Actions in the conditions of the conflict. What is conflict: concept, types, structure Concrete reasons for the motivation of the conflict are

Motives for the conflict

Why do two people think of the same thing differently? There must be some reason for this. There are many such reasons, but all of them, ultimately, lead to the fact that each person develops his own set of attitudes, needs, interests, opinions, ideas, etc., on the basis of which he perceives and evaluates everything with which is facing. On this basis, he also has corresponding motives - aspirations, incentives for actions aimed at realizing his attitudes, needs, etc. But in both cases, they most significantly affect a person's attitude to things that are important to him.

Motivation determines the process that psychologists call goal formation. The goal acts as a mentally represented result that an individual would like to achieve in a given situation.

It happens that a person forms really unattainable goals. Then he has internal personal conflicts. Chress P. and Piapi J. wrote in “ experimental psychology”: “A person faced with the need to choose one of two objects can choose one of them and, having already made a decision, perceive the second object as having a significantly higher value (poss-decision conflict). There may also be conflict due to the fact that a person loves or admires two individuals who do not tolerate or hate each other. Cognitive conflicts are also possible when a person encounters information that contradicts his views, etc.”

It is also possible that a person forms incompatible goals. In this case, the process of their formation takes the form of a struggle between competing motivational tendencies: one of them creates a positive attitude towards the object in a person, the desire to get closer to it, and the other creates a negative attitude towards the object, the desire to avoid it.

If two people have conflicting ideas about a situation, and disagreements arise about some issues that are important to them, then their motives, accordingly, also diverge. Those. in this situation, the aspirations, desires of these people do not coincide, turn out to be incompatible.

Action in conflict situations

When people have a zone of disagreement, there are different ideas about the situation that arises in connection with the existence of this zone, there are contradictory, simultaneously unrealizable motives and goals - then, naturally, these people begin to behave in such a way that their actions collide. The actions of each side prevent the other side from achieving its goal. Therefore, they are evaluated by the latter as hostile or at least incorrect. In turn, this other side undertakes countermeasures, which the first side also receives a negative assessment of. In such a clash of actions and counteractions directed against each other, in fact, lies the real course of the conflict. The conflict is like an iceberg: actions form its “surface” part, which lies on the surface, in contrast to the “underwater” part, hidden from direct observation, a zone of disagreement, ideas of the parties to the conflict in a complicated situation, motives and goals of their behavior.

The main types of actions of one of the conflicting parties, which the other assesses as conflict, hostile, directed against it, are:

creation of direct or indirect obstacles to the implementation of the plans and intentions of the other party;

non-fulfillment by the other party of its duties and obligations;

seizure or retention of what, in the opinion of this party, should not be in the possession of the other party;

causing direct or indirect damage to property or reputation (for example, spreading defamatory rumors);

degrading acts (including verbal abuse or offensive demands);

threats and other coercive actions that force a person to do what he does not want and is not obliged to do;

physical violence.

At the same time, those whose actions are perceived as conflicting may themselves not think so and even suspect that they are acting against someone. To them, these actions may seem quite normal, or random, or simply thoughtless. Often when candid conversation this becomes clear to the other side, and the tension in the relationship subsides. But sometimes the tact of justification does not dispel the other side's belief that the actions were deliberately hostile, specifically directed against them. And in excuses, they see only falsehood and cunning, which further worsens the relationship.

Conflict interaction, therefore, is a struggle in which the actions of one side meet the counteractions of the other.

In a conflict situation, the actions of one side have a significant impact on the other side. This influence consists not only in the fact that the other side suffers some damage, but also in the fact that it, in turn, begins to plan and take retaliatory actions. The behavior of one participant in the conflict causes corresponding changes in the behavior of another. Thus, the conflicting parties influence each other in one way or another. In a conflict, the influences from the enemy are experienced especially sharply, because they are aimed at destroying our own plans, ideas, goals. The intensity of foreign influence increases with the aggravation of the conflict. In particularly intense situations, actions that normally do not attract attention are experienced much more strongly. The mutual influence of rivals can take various forms: infection, suggestion, persuasion, imitation, and others.

Subjects (participants) of the conflict

The main participants in the conflict are the opposing parties or opponents. It can be - individuals, social groups, organizations, states, coalitions of states They form the core of the conflict. When at least one of the main parties withdraws from the confrontation, the conflict ends.

Subjects - participants, parties to the conflict, these are mutually actively opposing sides of social interaction, which are in a state of conflict, or covertly and openly support the conflict.

Participants in the conflict- the main element of social conflict, they are always individuals with their own interests, goals and values. However, social life is not limited to the interaction of individual individuals. Various social groups, communities, peoples, political entities, legal entities, etc. operate in society, which can also act as participants in the confrontation. Thus, the participants in the conflict, as well as the conflicts themselves, can be a great many.

The roles of the participants in the conflict are not the same. All participants in the conflict behave differently depending on the interests and role they play in a given situation. The role behavior of any participant in the conflict, in general, is quite definite, since it is connected not only with his own desire or plan, but also with the plan of the opponent, forcing the participants to specific actions. At the same time, simply imitation of the participants in the conflict is possible. Sometimes the subject, as it were, "enters the role" of an inapplicable conflicting party, although the conflict as such does not yet exist, or is already fading away. Entering the “role” of the conflicting side, there are numerous litigants and squabblers who hang around the thresholds of various institutions with real or fictitious claims, for the satisfaction of which sometimes it was not at all necessary to enter into conflict relationships.

Modern conflictology divides all participants in the conflict into major(direct) and non-core(indirect).

The main participants in the conflict- these are always direct, immediate sides participating in the confrontation. They play a decisive and most active role in its emergence and development. The main participants in the conflict are its main actors, and it is the conflict of their interests that underlies the confrontation. Therefore, the main participants are called subjects, or opponents conflict.

In connection with the potential or power possessed by the parties participating in the conflict, there is such a thing as opponent's rank. The more opportunities a conflict participant has to influence the course of confrontation, the higher his rank. At the same time, ranking can be done on various grounds: physical strength, political and economic power, resource, administrative or informational potential, etc. The rank of the participants in the conflict is directly related to their social status - the position occupied in society in accordance with the profession, age, marital status and the social role of the participant in the conflict.

Rank - the position occupied by one of the parties in relation to the opposing side. The following types of opponents can be distinguished, according to the rank:

opponent of the 1st rank - a person acting on his own behalf and pursuing his own interests;

opponents of the 2nd rank - separate individuals pursuing group interests;

opponent of the 3rd rank - a structure consisting of groups directly interacting with each other;

opponents of the 4th rank are state structures acting on behalf of the law.

In various conflict situations, the different potential of the participants in the conflict is also in demand. So, if there is a physical fight, the rank of opponents will be determined by their muscular strength, in economic fights it will depend on economic potential.

To non-main parties to the conflict include all other parties to the conflict. They are also often referred to as indirect participants in the conflict. By definition, they play a secondary role in the emergence and development of the conflict. Often, non-main participants in the conflict are also called third party.

In the real dynamics of the conflict, the line between main and non-core participants, often turns out to be mobile and relative. The dialectic lies in the fact that in the process of the development of the conflict, the main and non-main actors can change places. The conflict that arose at the everyday level, between two neighbors, may, over time, develop into an intergroup conflict between ethnic communities, in which few people will remember the original subjects. In turn, an intergroup conflict can develop into an international one, and then its other subjects will come to the fore. For example, the conflict that arose in Yugoslavia in the 1990s between Kosovo Albanians and Serbs later escalated into an international conflict between Yugoslavia and NATO countries, as well as into a NATO war against Yugoslavia.

The role of non-main participants in the conflict can be both constructive(positive) and destructive(negative) - they can contribute not only to the resolution or prevention of the conflict, but also to its aggravation and further development. At the same time, the result of the intervention of a minor participant in the conflict may not coincide with its goals. They say about such a case that the road to hell is paved with good intentions, or the modern version - “we wanted the best, but it turned out as always.”

Among the indirect participants in the conflict, one should single out such groups that are specially created to support one or another subject of the conflict. They're called support groups. A clear example of such groups and their role can be various associations, organizations, movements, media, etc., supporting one or another candidate for deputies (president) in his election campaign.

An important role in the emergence and development of the conflict is played by other members: initiators (instigators); organizers; collaborators; intermediaries (mediators).

Initiators (instigators)- those participants in the conflict who take the initiative in unleashing the conflict between other individuals, groups or states. They can be both individuals and various associations and even states. It can be both main and non-main participants. Once the conflict has arisen, the initiator of the conflict may not participate in it. A person who started a squabble in the team may then go into the shadows or quit his job altogether, and the conflict will continue without him.

Organizers- a group of persons (or an individual) developing a general plan of confrontation with an opponent in order to resolve the contradiction in their favor. To organize a conflict means to think through all its dynamics in such a way that the expected benefits as a result of its end are greater than the losses. The organizers can be both the main and non-main participants in the conflict. The organizer can be one of the opposing sides ("shadow"), but it can also be an independent figure.

Instigator- this is a person pushing the other participant to the conflict. The instigator himself may then not participate in this conflict: his task is limited to provoking, unleashing a conflict between other individuals (groups).

collaborators- persons who help the participants in the conflict in its unleashing, organization and development. Accomplices can be both spontaneous groups of persons, and specially created, as well as individuals. Assistance provided by accomplices can be of a very different nature: material, ideological, moral, resource, informational, administrative, etc. In group conflicts, especially when they involve an indefinite circle of people, many people present actually act as accomplices of the main participants - the opposing forces. Someone shouts slogans, others threateningly brandish sticks and throw stones, give various advice, excite others.

Intermediaries (mediators)- a third party in the conflict and its indirect participants.

Mediator- a strictly neutral person, a third party in the negotiation process regarding the conflict, designed to ensure a constructive discussion of the problem and resolution of the conflict by reaching an agreement, through negotiations. However, the mediator himself does not have the authority to make a decision. In a certain sense, mediators can be considered participants in the conflict, especially those who are trying not only to understand the causes and circumstances (which judges do), but to prevent, stop, and resolve the conflict.

Mediation - assistance of a neutral person to the conflicting parties in order to resolve through negotiations. Mediation provides for a regulated procedure, usually ending with the signing of an agreement. The intermediary itself does not have the power to issue or control , any solution. Mediation improves communication and prepares the conditions for proposals to be made.

The role of the mediator is the role of an authoritative assistant called upon by the subjects of the conflict to resolve the problem. This role can be played by individuals, organizations and states. An important feature of the mediator is his authority, recognized by both sides of the conflict. Therefore, only people or organizations that are chosen by both subjects of the conflict can act as a mediator. At the same time, both official persons and organizations, and unofficial ones can act as an intermediary.

The purpose of mediation is to achieve an end to the conflict by finding a compromise between its opponents. Therefore, the mediator must have the appropriate qualities for this: the ability to negotiate, wisdom, special knowledge, a culture of communication, high moral principles. He must also take a neutral position in relation to its participants, even in the case when his personal sympathies or convictions run counter to the position of any of the parties. Otherwise, one of the parties will refuse such an intermediary.

Unlike arbitrator who owns the right to make the final decision, the mediator does not have such a right. Its task is to organize and ensure negotiations, to help the parties to the conflict reach agreement.

Support Group: friends; close and distant relatives; colleagues. A support group can be active or passive.

conflict confrontation motive tactics

Macro and microenvironment of conflict

The objective elements of the conflict include such components that do not depend on the will and consciousness of a person, on his personal qualities (psychological, moral, value orientations, etc.). These elements are: the conflict environment;

Medium of conflict. This element has a significant impact on the causes of its occurrence and the entire dynamics. From the point of view of the levels of the social system, the micro- and macroenvironment of the conflict are distinguished.

Micro-environment of conflict- this is a set of conditions for the interaction of people that directly affect interpersonal and intergroup conflict. The scale of the microenvironment is a small social group.

Macroenvironment of conflict includes those conditions that influence the development of conflicts between large social groups and states. Although the macro-environment indirectly affects, of course, the development of conflicts at the level of individuals and small groups.

By the nature of its components three types of conflict environment can be distinguished: physical; socio-psychological; social. All of them are manifested both at the micro and macro levels of the social system and can serve not only as conditions for the course of the conflict, but as its object. Thus, the struggle can be waged for clean air, improving the socio-psychological climate at the enterprise or the social conditions of people's lives.

The physical environment of the conflict. This is a combination of physical, geographical, climatic and environmental conditions and factors in which the confrontation takes place.

On the micro level the physical environment of the conflict includes a set of such external conditions of human interaction as clean air, lighting and noise levels in the workplace. Anyone who worked in a poorly lit laboratory, in a noisy workshop, in a dusty and polluted room, could repeatedly verify that negative impact these factors on the development of interpersonal and intergroup conflicts. Moreover, these conditions themselves can become an object of conflict both between the administration and employees, and between employees themselves.

On the macro level The physical environment is represented by geographic, climatic and environmental factors that can have a significant impact on the development of the conflict. It is known what great importance for the course of military operations have climatic conditions. As at the micro level, at the macro level the physical environment can also act as an object of conflict.

In our time, it is becoming increasingly important to take into account the influence of the geographical factor on the development of social conflicts. Geopoliticians directly and unequivocally pay attention to its great importance in the political life of society, including in the emergence of social conflicts.

Today, all states in their policies are trying to actively use this factor in the interests of the military-political, economic and environmental security of their countries.

Socio-psychological environment of the conflict. This is the totality of those moods, opinions, concerns, feelings and experiences in which the conflict develops. These factors are objective for the participants in the conflict, because they are given to them from the very beginning and do not depend on their will, consciousness and desires. This environment, like the physical one, manifests itself at the micro and macro levels of the social system,

On the microlevel, for example, within an organization, the socio-psychological environment is the psychological climate of a given team, its general mood, which can be more or less major or minor, optimistic or pessimistic, etc.

On the macro level social system, that is, at the level of the whole society, the socio-psychological environment is determined by the prevailing moods, feelings and emotions in society, which are manifested at the level of large social groups and the whole people. In certain periods, society may be dominated by feelings of fear, insecurity and anxiety experienced by entire segments of the population. In other times, on the contrary, the social psychology of the people can be major, characterized by calmness, cheerfulness and emotional upsurge. The first type of socio-psychological environment contributes to the development of conflict behavior, the second, on the contrary, to a faster and easier conflict resolution.

In our society, a major and optimistic socio-psychological environment of people's lives existed in the years after the victory in the Great Patriotic War. In the last decade of the past century, on the contrary, minor moods, a sense of fear, despair and depression prevailed.

Of great importance in the formation of the socio-psychological environment at different levels of the social system belongs to the media. With their information policy and technologies, they can contribute both to the attenuation of conflicts in society and to inflate them.

Social environment of conflict. The social environment is a set of social conditions under which the confrontation of the parties arises and develops. The most common and fundamental factors of the social environment of the conflict are the type of civilization, the socio-economic conditions of life and the socio-political structure of society. But the social environment of the conflict also includes the entire socio-cultural reality that surrounds a person. Like any other, the social environment of the conflict has an important influence on its dynamics and ways of resolution. In a society that is in a deep socio-economic and political crisis, all types of conflict will be powerfully influenced by this factor -

It can be stated with a high degree of reliability that improving the state of affairs in the social sphere of people's lives will contribute to a sharp decrease in the level of conflict, both at the level of the whole society and within the organization, at the interpersonal and intrapersonal levels.

Motives and tactics of the conflict

The motive for the conflict this is an internal, motivating, subjective force that pushes the subjects of social interaction to conflict (the motive manifests itself in the form of needs, interests, goals, ideals, beliefs). Motive is the reason for doing something. The motive is in the actions of each participant in the conflict. Another thing is that the motives of the behavior of different subjects may not be the same, inconsistent, and often opposite. It cannot be otherwise, because if a conflict is a confrontation, then its psychological causes are made up of contradictions, interconnecting goals and motives of behavior. In this regard, the motive is often considered as an internal, subjective reason for this or that act. It is clear that, without any motive, it is impossible to perform a certain action; it turns out to be meaningless, unnecessary, inexplicable. Consequently, having revealed the motivation of the conflicting parties, we begin to understand to a large extent the meaning of their confrontation.

For any conflict, psychological components are needed:

Conflict motive - internal motive forces that push the subjects of social interaction to conflict (motives, interests, goals, ideals, beliefs);

Motives of the parties (goals, needs, interests);

The motive in the conflict is the satisfaction of personal needs (resources, power, spiritual values); it is the realization of goals, the awareness of the anticipation of the results in the name of which the hostile activity is directed.

These motives can be: strategic; tactical. But the main purpose of the motive is to cause maximum damage; the longer the conflict, the more destructive the power.

List of used literature

1. Antsupov A.Ya., Shipilov A.I. Conflictology. – M.: UNITI, 1999.

2. Grishina N.V. Psychology of conflict. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2000.

3. Liginchuk G.G. Conflictology. - M.: MIEMP, 2009.

Psychological peculiarities the process of adaptation of students to study at a higher educational institution

Abstract >> Psychology

Adaptation of students to study at the university, and identification psychological features marked process|. In accordance with the purpose of the study ... the student's adaptation to the university is often accompanied by conflicts with parents. T.M. Buyakas notes "a very common ...

Psychological peculiarities difficult student and work with him

Abstract >> Psychology

The phenomenon of inability to educate. Subject of course research psychological peculiarities"difficult student" Practical significance... Relationships with family members. Typical conflicts. current bans. Peculiarities describing fears. Difficulties. Complaints...

Psychological peculiarities guest services in accommodation facilities

Abstract >> Physical culture and sports

Guests in accommodation facilities. Subject of study - psychological peculiarities guest service. The purpose of the study is being implemented ... : ways of regulating emotional states, resolving conflicts, the basics of ethnopsychology, etc. It should be noted that...

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Hosted at http://www.allbest.ru/

Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution

higher professional education

"St. Petersburg State University of Economics"

Master's Institute

Course work

Subject: Conflictology

Topic: Interpersonal conflicts, causes and motives for their occurrence

Arakelyan Aida Samvelovna

Introduction

1.1 Conflict as a form of interaction, types of conflicts, their features

2.2 Experimental procedure

Conclusion

Bibliography

Applications

Introduction

In the process of interaction between people, there is a constant contact of their values, interests, views, motives, psychological characteristics and other characteristics that make up the core of the individuality of a particular person. Differences in these indicators often underlie the emergence of conflicts, both in personal and professional spheres of life.

As a result of professional conflicts, the general emotional background is disturbed, the ability to work and the effectiveness of the organization as a whole are reduced. That is why the problem of conflicts in the organization, finding ways to optimize interaction and resolve conflicts between employees is very relevant. Constructive interaction based on partnership, mutual understanding and work for a common result significantly affects the efficiency of the organization and its competitiveness. It is necessary to emphasize the role of the head of the organization in creating conditions for the development of such interaction in the team.

The theoretical study of this problem was carried out by numerous foreign and Russian researchers within the framework of such scientific disciplines as sociology, psychology, conflictology, management, organization theory, management psychology, etc. So, among sociologists, G. Simmel, R. Dahrendorf, L. Koser, I.D. Ladanov, K.A. Radugin. Within the framework of psychology, M. Sheriff, D. Rapoport, R. Doz, L. Thompson, K. Thomas, M. Deutsch, D. Scott, 3. Freud, A. Adler, K. Horney, E Fromm, K. Levin, D. Krech, L. Lindsay, D. Dollard, L. Berkowitz, N. Miller, F. Haider, D.P. Kaidalov, E.I. Suimenko, A.G. Kovalev, K.K. Platonov, V.G. Kazakov, A.A. Ershov and many others.

The purpose of the work is to study the specifics of interpersonal conflicts in the organization.

Work tasks:

1. to study the specific features of conflicts in organizations;

2. analyze the causes of conflict situations in organizations;

3. consider the motives for the emergence of conflicts;

4. to study the features of the motivational-need sphere of the individual and to identify their influence on the choice of a strategy of behavior in a conflict.

Object of study: the influence of the motivational-need sphere of the personality on the behavior of the subject in conflict.

Subject of research: the degree of satisfaction of basic needs and strategies of behavior in conflict situations.

Hypothesis: In the process of interaction between people, the choice of a strategy of behavior in a conflict situation is significantly influenced by the degree of satisfaction of basic needs.

Research methods: experiment, conversation, observation, data processing methods, interpretation methods, theoretical analysis of literature (analytical, hypothetical-generalizing methods).

Study sample: employees of a construction company in the amount of 30 people (men). Age from 24 to 35 years.

1. General concept conflict, its types

conflict need professional

1.1 Conflict as a form of interaction, types of conflicts and their features

The term "conflict" has Latin roots (lat. conflictus) and is translated as "collision".

Currently, there are several definitions of the concept of conflict in the literature, a general analysis of which allows us to identify the following structural features that are characteristic of conflict interaction and determine its specificity. Firstly, any conflict is based on an objective contradiction or incompatibility that affects goals, interests, motives, etc. parties to the conflict. Secondly, this contradiction or incompatibility is recognized by the parties. Thirdly, the parties to the conflict take a variety of actions (activity), the purpose of which is to overcome this contradiction.

Based on these signs, it can be argued that the conflict is a certain situation in which several parties with incompatible views, positions and interests take part, the interaction between the parties to the conflict is characterized by confrontation.

In modern psychology, there is a division of conflicts into the following types:

Intrapersonal conflict

interpersonal conflict;

Conflict between the individual and the group

intergroup conflict.

Each of these types has its own characteristics that determine the specifics of the flow of conflict interaction.

Intrapersonal conflicts imply a lack of agreement in a person with himself, i.e. the presence of internal contradictions, which may be based on the need to choose alternatives, the discrepancy between external requirements and internal positions; ambiguous perception of the situation, goals and means of achieving it; needs and opportunities to satisfy them; drives and responsibilities; various kinds of interests, etc.

Special attention of researchers is aimed at interpersonal conflicts, since they affect the sphere of interaction between people and underlie intergroup conflicts and general collective conflicts.

At the same time, the following specific features can be distinguished in this type of conflict:

1. Direct confrontation (face to face), carried out in a situation "here and now", which is based on a clash of personal motives, interests, etc.

2. A very wide range of reasons that can provoke a conflict (general and particular, objective and subjective);

3. The emergence of a conflict requires a person to maximize the possibilities of character, temperament, abilities, intelligence and other features that make up the individuality of the individual.

4. High emotional involvement in the situation and coverage of all sides of the relationship between the participants in the conflict.

5. Influencing the interests of not only the direct participants in the conflict interaction, but also persons who have direct ties with them (official or personal).

The next type is conflicts between the individual and the group. At the heart of such conflicts, as a rule, lies the discrepancy between collective and individual norms of behavior.

Intergroup conflicts demonstrate the contradictions between formal and informal groups that are part of the organization in terms of views and interests.

Numerous researchers of conflict interaction offer several classifications of conflicts on various grounds.

Classification according to the direction of interaction. Within the framework of the organization, horizontal conflicts can be distinguished - they do not involve persons who are subordinate to each other; vertical - participants in such conflicts are subordinate to each other, as well as mixed conflicts, including both persons of equal authority and subordinates.

Classification by value to the organization. This basis allows us to divide conflicts into constructive ones, i.e. creative and beneficial, and destructive, which can lead to disruption of the organization as a whole. Constructive conflicts make it possible to reform activities, improve the level of mutual understanding and the effectiveness of interaction.

Classification according to the nature of the causes that led to the conflict includes:

1. Conflicts of goals. The opposing sides are focused on various purposes and differently see ways to achieve the desired state.

2. Conflicts of views, implying the presence of contradictions among the participants in the conflict in the views, ideas, etc.

3. Conflicts of feelings, characterized by differences in persons involved in conflict interactions, feelings and emotions that underlie interpersonal relationships between them (irritation, antipathy, etc.).

Classification according to the duration of the conflict interaction. According to this classification, short-term and protracted conflicts are distinguished. It should be noted that protracted conflicts, as a rule, arise on the basis of unresolved short-term ones.

The following classification is based on the goals pursued by the parties: personal, group and public. In addition to these types, this classification includes conflicts based on differences in moral content, time (close or distant) and publicity (open or hidden).

In addition to these classifications, there are others (according to sources of occurrence, by volume, etc.).

Thus, it is customary to call a conflict a certain situation in which several parties with incompatible views, positions and interests take part, and the interaction between the parties to the conflict is characterized by confrontation.

Conflicts are divided into the following types: intrapersonal conflict; interpersonal conflict; conflict between the individual and the group; intergroup conflict. Each of these types has its own characteristics that determine the specifics of the flow of conflict interaction.

Currently, researchers offer several classifications of conflicts on various grounds.

1.2 The specifics of conflict interaction in organizations

The functioning of an organization complete system is carried out in accordance with pre-defined and clearly defined tasks and goals that determine the direction of activity, its specificity. At the same time, the personnel of the organization have their own individual goals and objectives, which in the process labor activity correlate with or conflict with the goals of the organization as a whole.

The term "organization" itself can be interpreted from the standpoint of different directions:

o the specifics of the structure of the organization, which underlies the orderly and coordinated interaction of its components;

o a variety of purposeful processes that improve the interaction between the elements of the system and strengthen the links between them;

o a factor contributing to the unification of people for the joint achievement of goals. The activities of such an association are regulated by formal rules, methods and technologies;

o a segment in the structure of the company, whose activities are aimed at the implementation of certain tasks and the performance of specified functions;

o an efficiently functioning system that takes into account the conditions of the external and internal environment;

o set of forms (legal, legal and organizational).

Given such a variety of relationships in the organization, conflicts can arise between people, which naturally affect the efficiency of functioning, staff turnover, decrease in production volume and other parameters.

Organizational conflicts may be based on contradictions in assessing the goals, methods and means of managerial and organizational activities, their results and social consequences.

Naturally, organizational conflicts have features that are also characteristic of other types of social conflicts (reference, subjectivity, etc.). At the same time, characteristic ones can also be distinguished from these conflicts.

High predictability can be distinguished among the essential features of organizational conflicts. Since the functioning of the organization is carried out in accordance with certain standards that contribute to the coordination of the behavior of employees, it is easy to monitor situations that can later develop into conflicts.

The specificity of organizational conflicts is largely determined by the features of the role structure of the organization, which implies the implementation by employees professional activity in accordance with existing behavioral stereotypes. Roles leave a significant imprint on the personality of each person and depend on social positions and specific work behavior. It must be emphasized that the roles are fixed very quickly, they can sometimes contradict each other and, for their part, also influence the assessment of social position and labor behavior.

The course of the conflict in the organization is significantly influenced by its very structure, which is managed through the targeted coordination of the activities of employees and material resources. That is why it contains the division of the labor process into elements in order to fully control. The structure of any organization includes horizontal and vertical differentiation.

Horizontal division is carried out in accordance with the methods of grouping and distribution of functional responsibilities (by work performed, by product, by consumer groups, by location). Such a horizontal division can provoke the emergence of conflicts of interest, since it is possible to focus on different goals in groups distributed according to different criteria.

Vertical differentiation affects the administrative apparatus and is determined by the number of levels of power, as well as the distribution of power.

Thus, the specificity of conflict interaction within an organization is due to the complexity of emerging relationships affecting various spheres of life. These conflicts have the following characteristic features: high predictability, features of the role structure of the organization, general structure and division horizontally and vertically, etc.

1.3 Causes of conflicts in the organization

At the heart of the emergence of any conflict interaction is one or another reason, the identification and elimination of which contributes to the resolution of the conflict and smoothing the situation. That is why the question of identifying the causes of conflicts attracts the attention of researchers.

Traditionally, there are objective and subjective causes that contribute to the emergence of conflict. Objective factors include characteristics that do not depend on a person, while subjective factors are personal characteristics (character traits, striving for superiority, dominance, etc.). At the same time, it should be noted that in a real conflict situation there are almost always both objective and subjective reasons.

Among the objective reasons for the emergence of conflict interaction, one can single out factors affecting the management process, organization of activities, the level of professionalism, violations of sanitary and hygienic standards, insufficient material and technical base, and economic reasons.

Among the managerial reasons, it is customary to include shortcomings in the organizational structure, fuzzy job descriptions and as a result, an ill-conceived distribution of rights and obligations, disproportionate rights and responsibilities for the results of activities, vague requirements for an employee and their inconsistency with job descriptions.

Organizational factors include: lack of working conditions, violations of the regime of work and rest, overload, violations of labor and performance discipline, etc.

Professional factors include an assessment of the level of professionalism, a competent system of selection and placement of personnel, clarity of prospects for further professional and career growth.

Sanitary and hygienic factors include unfavourable conditions labor and various violations concerning the regime of professional activity.

Among the material and technical factors contributing to the emergence of conflicts, researchers note outdated equipment and technical support, as well as their insufficiency.

In addition to the above reasons, economic ones can be noted: delays in payment, lack of a well-planned reward system.

The subjective causes of conflict include personal characteristics of both subordinates and leaders. The most common mistakes in the professional activities of a leader that can stimulate the emergence of conflict situations are violations of work ethics (rudeness, intolerance, arrogance, disrespectful attitude, etc.); labor legislation (overtime unpaid work, a ban on sick leave and vacations, etc.); the inability to fairly evaluate the results of the activities of subordinates and motivate them to achieve success, as well as the lack or insufficiency of attention on the part of the manager to the socio-psychological climate in the team, the possibilities of taking into account the compatibility of workers.

In addition to the above classification of causes that contribute to the emergence of conflict relationships, there are others (W.F. Lincoln, B. Myers, K. Thomas).

According to N.V. Grishina, the causes of conflict situations in the organization include:

1. Shortcomings in the organization of production processes, unfavorable working conditions, imperfection of the forms of its stimulation.

2. The lack of experience of the manager, as a result of which he takes the wrong actions (ineptly distributes tasks, incorrectly uses the system of labor incentives, is not able to understand the psychology of the employee).

3. Disadvantages of the manager's professional style of work and his incorrect behavior.

4. Divergence of workers' opinions in assessing the phenomena of production life.

5. Violation of intra-group norms of behavior, the disintegration of the team into various groups, the emergence of disagreements between different categories of workers.

6. Contradictions of interests of people, their functions in labor activity.

7. Incompatibility due to personal, socio-demographic (gender, age, social origin) differences.

8. Personal characteristics of individuals - specific features of behavior, attitudes towards work and the team, character traits.

In the works of R. L. Krichevsky, the causes of conflict relations are divided into three groups: due to the labor process, psychological characteristics human relationships, personal identity of group members

In general, it is almost impossible to list all the reasons due to which the development of a conflict is possible. At the same time, the following areas of organizational interaction should be emphasized, in which the occurrence of conflicts is especially common: the distribution of resources, the interdependence of tasks, differences in goals, differences in ideas and values, differences in behavior and life experience, and poor communication.

It should be noted that the timely identification and elimination of the above reasons is possible only with the improvement of the management system of the organization as a whole.

Thus, among the reasons contributing to the emergence of conflict relations in the team, one can single out objective and subjective.

Timely identification and elimination of the above causes contributes to the establishment of constructive relationships in the organization and improves overall performance.

1.4 Motives for conflicts

When studying a conflict, in addition to finding out the external causes of a conflict situation, it is necessary to reveal its internal content, which is determined by the motives of the conflicting parties.

In this case, motives act as internal motivating forces that push the subjects of conflict interaction to open confrontation. It is the motives for entering the conflict that fill it with emotions. As a rule, during the conflict, opponents may experience feelings of dependence, infringement, feelings of guilt, etc.

Reasons for conflict may include:

Needs - conditions created by a shortage of material or ideal objects that stimulate the activity of the subject. The classification of needs includes: needs for security, recognition, social belonging, cognitive needs, aesthetic needs, etc.

It should be noted that these needs can arise not only in individuals, but are also characteristic of social groups, entire societies and states.

interests - are conscious needs that ensure that opponents are directed to the object of the conflict and contribute to its manifestation conflict behavior.

· values - a set of qualities of the internal structure of the personality, which are especially significant for it and determine the basis of consciousness and behavior. Values can be divided into universal, cultural, personal, etc.

Goals are the realization of the possible result to which the actions taken should lead. Within the framework of conflict interaction, the goal is the end result, which is evaluated from the standpoint of utility (for the individual, the reference group or the team as a whole). It is customary to single out tactical (focused on mastering the object of the conflict) and strategic goals (determining the order of achievement, means of influence, etc.).

ideals - some generalized images that characterize the best state of the object, formed by each specific person on the basis of a generalization of the social and personal experience and life position.

· Beliefs - a system of personal values that determines the choice of a strategy of behavior in accordance with personal views, interests and needs.

The motives of the behavior of a particular person or group are determined not only by internal components. They also arise on the basis of a specific social situation, existing social conditions. This is due to the fact that the reforms of society naturally affect the transformation of public consciousness, which in turn contributes to a change in the needs, interests, values, goals, ideals and beliefs of specific people, and therefore motivation in general.

At the same time, it should be noted that in the process of conflict interaction it is very difficult to establish the true motives of opponents. The fact is that the participants in the conflict often declare the same reasons as motives for entering the conflict, when in a real situation completely different factors serve as motives.

Thus, the motives for entering into conflict interaction are internal motivating forces that push the subjects of conflict interaction to open confrontation. The motives for the emergence of a conflict can be: needs, interests, values, goals, ideals, beliefs, etc. In addition, the motivation of the participants in the conflict is influenced by the specific social situation, the existing social conditions.

1.5 Strategies for behavior in conflict situations

Conflict interaction between people requires each participant to choose one or another strategy of behavior in order to achieve the most beneficial result. Currently, the following strategies of behavior in conflict are distinguished: withdrawal, coercion, compromise, concession or cooperation. The choice of strategy is carried out on the basis of the following factors: the correlation of one's own interests and the interests of the opponent, the value of existing interpersonal relations with the opposite side, etc. It is these indicators that make it possible to characterize each strategy.

Coercion (struggle, rivalry). For those who prefer such behavior, personal interests come first, compared with the interests of the opponent. In any case, you have to choose between struggle and relationships. This strategy is expedient only in two cases: when protecting the interests of the case from encroachment on them by a conflicting personality or when the existence of an organization or team is threatened. In other cases, it is destructive.

The exit strategy is characterized by the desire to avoid conflict interaction. In fact, people who prefer such behavior have a low level of focus on both the realization of their own interests and the realization of the interests of the opponent. This behavior does not have a significant impact on interpersonal relationships and actually acts as a mutual concession. The use of care is beneficial when the problem is insignificant for both parties. If the situation affects one of the parties more strongly, then there is a possibility of a resumption of the conflict.

A concession on the part of one of the participants in the conflict is also focused on avoiding the problem. In this case, the interests of the opponent are in the first place, and the inferior sacrifices his own.

The reasons for choosing this strategy may be strategic goals, inadequate assessment of the subject of the conflict, individual psychological characteristics.

The compromise strategy implies a balance of interests of the parties to the conflict. In this case, both mutual consideration of interests is carried out, and interpersonal relations are preserved, rising to a new level. The choice of a compromise strategy can lead to conflict resolution, but often this behavior is part of a further search for a mutually acceptable solution.

Cooperation is the most constructive strategy, which is characterized not only by recognizing the importance of the interests of both parties, but also by recognizing the value of interpersonal relationships. The possibility of using this strategy is due to the importance for the parties of the subject of conflict interaction. If the significance is approximately equal, then this strategy can be implemented. This strategy is characterized by the inclusion of behavior that is characteristic of all other strategies, contributing to the joint solution of the problem situation that has arisen.

On the basis of taking into account the importance of their own interests (assertiveness) and the interests of the opponent (cooperation), K. Thomas developed a two-dimensional model of conflict regulation.

According to K. Thomas, avoiding conflict does not contribute to the success of any of the parties. Such strategies as adaptation, rivalry or compromise lead to the infringement of the interests of one of the parties. Only cooperation allows both conflicting parties to achieve mutual benefit.

Thus, conflict interaction between people requires each participant to choose one or another strategy of behavior (withdrawal, coercion, compromise, concession or cooperation). The choice of strategy is carried out on the basis of taking into account the following factors: the correlation of one's own interests and the interests of the opponent, as well as the value of existing interpersonal relationships with the opposite side. It is these indicators that make it possible to characterize each strategy. Of the available strategies of behavior, only cooperation can bring the maximum benefit for both parties.

2. Practical study of the influence of needs on the choice of a behavior strategy

2.1 Design and organization of the experiment

An empirical study of the relationship between the degree of satisfaction of basic needs and the choice of a strategy of behavior in a conflict situation was carried out on the basis of a construction company. The subjects were men from 24 to 35 years old in the amount of 30 people. Women did not participate in the study, as the team is same-sex.

The following methods were used to obtain the initial data:

The analysis of this technique is carried out in accordance with a special key, which allows 12 judgments about the behavior of a particular person in a conflict situation, depending on the answer, to be attributed to one of the five strategies of behavior in a conflict (rivalry, adaptation, compromise, avoidance, cooperation) These judgments in various combinations grouped into 30 pairs. From each pair, it is necessary to choose a judgment that characterizes behavior in a conflict situation. The text of the methodology is presented in Appendix 1.

In the process of processing the received data, for each answer that matches the key, the corresponding type of behavior in a conflict situation is awarded one point. Dominant is the type (types) that scored the maximum number of points. The key to the methodology is presented in Appendix 2.

Test instructions:

In each pair, choose the statement that most accurately describes your typical behavior in a conflict situation.

2. Methodology for diagnosing the degree of satisfaction of basic needs (Appendix 3).

This technique was presented to the subjects with the following instructions: “There are 15 statements in front of you, which you must evaluate by comparing them in pairs with each other.

First evaluate the 1st statement with the 2nd, 3rd, etc. and write the result in the 1st column. So, if when comparing the first statement with the second, you consider the second one to be preferable for yourself, then enter the number 2 in the initial cell. If the first statement is preferable, then enter the number 1. Then, do the same with the second statement: compare it first with the 3rd, then with the 4th, etc., and enter the result in the second column.

In the same way, work with the rest of the statements, gradually filling in the entire form (Appendix 4).

While working, it is useful to say the phrase “I want ...” aloud for each statement.

The analysis of the results is carried out by counting the number of points (ie elections) that fell on each statement. After counting is completed, the statements are categorized in a hierarchy according to the number of points, the 5 statements that received the maximum points are the main needs.

In the future, the degree of satisfaction of these needs is determined. To do this, the sum of points is calculated in five sections on the following issues: 1. Material needs: 4,8,13; 2. Security needs: 3,6,10; 3. Social (interpersonal) needs: 2.5.15; 4. Needs for recognition: 1.9, 12; 5. Needs for self-expression: 7,11,14.

As a result, the sum of points for each of the 5 sections is calculated and a graph of results is built, which illustrates the three zones of satisfaction for five needs (Appendix 5).

2.2 Experimental procedure

According to the methodology for diagnosing a person's predisposition to conflict behavior by K. Thomas, the following data were obtained, characterizing the preferred behavioral strategies of the subjects in a conflict situation, presented in Table 1.

Table 1 Diagnostic results according to the method of K. Thomas (adapted by N.V. Grishina)

survey participant number	Rivalry	Cooperation	Compromise	Avoidance	fixture

Comparison of the data obtained allows us to assert that the most preferred in conflict situations among the young people surveyed are such behavioral strategies as cooperation, rivalry and compromise. The subjects also resort to avoidance and adaptation strategies, but much less frequently.

Analysis of the results according to the methodology for diagnosing the degree of satisfaction of basic needs is presented in Table 2.

Table 2 Results of testing according to the methodology for diagnosing the degree of satisfaction with basic needs

survey participant number	Needs
	material needs	need for security	Social needs	need for recognition	need for self-expression

The distribution of these needs according to the degree of significance for each individual subject is shown in Table 3.

Table 3 Importance of Needs

survey participant number	Needs
	material needs	need for security	Social needs	need for recognition	need for self-expression

An analysis of the data obtained shows that for the majority of respondents, the most relevant are material needs and needs for self-expression - 9 people each (30% of respondents), followed by recognition needs - 8 people (27%), social needs- 3 people (10%) and security needs - 1 person (3%).

To assess the degree of satisfaction of basic needs, the division of points proposed by the developers of the methodology was used in accordance with the zones, of which three are distinguished:

Satisfaction zone: from 1 to 14 points;

zone of partial satisfaction: from 15 to 28 points;

zone of dissatisfaction: from 29 to 42 points.

Comparison of the results obtained with this assessment scheme revealed the fact that the vast majority of respondents assess their needs as partially or completely unsatisfied.

A comparative analysis of the choice of strategy for each particular subject and the degree of satisfaction of his basic needs demonstrates a direct relationship between the choice of a rival strategy and the complete dissatisfaction of basic needs. For respondents with partial dissatisfaction of needs, other strategies of behavior in conflict situations are characteristic. These indicators confirm the hypothesis that in the process of interaction between people, the choice of a strategy of behavior in a conflict situation is significantly influenced by the degree of satisfaction of basic needs.

The conflict is a situation of contradiction, in which several parties with incompatible views, positions and interests take part.

There are many types of conflicts, each of these types has its own characteristics that determine the specifics of the flow of conflict interaction.

Within the framework of the organization, the flow of conflicts is determined by the complexity of the emerging relationships that affect various spheres of life. characteristic features organizational conflicts are: high predictability, features of the role structure of the organization, the overall structure and division horizontally and vertically, etc.

Among the reasons that contribute to the emergence of conflict relations in the team, one can distinguish objective and subjective.

The motives for entering into conflict interaction are internal motivating forces that push the subjects of conflict interaction to open confrontation. The motives for the emergence of a conflict can be: needs, interests, values, goals, ideals, beliefs, etc. In addition, the motivation of the participants in the conflict is influenced by the specific social situation, the existing social conditions.

Conflict interaction between people requires each participant to choose one or another strategy of behavior (withdrawal, coercion, compromise, concession or cooperation).

It should be noted that the choice of a strategy of behavior in a conflict is significantly influenced by the degree of satisfaction of basic needs, which is confirmed by this work.

Conclusion

The current state of the economy and the level of social development impose rather stringent requirements on the functioning of production teams and organizations. Creating conditions for effective professional activity includes the analysis and consideration of factors that can provoke conflict interaction, and therefore the problem of interpersonal conflicts in organizations is under the close attention of researchers.

The study of the factors that determine the choice of a strategy of behavior in a conflict makes it possible to take into account these parameters and use them as ways to stimulate the desired behavior.

The study of the influence of the degree of satisfaction of the basic needs of the subjects on the preference in choosing a strategy for conflict behavior was carried out on the basis of a construction company. The experimental sample consisted of 30 males aged 24 to 35 years.

The following methods were used as diagnostic tools:

1. Methodology for diagnosing a person's predisposition to conflict behavior by K. Thomas (adapted by N.V. Grishina).

2. Methodology for diagnosing the degree of satisfaction of basic needs.

An analysis of the data obtained during testing allowed us to confirm the hypothesis that in the process of interaction between people, the choice of a strategy of behavior in a conflict situation is significantly influenced by the degree of satisfaction of basic needs.

Bibliography

1. Bolshakov A. G., Nesmelova M. Yu. Conflictology of organizations. M., 2001.

2. Borodkin F. M., Koryak N. M. Attention - conflict. 2nd ed. Novosibirsk, 1989.

3. Vasilyuk F. E. Psychology of experience: Analysis of overcoming critical situations. M.: Publishing House of Moscow. University, 1984.

4. Vikhansky O. S., Naumov A. I. Management. M.: Gardarika., 1996.

5. Grishina NV Psychology of conflict. S.-P., 2000

6. Grishina NV I and others: communication in the workforce. St. Petersburg: Lenizdat, 1990

7. Zerkin D. P. . Fundamentals of conflictology: a course of lectures. Rostov-on-Don: Phoenix, 1998.

8. Kibanov A. Ya., Vorozheikin I. E., Zakharov D. K., Konovalova V. G. Conflictology. 2nd ed., M., Ed. Infra-M, 2006.

9. Koshelev A. N., Ivannikova I. I. Conflicts in the organization: types, purpose, management methods. M .: Alfa-Press, 2007.

10. Krichevsky R. L., Dubovskaya E. M. Social Psychology small group, M.: Ed. Aspect Press, 2001.

11. Krichevsky R.L. If you are a leader ... - M., 2001

12. Kuliev T. A., Mamedov V. B. Leader and team: interaction. Moscow: Knowledge, 1990.

13. Latynov VV Conflict: flow, methods of resolution, behavior of the conflicting parties. T. 1. M., 1993.

14. Leonov N. I. Conflict, conflict and behavior in conflict. Scientific publication. Izhevsk, 2002.

15. Leonov N. I. Conflicts and conflict behavior. Study methods. Peter, 2005.

16. Leonov N. I. Fundamentals of conflictology. Tutorial. Izhevsk: Udmurt University, 2000.

17. Ratnikov V.P. Conflictology. Moscow: Unity, 2001.

18. Somova L. K. Conflict resolution // Manager, 2000.

19. Travin V.V., Dyatlov V.A. Fundamentals of personnel management. - M., 1992

20. Chumikov A. N. Conflict management. M., 1996.

21. Shalenko VN Conflicts in labor collectives. M., Publishing House of Moscow. un-ta, 1992.

22. Sheinov V.P. Conflicts in our life and their resolution. Mn., 1997, p. 11-70

Appendix 1

Method for diagnosing a person's predisposition to conflict behavior by K. Thomas (adaptation by N.V. Grishina)

Answer "A"	Answer "B"
1. Sometimes I let others take responsibility for resolving a contentious issue.	Instead of discussing what we disagree on, I try to draw attention to what we both agree on.
2. I try to find a compromise solution.	I'm trying to work things out with the other person's interests and mine in mind.
3. I usually push hard to get my way.
4. I try to find a compromise solution.	Sometimes I sacrifice my own interests for the interests of another person.
5. When settling a controversial situation, I always try to find support from another.	I try my best to avoid tension.
6. I try to avoid getting into trouble for myself.	I'm trying to get my way.
7. I try to postpone the decision of the controversial issue in order to finally resolve it over time.	I consider it possible to yield in order to achieve my own.
8. Usually I am persistent in trying to get my way.	First of all, I try to clearly define what all the interests and issues involved are.
9. I think that it is not always worth worrying about some disagreements that arise.	I'm making an effort to get my way.
10. I am determined to achieve my goals.	I'm trying to find a compromise solution.
11. First of all, I try to clearly define what all the interests and issues involved are.	I try to calm the other down and mostly keep our relationship going.
12. Often I avoid taking a position that can cause controversy.
13. I offer a middle position.	I insist that it be done my way.
14. I communicate my point of view to another and ask about his views.	I am trying to show the other the logic and advantages of my views.
15. I try to calm the other down and mostly keep our relationship going.	I try to do whatever is necessary to avoid tension.
16. I try not to hurt the feelings of another.	I am trying to convince the other of the benefits of my position.
17. I usually try hard to get my way.	I try my best to avoid useless tension.
18. If it makes another happy, I will give him the opportunity to insist on his own.	I give the opportunity to another in something to remain with his opinion, if he also meets me halfway.
19. First of all, I try to clearly define what all the interests involved and the issues at issue are.	I try to postpone the decision of the controversial issue in order to finally resolve it in due course.
20. I try to get over our differences immediately.	I strive for the best balance of gains and losses for everyone.
21. When negotiating, I try to be attentive to the wishes of the other.	I always tend to direct discussion of the problem.
22. I try to find a position that is in the middle between my position and the other person's point of view.	I defend my desires.
23. I am concerned to satisfy the desires of everyone.	Sometimes I present an opportunity for others to take responsibility for resolving a contentious issue.
24. If the position of another seems very important to him, I will try to meet his desires.	I try to convince the other to come to a compromise.
25. I try to prove to another the logic and advantages of my views.

Species and types

Based on the way conflicts are resolved, they are divided into two types:

Antagonistic. The confrontation is resolved by the destruction of the structures of all parties or the complete refusal of the parties to participate, except for the one that won the conflict. For example, winning a dispute or being elected to the authorities;
Compromise. The solution to the conflict is made taking into account one or another benefit for both parties. For example, a supplier offers a customer a discount on services for a delay in terms, etc.

Based on the areas of manifestation, conflicts are divided as follows:

political: struggle for power;
social: contradictions in relations between people and groups, which are characterized by increased interests - workers' strikes, pickets, etc.;
economic: the conflict is based on the contradictions of economic interests, the struggle for benefits, resources.
organizational A: At the heart of conflicts, as a rule, is the regulation of responsibilities as a consequence of the hierarchical structure in the organization.

Based on the direction of the conflict, they are divided into two types:

vertical: Decrease the amount of power from top to bottom. For example, in relations between a boss and a subordinate, a parent company and a subsidiary;
horizontal: interaction occurs between parties having an equal amount of power. For example, the heads of neighboring departments in the enterprise.

According to the severity of conflict situations are divided into two groups:

open: the collision is clearly expressed: a dispute, a quarrel;
hidden: the expression of the conflict is indirect, aggressive actions are hidden.

According to the number of participants, conflicts are divided into:

Intrapersonal: clash of motives of the personality of the same person, most often they are characterized by the problem of choice. At the same time, the choice can be determined both by the norms and requirements of society, and by personal needs and desires.
interpersonal: collision can be between a person and a group, between two people.
Intergroup: in this case, two groups of people united on a certain basis collide.

According to the needs affected by the conflict, there are two types:

cognitive conflict- clash of knowledge, opposing opinions and judgments;
conflict of interest- the conflict is based on the interests of a group or an individual.

Classification and structure of the conflict

The structure of the conflict is a set of stable links that ensure its integrity. Mandatory components of the conflict are:

Participants in the conflict. This category includes all persons involved in the conflict in one way or another.
Information Models for all categories of participants.
Thing: the problem is at the heart of the conflict, while it can be both objectively existing and subjectively presented.
An object: the reason for the conflict situation. When he finds himself at the intersection of interests, a direct conflict situation arises.
Micro environment, macro environment. All the conditions of the system in which the participants in the conflict are located, which make it possible to draw the correct conclusion about the causes, the course of the conflict and not to single it out as a separate phenomenon, but to perceive it as part of the social situation.

Causes and conditions of occurrence

The reasons for the emergence of a conflict are very diverse and depend on the type, number of participants, flow conditions, etc.

Common reasons for the formation of most conflict situations include:

Natural clash of values in the process of social interaction. At the same time, spiritual, material, etc. can be attributed to values.
Underdeveloped legal framework, allowing to resolve social contradictions in a particular area, the lack of a clear regulation.
An acute shortage of goods which are of decisive importance in the life of the subjects.
Persistent stereotypes behavior and thinking, which most often leads to group conflicts.
Poor awareness in certain issues related to the subjects of the conflict.

Participants and consequences

Participants in the conflict are all subjects, one way or another taking part in the conflict situation: from the direct parties to those who influence its course.

Members are divided into:

The main ones are opposing forces.
Support groups - helping, sharing views, etc.
Other participants - stimulating the conflict, provoking, etc.

The consequences of the conflict can be different:

Favorable. These are the ones that are acceptable to both parties. This gives the participants a sense of belonging to the solution of a common problem, and also allows you to build prospects for cooperation in the future.
Dysfunctional. These include:

dissatisfaction;
low degree of cooperation;
unconstructive, unproductive competition with other groups;
forming an opinion about the other side as an "enemy";
the end of the interaction of the parties;
hostility.

Conflict Strategies

Rivalry. The one who chooses this strategy, as a rule, values his own interests much higher than the interests of his opponent. With this strategy, authority, power, and a tough position are actively used.
Care. This strategy is characterized by a low assessment of one's own interests and those of the opponent. In essence, this is a mutual concession.
concession. In this case, the person values the opponent's interest above his own, and sacrifices personal needs.
Compromise. It is characterized by a balance of interests and the search for ways out that are convenient for both parties.
Cooperation. Such a strategy is characterized by a high appreciation of both interests, as well as recognition of the value of interpersonal relationships.

Management and methods of resolution

Conflict management involves keeping it within the boundaries, beyond which there is a threat to interpersonal relationships, organizations, groups, etc. Skillful management in some cases helps to resolve the conflict situation.

There are several ways to resolve conflicts:

Care, evasion. The desire to avoid conflict, and once in it, the refusal to discuss, negotiate, etc. In some cases, this method of resolution is acceptable, for example, if necessary, to analyze the situation, but this is, in a sense, postponing to a later time.
Smoothing. This is a demonstration of agreement with the set requirements. Smoothing can include promises, apologies, etc.
Compromise. Mutual concession, which allows each of the parties to come out of the conflict satisfied to one degree or another.
Compulsion. This is the suppression of one of the parties, ignoring its interests and opinions.
Confrontation. With this method of solution, everyone remains with his own opinion, insists on his own. In this case, a third party is needed for a better resolution.
Cooperation– joint overcoming of the arisen disagreement.

Diagnostics and forecasting

Conflict prediction is an assumption about the possibility of its occurrence and further development based on available information.

Many external stimuli can be foreseen and eliminated in a timely manner, however, forecasting should take into account data on all the structural elements of the conflict:

problem;
relations between the parties, circumstances;
signals about a possible conflict, their frequency;
incidents, constructive and destructive manifestations, behavioral reactions, etc.;
the composition of the participants or their personal characteristics, individual inclinations to enter into conflict situations.

Conflicts are an obligatory side of any relationship, including labor, economic, social, etc., and depending on the field of activity, direction, characteristics of the parties and other factors, various behavior strategies and optimal solutions to these situations are chosen.

Video: What is conflict

Conflicts are extremely diverse in terms of origins, driving forces that to a certain extent determine the way they operate, and, finally, in terms of motivation, vital energy, which is involved in the dynamics of conflicts and turns out to be a kind of nourishing material for them.

Any social tension can turn into a social conflict under appropriate conditions, but the course of this transformation, the way of understanding the process, the nature of its representation in the mind of the acting subject will develop according to certain rules. At the same time, a certain sequence will be maintained in the argumentation, advancement of claims and substantiation of their requirements.

The lines of argument put forward by both sides of the conflict form a field of motivation and can be designated as appeals to needs, interests and values. Here the question of the extent to which the specific content of the claims in the course of the development of the conflict corresponds to “real” needs, interests and values is no longer important. The fact is that if the lines of argumentation (motivation) arise and are developed, then they become a reality, expressed in motivating a conflict situation. In a conflict, one set of needs, interests, and values opposes another, put forward by the opposite side. The conflict will be complete and developed when it is based on the simultaneous inclusion in the motivation of all levels of motivation: needs, values and interests.

Motivation- a system of motives that cause the activity of the individual and determine its direction. These are conscious or unconscious mental factors that prompt the individual to perform certain actions, as well as a combination of internal and external conditions that cause the activity of the individual.

motive- this, on the one hand, is an incentive reason for any action, a system of arguments in favor of something, on the other hand, it is a conscious motivation for activity associated with the desire to satisfy certain needs.

stress - nervous overexcitation resulting from the resolution of contradictions between the natural, social and spiritual essences of the individual, an explosion of internal confrontation between emotions and opinions, feelings and reason, a reaction to stimuli that exceed a certain critical level and upset the balance in the internal environment of the body. Stress, therefore, has a protective and adaptive character, aimed at increasing the body's resistance to the effects of adverse life circumstances. A significant factor in stressful conditions and risks is the reaction of workers to conflict situations at their place of employment. It can be justifiably argued that stress inevitably accompanies organizational and social and labor conflicts. It is equally natural that they arise as a result of emotional breakdowns in interpersonal relationships caused by tactlessness and rudeness of colleagues, primarily leaders, hypocrisy and deception on the part of people with a bad conscience. Any state of struggle with something is already stress. The impact of these factors increases many times if the economy and social sphere of the country is in a fever of crisis, the state of society is not stable and stable, the standard of living of the population is falling, the policy of the state, the legislative, executive and judicial branches of power are not supported, cause mistrust and protest from a significant part of the population. citizens. Russia is currently experiencing such a multifaceted crisis. It inflicts the strongest destructive trauma on the mental health of people, constantly keeps Russians in social tension, in fact, in a continuously ongoing state of stress.

57. Methods for preventing and resolving conflicts

Conflict prevention- this is an activity aimed at preventing its occurrence and destructive impact on the social situation

Conflict prevention activities can be carried out by the participants in conflict interaction, heads of organizations, and conflict experts.
It can be carried out in four main areas:
1. Creation of objective conditions preventing the emergence and destructive development of pre-conflict situations. It is apparently impossible to exclude the occurrence of pre-conflict situations in a team, organization, or society. To create objective conditions for minimizing their number and resolving them in non-conflict ways is not only possible, but also necessary.
2. Optimization of organizational and managerial conditions for the creation and functioning of organizations is an important objective and subjective prerequisite for preventing conflicts.
3. Eliminate the socio-psychological causes of conflicts.
4. Blocking personal causes of conflicts.

In conflictology, the traditionally final stage in the dynamics of the conflict is denoted by the term conflict resolution. However, many authors also use other concepts that reflect the specifics and completeness of the termination of conflict actions: attenuation, overcoming, self-resolution, suppression, extinction, settlement, elimination, settlement, etc. Of these concepts, the broadest is the end of the conflict, which consists in the end of the conflict for any reason. The main forms of the end of the conflict: resolution, settlement, attenuation, elimination, escalation into another conflict.
Conflict resolution is a joint activity of its participants, aimed at stopping opposition and solving the problem that led to the collision. 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, which they defended in the conflict. Often conflict resolution is based on a change in the attitude of opponents to its object or to each other.
Conflict resolution differs from resolution in that a third party takes part in resolving the contradiction between opponents. Its participation is possible both with the consent of the warring parties, and without their consent. At the end of the conflict, the contradiction underlying it is not always resolved.

The attenuation of the conflict is a temporary cessation of opposition while maintaining the main signs of the conflict: contradictions and tensions. The conflict moves from an explicit form to a latent one.
The elimination of the conflict is understood as such an impact on it, as a result of which the main structural elements of the conflict are eliminated. Despite the "non-constructive" elimination, there are situations that require quick and decisive action on the conflict.

Conflict resolution styles (for conflict participants):
1. Competition style.
When using this style, you must act actively and go to resolve the conflict in your own way. This style is recommended only in cases where the solution of the problem is of great importance for the participant in the conflict, when there is a need to act quickly and decisively, realizing the desire to satisfy their interests in the first place.
2. Style of evasion.
It can be used in cases where the problem involved is not of priority importance, when the other side has more weight or power, when there is no complete confidence in one's own rightness or competence, and also if there is a possibility that the problem will be resolved by itself. At the same time, taking a passive position, the participant in the conflict does not show a desire to satisfy their own interests, as well as the interests of the other side of the conflict. The problem is ignored and the responsibility for its solution lies with another person.
3. Fixture style.
A bit like the avoidance style, the difference lies in the fact that the participants act together, and one of them shows a willingness to make concessions and satisfy the interests of the other participant in the conflict. It gives you the opportunity to smooth the situation and gain time.
4. Style of cooperation.
The most difficult, energy - and time-consuming style of conflict resolution. Defending their interests, the parties make efforts to satisfy the interests of other participants in the conflict, showing understanding for their opponent, expressing their readiness to listen to the opposite point of view and jointly develop alternative solutions to the problem.
5. Style of compromise.
Each of the parties makes certain concessions, limiting itself to the partial fulfillment of its own intentions and developing a solution to the problem that would best satisfy the interests of both conflicting parties.
To resolve conflicts, it is important to have the ability to quickly and adequately respond to various options for the development of a conflict situation, to have at your disposal various approaches and be able to use it, go beyond the usual patterns of thinking, and at the same time, you can use the conflict as a source of life experience, self-education and self-learning.