Ways to resolve conflicts in various situations: strategies, tools

In the previous lessons of our training on conflict management, we covered an extensive theoretical part concerning this issue, namely: we talked about what the causes of conflicts are and what are the stages of their development. We also looked at the practical aspect and presented to your attention methods for preventing and managing conflicts.

However, if due attention has been paid to theory and the knowledge gained is quite enough to understand the basics of conflict management, then practice is far from being limited to one lesson. Moreover, even a dozen lessons will not exhaust it, because the relevance of the problem is great and a huge amount of research and work is devoted to it. But we, nevertheless, still strive to provide you with the most useful and effective recommendations, which is why we continue to talk about practice.

Now we will talk about what to do in situations when the situation gets out of control and grows from potentially dangerous to posing a real threat - about what methods exist for resolving and resolving conflicts. But first, let's figure out what it is all about?

What is conflict

Translated from Latin, the word “conflict” means “collision, blow.” A conflict is an acute discrepancy between the interests of two or more parties, leading to confrontation. This is a radical way to eliminate contradictions between goals and views that arise in the process of interaction.

Conflict situations are always associated with negative emotions and often lead to antisocial behavior. To avoid bad consequences, you need to be able to get out of them correctly.

More than 100 cool lessons, tests and exercises for brain development

Start developing

Despite their negative emotional connotation, conflicts have not only destructive effects. There is an opinion in society that any confrontations should be avoided or tried to be resolved as soon as possible. But there is also a positive side. The collision of contradictions always leads to the birth of alternative ideas and meanings. This is an integral part of development and movement forward.

The main causes of conflicts

Let's remember what is called conflict? This is a confrontation of incompatible views of a person, as well as two or more parties to communication, accompanied by negative emotions and feelings.

In society, such disagreements usually arise due to divergence of goals, interests and opinions about how to implement them. Today we will look at methods of conflict resolution and the prerequisites for their formation.

1. Objective reasons

The reasons that lead to the maturation of a pre-conflict (tense) situation become objective. They can be genuine or imaginary (made up) and serve as a basis (pretext) for discord.

The most common causes of conflict are:

Collisions of moral and material interests that arise in human life.
Ill-conceived legal regulations that can regulate the resolution of controversial situations.
Weak spiritual development, accompanied by poverty, which prevents a person from living a normal life.

2. Managerial and organizational reasons

In general, this category of root causes is more suitable for subjective factors, since they are associated with the creation and activities of enterprises, groups and teams. Here we can highlight four main reasons that will help us determine the types of possible conflict and methods for resolving it. So the conflict could be:

structural and organizational;
situational and managerial;
personal-functional;
functional-organizational.

3. Social and psychological reasons

Social or mental discord that has crept into relationships between people is considered as the basis for this type of prerequisites for the emergence of disagreements. Accordingly, methods for resolving psychological conflicts, taking into account their specifics, are applicable to this category. Conventionally, all these reasons are divided into several different groups:

Negative atmosphere in the team.
Discrepancy between citizens' expectations and their social roles.
Contradiction of generations.
Mutual misunderstanding of people.
Regionality (in matters of ecopsychology).
The arrival of a destructive leader in a group of informals.
Problems of moral and social adaptation of new members of the team (group).
Hostility of the respondent.
Psychological incompatibility.

4. Subjective (personal) motives

The causes and methods of resolving organizational and interpersonal conflicts are tied to the psyche of those individuals who participate in them, and are often caused by the specifics of the psychological processes of communication between the individual and the environment or people. Here are the main sources of controversy:

Assessing the behavior of others.
Mental imbalance.
Socio-psychological ignorance.
Inability to empathize.
Exorbitant self-esteem.

We recommend

“12 books on sales psychology” Read more

In this section, we have described the most common causes of disagreement that occur most often on a day-to-day basis. However, in life there are, of course, much more. An important role in this issue is played by situations where disagreements arise or end.

Strategies for exiting conflict

Any unstable situation ultimately tends to reach equilibrium. Conflict is no exception. The outcome of the confrontation depends on the actions of each side. There are several basic strategies for dealing with confrontation.

Rivalry

The essence of this strategy is the uncompromising defense of one’s own interests, regardless of the interests of the opponent. Competition does not imply any compromise or cooperation. By choosing this style of behavior, a person actually starts a war, which should end in the victory of one side and the defeat of the other side.

Rivalry applies in the following cases:

one of the parties is extremely interested in satisfying its own interests;
there is no time to negotiate and discuss the possibility of compromise;
the conflict occurs in an emergency situation;
there is a high probability of developing dangerous consequences.

Withdrawal, avoidance

The avoidance strategy involves avoiding direct confrontation. A person does not try to defend his interests and avoids confrontation. In this way, he strives to avoid increasing tension and passions, and maintain peaceful relations with his opponent.

This strategy is most often used in the following cases:

one of the parties realized that they were wrong;
relations with an opponent are more important than one’s own interests in a given situation;
it is beneficial for one of the parties to “suspend” contradictions, leaving them unresolved;
lack of leverage and power;
too much passion, preventing a constructive solution to the problem;
one of the sides wants to gain time to prepare for open confrontation.

Device

Accommodation is essentially voluntary surrender. One of the parties agrees to accept the opponent’s terms, renouncing its interests. In this way, the conflict is resolved and the relationship returns to normal.

This strategy is useful when:

for one side the outcome is not significant, but for the other it is extremely important;
one side does not have enough resources to win, it soberly assesses its chances;
It is very important to maintain a good relationship with your opponent.

Cooperation

Neither side avoids the conflict or enters into confrontation, but neither does it renounce its interests. The needs of each party are determined - explicit and hidden - and a joint search for a solution occurs.

Suitable situations for use:

the outcome is very important for both sides, no one wants to sacrifice their interests;
the parties have a long-term close relationship and do not want to destroy it;
both parties show a willingness to cooperate;
power and leverage are distributed evenly between the parties;
the problem does not require an immediate solution; there is time for discussion and search for optimal options.

Collaboration is considered the most productive and constructive strategy, but at the same time the most difficult.

Compromise

Both sides make mutual concessions to reach a consensus. Compromise is a more superficial strategy than cooperation. The final decision suits both participants; no one really loses in positions, but no one wins either.

Appropriate in the following cases:

the parties have approximately equal power;
the decision must be made quickly;
each side has interests that they are willing to sacrifice;
The parties are interested in maintaining good relationships.

As you can see, there are quite a lot of solution methods. It is impossible to say unambiguously which one is optimal. Different strategies are appropriate in different situations. Whereas people most often resort to one favorite method.

The main thing that is needed for effective conflict resolution is the ability to adequately assess the situation and not give in to emotions. Having developed these two skills, you can not be afraid of open confrontation and confidently defend your interests.

Conflicts in the organization and possible ways to resolve them

Methods for resolving conflicts in an organization can be divided into 3 general groups:

Structural methods based on 4 mechanisms:

a description of the specific job requirements;
establishment of hierarchical powers at all levels of the structure;
uniting the team for one common goal;
introduction of an employee incentive system.

Regulatory methods involving normative control and regulation of the activities of representatives of the organization.
Constructive methods aimed at resolving functional conflicts. For example, disputes that ultimately help make the only right decision.

From the general typology presented above, the following options can be used to resolve conflicts in an organization:

Competitive methods are used only in cases where a quick solution to the problem is required.
Avoidance or evasion is reasonable in situations where time is required to gather information or when it takes too much time to resolve the consequences of conflict resolution.
Compromise – opponents mutually strive for a solution that suits them.
Adaptation - used in situations where maintaining harmonious relationships in a team is important.
Cooperation – allows opposing parties to develop a joint solution.

To prevent the occurrence of conflicts in an organization, it is necessary to create an effective management structure, correct allocation of resources, improve working conditions, and monitor compliance with accepted norms and rules.

Tools for Conflict Resolution

In addition to the strategies themselves, it is necessary to consider special tools that help implement these strategies. Otherwise, you will want, for example, to reach a compromise with your opponent, but you have no idea how to do this. And instead of mutual concessions, you will only receive mutual claims.

Negotiation

If you and your opponent have decided to avoid open confrontation and are ready to cooperate, then negotiation is the best tool, which involves equal interaction between the participants to find the best solution. During negotiations, the parties adhere to certain rules.

Negotiation functions:

Informational. Exchange of information that is necessary to solve the problem.
Communicative. Establishing normal interaction between participants.
Regulatory. Control over the actions of both parties.

The negotiation process includes several stages. Let's look at them in detail.

Preparation

At the initial stage, the parties establish contact, negotiate the terms of interaction, and exchange important information. After studying the data received, each party determines a strategy for further behavior.

Positioning

Then there is an exchange of views on the controversial issue. Each side voices its point of view and expresses awareness of the opponent's disagreement.

Finding a solution

Opponents “probe” each other, try to find the enemy’s weaknesses and gain an advantage. The outcome of the stage depends on the chosen tactics and diplomatic qualities of each participant.

End of negotiations

At the end, the results are summed up and the decision made is declared. If the parties fail to reach a consensus, mutual tension increases between them and the situation remains unresolved. They have a choice: either continue to try to find a solution together, or move on to open confrontation.

Mediation

If the parties cannot agree among themselves on their own, they can resort to the help of a third party. The mediator organizes the interaction of opponents, offers options for solving the problem, monitors compliance with all rules and formalities, and monitors the implementation of agreements.

Involving an intermediary is advisable in the following cases:

the parties agree to make concessions, but cannot reach an agreement;
there is no way to organize their direct interaction;
monitoring of compliance with decisions made is required;
the confidentiality of one or both parties must be maintained.

The choice of intermediary must be approached very carefully. He must be competent, impartial and authoritative. You should be prepared for the fact that the conflict may not be resolved even with the participation of a third party.

Subordination

This conflict resolution tool, unlike the previous two, is not constructive. It can lead to the end of normal relationships and open hostility. It is usually used by the side that has enough power to suppress the enemy. But even in this case, the outcome and long-term consequences can be unpredictable.

Conflict resolution

When starting a conversation about conflict resolution, it should first of all be emphasized that the very concept of “conflict resolution” has two meanings:

1	Resolution of conflicts by their subjects themselves.
2	Conflict resolution based on identifying their causes and neutralizing them, as well as taking measures to prevent open conflict between subjects.

Conflict resolution, as a serious practical tool, cannot be carried out without knowledge of its features. And even this does not always guarantee that the problem situation will be resolved successfully. And this depends not so much on how specific each individual situation is and what this specificity is, but on what measures should be taken to resolve the conflict. And here we should strive to ensure that measures aimed at dealing with the fact of conflict correspond to the scheme below:

Analysis and determination of the causes of conflicts and the reasons for the conflict behavior of their subjects (conflict cartography).
Making a decision to enter into a conflict, taking into account its outcome.
Implementation of a decision to enter into conflict.

In practice, in resolving a conflict, everything depends on the position of the subjects resolving it. This position can be expectant, authoritative, negatively competent, leading to escalation, rational, or based on a deep understanding of the causes of the conflict. The point of conflict resolution is to influence both its causes and its participants.

Methods for resolving conflicts can be completely different, from eliminating their causes and containing the situation to reorienting the attitudes of the participants, the purpose of which is to form in them the conviction that it is necessary to abandon destructive conflict interaction. Methods can also be socio-psychological, administrative or complex. If we consider the issue of resolution, we can distinguish between seemingly resolved conflicts, partially resolved conflicts and completely resolved conflicts.

And given the fact that conflict in the abstract cannot exist in nature, there are no universal methods of settlement and resolution suitable for any type of conflict. To resolve an interpersonal conflict, some methods are used; to resolve a family conflict, others are used; to resolve a military conflict, others are used. Approaches to conflict resolution are selected depending on their theoretical understanding.

The problem of conflict resolution and resolution today is very relevant in many countries around the world, and therefore it receives great attention. Particularly acute is the question of the role and functions of civil services, situations related to terrorist attacks, strikes and other movements that are potentially dangerous to humans, as well as the question of law and order in the army. In this regard, state governments are even developing special technologies for conducting operations to resolve conflicts and systems of behavior in conflict situations. For example, in the USA there is even a position of conflict manager.

It should also be said that the terms “resolution” and “settlement” of conflicts should not be identified with each other.

Conflict resolution is a set of measures aimed at eliminating the source of conflict interaction and ultimately satisfying the needs and interests of the subjects of the conflict. In the social aspect, this process can last for many years.

Conflict resolution is work aimed at stopping aggressive actions and achieving compromises that suit them, which will be more beneficial for them than continuing conflict interaction. Moreover, conflict resolution through negotiations, arbitration and mediation is used in practice much more often than resolution, and is achieved many times faster than it.

EXAMPLE: The most unproductive and primitive method of resolving a conflict is considered to be the use of force (for example, the start of hostilities), because in this case, there is a high probability of significant losses by all subjects of the problem situation and even escalation of the conflict. For this reason, in addition to this method, the truce method is used.

The conclusion of a truce is largely a tactical technique or an element of strategy. A form of truce can be a renunciation of aggressive actions through intermediaries (for example, the media), a withdrawal from the line of interaction between the parties to the conflict, a temporary renunciation of aggressive actions (for example, a temporary cessation of shelling), etc.

But the truce method is not very effective, because it is only temporary, the parties do not give each other any obligations, and no sanctions are established for violating the truce.

The most suitable method for eliminating a conflict is the conclusion of an agreement to end hostility (for example, a peace treaty). But reaching agreement is quite problematic, because... may be required to be competent in certain issues: political, cultural, economic, etc.

However, along with less effective or more radical methods, there is a better way to resolve conflicts in many aspects - negotiations, to which we will pay special attention. But before we move on to talking about negotiations, we should say a few words about how a conflict situation should be analyzed, because without knowing its features, hoping for success is, at a minimum, naive and ridiculous, and at a maximum, impractical and dangerous.

How to resolve family conflicts

Conflicts in the family are a common phenomenon. How long their marriage will last depends on the behavior of the spouses in critical moments. The specificity of family conflicts is that it is extremely important for both parties to maintain good relationships. Sometimes even at the cost of their own interests. The more the parties understand this, the better the prognosis.

When using a strategy of competition, the spouse must keep in mind that this may cause divorce. It is worth taking such measures only in extreme cases, if it is absolutely impossible to sacrifice interests and if the other side itself is not interested in maintaining peace.

Avoidance is also not the best strategy in family conflicts. If you constantly avoid solving a problem, it will grow like a snowball. You can postpone the decision for a while to reduce the intensity of emotions, but be sure to return to it and bring the matter to the end.

The adaptation strategy can be used, but with some reservations. For example, if only one spouse uses it all the time, and the other does not want to make concessions, imbalance grows in the family. Sooner or later, the compliant spouse will get tired of his role and will rebel. So the confrontation can go into an uncontrollable phase.

The most productive strategies for resolving family conflicts, like any other, are cooperation and compromise. It is important that each spouse is ready to make concessions and seek a joint solution.

Main mistakes in conflict resolution

When resolving conflicts, people usually make the following mistakes:

✔	Failure to implement appropriate conflict resolution measures in a timely manner.
✔	Attempts to resolve conflicts without finding out their actual causes.
✔	The use of exclusively aggressive methods and punitive measures or, on the contrary, purely diplomatic methods in resolving conflicts.
✔	Using template schemes to resolve conflicts without studying their types and features.

Another, and quite significant, omission is that proper attention is not paid to the prevention of conflict situations, because how can one talk about influencing them without having information about their occurrence, without knowing what they can develop into, etc. . We have already touched on this topic in more detail in the last lesson, but given that all aspects of conflictology are closely intertwined, we should still return for a moment to the issue of conflict prevention and recall what their prevention is.

How to resolve conflicts in a team

Conflict can arise in almost any group: at school, at work, in various social organizations. Such conflicts can be divided into three types: interpersonal, between an individual and a group, and between several groups.

To resolve them, the following methods are used:

creating healthy competition;
choosing an evasion strategy if the subject of confrontation is insignificant for the team;
forced compromise when the common goal is more important than personal differences;
accommodation of both parties and smoothing out the situation.

The choice of strategy depends on the possibility of achieving a common goal in the current conditions and the need for further interaction. Time also plays an important role. If time resources are limited, you will have to use rigid, non-constructive solution methods.

Types of conflicts

There are several classifications of conflicts (psychologists love to sort everything into categories). We will present two main ones and consider how to act in the realities of an online store.

Interpersonal conflict

The most common type of conflict in which a person and... a person collide . These could be two of your employees who do not share the client or simply have different worldviews. Or you yourself with some employee - it doesn’t matter. In this battle, two characters, two personality types, two souls with their own beliefs and habits come together.

Examples of conflicts. You hired a new manager and were surprised to notice that he had already made an enemy - another manager, more experienced. It's simple: two strong salespeople cannot divide the territory. An experienced person is afraid that a newcomer will take away his clients and, in general, he is right to be afraid. The newcomer eagerly got to work and shows every chance of becoming a leader. So what should we do?

A less dramatic example. Two employees are sitting in the same office. One is accustomed to cleanliness and carefully cleans his workplace. The other is a cheerful goof who is always in a mess. It is clear that these two will not find a common language and will constantly quarrel over cleanliness.

And now about you. Imagine that you hired an employee and set him a fixed salary. He worked for some time and was dissatisfied: it’s time to raise the boss! You are categorically against it: let it work better, then we’ll talk. But he has his own truth: it is impossible to live on such a salary, and he still has to feed his family. And who is right?

How to resolve the conflict? Obviously, you need to choose the third way - namely, to lead the person to constructive behavior . For example, in the first case, clearly divide the base between managers so that no one is offended. Hold a corporate event or training to bring the team together. The second example is even simpler - set a duty schedule in the offices and monitor compliance with the rules. Motivate those who have especially distinguished themselves: give pleasant trinkets and sweet gifts. Well, if it comes to you, offer the employee a real task: let him show himself in full force, and then you will consider the option of raising his salary.

Conflict between individual and group

This is a confrontation between one person and the rest of the team. Who is this person - a black sheep, a rebel-saboteur, or maybe a cruel tyrant boss? There can be many options - and there are also several culprits in the conflict.

Examples of conflicts. Let's take an employee first - you have a dude unlike any other in your quiet lamp department. Maybe he's a nerd, or maybe he's a punk rocker - it doesn't matter. The main thing is that everyone else sensed a stranger and is eager to deal with him - morally, of course. They organized a boycott of him or sophisticatedly mock him, weave intrigues - well, you know how employees survive those they don’t like. Or maybe the white crow is you? Have you joined an online store as a partner or manager and are faced with a lack of understanding from the team?

How to resolve the conflict? In the first case, it is very subtle and soft. If you openly take the side of an offended employee, the rest of the team may not like it. If you, along with everyone else, happily bully a newbie, we won’t even write how unprofessional it is. What to do? You will be surprised, but the same proven methods of team building help a lot . It’s also good to unite people with one goal - for example, start developing the company’s mission together. During the development process, unobtrusively indicate that no intrigues or office wars are now allowed in your team. Well, nothing prevents you from talking to the outcast - who knows, maybe this weirdo himself is behaving incorrectly. You are a leader, you better know the peculiarities of the psychological climate in the team. Explain what he is doing wrong and how to find the key to each colleague.

If you play the role of an outcast, oh, long and painstaking work awaits you. You will have to inspire confidence in the new team and show your business and personal qualities. Under no circumstances should you flirt with your subordinates, don’t play at being your boyfriend—just do your job well and open up as a person—again, in moderation.

Intergroup conflict

It occurs in relatively large organizations - entire departments can quarrel . For example, the advertising department and content specialists, couriers and dispatchers - all those whose professional interests may intersect. But even several groups of 2-3 people, united by personal interests, can greatly ruin the life of the boss.

Examples of conflicts. The advertising department demands money to carry out advertising campaigns - but the accounting department is against it. The first ones are sure: contextual advertising and targeting in social networks can bring more profit to the business. But financiers can also understand: it’s scary to invest money in a risky enterprise, what if it doesn’t work out? And it begins: sidelong glances, gossip, jokes and reproaches...

’s even worse when a team has a saboteur-provocateur who skillfully manipulates people and creates warring factions. These can be either two warring groups of people of equal strength, or several groups fighting against their superiors. In any case, conflicts like acid corrode the team from the inside.

How to resolve the conflict? Decisively intervene and stop the outrage. Offer a constructive solution or at least a compromise that will suit everyone. In the latter case, it is also necessary to neutralize the provocateur, take the sting out of him, so that he does not continue his subversive activities in the future.

How to resolve intrapersonal conflicts

Intrapersonal conflict is not like all others. There is only one opposing side, all processes take place inside and are hidden from prying eyes. Intrapersonal conflicts always precede important changes. Psychological development is a nonlinear process. It happens in spurts, and conflict plays a primary role along the way.

Contradictions can arise between motives, goals, feelings, ideas, aspirations, fears, etc. They cause discomfort, mental pain and negative emotions. The conflict can be considered successfully resolved when a person was able to return to balance and harmony, having completed certain internal work and acquired new meanings.

Strategies for resolving internal conflicts are partially different from traditional ones. The following can be distinguished:

Compromise. Smoothing out contradictions by renouncing some of the claims.
Avoidance. Avoiding a problem in the hope that it will resolve itself.
Sublimation. Converting destructive energy into constructive energy. For example, in creative.
Repression. Repression of traumatic experiences.
Correction. Changing attitudes towards the factors that caused the contradictions.

The choice of strategy most often occurs unconsciously. Psychological defenses are triggered, protecting the psyche from strong negative emotions. And the conflict itself can remain unresolved for a long time, provoking feelings of anxiety and inhibiting personal development.

A person must strive for a conscious, proactive solution to intrapersonal conflict. This is the only way to become stronger, strengthen your internal supports and enter a new stage of evolution.

What should not be allowed during a conflict

In any situation you need to remain human, even in the biggest conflict. What should not be allowed in the event of a conflict of interests:

speak criticism towards the individual, and not about the situation;
assert that you are confident in the mercantile interests and motives of your opponent;
characterizing a person’s condition is very annoying;
show that you are superior to him, instruct;
blame only one side for everything;
exert physical influence;
touch a person's nerves;
remember old grievances.

Conflict Prevention

Most conflicts are easier to prevent than to resolve. In order not to bring the situation to the boiling point, you should follow simple rules:

Treat any person with respect, regardless of their social status, level of education, ideas and views. Even if you have a disagreement with someone, this is not a reason to humiliate the person and demonstrate your superiority.
Be polite. This way you will save yourself from small useless skirmishes out of nowhere.
State your thoughts clearly and unambiguously to avoid misunderstandings. Be loyal to your interlocutor’s clarifying questions and be prepared to clarify controversial points.
If you yourself are not sure that you understood your interlocutor correctly, do not hesitate to ask again.
Refrain from expressing negative opinions about things that do not concern you unless asked.
Express disagreement and dissatisfaction only in a correct, tactful form.

Of course, these tips will not save you from all conflicts. Conflicts of interest will still occur from time to time. But they will help you not to get involved in meaningless squabbles and showdowns, which only take away energy and spoil your nerves.

Basic methods of conflict resolution

Methods for resolving disputes consist of taking active steps to reduce potential disagreements and adjusting behavior in the process of the emergence of a tense situation.

Consider the following methods and means of conflict resolution:

Structural . Such methods are usually practiced in the professional sphere to solve organizational issues. This includes developing job descriptions, distributing functions among departments, creating a system for motivating employees, and finding ways to manage their actions.
Intrapersonal . These techniques will allow you to control your own behavior. Developing self-awareness and managing your mood will help you find the weak sides of your personality and those defensive reactions that cause disagreements and strain you in a conversation with your interlocutor. A rather constructive method of controlling actions is indignation, expressed not in an accusatory manner, but in the form of an explanation of feelings. For example, a person interrupting his interlocutor prevents him from expressing his own thoughts. This is undoubtedly annoying and anger-inducing. However, instead of the expected complaint about the lack of civility of such an uncivil colleague, you can calmly express your emotions to him and eliminate discord.

Aggressive responses . Such methods of preventing and resolving conflicts are possible as a last resort, if all other ways to resolve the issue have been exhausted.
Negotiation . This is the most productive tool that is included in positive conflict resolution methods. Its essence lies in attempts to reach a compromise between the parties to the dialogue in order to at least partially achieve the desired outcome.

Conflict in a team: how to reduce losses, benefit and stay alive. Part 1

Hello, Habr!

My name is Tatyana, I am Team Coach R&D at Plesk, and we resolve most of the conflict situations in teams together with team leads.

Conflicts arise from time to time even in the most cohesive teams. And if they are not resolved naturally and constructively, they create costs, reduce the productivity of the entire team, demotivate and destroy trust.

Over the past few years, our approach to conflict management has changed significantly. We have learned to solve them faster, more efficiently, and with fewer losses. But even now our team is only halfway there.

At TeamLead Conf 2021, I shared the obstacles we overcame, the mistakes we made, the approach we developed, and the recipes that worked. Unexpectedly, the report made it to the TOP-3. You can combine reading and listening to a video of the speech.

There was a lot of content, so colleagues from Ontiko suggested breaking it into parts and writing two articles based on the report. Therefore, I am glad to share today the first story about our approach to conflict resolution (more theory), and an article with specific cases (practice) will be published in a week.

The story turned out to be voluminous, so here is a summary.

Introduction
What is conflict?
Where can conflict arise in a team?
Structure of the conflict
Finding participants, their points of view and context
We identify positions, interests and formulate the problem
How to find interests hidden behind a position?

Dynamics of conflict

Stages of conflict

How to recognize escalation

Choosing a solution

Interaction styles in conflict

Our current approach

Introduction

The topic of conflicts is raised from time to time at conferences and in articles on Habré. But, in my opinion, most often we are talking about specific communication techniques and ways of working with manipulation. That is, reactive actions are considered “in the moment,” in the midst of a conflict confrontation.

But think about it, how often do we, at the time of a conflict that occurs on emotions, remember those 33 techniques that we read about in a book and act according to the instructions? Most likely rare. And our first reaction to a conflicting stimulus is not always thought out, often emotional. We are usually unhappy with the result of such a reaction.

At the same time, when faced with a more familiar technical problem, the first thing we usually do is evaluate it, decompose it, examine it from different angles, validate the data, reduce the degree of uncertainty, and only then begin to solve it. You can work with conflicts in the same way.

I propose to focus on diagnosing the conflict. My hypothesis: if we learn to quickly and accurately diagnose a conflict, we will be able to quickly, accurately and cheaply choose the right way to manage it.

I suggest that you first get under the hood of the conflict and see what it consists of. Next, look at what laws the conflict develops dynamically. As a result, we will put the steps to manage conflict into a small algorithm.

Logic of working with conflict / Contents of the report and two articles

Let's check the cards for the main characters: who is the team lead?

Historically, our team leader is, first of all, an experienced engineer with a balance of hard and soft skills, who had the authority of a cool engineer, but became interested in strategy, people and became a manager. Perhaps you recognize yourself in this portrait.

Portrait of a Plesk team leader

What is conflict?

Before reading the next block, try to take a moment’s pause and answer the question: what is conflict for me? What associations does this word evoke in me? What does it sound like, what does it look like?

And to remember whether we are ready to openly discuss conflicts to which we were directly related, let’s look at a situation in which everyone probably found themselves.

Interview. For the position of team lead. Let's imagine, for example, that an HR manager tests your conflict management skills and asks how you resolved conflicts in your team. You answer: “Well, what conflicts! I am a completely non-conflict person!”

Dialogue about conflicts in interviews

Question: why did you choose the tactic of not talking about conflicts in the team that you probably had?

Perhaps because when you heard the word “conflict” your imagination pictured failures, and you didn’t want to associate your reputation with them in an interview? Or maybe you didn’t want to talk about the fact that in difficult situations you made decisions almost randomly?

One way or another, in this example, the interlocutors look at the fact of the presence of conflicts in experience differently. The team lead, who decided not to talk about ambiguous cases, did not expect that for HR a person without experience in solving problems is a pig in a poke, and a candidate with experience of failures from which the right conclusions were drawn is a godsend.

Today we’ll talk about different attitudes to conflict. In our team, the attitude towards him has changed evolutionarily. When we started to sort out complex conflict situations with our team leads, we noticed that most of them were associated with losses, burnout, stress, loss of trust, powerlessness and putting out fires.

In general, the conflict was inevitably associated with negative things, which are sometimes easier to sweep under the rug, because... What to do with them is completely unclear. It was also possible to pretend that nothing was happening, or to nip the conflict in the bud - especially since the team lead had administrative leverage. I will not hide that we had similar stories, but gradually we began to admit that such an attitude towards the conflict costs us dearly.

Let's get a little synchronized in terms of concepts. You've probably already thought about your associations and terms that are familiar to you. I propose today that by conflict we understand any situation based on a contradiction (and often more than one) born at the intersection of the interests of several parties.

Where can conflict arise in a team?

In fact, a conflict can arise at any stage of the management cycle: when you plan tasks, set them, control their implementation, motivate people, give them feedback.

Conflicts at any stage of the management cycle

There are many reasons for their typology, let’s take a simple one - based on the composition of the participants: interpersonal, inter-team, conflicts between roles and systems.

Types of conflicts by composition of participants

Surely, you have come across all the named types. But most often we are disturbed and drained of strength by interpersonal conflicts in which something personal and important is affected. What we are doing right now. Therefore, we will mainly analyze them further.

Structure of the conflict

Now let's figure out what the conflict consists of.

Finding participants, their points of view and context

The first step is to understand who is actually involved in the conflict. If there are few participants, they are in an open constructive dialogue, we can quickly understand the problem and offer a solution.

But in interpersonal conflicts, the interests of even two participants are often not obvious; hurt feelings prevent an open dialogue. And if the team has not yet developed a clear culture of conflict resolution, the team leader will have to try hard to understand which problem is really worth solving and which is false or secondary.

The situation is complicated by the fact that team conflicts often involve not two participants, but several, and not all of them are obvious. The composition can be varied - support groups, coalitions, other “onlookers” participants. Everyone is vocal about their point of view, but the “thought leaders” of a conflict are usually not those who speak loudest, but those in the shadows. Identifying them is not always easy, but it is important - they are the ones you need to talk to first.

What is worth talking about?

When analyzing conflicts in a team, we often noticed that both employees and ourselves often talk about the same fact, but put completely different meanings into the words. This is a trap that is important to reflect on in time.

Everything becomes easier if you learn to align the context : understand what fact a person is talking about, what really stands behind it, what goals and interests he pursues, what emotions he experiences. It is important to learn to separate one from the other, recognize and discuss what is necessary. When such a skill is developed, arguing becomes much easier.

We separate the fact -> its interpretation -> emotions -> compare the cards

To help separate the flies from the cutlets, there is a tool called the Triangle Criminal Procedure Code - a method for diagnosing the structure of a conflict, proposed by conflictologist Christopher Mitchell. The method helps to look at the situation from the point of view of each side.

If each participant in the conflict can formulate his own view of himself and his partner and tries to formulate the same for the second participant in the conflict, this can become an important stage in the dialogue.

It is assumed that each party will formulate a view on specific actions (their own and the opponent’s), reflect on existing attitudes towards themselves and their partner, and describe their perception of the context - the objective circumstances in which they and the opponent find themselves.

The point of view can be “read” from another, it can be asked about directly, it can be clarified and recorded in writing on the “conflict map”. Validated data about each other is a reason for synchronization, increasing transparency, understanding the essence of the conflict and the problems that require solutions.

Points of view of the parties according to the “Triangle of Criminal Procedure Code” method

It is also extremely important for the team to be able to synchronize on values. This is a guarantee that even if we initially argue at the level of different meanings, we will be able to solve the problem on its merits and, which is very important in team conflicts, maintain (or even strengthen) relationships.

A simple example of my own mistake and misunderstanding in online dialogue. The department had a case of non-standard internal rotation for a key position, and something went wrong.

In my opinion, the team leads did not talk quite correctly with the person they wanted to offer to radically change their role and team. And, cutting corners during a call in Google Meet, I allowed myself to give a rather careless assessment of the actions of one of the guys: “Vasya, why did you shift responsibility for communication?” And the always very diplomatic Vasya very quickly reacted and retorted: “What kind of nonsense are you talking about? I didn’t shift any responsibility!”

Another interested participant took part in the conversation, which heightened the perception. There could have been a curtain right away, but we quickly realized that the conversation had gone in the wrong direction, returned to the facts, found out common interests and agreed to resolve the issue on the merits.

But immediately after the call, we contacted the team lead, apologized to each other for the wording, and once again explained the nature of the trigger. And this is a very cool feeling of shoulder, like-mindedness, when in disagreements you can immediately align the context and speak frankly about perception.

values help us a lot in this : openness, safety, timeliness, non-toxicity and trust. Attunement to basic values helps to remove misunderstandings on the spot and not leave a residue.

We identify positions, interests and formulate the problem

Often in conflict we argue at the level of positions , and often they are mutually exclusive:

But behind these declarations there are most often specific interests that we do not talk about.

There are substantive interests, and there are psychological ones, which often even come to the fore.

the problem that needs to be solved most often lies

Thus, in conflict analysis, it is extremely important to learn to separate what people say from what really stands behind that statement.

Correlation of positions and interests in the conflict

It is important to consider that there is usually more than one interest behind each position.

For example, in the case of internal rotation, behind the position of transferring a specific employee to a new role, each party had a number of its own interests. The goals of all teams were constructive, but some interests overlapped.

Each team assessed its balance of resources and tasks, risks and benefits due to rotation. Therefore, a competent scenario required that all the interests and all the doubts of the teams and individual participants be clarified and brought to the negotiating table.

Important: as soon as we learn to find out what interests, needs, and values lie behind each position of the parties, we will understand that we can replace positional bargaining with substantive negotiations.

A simple everyday example. Let's imagine that two children are fighting over one orange. This is a scarce resource, both sides want to have it. What to do? You can throw away the orange, place the children in the corners. Or you can ask: “Tell me, why do you need the fruit?”

Let's hear that one child decided to bake a pie; he needed a crust and zest. And the other wanted to squeeze out fresh juice. We see that if you look _behind_ the declaration, you can invent a previously invisible, mutually beneficial option for satisfying initially mutually exclusive positions.

When the situation becomes more complicated, the same approach works.

In negotiation strategies it is also called “increasing the pie.”

Harvard scientists R. Fisher and W. Urey were the first to talk about this approach; there is an article on Habr with a synopsis of one of their famous books on this topic.

Or a real example from the life of one of our teams. Engineer Petya came to the team lead with an offer and asked to increase the salary by one and a half times, noting that otherwise he would be forced to accept the invitation of another company.

The team leader is upset, but throws up his hands, since it is not possible to resolve the issue in this way. I find out about the situation after the fact, conduct an exit interview and hear from the engineer:

– To be honest... I didn’t want to leave at all, money was just an excuse...

– ?…

– I got tired of being a developer and wanted to try myself as a devops engineer...

- Okay, why didn’t you say so directly?

- Yes, it was somehow awkward. But I was hinting! Apparently I’m not suitable...

Having found out all the details, I suggest calling the team lead and going back a step, discussing the options and finding a solution. The engineer would be happy, but by the time of the exit interview he had already given his word to the new company and became involved in new prospects.

What happened? The conversation between the team lead and Petya initially took place at the level of positions: “give me money, I won’t give you money.” At the same time, they had common interests - working in the same team, cutting their favorite product. Initially, both did not want to lose each other, but these interests were not revealed.

Both of them either did not hear each other’s silence or hints, or interpreted them incorrectly. Hidden interests remained at the level of a private position and did not turn into a neutrally formulated list of problems that could be discussed and solved:

– the possibility of changing the role in the current team – the possibility of changing the team – conditions for a salary increase – and so on.

If we evaluate the consequences, then such a mistake is expensive for the team - investing in effective communications with an existing employee is much cheaper than recruiting and immersing a new one in the project.

We had similar problems not only in situations with engineers, but also at the level of team leads. Sometimes, when inviting us to discuss contradictions in the team, we could hear the following words from the guys:

-What's the problem? I do not have problems.

– I don’t have any conflicts in my team at all. You have misunderstood it!

- Everything is calm for me. There is a problem, but I am not a psychologist for them, not their father or mother - let them resolve it themselves.

- Listen, have you even seen my schedule?

- I don’t understand, am I to blame?

Perhaps you said something similar to your leader or HR, who decided to open up a sore spot and help. Think about it, what really stands behind these formulations?

Remember, maybe in similar situations you felt the same? If so, then a great help in the conflict will be the ability to move from provocation and defense at the position level to the level of frank dialogue about your needs, concerns and resources, and by your example teach constructive dialogue to the team.

How to find interests hidden behind a position?

Of course, you can simply ask: “Petya, why do you want to leave?” And he can answer: “Yes, that’s why.” But more often than not, people do not speak directly about their own motives, especially if we are talking about difficult and significant situations for them. There are different reasons, each of which can be dealt with in its own way.

I will share the ones that I encountered most often in conflicts:

People had different understandings of the terms/essence of the problem.
They understood/knew the facts differently.
Leverages and consequences were understood differently.
They felt the distance, the lack of contact, and did not understand the goals of the interlocutor.
They had certain role expectations (“I was waiting for you to ask in more detail”, “I was waiting for the team lead to ask”).
They considered themselves/their interests “insignificant”, “outside the system”.
They tried to “save face.”
They were afraid of condemnation.
They were afraid of disclosure.
We were at the moment under the influence of a traumatic situation for ourselves.
They felt meaningless, did not trust the sincere interest of the leader, and projected past experience.
They understood etiquette and confidentiality in their own way (“it is indecent to reveal details in which management is involved”).

Above, we examined the “triangle of the Code of Criminal Procedure,” which, among other things, will help bring to the surface the hidden interests of the parties. In his book “Jedi Techniques for Constructive Communication,” Alexander Orlov also offers simple formulations in the form of questions.

If a person does not answer the direct question “Why?”, you can offer him your own solution and ask him to criticize him. It is sometimes easier for people to criticize someone else's decision than to offer your own. But the interests in such “cases on the contrary” also become clearer.

What to ask:

- Why don’t you like my version? -Which decision do you see as correct? - How do you see it? Why do you want it? - Why not"? -What exactly do you want? - How do we solve this?

Sometimes it works.

So, what we have already sorted out:

– what do we mean by conflict; – how to identify participants in the structure, their positions, interests, needs and view of the context; – why and how to agree on terms and expectations from each other; – how to formulate a non-judgmental problem for solution.

Structure of a conflict situation

Dynamics of conflict

Let's now look at how the conflict develops. This is important because the conflict, like any thriller, has its own dramaturgy. It grabs us emotionally, and when this happens, we instinctively want to fight back, attack back, defend ourselves, or hide.

If we learn to recognize conflict by “weak” signals at a stage when it has not yet entered the stage of open emotional declarations, it will be easier, more effective and cheaper to manage.

Dynamics of a conflict situation

Stages of conflict

Conflictologists identify a large number of stages of conflict. For example, the Austrian conflictologist Friedrich Glazzle in his work “Conflict Management” describes as many as 9 stages, but we will look at four main ones.

1. Pre-conflict . The first disagreements have arisen, and the parties are still trying to resolve them in a non-conflict manner. But time passes, an agreement cannot be reached, tensions grow.

2. Stage of open conflict. Escalation. With increased tension, something happens that becomes a “point of no return.” Such an incident can be a careless word or action - accidental or deliberate, provoked by one of the parties. After that everything goes to hell. It is usually extremely difficult to reach an agreement at this stage.

3 . Stage of open conflict. De-escalation. The situation reaches a certain peak, after which the tension subsides. But this does not always mean that the conflict is moving towards resolution - perhaps the parties have taken a break, are hoarding resources, looking for information, and have even lost the motive to fight. But with proper management of the situation, this may well mean that the parties have heard each other, recognized the legitimacy of demands, fears and emotions, cooled down and are looking for a solution.

4. Post-conflict . An important stage that will show how correctly everything was decided at the previous stage. It’s too early to relax, it’s important to observe. If the parties “swept the conflict under the rug” or settled it by force, but did not solve the problem in essence, then with a high degree of probability it will flare up again.

When you notice signs of conflict in your team and analyze what is happening, you can ask yourself the following questions:

- Where are we now? — What was hidden and becomes clear? — What became the incident? — How did the interaction change? — What is the forecast for the aggravation of the situation on a 10-point scale? — Is a new revolution possible?

How to recognize escalation

A little about how you can find out that the matter smells of kerosene, although no one on the team raises their voice, slams the door or defiantly leaves the chat, while the conflict is already at the escalation stage and requires active action.

You may notice that communication and relationships have changed within the team. The guys who yesterday were playing board games together and drinking beer in a bar, celebrating the release, today turned from partners into enemies. Arguments in disputes have become irrational. Trust was replaced by the expectation of a catch. The section of responsibility for the failure at the iteration turned into a sharp debriefing with shifting the blame.

Everything has become so escalated that nuances have disappeared, thinking and arguments have become black and white, and any action of the “other side” has begun to be interpreted as intentional harm and damage to oneself.

What happens at the stage of conflict escalation (open conflict)

And vice versa, if jokes and open clashes during work disputes in your team were commonplace, everyone was OK, and no one was shy about swearing when they were solving problems on the merits, but “suddenly” everyone became extremely polite and acted according to instructions, then this is more like an “Italian strike” than a sharp change in cultural code. This, however, is rather about how to identify a hidden, “cold conflict” in the active phase; this can be discussed separately.

Once you know that you are now in the escalation phase, you need to take immediate action. How can development be stopped at the escalation stage?

There are a number of techniques for direct and preventive amortization (you can read about them in the books of Mikhail Litvak, for example, in “Psychological Aikido”) and active listening techniques that will help to amortize emotions in a conflict due to the fact that they will be revealed, named, heard and recognized .

You can also use a series of questions that will help bring a person back to reality and conscious perception. If you are embroiled in conflict, it is worth asking these questions to yourself. And if you are a mediator in a conflict - to a colleague.

– What do you really want now? – What will happen if you continue to do A? – Are you ready to bear the consequences of B’s actions? – What do you think will happen if you continue to publicly discuss Vasya in the kitchen and say that his code is g*o?

Questions with a reality test and validation of consequences are often sobering and allow you to return the conversation to the subject.

Choosing a solution

When you have analyzed the conflict from different sides, you can choose a management .

I propose that in a narrow sense, conflict management is understood as the resolution of a conflict or its episode,
and in a broad sense, we understand conflict management as any conscious action in response to a conflict.

There are many approaches to conflict management. But since we consider conflicts in a team, we by default consider partner integrative negotiations and the win-win approach to be more effective than the win-lose approach.

Interaction styles in conflict

Positional bargaining, based on rivalry and suppression of information, may suit you once with a one-time sale of a gadget on Avito, but it will definitely come back to haunt you in a conflict with a “difficult” employee. Even after resigning, he will be a leader of opinion in circles, the reputation of which may subsequently be critically important for you.

According to famous American conflictologists Kenneth Thomas and Ralph Kilmann, 5 main styles of interaction in conflict can be distinguished. And each of them has its own advantages and limitations.

Approaches to interaction in conflict

1. Suppression . You act from a position of strength, the administrative leverage that you have, without taking into account the interests of the other side.

It happens that such tactics are appropriate - for example, in the event of a “fire”, when decisive urgent action is required and there is no time to negotiate. But after that, you definitely need to explain what happened.

2. Evasion. Sometimes you can simply walk away from a conflict, ignore it, or limit contact with the conflicting party. This may be an appropriate tactic if the gain is not comparable to the damage or the current development of the situation does not promise a gain at all. Perhaps the clash is with an equal participant, and complications in the relationship are undesirable. Perhaps you need to gain time or this conflict is not relevant to you at all now.

3. Device. This tactic can be chosen if you are ready to sacrifice your interests for the sake of the interests of another. For example, when your relationship with a person is more important than the subject of your disagreement, or the problem as a whole is not very significant for you.

4. Compromise. It implies only partial satisfaction of interests, therefore in many cases it is considered a rather unstable technique. Compromise is loved because it allows you to save relationships and not lose everything; it can be a temporary solution when suppression or cooperation is impossible or does not bring the desired effect. And they criticize the fact that if a party infringes on important points for it, the visually stable agreement will fall apart and the conflict will flare up again.

5. Collaboration. It involves a joint search for a solution that will suit everyone. Therefore, many consider it a “magic hike” that should be applied everywhere. But this is not entirely true; cooperation is a very “expensive” strategy that is not always possible. For example, you want to cooperate, but your colleague does not. It is unknown what to do about it, and there is no time to decide. There are techniques for bringing a party into integrative negotiations, but this is a separate complex topic. Therefore, an important condition for the implementation of a partnership approach will be approximately equal and voluntary desire, as well as the ability of each party to invest all resources in developing agreements.

Let's get back to practice. Many approaches from books on raising children are very similar to approaches in books for managers. Therefore, let's look at another everyday example that will seem familiar to many who work remotely.

So, you are on remote mode, there is a quarantine around you, everything is closed, you are working from home, and children are running around in the background.

Let's imagine that two children are making noise while trying to share a ball.

And you have an important ZOOM call.

Gluing children to the wall with duct tape is only possible in an Internet meme.

There are three sides here: you and the children, and each has its own interests. For children - to play, for you - to have a normal meeting, and also - to teach children to respect your work space and agree with each other. Common interests are to maintain respectful relationships and atmosphere in the home.

If your call starts any minute, you only have time to put on your top, pick up the ball and close the door, offering to discuss everything later. You may decide that suppression is appropriate here.

But if there is still time before the call, you can choose a partnership approach and ask: “Tell me, what is the problem? What can we come up with so that you can agree and I can work in silence?” In this way, you demonstrate interest in what is behind the behavior of children, in a sense, you even respect this fight as a construct and teach a different approach, to talk by example.

And you don't need to be a certified coach to do this. The good news: by and large, everyone who knows how to listen, hear and ask questions is already working in the coaching approach. From this perspective, each team leader can easily be a coach and mediator in a team conflict.

Our current approach

I began the story by describing the approach to conflict as an unwanted problem that is easier to avoid and suppress. But today conflict is a normal occurrence for Plesk team leads. We accepted this not at the level of a beautiful declaration, but at the level of lived experience and conclusions drawn. Where there are people, there will always be conflicts; there is no change without clashes.

– At the heart of a conflict are usually contradictions that require resolution. Solving problems is our job.

– Conflict can be useful. So much so that it is worth learning to intervene in a conflict, sometimes it is even worth provoking it.

– Inability to negotiate, lack of time – these are bad habits or lack of skills. This can and should be changed.

How exactly did we get to this point:

– in case of disagreements, we agreed on terms, – we revised roles and expectations for each other, – we aligned contexts, – we clearly formulated positions, explained to each other what we wanted and why, – we looked for common interests and relied on them, – we gave each other feedback, if something went wrong, we stopped comparing ourselves with carrots, admitted that experiences can be different, and we are stronger together, we began to admit mistakes.

Gradually, we also built a system of internal LeadTalks, where team leads meet, exchange experiences, sort out difficult situations and look for new solutions. This happens almost every two weeks.

Long-term training of all Plesk team leads at the management school, where the guys became acquainted with the principles of the famous American psychotherapist Milton Erickson, some of which they took into their work, also helped us develop a new approach to solving difficult situations.

Changes are inevitable . We are growing, everything will change, those who are flexible will survive.
Everything is OK with everyone . Each author of his own decisions. This means that, a priori, all participants in the conflict are normal. And there is no need to get into a person’s head if he does not have a request for it.
Everyone has all the resources. By default, a person has everything they want and need in order to change. If you make it clear to a person that he is not currently operating within the rules of your team, he is free to change. If he doesn’t understand how, he’ll ask you.
The basis of everything is positive intention . This is a very important approach. It lies in the fact that every action of a person on our team is based on a positive intention. Nobody wants to write bad code and intentionally damage the release. If, for example, a mistake was sent to production, it means it was made by accident.
And at that (and at every) moment it was the best choice a person could make.

We based our approach on 4 more principles.

1. The solution is based on diagnostics.

2. Gently towards the person, firmly towards the problem.

3. Focus on cooperation.

4. Form first, then essence.

Let me expand a little on the second principle: it means that we share our attitude towards a person and our attitude towards a problem.

A person’s behavior in a conflict at some point can be negative and even harmful in its impact on the project, result, or team. But this is an assessment of specific actions and consequences. This does not affect our attitude towards the personality of the team member himself. He remains our colleague, friend, partner and just a good person.

An example from the life of our team. Complex in emotions, delicate in ethics. We had a colleague, a very talented experienced engineer, who had been working on the team for many years. But something happened in his life, and he began to drink. This happens, this is life.

What did we do? For some time they carefully but firmly said that any manifestations of drunkenness during working hours were unacceptable and harmful, and asked to change the situation. She didn't change. And it became obvious to a large part of the team.

Some would probably break up right away. But we asked a question and heard that the employee would be glad to get all kinds of help. Then we enlisted his desire to change the situation and for almost a year we supported him in various ways: we recommended doctors, psychologists, supported him personally, and built a system of sick leave and recovery leave. They considered it important and correct.

In our opinion, without such a partnership approach to people, conflicts in a team cannot be effectively resolved. And often this choice is tactically quite expensive. Moreover, he is not even talking about some deferred strategic benefit. This is not written about in the “benefits” section on the company’s career website.

But this is a cultural code that is formed from specific decisions in difficult situations. And gradually becomes part of the team's DNA. These are the values that allow you to feel safe not only at the peak of success, but also in situations of vulnerability that are characteristic of any conflict.

And the fourth principle: “first form, then essence.” I won’t say that we follow it perfectly, but we understand the importance of wording. And if we are not satisfied with the form of communication, we first try to make it work, and only then move on to the essence of the issue.

For example, if a holiwar starts in Slack chats and gets personal, the leaders try to move the conversation in a constructive direction. Guys-engineers also learn from concrete examples, and one day they themselves take on the role of a peacemaker, facilitator and mediator, even in a “neighboring” conflict. And it’s all about common values, goals, approach and team.

In the next article, we will analyze several large cases of conflict resolution from our experience, talk about what a conflict map is, and consider a conflict management algorithm.

PS Kirill Anastasin’s memes from his https://komikaki.ru/ were used as some illustrations, many thanks to him.

The nearest Ontiko conference - Saint TeamLead Conf 2021 - will be held on September 16 and 17, 2021 at the DESIGN DISTRICT DAA in SPB. You can purchase tickets for it today.
We look forward to seeing you at the 2021 conferences!

Causes of conflicts between employees

Imperfect work organization

Work processes must be transparent and understandable to employees. If business processes are clearly defined, there is no room for confusion - the organization works smoothly. 44% of respondents in the HeadHunter study admitted that improperly structured work and communication systems become causes of conflicts.

Unclear terms of reference

Each employee must understand what tasks he is responsible for and what is beyond his competence. If the manager cannot distribute responsibilities between employees, determine the area of responsibility, or formulates the task vaguely, this gives rise to conflicts.

Employee Relations

Employees are expected, first of all, to perform their functions, but it is impossible to prevent them from communicating on personal topics or forming opinions about each other. It happens that people do not agree on certain events, hobbies, or lifestyle. This leads to tension.

You cannot demand from subordinates that they communicate exclusively warmly and in a friendly manner, but the manager’s task is to make sure that these differences do not interfere with work. There needs to be an emphasis on team building in a variety of ways. For example, the Buffett National Wellness Survey found that in companies that implemented corporate sports, employees took fewer sick days, revenues were on average 11% higher, and shareholder returns increased by 28%.

Peculiarities of employee behavior

Insults, personalization, scandals - all this is unacceptable in a work environment. Even if a person is right in assessing the situation, presenting it too emotionally can provoke an even greater conflict.

Limited resources

Conflicts arise at the point of convergence of interests. The lack of material and financial resources leads to clashes and struggles for them.

Lack of information

By hiding important information from employees, management can encourage rumors to arise. In crisis conditions, when the situation in the team is tense, a careless word can lead to a series of gossip and speculation, provoking conflicts.

According to statistics, 86% of managers and employees cite ineffective communication and lack of cooperation as the cause of work failure.

Excessive pressure

It is impossible to work in a state of constant emergency. Stress affects the emotional state of employees and can lead to scandals and showdowns.

These are the main causes of work conflicts, but there are many more reasons for them. It is more effective to prevent conflicts between employees than to constantly put out emerging fires. The main directions of the manager’s work in this matter:

optimization of the organization’s work – building logical vertical and horizontal connections, sharing responsibilities;
creating comfortable working conditions;
eliminating the psychological causes of conflicts - improving relationships in the team, reducing stress, neutralizing irritating factors;
a fair and transparent system of rewards and punishments.