resorting to all sorts of methods, techniques and tricks. But, of course, there are no methods that 100% guarantee that conflict will not arise, and conflicts should be perceived as an integral part of human life. And if problems arise, then you need to be fully armed, i.e. be prepared for them and be able to resolve them. So what does conflict resolution mean? How does this happen and how to learn it?

Horizontal conflicts

“Horizontal” conflicts are the least formalized; they arise between employees, often of the same department, or between departments and divisions or specialists of the same or different areas. To such conflicts, the employer is forced to take an “individual approach”, since except for cases of direct harm to employees (the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation and the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) and material damage to the organization (Articles 21, 239, 241-243 and 247-248 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation), they are not regulated no way.

Sometimes “horizontal” conflicts easily develop into “vertical” ones: the employer is responsible for the employees, and they look to management for help in resolving the conflict. And, conversely, a conflict between an employee and management may lead to a change in the attitude of his colleagues towards this employee and lead to a “horizontal” conflict.

Keep records of exports and imports in the Kontur.Accounting web service. Simple accounting, payroll and reporting in one service

Characteristics of the conditions for ending the conflict

All conflicts are characterized by negative emotions and negative attitudes of the parties towards each other at the time of the conflict. Since a conflict has arisen between the parties, negative emotions automatically arise, otherwise we are not talking about a conflict. In this case, a negative opinion is formed about the opponent, which, in most cases, can be expressed by subjective factors. For the parties at the moment, the main goal is to reduce the negativity of experienced emotions and think logically in the designated situation.

It is important that subjects stop seeing each other as enemies, adversaries. They need to understand why the conflict arose at this stage of the relationship and how it can be resolved

There are several ways to reach this opinion:

• Indicate your own position and the position of your opponent. In this way, it is possible to identify the motive and goals of everyone’s actions, analyze mistakes, and thereby reduce the negative perception of the opponent.
• Understand the other person's interests or goals. However, you should not accept or justify them. However, obtaining information about the opponent is one of the key points in resolving the conflict.
• Highlighting the constructive principle in the opponent’s behavior. There are no only good or only bad people; each person has different behavior that needs to be analyzed and understood.
• Reducing negative emotions. Despite the fact that conflicts always cause negative emotions in the subject, you need to be able to control them so that emotions do not influence the development of the conflict and a critical attitude towards it. It is necessary to be balanced, not to show violence or pronounced aggression.
• Objective discussion of the problem. The parties must be able to find out the essence of the conflict, see problems and contradictions. Explicit concern only for one's own interests reduces the possibility of resolving the conflict.

When resolving a conflict, it is also necessary to take into account the status of the opponent. So, if a boss and a subordinate are involved in a conflict, it is necessary to comply with the requirements of subordination, otherwise the conflict will develop into a more severe form. Too radical demands of the parties can also provoke extremely negative consequences.

Don't try to get involved in the conflict

Conflictology expert and author of the book “The Magic of Conflict” Thomas Cram believes that one of the key mistakes of participants in any conflict is to perceive disagreement as a kind of competition that needs to be won.

A popular managerial mistake is to try to immediately figure out which side is right and which is wrong. So you indirectly take someone’s side and begin to participate in this competition.

Instead, you should try to first extinguish the conflict itself. For example, convey to the participants that it is not necessary to perceive each other as enemies or as competitors. You can look for a compromise that will suit both sides.

Or the best option is to offer, together with the conflicting parties, to study the situation that led to the disagreement. And try to look at it more broadly, as if to find some kind of third opinion that contradicts the positions of both sides. It is unlikely that the conflict will be resolved as a result, but at the same time you will extinguish the intensity of passions in the team, direct the energy of the conflict participants in a productive direction, and at the same time you will not be involved in disagreements.

See also: How to Succeed in Business Communications

Social conflict

Social conflict is the most destructive way of resolving significant contradictions that arise in the process of social interaction, which consists in the opposition of the subjects of the conflict and is accompanied by expressed negative emotions and feelings.

Conflict affects:

• mental states and, as a consequence, the physical health of participants;
• relationships between opponents;
• quality of individual activity;
• socio-psychological climate of the group;
• quality of joint activities.

Consequences of the conflict

• Constructive
• Destructive

Destructive consequences of conflict:

• difficulties or impossibility of joint activities of the parties to the conflict;
• strengthening of personal hostility of the conflict participants, up to the formation of the image of the “enemy”;
• opposition between the parties to the conflict towards each other, which damages professional activity;
• manifestation of unproductive competition in relation to other persons;
• reduction of interpersonal communications up to their complete disappearance;
• a decrease in the general background of mood and the effectiveness of individual activities among the participants in the conflict.

Constructive consequences of conflict:

• in searching and developing mutually acceptable solutions;
• in removing the hostility of the conflict participants towards each other;
• in emotional release;
• in psychological renewal of relationships;
• in the emergence of a deeper and more adequate mutual understanding between people.

Structure of the conflict

• Objective level
• Subjective level
• Objective level
• the subject of the conflict, that is, what causes the conflict;
• main participants in the conflict;
• secondary participants in the conflict, that is, those who explicitly or implicitly support the main participants in the conflict;
• factors of the physical and social environment that directly influence the conflict;
• factors of the physical and macrosocial environment that indirectly influence the conflict.

What is conflict?

In simple words, this is the opposition of the participants, and a conflict situation is a way of resolving contradictions, which is not expressed in a peaceful way. Conflicts are usually accompanied by a surge of negative emotions.

Without conflicts, communication is impossible. Even the best relationships are tested. And in general, wherever at least two people act, conflicts are inevitable, because each of them has different interests, goals, and values. Even if everything is decent on the outside—no one hits each other’s faces or says hurtful words—people can have passions boiling inside. How to extinguish this volcano in the bud and get out of a conflict situation with dignity? And is it necessary to extinguish it - perhaps this is not a dead end, but a path to development?