Among the control actions in relation to the conflict, its resolution occupies a central place. Not all conflicts can be prevented. Therefore, it is very important to be able to constructively resolve conflicts.
^^ 36.1. Forms, outcomes and criteria for ending conflicts
In conflictology, it has become traditional to designate the final stage in the dynamics of a conflict with the term conflict resolution. However, many authors also use other concepts that reflect the specificity and completeness of the cessation of conflict actions, for example, “attenuation” (V. Boyko, A. Kovalev), “overcoming” (N. Fedenko, V. Galitsky), “suppression” (A. . Kamenev), “extinction” (A. Rapoport), “self-resolution” (A. Antsupov), “extinction” (V. Dobrovich), “settlement” (A. Hill), “elimination” (R. Ackof, F. Emery), “settlement” (A. Gozman), etc. The complexity and multivariate development of the conflict imply ambiguity in the methods and forms of its completion. Of these concepts, the broadest is ending the conflict, which is the end of the conflict for any reason. The main forms of ending a conflict: resolution, settlement, attenuation, elimination, escalation into another conflict.
Permission conflict is a joint activity of its participants aimed at ending opposition and solving the problem that led to the clash. Conflict resolution involves the activity of both parties to transform the conditions in which they interact, to eliminate the causes of the conflict. To resolve the conflict
it is necessary to change the opponents themselves (or at least one of them), their positions that they defended in the conflict. Often the resolution of a conflict is based on changing the attitude of opponents towards its object or towards each other.
Settlement conflict differs from resolution in that a third party takes part in eliminating the contradiction between opponents. Its participation is possible both with the consent of the warring parties and without their consent.
When a conflict ends, the contradiction underlying it is not always resolved. Only about 62% of conflicts between managers and subordinates are resolved or regulated. In 38% of conflicts, the contradiction is not resolved or escalates. This happens when the conflict dies down (6%), develops into another (15%) or is resolved administratively (17%) (Figure 36.1).
Ending the conflict
Intervention by third parties
Conflict resolution
Negotiation
Cooperation
Compromise
Concessions by one of the parties
Evolving into another conflict
Resolving Conflict
Transfer of one or both opponents to another place of work (dismissal)
Removal of the conflict object
Eliminating the conflict object deficit
Rice. 36.1. Basic forms of conflict resolution
Attenuation conflict is a temporary cessation of opposition while maintaining the main signs of conflict: contradiction and tense relations. The conflict has moved
17 Conflict Yugin
470 VIII.
dits from the “explicit” form to the hidden one. Conflict subsides usually as a result of:
Depletion of resources on both sides necessary for the fight;
Loss of motive to fight, reduction in the importance of the object of the conflict;
Reorientation of the motivation of opponents (the emergence of new problems that are more significant than the struggle in the conflict). Under eliminating conflict understand this impact
on it, as a result of which the main structural elements of the conflict are eliminated. Despite the “unconstructiveness” of elimination, there are situations that require quick and decisive influence on the conflict (threat of violence, loss of life, lack of time or material capabilities). Resolving the conflict is possible using the following methods:
Removal of one of the opponents from the conflict (transfer to another department, branch; dismissal from work);
Eliminating interaction between opponents on long time(sending one or both on a business trip, etc.);
Eliminating the object of the conflict (the mother takes the toy that caused the conflict from the quarreling children);
“elimination of the shortage of the conflict object (the third party has the opportunity to provide each of the conflicting parties with the object they sought to possess). Evolving into another conflict occurs when a new, more significant contradiction arises in the relations of the parties and the object of the conflict changes.
Outcome of the conflict is considered as a result of the struggle from the point of view of the state of the parties and their attitude towards the object of the conflict. The outcomes of the conflict can be:
Elimination of one or both parties;
Suspension of the conflict with the possibility of its resumption;
Victory of one of the parties (mastery of the object of the conflict);
Division of the conflict object (symmetrical or asymmetrical);
Agreement on the rules for sharing the object;
Equivalent compensation to one of the parties for possession of the object by the other party;
Refusal of both parties to encroach on this object;
36. 471
An alternative definition of such objects that
satisfy the interests of both parties.
The important question is about criteria for resolving the conflict. According to the American conflict expert M. Deutsch, the main criterion for resolving a conflict is the satisfaction of the parties with its results. Domestic teacher V.M. Afonkova identified the following criteria for resolving the conflict: cessation of opposition; elimination of traumatic factors; achieving the goal of one of the conflicting parties; change in the individual's position; developing the skill of active behavior of an individual in similar situations in the future.
The criteria for constructive conflict resolution are degree of resolution of the contradiction, underlying conflict, and victory of the right opponent. It is important that when resolving a conflict, a solution is found to the problem that caused it. The more completely the contradiction is resolved, the greater the chances for normalization of relations between the participants, the less likely it is for the conflict to escalate into a new confrontation. No less important is victory right side. The affirmation of truth and the victory of justice have a beneficial effect on the socio-psychological climate of the organization, the effectiveness of joint activities, and serve as a warning to individuals who could potentially seek to achieve a legally or morally dubious goal through conflict. It must be remembered that the wrong side also has its own interests. If you ignore them altogether and do not strive to reorient the motivation of the wrong opponent, then this is fraught with new conflicts in the future.
4Р 36.2. Conditions and factors
constructive conflict resolution
Most of the conditions and factors for successful conflict resolution are psychological in nature, as they reflect the characteristics of the behavior and interaction of opponents. Some
472 VIII. Theory and practice of conflict resolution
Some researchers highlight organizational, historical, legal and other factors. Let's take a closer look at them.
Termination of conflict interaction - the first and obvious condition for the beginning of the resolution of any conflict. As long as some measures are taken from one or both sides to strengthen their position or weaken the opponent’s position through violence, there can be no talk of resolving the conflict.
Search for common or similar points of contact in the goals and interests of opponents is a two-way process and involves an analysis of both one’s own goals and interests and the goals and interests of the other party. If parties want to resolve a conflict, they must focus on the interests, not the personality of the opponent.
When resolving a conflict, a stable negative attitude of the parties towards each other remains. It is expressed in a negative opinion about the opponent and in negative emotions towards him. To begin to resolve the conflict, it is necessary to soften this negative attitude. Main - reduce the intensity of negative emotions, experienced in relation to the opponent.
At the same time it is expedient stop seeing your opponent as an enemy, an adversary. It is important to understand that the problem that caused the conflict is best solved together by joining forces. This is facilitated, firstly, by a critical analysis of one’s own position and actions. Identifying and admitting your own mistakes reduces negative perceptions of your opponent. Secondly, you must try to understand the interests of the other. To understand does not mean to accept or justify. However, this will expand your understanding of your opponent and make him more objective. Thirdly, it is advisable to highlight the constructive principle in the behavior or even in the intentions of the opponent. There are no absolutely bad or absolutely good people or social groups. There is something positive in everyone, and that is what is needed. t Difficult to rely on when resolving a conflict.
Important reduce the negative emotions of the opposite party. Among the techniques are such as a positive assessment of some of the opponent’s actions, readiness to bring positions closer together, appeal to a third party who
36. Constructive Conflict Resolution473
Objective discussion of the problem, clarification of the essence of the conflict, the ability of the parties to see the main thing contributes to the successful search for a solution to the contradiction. Focusing on secondary issues and caring only about one’s own interests reduces the chances constructive solution Problems.
When the parties join forces to end the conflict, it is necessary taking into account each other's status (position). The party occupying a subordinate position or having junior status must be aware of the limits of concessions that its opponent can afford. Too radical demands can provoke the stronger side to return to conflict confrontation.
Another important condition is choosing the optimal resolution strategy, appropriate to the given circumstances. These strategies are discussed in the next paragraph.
The success of ending conflicts depends on how the conflicting parties take into account the factors that influence this process. These include the following:
time: availability of time to discuss the problem, clarify positions and interests, and develop solutions. Reducing the time available to reach agreement by half leads to an increase in the likelihood of choosing an alternative that is more aggressive;
Third side: participation in ending the conflict of neutral persons (institutions) who help opponents solve the problem. A number of studies (V. Cornelius, S. Fair, D. Moiseev, Yu. Myagkov, S. Proshanov, A. Shipilov) confirm positive influence third parties for conflict resolution;
timeliness: the parties begin to resolve the conflict in the early stages of its development. The logic is simple: less opposition - less damage - less resentment and claims - more opportunities to reach an agreement.
balance of forces: if the conflicting parties are approximately equal in capabilities (equal status, position, weapons, etc.), then they are forced to look for
474 VIII. Theory and practice conflict resolution
ways to a peaceful solution to the problem. Conflicts are resolved more constructively when there is no work dependence between opponents;
culture: high level general culture opponents reduces the likelihood of a violent conflict developing. It has been revealed that conflicts in government bodies are resolved more constructively if the opponents have high business and moral qualities;
unity of values: the existence of agreement between the conflicting parties about what should constitute an acceptable solution. In other words, “... conflicts are more or less regulated when their participants have a common system of values” (V. Yadov), common goals, interests;
experience (example): at least one of the opponents has experience in solving similar problems, as well as knowledge of examples of resolving similar conflicts;
relationship: good relations between opponents before the conflict contribute to a more complete resolution of the contradiction. For example, in strong families, where there are sincere relationships between spouses, conflicts are resolved more productively than in problem families.
4^ Zb.Z. Logic, strategies and methods of conflict resolution
Conflict resolution is a multi-stage process that includes analysis and assessment of the situation, choosing a method for resolving the conflict, forming an action plan, its implementation, and assessing the effectiveness of one’s actions.
Analytical stage involves collecting and assessing information on the following issues:
The object of the conflict (material, social or ideal; divisible or indivisible; can it be withdrawn or replaced; what is its accessibility for each of the parties);
Opponent (general information about him, his psychological characteristics; the opponent’s relationship with management; opportunities to improve your rank; his goals, interests,
475
position; legal and moral foundations of his demands; previous actions in the conflict, mistakes made; where interests coincide and where they do not, etc.);
Own position (goals, values, interests, actions in conflict; legal and moral foundations own requirements, their reasoning and evidence; mistakes made and the possibility of admitting them to an opponent, etc.);
The reasons and immediate cause that led to the conflict;
Social environment (situation V organizations, social group; what problems are solved by the organization, the opponent, how the conflict affects them; who supports each opponent and how; what is the reaction of management, the public, subordinates, if opponents have them; what they know about the conflict);
Secondary reflection (the subject’s idea of how his opponent perceives the conflict situation, how he perceives me, my idea of the conflict, etc.). Sources of information are personal observations,
conversations with management, subordinates, informal leaders, one’s own friends and friends of opponents, witnesses to the conflict, etc.
Having analyzed and assessed the conflict situation, opponents predict options for conflict resolution and determine the ones that suit their interests and situations ways to resolve it. The following are predicted: the most favorable development of events; least favorable development of events; the most realistic development of events; how the contradiction will be resolved if you simply stop active actions in the conflict.
It is important to determine criteria for conflict resolution, and they must be recognized by both parties. These include: legal norms; moral principles; opinion of authority figures; precedents for solving similar problems in the past, traditions.
Actions to implement the planned plan carried out in accordance with the chosen method of conflict resolution. If necessary, it is done correction of a previously planned plan(return to discussion; putting forward alternatives; putting forward
476 VIII. Theory and practice of conflict resolution
development of new arguments; contacting third parties; discussion of additional concessions).
Monitoring the effectiveness of your own actions involves critically answering the questions to yourself: why am I doing this? what do I want to achieve? What makes it difficult to implement the plan? Are my actions fair? What actions need to be taken to eliminate obstacles to conflict resolution? and etc.
At the end of the conflict advisable: analyze errors own behavior; summarize the knowledge gained and experience in solving the problem; try to normalize relations with a recent opponent; relieve discomfort (if it arises) in relationships with others; minimize the negative consequences of the conflict in one’s own state, activities and behavior.
Strategies for exiting conflict. Of fundamental importance for how the conflict ends is the opponent’s choice of exit strategy. “The interaction strategies developed by its participants are often decisive for the outcome of a conflict.”
The conflict exit strategy is the main line of behavior of the opponent at its final stage. Let us recall that there are five main strategies: competition, compromise, cooperation, avoidance and adaptation (K. Thomas). The choice of strategy for exiting a conflict depends on various factors. Usually they indicate the personal characteristics of the opponent, the level of damage caused to the opponent and their own damage, the availability of resources, the status of the opponent, possible consequences, the significance of the problem being solved, the duration of the conflict, etc.
Let's consider the feasibility of using these strategies. Rivalry consists in imposing on the other side a preferred solution. Rivalry is justified in the following cases: the proposed solution is clearly constructive; the benefit of the result for the entire group, organization, and not for an individual or microgroup; the importance of the outcome of the struggle for those pursuing this strategy; lack of time to persuade the opponent.
Many researchers consider this strategy to be detrimental to solving problems, since it does not provide
36, Constructive Conflict Resolution477
opportunity for the opponent to realize his interests. However, life provides many examples when competition turns out to be effective. It is advisable to stop an aggressor who is seizing someone else's territory with a tough strategy, and not with exhortations. Against a criminal who encroaches on the life of another person, it is also necessary to use this strategy. Rivalry is advisable in extreme and fundamental situations, when there is a shortage of time and a high probability of dangerous consequences.
Compromise consists in the desire of opponents to end the conflict with partial concessions. It is characterized by the rejection of some of the previously put forward demands, the willingness to recognize the claims of the other party as partially justified, and the willingness to forgive. Compromise is effective in the following cases: the opponent understands that he and the opponent have equal capabilities; the presence of mutually exclusive interests; satisfaction with the temporary solution; threats to lose everything. Today, compromise is the most commonly used strategy for ending conflicts.
device, or concession is considered as a forced or voluntary refusal to fight and surrender of one’s positions. The opponent is forced to accept such a strategy by various motives: awareness of his wrongness, the need to preserve good relations with an opponent, strong dependence on him; insignificance of the problem. In addition, such a way out of the conflict is caused by significant damage received during the struggle, the threat of even more serious negative consequences, the lack of chances for a different outcome, and pressure from a third party. In some situations, with the help of a concession, the “Three D” principle is implemented: Give Way to the Fool.
Avoiding solving the problem or avoidance, is an attempt to get out of the conflict at a minimum cost. It differs from a similar strategy of behavior during a conflict in that the opponent switches to it after unsuccessful attempts realize your interests using active strategies. Actually, the conversation is not about resolution, but about the fading of the conflict. Leaving can be a completely constructive response to a protracted conflict. Avoidance is used in the absence of strength and time to resolve a contradiction, the desire to win
478 VIII. Theory and practice of conflict resolution
36. Constructive Conflict Resolution479
wasting time, having difficulties in determining the line of one’s behavior, and unwillingness to solve the problem at all.
Cooperation is considered the most effective strategy for dealing with conflict. It involves opponents focusing on a constructive discussion of the problem, viewing the other side not as an adversary, but as an ally in the search for a solution. Most effective in situations: strong interdependence of opponents; the tendency of both to ignore differences in power; the importance of the decision for both parties; open-mindedness of the participants. The combination of strategies determines how the contradiction underlying the conflict will be resolved (Fig. 36.2).
Back in 1942, American social psychologist M. Follett pointed out the need to resolve (settle) conflicts, rather than suppress them. Among the methods, she highlighted the victory of one of the parties, compromise and integration. Integration was understood as a new solution in which the conditions of both parties are met, and neither of them suffers serious losses. In the future this method conflict resolution is called “cooperation”.
| First party strategy | + + + + + + + | Second party strategy | Conflict resolution strategy | ||
| Rivalry | Concession | Concession | |||
| TO, | |||||
| Compromise | Compromise | Compromise a) symmetrical b) asymmetrical | |||
| Compromise | Cooperation | ||||
| TO, | |||||
| Compromise | Concession | ||||
| Compromise | Rivalry | ||||
| Cooperation | Cooperation | Cooperation | |||
Figure 36.2. Dependence of the method of conflict resolution on the strategies chosen by opponents
As can be seen from Fig. 36.2, the use of a compromise is most likely, since steps forward taken by at least one of the parties make it possible to achieve an asymmetrical (one hundred
one side gives more, the other less) or symmetrical (the sides are approximately equal mutual concessions) agreements. The value of compromise is that it can be achieved in cases where the parties choose different strategies. This happens often in life. A study of conflict resolution between a manager and a subordinate showed that one third of these conflicts end in compromise, two thirds in a concession (mostly of the subordinate) and only 1-2% of conflicts end in cooperation!
The explanation for this dispersion in the frequency of using vertical conflict resolution methods lies in the stereotypes of thinking and behavior of Russians and the characteristics of this type of conflict. Most of us are focused on confrontation, solving problems with the outcome: I won, he lost. For decades, this principle prevailed in interactions with those who were not like us, who did not agree with us. In addition, in conflicts between “manager and subordinate” in 60% of situations, the boss is right in his demands on the subordinate (omissions in work, dishonest performance of duties, failure to perform, etc.). Therefore, most managers consistently pursue a strategy of competition in conflict, achieving the desired behavior from their subordinates.
The considered methods of conflict resolution are implemented in practice by forceful suppression one of the parties or through negotiations (compromise, cooperation, and sometimes concession). Forceful suppression is a continuation of the application of the strategy of competition. In this case, the stronger side achieves its goals and gets the opponent to waive the initial demands. The yielding party fulfills the opponent’s demands, or apologizes for shortcomings in activity, behavior or communication. If the parties understand that the problem is important for each of them and it is worth solving it taking into account mutual interests, then they use the path negotiations Procedural and psychological aspects of preparing and conducting negotiations will be discussed in Chapter. 38. Here we will briefly describe the main technologies of compromise and cooperation.
It is important to normalize relations between opponents on the eve of the negotiation process. One way to do this is PRISN technique(consecutive and
480 VIII. Theory and practice of conflict resolution
reciprocal initiatives in reducing tension (S. Lindskold and others) The PRSN method was proposed by social psychologist C. Osgood and is successfully used in resolving conflicts at various levels: international, intergroup, interpersonal (B. Bethe, W. Smith). It includes the following rules:
Make sincere, public statements that one of the parties to the conflict wants to stop the escalation of the conflict;
Explain that conciliatory steps will definitely be taken. Inform what, how and when will be done;
Keep what you promise;
Encourage your opponent to exchange concessions, but do not demand them as a condition for fulfilling your own promises;
Concessions must be made over a sufficiently long period of time and even if the other party does not reciprocate. They should not lead to an increase in the vulnerability of the party implementing them. An example of the successful use of the PRSN method is the trip of Egyptian President A. Sadat to Jerusalem in 1977. Relations between Egypt and Israel were very tense at the time, and the trip increased mutual trust and paved the way for negotiations.
The compromise is based on the technology of “proximity concessions” or, as it is also called, - bargain. Compromise is believed to have disadvantages: disputes over positions lead to cut-rate agreements; the ground is created for tricks; a deterioration in relations is possible, as there may be threats, pressure, and breakdown of contacts; if there are several parties, bargaining becomes more complicated, etc. According to D. Lowell:
com.industrialiss - a good umbrella, but a bad roof; for some time it is expedient, often needed in inter-party struggle and almost never needed by the one who governs the state..
Despite this in real life compromise is often applied. To achieve this, it can be recommended open conversation technique, which is as follows:
State that the conflict is disadvantageous to both;
36. Constructive Conflict Resolution481
Offer to stop the conflict;
Admit your mistakes already made in the conflict. They probably exist, and it costs you almost nothing to recognize them;
Make concessions to your opponent, where possible, on what is not the main thing for you in the conflict. In any conflict you can find a few little things in which it is not worth giving up. You can give in on serious, but not fundamental things;
Express wishes for concessions required on the part of the opponent. They usually relate to your main interests in the conflict;
Calmly, without negative emotions, discuss mutual concessions, and, if necessary, adjust them;
If you manage to reach an agreement, then somehow record that the conflict has been resolved.
Way cooperation it is advisable to carry out using the method "principled negotiations". It boils down to this:
Separating people from the problem: separate the relationship with your opponent from the problem; put yourself in his place; do not act on your fears; show your willingness to deal with the problem; be firm on the issue and soft on the people.
Focus on interests, not positions: ask “why?” and “why not?”; record basic interests and many of them; look for common interests; explain the vitality and importance of your interests; recognize the interests of your opponent as part of the problem.
Offer mutually beneficial options: Don't look for a single answer to a problem; separate the search for options from their evaluation; expand the range of options for solving the problem; seek mutual benefit; find out what the other side prefers.
Use objective criteria: be open to the other side's arguments; do not give in to pressure, but only to principle; For each part of the problem, use objective criteria; use multiple criteria; use fair criteria.
482 VIII. Theory and practice of conflict resolution
conclusions
1. The end of the conflict is the cessation of the conflict for any reason. The main forms of ending a conflict are resolution, settlement, attenuation, elimination, and escalation into another conflict. The outcome of the conflict is the result of the struggle from the point of view of the state of the parties and their attitude towards the object of the conflict. The main criteria for constructive conflict resolution are the degree to which the contradiction is resolved and the victory of the right opponent.
2. Among the conditions for constructive conflict resolution, the following are distinguished: cessation of conflict interaction, search for common goals and interests, reduction of negative emotions, changing one’s attitude towards the opponent, reduction of the opponent’s negative emotions, objective discussion of the problem, taking into account each other’s statuses (positions), choosing the optimal conflict resolution strategies. The effectiveness of conflict resolution is influenced by factors: time, third party, timeliness, balance of power, culture, unity of values, experience (example) and relationships.
3. Direct conflict resolution is a process that includes analysis and assessment of the situation, selection of a method for resolving the conflict, formation of an operational set of actions, implementation of the plan and (or) its correction, and assessment of the effectiveness of actions. The main conflict resolution strategies are competition, cooperation, compromise, accommodation and avoidance. Depending on the chosen strategies, it is possible to resolve the conflict by forceful suppression (concession by the opponent) or through negotiations (compromise or cooperation). Compromise can be achieved through the technique of open conversation, and cooperation through the technique of principled negotiation.
Chapter \J I
Definition of conflict. Destructive and constructive ways to resolve conflict situations
A child is like a blank sheet of paper, Don’t carelessly doubt his fate, Help him, give him courage And teach him to win the fight
What is conflict? Conflict in Latin means clash. Conflict experts say that there are no conflict-free relationships.
Definitions of this concept can be divided into two groups. IN public consciousness conflict is most often synonymous with hostile, negative confrontation between people due to incompatibility of interests, norms of behavior, and goals.
But there is another understanding of conflict as an absolutely natural phenomenon in the life of society, which does not necessarily lead to negative consequences. On the contrary, when choosing the right channel for its flow, it is an important component of the development of society.
Depending on the results of resolving conflict situations, they can be designated asdestructive or constructive . The resultdestructive collision is dissatisfaction of one or both parties with the outcome of the collision, destruction of relationships, resentment, misunderstanding.
Constructive is a conflict, the solution of which became useful for the parties taking part in it, if they built, acquired something valuable for themselves in it, and were satisfied with its result.
Variety of school conflicts. Causes and solutions.
Conflict in school is a multifaceted phenomenon. When communicating with participants school life, the teacher also has to be a psychologist. The following “debriefing” of clashes with each group of participants can become a “cheat sheet” for a teacher on exams in the subject “School Conflict”.
Conflict "Student - student"
Disagreements between children are a common occurrence, including in school life. In this case, the teacher is not a party to the conflict, but sometimes it is necessary to take part in a dispute between students.
Causes of conflicts between students
rivalry
deception, gossip
insults
grievances
hostility towards the teacher's favorite students
personal dislike for a person
sympathy without reciprocity
fight for a girl (boy)
Ways to resolve conflicts between students
How can such disagreements be resolved constructively? Very often, children can resolve a conflict situation on their own, without the help of an adult. If teacher intervention is still necessary, it is important to do so in a calm manner. It is better to do without putting pressure on the child, without public apologies, and limit yourself to a hint. It is better if the student himself finds an algorithm for solving this problem. Constructive conflict will add social skills to the child’s experience, which will help him communicate with peers and teach him how to solve problems, which will be useful to him in adult life.
After resolving a conflict situation, dialogue between the teacher and the child is important. It is good to call the student by name; it is important that he feels an atmosphere of trust and goodwill. You can say something like: “Dima, conflict is not a reason to worry. There will be many more disagreements like this in your life, and that's not a bad thing. It is important to solve it correctly, without mutual reproaches and insults, to draw conclusions, to work on mistakes. Such a conflict will be useful."
A child often quarrels and shows aggression if he has no friends and hobbies. In this case, the teacher can try to correct the situation by talking with the student’s parents, recommending that the child enroll in a club or sports section, according to his interests. A new activity will not leave time for intrigue and gossip, but will give you an interesting and useful pastime and new acquaintances.
Conflict “Teacher - student’s parent”
Such conflicting actions can be provoked by both the teacher and the parent. Dissatisfaction can be mutual.
Causes of conflict between teacher and parents
different ideas of the parties about the means of education
parent's dissatisfaction with teacher's teaching methods
personal animosity
parent's opinion about the unreasonable underestimation of the child's grades
Ways to resolve conflicts with student parents
How can such discontent be constructively resolved and stumbling blocks broken? When a conflict situation arises at school, it is important to sort it out calmly, realistically, and without distortion, look at things.
The main and only path to agreement will be an open dialogue between the teacher and the parent, where the parties are equal. The analysis of the situation will help the teacher express his thoughts and ideas about the problem to the parent, show understanding, clarify the common goal, and together find a way out of the current situation.
After resolving the conflict, drawing conclusions about what was done wrong and what should have been done to prevent a tense moment from occurring will help prevent similar situations in the future.
Conflict "Teacher - student"
Such conflicts are perhaps the most frequent, because students and teachers spend hardly less time together than parents and children.
Causes of conflicts between teacher and students
lack of unity in teachers' demands
excessive demands on the student
inconstancy of teacher's demands
failure to comply with requirements by the teacher himself
the student feels underestimated
the teacher cannot come to terms with the student's shortcomings
personal qualities of a teacher or student (irritability, helplessness, rudeness)
Resolving teacher-student conflict
It is better to defuse a tense situation without leading it to conflict. To do this, you can use some psychological techniques.
The natural reaction to irritability and raising your voice is similar actions . The consequence of a conversation in a raised voice will be an aggravation of the conflict. That's why right action on the part of the teacher there will be a calm, friendly, confident tone in response to the student’s violent reaction. Soon the child will also be “infected” by the calmness of the teacher.
Dissatisfaction and irritability most often come from lagging students who do not conscientiously perform school duties. You can inspire a student to succeed in their studies and help them forget about their dissatisfaction by entrusting them with a responsible task and expressing confidence that they will complete it well.
A friendly and fair attitude towards students will be the key to a healthy atmosphere in the classroom and will make it easy to follow the proposed recommendations.
It is worth noting that during the dialogue between teacher and student, it is important to take certain things into account. It is worth preparing for it in advance so that you know what to tell your child. How to say - the component is no less important. A calm tone and absence of negative emotions is what you need to receive good result. And it’s better to forget the commanding tone that teachers often use, reproaches and threats.You need to be able to listen and hear the child. A unified algorithm for resolving any school conflict
The first thing that will be useful when the problem is ripe iscalmness .
The second point is situation analysiswithout vicissitudes .
The third important point isopen dialogue between conflicting parties, the ability to listen to the interlocutor, calmly express your view on the problem of the conflict.
The fourth thing that will help you reach the desired constructive result isidentification common goal , ways to solve the problem that allow you to achieve this goal.
The last, fifth point will beconclusions that will help you avoid communication and interaction mistakes in the future.
So what is conflict? Good or evil? The answers to these questions lie in the way tense situations are resolved.The absence of conflicts in school is almost impossible . And you still have to solve them. A constructive solution brings with it trusting relationships and peace in the classroom, a destructive solution accumulates resentment and irritation. Stop and think at the moment when irritation and anger surge - important point in choosing your own way to resolve conflict situations.
Among many inquisitive eyes
Try to earn recognition.
The child is the main one among us,
He always demands attention.
Be able to charm everyone with affection,
Greeting every day with a smile.
And know a lot, and not lie,
Don't make mistakes.
Introduction
Approaches to the study of conflict in social psychology
Concept and typology of conflicts
Conflict resolution methods
Conflict Prevention
Conclusion
Literature
Introduction
Conflicts are an eternal companion of our lives. And therefore, even the most consistent policy of humanization in enterprises and institutions and the best management methods will not protect against the need to live in conditions of conflict. Word conflict - Latin root and literally translated means collision . The basis of any conflict is a contradiction, which usually leads to either constructive (for example, strengthening group dynamics, team development) or destructive (for example, the collapse of the team) consequences.
The purpose of this work is to consider constructive ways to resolve conflicts and prevent conflicts.
The set goal led to the solution of the following tasks: to consider approaches to the study of conflict in social psychology, what conflict is and the typology of conflicts, methods of conflict resolution and conflict prevention.
1. Approaches to the study of conflict in social psychology
Judging by numerous publications, the study of conflicts is carried out from the point of view of various approaches. In order to organize the results obtained by researchers on the problem interpersonal conflict, it is necessary to consider these approaches.
There are various classifications of approaches in the literature. The most widely known classification is that proposed by R.L. Krichevsky and E.M. Dubovskaya. They highlight the following approaches.
Motivational. The motivational approach is based on the idea of confrontation between incompatible intentions and goals that guide the behavior of participants in interpersonal interaction;
Cognitive. Within the framework of the cognitive approach, the cognitive aspects of interpersonal conflict are studied. Its occurrence is determined, according to experts, by the structure of the task, the cognitive structures of the opposing parties, the degree of consistency of the strategies they use;
Active. In this case, the study of conflicts is based on the principles of the activity-based approach. However, the number of works, according to the authors, carried out from the perspective of the discussed approach is extremely small;
Organizational. In this case, the organizational approach means various models conflict relations in social organization, embodied in a fairly large number of empirical developments.
Among the works of domestic scientists, a systematic approach also stands out. From the perspective of this approach, conflict is understood as the interaction of complex systems with divergent goals and ideas about them.
As the researchers write, most Western studies of conflict have been carried out within the framework of a motivational approach to conflict. Recently, a normative approach has also emerged. It is based on the "polygenetic theory" interpersonal relationships", proposed by R.Kh. Shakurov. From the standpoint of the normative approach, social norms and normative expectations play a large role in the emergence, development and resolution of interpersonal conflicts. Interpersonal conflict, from the point of view of this approach, arises as a result of the following interrelated factors: frustration and violation of social norms of interaction in a given situation. At the same time, the process of conflict escalation, the emotions that arose in it, and changes in relationships during the conflict are determined by the action of the mechanisms for the formation of interpersonal relationships.
In addition to the above classification, which is based on conceptual schemes from the perspective of which the conflict is studied, there are classifications on other grounds. For example, approaches are divided depending on how researchers approach the causes of interpersonal conflicts. From this point of view, V.A. Fokin identifies the following approaches:
Personality-oriented approach - the causes of the conflict are seen in the characteristics of the individual in general or are localized in cognitive processes.
Motivational-oriented approach - the so-called “objective” signs of the situation are emphasized, the specifics of which determine the emergence of conflict.
The integral approach is an attempt to overcome the one-sided way of explaining the causes of the conflict, i.e. the desire to take into account all possible factors influencing the emergence and course of the conflict.
As V.A. Fokin notes, in terms of the number of explicit and implicit supporters, the motivation-oriented approach leads.
Another basis from which approaches to conflict are considered is an understanding of the essence of conflict as a phenomenon. A classification built on this basis is proposed by T.Yu. Bazarov and B.L. Eremin. They distinguish two approaches:
Proponents of the first approach describe conflict as a negative phenomenon. They divide conflicts into constructive and destructive. Most works within the framework of this approach provide recommendations for manipulation, which is called “conflict management”, “conflict situation management”.
Proponents of the second approach consider conflict a natural condition for the existence of interacting people, an instrument for the development of an organization, any community, although it has destructive consequences, but in general and over a long period of time is not as destructive as the consequences of eliminating conflicts, their information and social blockade. The second approach assumes the impossibility of managing conflict and optimizing interaction, theoretically justifying the development of conflict as a self-regulating mechanism.
The general trend in recent years, according to Bazarov T.Yu. and B.L. Eremina, is such that most theorists and practitioners of social psychology are inclined to the second approach, while maintaining some orientation towards psychological manipulation, psychological mitigation of the destructive consequences of the conflict. The basic point in this choice is that the first approach is based on subject-object communication, while the second is based on subject-subject communication.
Speaking about approaches to the study of interpersonal conflict, it is necessary to note the peculiarities of the study of conflicts by Western scientists. As a rule, conflict research by Western scientists is carried out primarily in laboratory conditions with the extensive use of mathematics, in particular, game theory. This feature immediately leads to the question of the possibility of applying the results obtained in real situations. The literature also contains criticism of the main theoretical postulates that are used when studying conflicts using this method:
Firstly, this is the postulate of rationality, according to which the desire to maximize gains is the main determinant of individual behavior. As you know, this postulate does not always correspond to reality. It is significant, write A.I. Dontsov and T.A. Polozova, that situations where the principle of maximizing winnings is violated are either not considered in most studies or are recognized as obviously ineffective.
Secondly, this is the postulate of the static nature of the situation of conflict interaction: it is believed that the individual initially has all the information contained in the matrix description of the situation and once and for all fixes the hierarchy of individual significances of certain actions. It is clear that in reality this principle is also often not followed.
Attempts to find a consistent synthesis of the results obtained face, as noted by the prominent French psychologist M. Plon, with significant difficulties: “Special reflection,” the author emphasizes, “requires that with the adoption of the analogy between the game and the conflict, the analogy between the rules of the game and norms was implicitly accepted functioning of social relations, although these latter have never, in essence, been studied.”
. Concept and typology of conflicts
Conflict is a relationship between subjects of social interaction that is characterized by confrontation over the presence of opposing motives (needs, interests, goals, ideals, beliefs) or judgments (opinions, views, assessments, etc.).
Another group of concepts in the categorical apparatus of conflictology are concepts that define the main types of conflicts and their typology. The need to classify conflicts is dictated by the research interests of deeper insight into their essence, as well as the practical needs of the most effective regulation of their various types. The classification depends on the criteria that are taken as its basis. The most common conflict classifications are based on criteria such as:
) parties to conflicts,
) the nature of the needs, the infringement of which caused the conflict,
) the direction of the conflict,
) time parameters of the conflict,
) the effectiveness of conflicts.
Depending on the parties, conflicts are divided:
to intrapersonal,
interpersonal,
between the individual and the group,
intergroup,
international.
In terms of needs, the blocking of which served as a prerequisite for the conflict, they can be divided into:
material,
status - role,
spiritual.
According to their direction, conflicts are divided into:
horizontal, arising between business partners and work colleagues;
vertical - between subordinates and superiors.
In this classification, mixed conflicts are those in which both colleagues and managers of different levels are represented. As practice shows, up to four-fifths of all conflicts in organizations belong to conflicts of the second and third groups according to this typology.
According to time parameters, conflicts are divided into:
short-term,
fleeting,
long-term, sometimes lasting for years and decades, as are often the case with state, national and religious gious conflicts.
And finally, according to the criterion of effectiveness, conflicts are divided into two types:
constructive, normal, positive, in which the groups where they occur maintain their integrity, and the relationships between group members are of a collaborative nature;
destructive, pathological, negative, when relationships between people take on uncivilized forms, the nature of confrontations, struggles, leading even to the destruction and disintegration of the organization.
Therefore, the most important task of a manager at any level is to solve problems of conflict resolution and prevent them from being overturned. growth from a constructive to a destructive form, preventing the growth and generalization of the conflict. For this, it is especially important to understand the structure, dynamics, typology of the conflict, i.e. in the entire conceptual-categorical apparatus of conflictology and, above all, in the content of its basic concept - the category of conflict.
3. Conflict resolution methods
All methods are divided into 2 groups: 1) negative, include all types of struggle, pursue the goal of achieving victory for one side over the other. 2) positive, when using them it is assumed that the basis of the relationship between the subjects of the conflict will be preserved. These are various types of negotiations and constructive competition.
The distinction between negative and positive methods is conditional. These methods often complement each other.
No matter how diverse the types of struggle are, they have some common features, for any struggle is an action with the participation of at least two subjects, where one of them interferes with the other.
In any fight, you must be able to: a) choose the best field for the decisive battle, b) concentrate the necessary forces in this place, c) choose the optimal moment in time to strike. All techniques and methods of fighting involve one or another combination of these components.
The goal of the struggle is to change the conflict situation. And this is achieved in three general ways: by direct influence on the opposing subject, his means of struggle, on the situation; changes in the balance of forces; true or false information from the opponent about his actions and intentions; obtaining an adequate assessment of the opponent’s capabilities and the situation. A variety of control methods use these methods of influence in different combinations.
The main positive method of conflict resolution is negotiation. Negotiation theory was developed by American conflictologists R. Fisher and U. Ury, D. Den.
Negotiation - this is a joint discussion by the conflicting parties with the possible involvement of a mediator of controversial issues in order to reach agreement. They act as a continuation of the conflict and at the same time serve as a means of overcoming it. When the emphasis is on negotiations as part of a conflict, they are sought to be conducted from a position of strength, with the goal of achieving a one-sided victory. Naturally, this nature of negotiations usually leads to a temporary, partial resolution of the conflict, and negotiations serve only as an addition to the struggle for victory over the enemy. If negotiations are understood in property terms as a method of conflict resolution, then they take the form of honest, open debates, designed for mutual concessions and mutual satisfaction of a certain part of the interests of the parties.
The method of principled negotiation, or "negotiation based on certain principles", is characterized by four basic rules.
“Make a distinction between the negotiators and the subject of the negotiation,” “separate the person from the problem.” Negotiations are conducted by people with certain character traits. Discussion of them is unacceptable, because... this introduces an emotional factor into the negotiations that interferes with the solution of the problem. Criticism of the personal qualities of the negotiators only aggravates the conflict or, at least, does not contribute to the search for ways to resolve it.
"Focus on interests, not positions." The positions of opponents may hide their true goals, and even more so, their interests. Meanwhile, conflicting positions are always based on interests. Therefore, instead of arguing about positions, we need to explore the interests that determine them. Behind opposing positions, along with contradictions, there are shared and acceptable interests.
“Develop win-win options.” An interest-based arrangement facilitates the search for a mutually beneficial solution by exploring options that satisfy both parties. In this case, the dialogue becomes a discussion with the orientation - “we are against the problem”, and not “me against you”. With this orientation, it is possible to use brainstorming. As a result, more than one alternative solution may be obtained. This will allow you to select the desired option that meets the interests of the negotiating parties.
"Find objective criteria." Consent as the goal of negotiations should be based on criteria that would be neutral with respect to the interests of the conflicting parties. Only then will it be fair, stable and lasting. If the criteria are not neutral towards one party, then the other party will feel disadvantaged, and therefore the agreement will be perceived as unfair and ultimately it will not be implemented.
The fairness of the solutions developed depends on the procedures used during negotiations for resolving conflicting interests. Such procedures include: resolving disagreements using lots, delegating the right to decide to a mediator, etc. The last method of resolving a dispute, i.e. when a third party plays a key role, is widespread, and its variations are numerous.
One of the main ways to resolve conflict is communication between people. This is the most common method, which also includes negotiations. This method is based on two rules: “do not interrupt communication,” because refusal to communicate creates and means conflict; “Do not use power games to win power struggles through coercion, threats, or ultimatums.” In the description by D. Den, the named method looks like this:
Step 1: Find time to talk.
Step 2: Prepare the conditions.
Step 3: Discuss the problem.
Introductory part:
Express your gratitude.
Express optimism.
Remind the cardinal rules.
State the problem.
Invite to conversation.
Task 1: Stick to the basic process.
Task 2. Support gestures of reconciliation.
Step 4: Conclude an agreement (if necessary):
Balanced;
Behaviorally specific;
In a written form.
The negotiation process in a specific form - with the participation of a mediator - mediation. This is the most universal and successful form of resolving disagreements with the help of a third, independent mediator.
The use of positive methods of conflict resolution is embodied by the achievement of compromises or consensuses between opposing entities. These are forms of ending the conflict, mainly of the “win-win”, “win-win” type.
Compromise means an agreement based on mutual concessions.
There are forced and voluntary compromises. The first are inevitably imposed by prevailing circumstances. Or a general situation that threatens the existence of the conflicting parties. The second ones are concluded on the basis of an agreement on certain issues and correspond to some part of the interests of all interacting forces.
The theoretical and methodological basis for compromise is the position of dialectics on the combination of opposites as a form of regulation and resolution of social contradictions and conflict. The social base is the commonality of certain interests, values, and norms as prerequisites for the interaction of social forces and institutions. In the case of a voluntary compromise, there is a commonality of basic views, principles, and norms facing the interacting subjects of practical tasks. If the compromise is of a forced nature, then it may consist of: a) mutual concession on certain issues in the name of ensuring a balance of private interests and goals; b) in uniting the efforts of all conflicting parties to resolve some fundamental issues related to their survival.
The technology of compromises is quite complex, unique in many ways, but still there is something repetitive in its structure. These are some ways of reconciling interests and positions: consultation, dialogue, discussion, partnership and cooperation. Using them allows us to identify common values, discover a convergence of views on certain issues, helps to reveal positions on which the conflicting parties need to make concessions, and develop a mutually acceptable agreement on the “rules of the game,” or in other words, norms and methods of further action in order to proper balance of interests and thereby resolve the conflict.
Consensus is a form of expressing agreement with the opponent’s arguments in a dispute.
Consensus becomes the principle of interaction between opposing forces in systems based on democratic principles. Therefore, the degree of consensus is an indicator of the development of public democracy.
The technology of achieving consensus is more complex than the technology of compromise. The essential elements of this technology are: a) analysis of the range of social interests and organizations expressing them; b) clarifying the fields of identity and difference, objective coincidence and contradiction of priority values and goals of the current forces; justification of common values and priority goals on the basis of which agreement is possible; c) systematic activity of institutions of power of socio-political organizations in order to ensure public consent regarding norms, mechanisms and ways of regulating social relations and achieving those goals that are recognized as generally significant.
4. Conflict prevention
A destructive conflict, like a disease, is easier to prevent or treat when it occurs. The early stage of dealing with conflict is its prevention, which involves preventing the emergence of the causes of the conflict. Prevention of conflicts in an organization is achieved through clear organization of work; healthy moral and psychological climate in the team; professionally and socially competent leadership; staff satisfaction with their stay in the organization; people's confidence in tomorrow, stable employment, etc. In other words, conflict prevention involves preventing the occurrence of all the previously discussed and some other causes in the team.
To prevent conflict, as well as to prevent it in general, measures such as:
correct selection and placement of personnel;
continuous improvement of remuneration in accordance with the changing situation;
rhythm of work, attention to the working and living conditions of workers;
improving organizational management methods taking into account changing situations;
timely provision of resources, their rational and fair distribution;
compliance of the rights and duties of employees, especially managers, strict control over respect for rights and fulfillment of duties, maintaining high labor discipline;
clear distribution of production tasks, powers and responsibilities;
formation of favorable interpersonal relationships;
strengthening collective norms of self-regulation of employee behavior, uniting the team;
paying special attention to rumors, gossip, and minor quarrels, which are usually indicators of unemployed workers and create favorable conditions for conflicts;
ensuring uniform workload for all employees.
Conflict prevention in an organization is carried out by three main actors, subjects: senior management, which determines the general position of a given unit in the system of an enterprise or institution; the head of the unit, who outlines the general line of dealing with conflicts and manages them, and the work collective, capable of performing educational and regulatory functions, uniting people, forming in them a sense of group identity, relationships of cooperation and mutual assistance, and being the most authoritative arbiter in the event of a conflict.
Despite the importance of all subjects of conflict regulation, the leading role in dealing with conflicts is played by the immediate head of the unit in which the conflict is brewing or is already developing. To effectively prevent and resolve conflicts, a manager is required to: the ability to analyze the social situation and its conflictological diagnosis; knowledge of human psychology and patterns of their behavior; own self-control, impartiality and consistency in relation to opponents; ability to conduct individual conversations and negotiations on a principled, business basis; having sufficient power and authority.
Under normal conditions of existence of an organization, with the coherence of the actions of top management, a specific leader and the team, it is, in principle, possible to exclude conflicts with a negative, destructive orientation from its life. However, it is not always possible to prevent conflicts. Moreover, most often this happens and is not advisable. When conflict occurs, it is important to ensure that the process of its development and resolution is managed.
Conclusion
Although relationships with other people should promote peace and harmony, conflicts are inevitable. Every sane person should have the ability to effectively resolve disputes and disagreements so that the tissue public life did not break into every conflict, but, on the contrary, grew stronger due to the growing ability to find and develop common interests.
To resolve conflict, it is important to have different approaches at your disposal, to be able to use them flexibly, to go beyond the usual patterns and be sensitive to opportunities and act and think in new ways. At the same time, conflict can be used as a source life experience, self-education and self-education.
Conflicts can be turned into beautiful educational material, if in the future you find time to remember what led to the conflict and what happened in the conflict situation. Then you can learn more about yourself, about the people involved in the conflict, or about the surrounding circumstances that contributed to the conflict. This knowledge will help you make the right decision in the future and avoid conflict. warning social conflict
Literature
1.Kolominsky Ya.L. Psychology. - Mn., 1993.
2.Vilyunas V.K. Psychology of emotional phenomena. - M., 1973.
3.Izard K.E. Human emotions. - M., 1980.
4.Jung K.G. Problems of the soul of our time. - M., 1996.
5.Anikeeva N.P. Psychological climate in the team. - M., 1989.
6.Andreeva G.M. Social Psychology. - M., 1998.
7.Sieger W. Lang L. Lead without conflict. - M., 1990. Submit your application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of receiving a consultation.
If the conflict could not be foreseen or assessed the seriousness of the contradictions and prevented, and it still flared up, then the main task is to resolve it constructively, draw appropriate lessons from it and, if possible, even benefit.
First of all, do not try to deny the conflict, hush it up, or pretend that everything is in perfect order. The well-known ostrich pose will not benefit any of the conflicting parties. It can only postpone the settlement of the conflict for a while, but this will not make its resolution any easier. Most often the opposite happens. The longer measures are not taken to resolve the conflict, the more severe the retribution. Cases when a conflict resolves itself painlessly do occur, but very rarely.
Most common principles and rules of conflict resolution assume the following actions:
- take control of emotions, realize the cause of anger or resentment;
- understand real reasons conflict, to understand what goals are pursued by the parties to the conflict;
- listen carefully to your opponent and understand his position, ask him to state facts and arguments, not speculation;
- establish a friendly tone of conversation;
- localize the conflict, do not put forward several reasons at once, do not remember past grievances;
- analyze the conflict point by point, trying not to convince the opponent (this is usually an unpromising matter), but to come to an agreement;
- find commonality of views and interests, agree with what the opponent is right about;
- if necessary, you can resort to the services of an “arbitrator” - an authoritative third party, i.e. intermediary.
We must also keep in mind that we should never hide the problem underlying the conflict. By presenting to your opponent the true cause of the conflict, you must thereby show sincere interest in resolving it. Every effort must also be made to ensure that this position is correctly understood by the opponent. At the same time, attention should not be focused on differences in the interests of the parties. The main thing is to find common interests and appeal to them. If possible, it is advisable to involve allies and refer to the fact that this point of view is shared by other members of the organization, especially if they are authoritative persons.
Conflict resolution styles
In modern conflictology there are five basic conflict resolution styles , which are based on a system called the Thomas-Kilmann method (developed by Kenneth W. Thomas and Ralph X. Kilmann). The system allows you to create your own conflict resolution style for each person.
- 1. Competition style. A person using this style is very active and prefers to go about resolving conflicts in his own way. He is not very interested in cooperation with other people, but he is capable of strong-willed decisions. With this style, you try to first satisfy your own interests by forcing other people to accept your solution to the problem. This can be an effective style when you have a certain amount of power. You know that your decision or approach in a given situation is correct, and you have the opportunity to insist on it. But if this style is used in a situation in which you do not have enough power, for example, when your point of view differs from that of your boss on some issue, you may get burned. This style is also recommended in cases where the solution you propose to the problem is of great importance to you; when you feel that you need to act quickly to implement it; and when you believe in victory because you have sufficient resources, will and power for this.
- 2. Evasion style. It is realized when you do not defend your rights, do not cooperate with anyone to develop a solution to the problem, but simply avoid resolving the conflict. You can use this style when the issue at hand is not that important to you, when you don't want to spend energy on solving it, or when you feel like you are in a hopeless situation. This style is also recommended in cases where you feel in the wrong or when your opponent has more power. This style is also suitable for cases when you feel that you do not have enough information to solve a specific problem.
- 3. Fixture style. It means that you act together with another person, without trying to defend your own interests. You can use this approach when the outcome of the case is extremely important to the other person and not very significant to you. This style is also useful in situations in which you cannot prevail because the other person has more power; thus, you give in and accept what your opponent wants. This style should also be used in cases where you feel that by giving a little you have little to lose. By giving in, agreeing, or sacrificing your interests in favor of another person, you can soften a conflict situation and restore harmony.
- 4. Collaborative style. With this style, you actively participate in conflict resolution and advocate for your own interests, but try to cooperate with the other person. This style requires more painstaking and time-consuming work than most other approaches to conflict by first laying all the cards on the table: the needs, concerns and interests of both parties, and then discussing them. If you have time and the solution to the problem is important enough to you, then this good way searching for a mutually beneficial result and satisfying the interests of both parties. The collaborative style encourages each person to openly discuss their interests. However, to successfully use this style, it is necessary to spend some time searching for hidden reserves in order to develop a way to satisfy the true desires of both parties. Cooperation is the most difficult among other styles, but it is this style that allows us to develop the most satisfying solution to both parties in complex and important conflict situations.
- 5. Compromise style. Any compromise presupposes mutual concessions. This style is where you give in a little on your interests to satisfy them otherwise, and the other party does the same. You do this by exchanging concessions and bargaining to develop a compromise solution. Such actions may resemble cooperation to some extent. However, compromise is achieved at a more superficial level compared to cooperation. Compromise is the umbrella, and cooperation is the roof. The collaborative style is different in that when you use it, you try to develop long-term and sustainable solutions. Compromise is often a successful retreat or even the last opportunity to come to some kind of solution.
Among various conflict resolution methods The negotiation method is considered the most constructive. Negotiation – this is a joint discussion by the conflicting parties (with the possible involvement of a mediator) of controversial issues in order to reach agreement. According to famous American conflictologists R. Fisher and W. Urey, this method is characterized by four main rules.
- 1. Make a distinction between the negotiators and the subject of negotiations, “separate the person from the problem.” Criticism of the personal qualities of negotiators only aggravates the conflict or, at least, does not contribute to the search for ways to resolve it.
- 2. Focus on interests , and not in positions. Opponents can hide the true goals of their positions and, even more so, their interests. Meanwhile, conflicting positions are always based on interests. Therefore, instead of arguing about positions, we need to explore the interests that determine them.
- 3. Develop mutually beneficial options. An interest-based arrangement facilitates the search for a mutually beneficial solution by exploring options that satisfy both parties. In this case, the dialogue becomes a discussion with the orientation - “we are against the problem”, and not “me against you”.
- 4. Find objective criteria. Consent as the goal of negotiations should be based on criteria that would be neutral with respect to the interests of the conflicting parties. Only then will the agreement be fair, stable and lasting. If the criteria are subjective, i.e. are not neutral towards either party, the other party will feel disadvantaged, and therefore the agreement will be perceived as unfair.
A widespread and fairly effective way to resolve conflicts is to delegate the right to solve the problem. intermediary - "arbitrator". Here the third party, the intermediary, plays a key role. The head of an organization, due to his status, often has to act as such a mediator in resolving conflicts. In this case, to successfully resolve the conflict, he should keep in mind some basic principles of mediation:
- the mediator must enjoy authority among all parties to the conflict;
- the dispute should not be allowed to move into the area of personal relationships, as this will lead the dispute far astray;
- it is necessary to maintain good and equal relations with both parties to the conflict;
- the mediator should take responsibility only for the process of solving the problem, and not for the essence of the solution found;
- Avoid making any assessments related to the essence of the problem, as this may cause a negative reaction from the parties to the conflict.
In this regard, the question of how behave in conflict with people who are difficult to communicate with. Both in the case of mediation and in the process of business communication in general, there are people who are difficult to communicate with. In a conflict situation, they pose a particular difficulty in resolving it. It can be difficult to find a “common language” with them, since they either “know everything” themselves or are constantly looking for a reason to argue, regardless of the problem and the degree of its importance. Anita and Klaus Bischoff offer some tips on how a mediator can best deal with difficult conflict participants.
- Argumentative. Listen to him calmly and respond to the point. When asking provocative questions, do not get involved in an argument, but forward them to other meeting participants.
- Know-it-all. It will be possible to include him in the work of the group if he is constantly asked to express his opinion and attitude to the problem.
- Timid. You need to praise him, ask him easy questions from time to time. This will strengthen his self-esteem. But you can’t overdo it, otherwise he will hide back into his shell.
- Thick-skinned. He is indifferent; to engage him in conversation, it is advisable to ask about the range of his work responsibilities or interests.
- Proud man. We must handle him carefully, as he is sensitive to criticism.
- Talker. He must be limited in time for performance. For example, the three-minute rule is very suitable for this: everyone has the right to speak for only three minutes.
- Silent. Some participants initially wait a long time before taking the floor. This may have various reasons: restraint, uncertainty, conceit, etc. We need to find out strengths this participant and include him in the overall work.
- A simple talker. He just likes to talk for a long time. You should tactfully interrupt him and ask him to quickly say the most important thing, since there is little time left.
- Cm.: Fischer R„ Yuri U. The path to agreement, or negotiations without defeat. M., 1992.
- Cm.: Bischof A., Bischof K. Secrets of effective business communication. M.: Omega-L, 2012.
Now about methods of conflict resolution. It is advisable to divide the entire set of methods, depending on the types of conflict resolution models, into two groups:
- · the first one will be conventionally called a group of negative methods, including all types of struggle, pursuing the goal of achieving victory of one side over the other. The term “negative” methods in this context is justified by the expected end result of the end of the conflict: the destruction of the unity of the conflicting parties as a basic relationship.
- · We will call the second group positive methods, since when using them it is assumed that the basis of the relationship (unity) between the subjects of the conflict will be preserved. These are, first of all, various types of negotiations and constructive competition.
The difference between negative and positive methods is relative, conditional. In practical conflict management activities, these methods often complement each other. In addition, the concept of “struggle” as a method of conflict resolution is very general in its content. It is known that a principled negotiation process may include elements of struggle on certain issues. At the same time, the toughest struggle between conflicting agents does not exclude the possibility of negotiations on certain rules of struggle. Without the struggle between the new and the old, there is no creative rivalry, although the latter presupposes the presence of a moment of cooperation in relations between rivals, since we are talking about achieving a common goal - progress in a specific area of public life.
The main positive method of conflict resolution is negotiation. Let's consider the most essential characteristics of the negotiation method and methods of its implementation.
Negotiations are a joint discussion between the conflicting parties, with the possible involvement of a mediator, of controversial issues in order to reach an agreement. They act as a continuation of the conflict and at the same time serve as a means of overcoming it. When the emphasis is on negotiations as part of a conflict, they are sought to be conducted from a position of strength, with the goal of achieving a one-sided victory. Naturally, this nature of negotiations usually leads to a temporary, partial resolution of the conflict, and negotiations serve only as an addition to the struggle for victory over the enemy. If negotiations are understood primarily as a method of conflict resolution, then they take the form of honest, open debates, designed for mutual concessions and mutual satisfaction of a certain part of the interests of the parties.
When negotiating, both parties operate within the same rules, which helps maintain the basis for agreement.
American conflictologists Fisher R. and Yuri U. analyze the method of principled negotiations. It consists in the requirement to solve a problem based on its qualitative characteristics, i.e. based on the merits of the matter. This method, the authors write, “assumes that you seek to find mutual benefit wherever possible; and where your interests do not coincide, you should insist on a result that would be justified by some fair standards, regardless of the will of each of the parties. The method of principled negotiations means a tough approach to the consideration of the merits of the case, but provides a soft approach to the relations between the negotiators.”
The method of principled negotiation, or "negotiation based on certain principles", is characterized by four basic rules. Each of them makes up base element negotiations and serves as a recommendation for their conduct:
- 1. “Make a distinction between the negotiators and the subject of negotiation,” “separate the person from the problem.” Negotiations are led by people; possessing certain character traits. Discussing them is unacceptable, as this introduces an emotional factor into the negotiations that interferes with solving the problem. Criticism of the personal qualities of negotiators only aggravates the conflict or, at least, does not contribute to the search for ways to resolve it.
- 2. “Focus on interests, not positions.” The positions of opponents may hide their true goals, and even more so, their interests. Meanwhile, conflicting positions are always based on interests. Therefore, instead of arguing about positions, we need to explore the interests that determine them. Behind opposing positions there are always more interests than those reflected in these positions. In other words, behind opposing positions, along with contradictions, there are shared and acceptable interests.
- 3. “Develop win-win options.” An interest-based arrangement facilitates the search for a mutually beneficial solution by exploring options that satisfy both parties. In this case, the dialogue becomes a discussion with the orientation - “we are against the problem”, and not “me against you”. With this orientation, it is possible to use brainstorming. As a result, more than one alternative solution may be obtained. This will allow you to select the desired option that meets the interests of the negotiating parties.
- 4. “Find objective criteria.” Consent as the goal of negotiations should be based on criteria that would be neutral with respect to the interests of the conflicting parties. Only then will it be fair, stable and lasting. If the criteria are subjective, that is, not neutral in relation to any party, then the other party will feel disadvantaged, and therefore the agreement will be perceived as unfair and ultimately it will not be fulfilled. Objective criteria follow from a principled approach to discussing controversial issues; they are formulated on the basis of an adequate understanding of the content of these problems.
Finally, the fairness of the solutions reached depends on the procedures used during negotiations for resolving conflicting interests. Such procedures include: resolving disagreements using lots, delegating the right to decide to a mediator, etc. The last way to resolve the dispute, i.e. when a third party plays a key role is widespread and its variations are numerous.
One of the main ways to resolve conflicts is communication between people. This is the most common method, which also includes negotiations. The essence and technology of communication are quite widely described in the literature. D. Dehn, in his work “Overcoming Disagreement,” developed a “4-step method.” In his opinion, this method serves to achieve agreement between people and their fruitful cooperation. It is based on two rules:
- · “don’t interrupt communication,” since refusal to communicate creates and means conflict;
- · “do not use power games to win the struggle for power through coercion, threats, or ultimatums.”
It is important to prepare suitable conditions for conversation, which means, in addition to time, also a place and environment favorable for conversation. The duration of the dialogue is determined by the time required to achieve a breakthrough in smoothing out the conflict. The content of the conversation must be kept secret, since untimely publicity of it gives rise to rumors, gossip and intensifies the conflict.
Thus, until a certain time, until a positive result is achieved, the confidentiality of the conversation must be maintained. Dialogue and its successful completion presuppose constant adherence to the subject of discussion, exclusion from the conversation of elements that are not related to the problem under discussion (talk about colleagues, about the events of the day, etc.). During the conversation, you should constantly make gestures of reconciliation, not take advantage of the other’s vulnerability and, at the same time, not show unscrupulousness. Conversations about a problem of concern to both parties should be conducted with a focus on a mutually beneficial solution and the exclusion of illusions about its result based on the “win-lose” principle. The result of the dialogue is an agreement describing the relations of the parties for the future, recording in writing balanced, coordinated behavior and actions to realize conflicting interests.
The described methods of communication and negotiations involve the interaction of individuals and teams. In life, conflicts that arise among mass communities, between not only small but also large groups, play a big role. Of course, such conflicts can be resolved through various negotiations and types of communication. However, communication in such cases takes the form not of dialogue, but of multi-subject discussion of problems. These are various kinds of business meetings, seminars, conferences, conventions, etc.
A diverse discussion of controversial issues of vital importance to everyone, with the participation of numerous individuals and organizations, certainly ensures the resolution of some conflicts. Positive result Such measures are achieved subject to a number of conditions.
- - Firstly, ensuring an objective consideration of controversial issues;
- - Secondly, free discussion of all positions and points of view with equal opportunities for participation in the discussion of each subject;
- - Thirdly, formalizing the results of the discussion in the form of recommendations summarizing the revealed unity of views and positions on certain issues.
These forms are effective in resolving political, ideological, and scientific conflict problems. In these forms, democratic principles of discussion and conflict resolution work best.
The use of positive methods of conflict resolution is embodied by achieving compromises or consensuses between opposing entities. These are forms of ending conflicts, mainly of the “win-win”, “win-win” type. They represent the implementation of styles of compromise and cooperation.