Introduction 2
Conflicts in organizations.3
1 What is conflict.3
2 Causes of conflicts.4
3 Causes of conflicts in organizations6
4 Types of conflicts in an organization8
Conflict resolution.11
1 Methods permissions conflicts in the organization11
2 Examples of conflict management in an organization.17
Conclusion. 22
Bibliography 24
Introduction
RelevanceThis topic is that at present in organizations, managers at many levels lack knowledge about conflicts and ways to prevent them. Many managers simply do not know how to get out of conflict situation, do not know that there are peaceful and constructive methods. Conflict is part of the process of interaction between people. This paper discusses: what a conflict is, what conflicts exist, the causes of conflicts, methods of resolving conflicts. All people are different. We all perceive different situations differently. Which leads to us simply disagreeing with each other. Conflicts in organizations arise not only during negotiations, but also during any business and personal contacts. There are many reasons for conflicts, but the main one is not right attitude managers with subordinates or psychological incompatibility of people.
Of course, most conflicts will negatively affect the organization's activities. But sometimes conflict benefits a company. It can stimulate more effective and constructive problem solving, and it can also identify alternatives for solving various controversial issues. It can also encourage employees to express their ideas and suggestions.
Tasks course work the following:
· Find out what conflict is, the causes and types of conflict situations.
· Give a detailed description of methods for resolving conflict situations.
It is possible to lead without conflict if you learn such management, in which, in purposeful cooperation with others, everything destructive is eliminated. This is a very difficult task. But today we have the knowledge and experience that allows us to get closer to the goal.
1. Conflicts in organizations
1.1 What is conflict
conflict dispute psychological organization
What is conflict? This is a process in which one individual, group of people or department of a company interferes with the implementation of the plans of another. The concept of conflict is often associated with negativity, quarrels, threats, warriors and the like. There is an opinion that conflict is an undesirable phenomenon that should be avoided.
Conflict (from lat. conflicts) - clash, struggle, hostility. Conflict situations are studied by conflictology.
The subject of the conflict is an imaginary or existing problem underlying the conflict.
The subject of the conflict is an active party capable of creating a conflict situation and influencing the conflict.
The object of the conflict can be a material or spiritual value, the possession or use of which is sought by both parties to the conflict.
An organization is a complex whole, which includes not only individuals with different statuses, social attitudes and interests. But also different social education striving to take a higher place in the structure of the organization, change existing standards activities or a system of relationships within an organizational structure.
Conflict in the organization. Who among us has not experienced this having a negative impact on every person in the company? Who hasn’t been drawn at least once into the cycle of intrigue, corporate conspiracies, sidelong glances, and whispered conversations behind one’s back? Any employee of a company, regardless of rank, can become a victim of conflicts. Moreover, if the company rapidly expands, the more conflicts appear.
At the heart of any conflict is a situation that includes:
1.The position of the parties contradicts any pretext.
2.Different goals or means of achieving them.
.Or a mismatch of interests and desires.
In textbooks on conflictology you can find that conflicts are necessary and useful. Positive functions can be identified, such as:
Ø Informational and educational. This function has two sides: signaling and communication. The signaling side is that the administration draws attention to intolerant working conditions and various forms of abuse. The communicative side is that opponents need to have information that allows them to draw conclusions about the strategy and tactics of their opponent, the resources that he has. Any conflict sends a signal to the manager that there is a problem that needs to be solved. It allows us to understand it, since it reveals the totality of facts perceived by people.
Ø Integrative. Conflict helps unite people into groups against another group or person in the same company. This effect can work in a variety of situations. As a result, boundaries are established between those people who, by some criteria, are considered their own or strangers.
Ø Function of stimulating adaptation to a changing environment.
1.2 Causes of conflicts
We are all different and it is quite natural that we differ in opinions, assessments, goals and methods of achieving them. All these disagreements contribute to the development of conflicts.
Conflict is a very complex and psychological phenomenon, the study of which depends on the quality of the methods used.
In psychology, conflict is defined as a collision associated with negative emotional experiences of oppositely directed, mutually incompatible tendencies, a single episode in consciousness, in interpersonal interactions or interpersonal relationships of individuals or groups of people.
The cause of the conflict is an event, situation, facts, phenomena preceding the conflict and causing it when certain conditions activities of subjects of social interaction.
The emergence and development of conflicts is determined by the action of four groups of factors:
1.Objective
2.Organizational and managerial
.Social - psychological
Personal.
The first two groups are objective in nature, while the third and fourth are subjective.
Objective reasons are considered to be those circumstances of social interaction between people that lead to a clash of their thoughts, interests, and values.
The subjective causes of the conflict are determined by individual psychological characteristics and the direct interaction of people during their unification into social groups.
The most important thing is to find out the cause of the conflict - this is the very first step in resolving the conflict. There are five main reasons for the conflict situation.
1.Different life values. This may result in a collision. For example, for you, family is most important, but for your manager success is more important companies. Conflict arises when your manager asks you to work more than normal, thereby spending less time with your family.
2.Wrong assumptions can cause conflict. For example, a husband, coming home after work, assumes that a warm dinner is waiting for him at home, but the wife has not prepared food or cleaned the house, this can lead to a quarrel.
.Expectation. We expect other people to know what we are thinking and what we want. These expectations give rise to resentment, quarrels, and misunderstandings. Therefore, we must always remember that we do not know how to read each other’s thoughts. What is clear to us today may be completely incomprehensible to others. If we expect certain actions from another, this absolutely does not mean that the other thinks the same.
.Different upbringing. Our upbringing, religion, status in society, age, gender, nationality, skin color can cause conflicts. For example, a man behaves confidently and sometimes aggressively at work, then this is considered in the order of things, but if a woman behaves this way, she will be condemned.
.Differences in goals, desires and, of course, inability to make compromises. For example, you want to go to the theater, and a friend wants to go to the cinema. A conflict may arise if everyone insists on their own option. In this situation, you need to be able to find a compromise.
1.3 Causes of conflicts in an organization
According to research, managers spend approximately 25% of their time resolving conflicts. Naturally, conflict in the workplace has a negative impact on team productivity. There are two typical reactions to conflict: withdrawal/avoidance or fighting. Of course, both options lead to the desired results. It is very important to learn how to resolve disagreements. Disagreements, with the right approach to them, can contribute to the development of mutual understanding and mutual assistance in order to more effectively solve the problem. But first you need to find out the cause of the conflict. The reasons may vary. Let's highlight these reasons:
1.Resource Allocation - The need to share resources almost always leads to various types conflict. For example, unfair assessment of staff work and also remuneration, undeserved privileges of some and undervaluation of other employees.
2.Interdependence of tasks on another person or group. Certain types organizational structures increase the possibility of conflict. For example, the matrix structure of an organization, where the principle of unity of command is deliberately violated.
.Poor communications can act as a catalyst for conflict, interfering individual employees or group to understand the situation or the point of view of others. For example, inaccurate job descriptions.
.Different life principles and values. For example, a manager will forgive a subordinate for doing something that is at odds with their moral principles.
.Conflicting goals. For example, when managers set goals for employees, they are opposite to each other. One manager says that the most important thing is to make a plan in a short time, and another says that the most important thing is the quality of work.
Fig. 1 Scheme of conflict development.
1.4 Types of conflicts in an organization
There are four main types of conflicts: intrapersonal, interpersonal, between a person and a group, and intergroup.
Let's consider the types of conflicts in an organization. Intrapersonal conflict. The participants are not people, but different psychological factors. Intrapersonal conflicts associated with work in an organization can take various forms. One of the most common is role conflict when various roles a person is subject to conflicting demands. Internal conflicts can arise in production; this can happen due to work overload or, on the contrary, lack of work.
Interpersonal conflict. The most common type of conflict. Conflict manifests itself in organizations in different ways. Many managers assume that the reason is a dissimilarity of personalities. Indeed, due to differences in character, views, and behavior patterns, it is very difficult to get along with each other. But a deep analysis shows that such conflicts are usually based on objective reasons. Conflicts occur between a subordinate and a manager. For example, when a subordinate is convinced that the manager makes unreasonable demands on him, and the manager believes that the subordinate does not fulfill the norm.
Interpersonal conflicts can be divided into the following types:
· Conflicts between a manager and a subordinate;
· Conflicts between employees;
· Conflicts managerial level, that is, a conflict between managers of the same rank.
Conflict between the individual and the group. They are mainly due to the discrepancy between individual and group norms of behavior. Anyone who does not perceive them becomes in opposition and risks being left alone.
Intergroup conflict. An organization consists of many formal and informal groups, between which, one way or another, conflicts arise. For example, between informal groups within departments, between managers and subordinates, between employees of different departments, between the administration and the trade union.
The entire set of conflicts, one way or another, is connected with the organization’s management method. Since management is nothing more than the activity of resolving conflicts for the sake of those goals and objectives that determine the essence of the organization. The manager must resolve conflicts that arise in the organization between departments, between managers and subordinates, between producers and consumers of products, suppliers and producers and suppliers in the name of the more general interests of the organization, which he considers as the goals of his management activities.
Also, conflicts are classified according to the degree of manifestation: hidden and open.
A hidden conflict usually affects two people who, for the time being, try not to show that they are in conflict. But as soon as one of them loses his nerve, the hidden conflict turns into an open one. There are also random, spontaneously arising and chronic, as well as deliberately provoked conflicts. Intrigues are also distinguished as a type of conflict. Intrigue is understood as a deliberate dishonest action beneficial to the initiator, who forces the group or individual to certain negative actions and thereby causes damage to the group and individual. Intrigues, as a rule, are carefully thought out and planned, and have their own storyline.
Main types of conflicts, causes of their occurrence and methods of resolution Table 1
Types of conflicts Causes of conflicts Methods of conflict resolution Intrapersonal Discrepancy between external requirements and internal positions, discrepancy between different kinds of interests Getting out of a state of discomfort through changing your thoughts, attitudes, values and behavior and through receiving more information about the problem Interpersonal Collision of interests (discrepancy of characters, personal views or moral values) Resolution of conflict by force; conflict resolution through cooperation (taking into account the interests of each party); avoidance of conflict (lack of personal persistence and desire to cooperate), compromise style (the interests of each party are moderately taken into account, quick resolution of the conflict) Intra-group Discrepancy in behavioral norms (change of leadership, emergence of an informal leader) Intra-organizational Struggle for spheres of influence within the organization
2. Conflict resolution
2.1 Methods for resolving conflicts in an organization
Currently, experts have developed many different recommendations regarding various aspects of people’s behavior in conflict situations. Selecting appropriate strategies and means of resolving them, as well as managing them.
Conflict resolution is the activity of participants aimed at stopping opposition and solving the problem that led to disagreement. Conflict resolution involves the active participation of both parties in transforming the conditions in which they interact and eliminating the causes of the conflict.
Resolving conflicts that arise in an organization can be part of the overall management process in a team, and then they fall within the responsibilities of the manager. The leader has the ability to use his power to resolve conflicts, and this allows him to influence the conflict and take timely measures to resolve their relationship. But at the same time, the leader will not be able to be objective enough.
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 your actions.
The main conflict resolution strategies are competition, cooperation, compromise, accommodation and avoidance.
· Rivalry is about imposing a preferred solution on another opponent.
· A compromise is the desire of the parties to end the conflict with partial concessions.
· Adaptation, or concession, is considered as a forced or voluntary refusal to fight and surrender of one’s position.
· Avoidance or avoidance is an attempt to get away from a conflict situation at a minimum cost.
· Cooperation is considered the most effective strategy for resolving conflict. It presupposes that the parties focus on a constructive discussion of the problem, considering the other opponent not as an adversary, but as an ally in the search for a solution.
Conflict management is a purposeful influence on the arrangement of the causes leading to the conflict, or on the correction of the behavior of the participants in the conflict.
There are many methods of conflict management. Several groups, each of which has its own area of application:
1.Intrapersonal methods.
2.Structural methods.
.Interpersonal method.
Negotiation.
.Aggressive responses. This method is used in extreme cases, when the capabilities of all previous groups have been exhausted.
Intrapersonal methods consist in the ability to correctly organize one’s own behavior, express one’s point of view without causing a defensive reaction on the part of another person. Several authors suggest using the “I am a statement” method, that is, a way of conveying your attitude to another person towards a certain subject, without negativity, but in such a way that the other opponent changes his attitude.
This method helps a person maintain his position without turning his opponent into his enemy, the “I am statement” can be used in any situation, but is more effective when a person is aggressive.
The structural method primarily affects organizational conflicts that arise at the organizational level, arising due to improper distribution of responsibilities. These methods include:
1.Clarification of requirements;
2.Use of coordination and integration mechanisms;
.Creation of a reward system.
Clarifying job requirements is one of the popular methods of managing and preventing conflicts. Each specialist must clearly understand what results he must provide, what his duties, responsibilities, limits of authority, and stages of work are. The method is implemented in the form of compiling the corresponding job descriptions, distribution of rights and responsibilities across management levels.
Coordination and integration mechanisms.
This is another method. One of the most common mechanisms is the hierarchy of authority. Which regulates the interaction of people, decision making and information flows within the organization. If two workers have disagreements on any issues, you need to contact the manager so that he can resolve the conflict.
Interpersonal styles of conflict resolution.
The interpersonal method is the choice of the style of the conflict participants in order to minimize damage to their interests. These include:
Evasion or withdrawal. This style means that a person tries to get away from a conflict situation with minimal losses. One way to resolve conflicts is to avoid situations that provoke contradictions. Evasion is aimed at leaving the situation without yielding, but also without insisting on one’s own, not expressing one’s opinion, and moving the conversation in a different direction.
Smoothing. This style is characterized by behavior that is dictated by a belief that is aimed at maintaining or restoring good relationships, at ensuring the interests of the other party through concessions. Such a “smoother” tries not to let the conflict out, appealing to the need for solidarity. But at the same time, you can forget about the very problem underlying the conflict. In this case, peace may come, but the problem will remain. This leads to the eventual "explosion" of emotions, and the conflict will become relevant again.
Compulsion. Within this style, attempts to force people to accept their point of view at any cost prevail. A person who tries to apply this style is not interested in the opinions of other people and behaves aggressively. This style is effective where the leader has power over subordinates. But this style suppresses the initiative of subordinates.
Compromise. The essence of this style is that the parties seek to resolve differences through partial concessions. It is characterized by a refusal to accept some of the demands that were put forward earlier, to accept the claims of the other side, and a willingness to forgive. The style is effective in the following cases: the opponent understands that rivals have equal opportunities, the presence of mutually exclusive interests, satisfaction with a temporary solution, the threat of losing everything.
Solution to the problem. This style is considered the most effective strategy for dealing with conflict. This style recognizes differences of opinion and is willing to listen to other points of view in order to determine the causes of the conflict and find a solution for all parties. Someone who operates with this style does not try to achieve their goals at the expense of others, but rather seeks best option solutions. This style is most effective in solving organizational problems.
The main positive method of conflict resolution is negotiation. Negotiations represent a broad aspect of communication, covering many areas of human activity. Negotiation is the process of finding an agreement between people by satisfying their interests. This method of conflict resolution is a set of tactics aimed at finding mutually acceptable solutions for conflicting parties.
The use of negotiations to resolve conflict is possible under certain conditions:
· The existence of interdependence of the parties involved in the conflict.
· Lack of significant development in the capabilities of the conflict actors.
· Correspondence of the stage of development of the conflict to the possibilities of negotiations.
· Participation of parties who can actually make a decision in the current situation.
Main function Negotiation is a joint discussion of a problem and decision-making. The decision made can be constructive, entailing a change in the situation for the better.
There are two types of negotiations:
1. Positional.
2. Rational.
The subject of positional negotiations is to identify the position of the parties, that is, discuss the subjective views of the parties on solving the problem. Positional negotiations can take place in soft and hard forms. The essence of the soft form is that the parties are ready to reach an agreement and maintain relations. Tough negotiations mean insisting on one's own at all costs, most often ignoring the interests of other parties.
The subject of rational negotiations is the deep interests of the parties, and not the positions they occupy. The goal of rational negotiation is to find the optimal solution.
Negotiation methods.
Here are several negotiation methods:
· Variational method.
· Integration method.
· Best Alternative Method.
· Balancing the position.
· A step-by-step method of reaching an agreement.
The variational method is that partners are offered pre-developed solution options, which are based on the idea of the optimal solution to the problem in combination with the others.
The integration method puts the interests of the parties at the forefront, which pushes the negotiating partners to unite them. The main emphasis is on existing points of contact. The opportunity to obtain mutual benefit through a reasonable combination of efforts.
The best alternative method is that any negotiations may end unsuccessfully and not be effective as expected. Therefore, it is always necessary to have alternative solutions.
The method of balancing a position is to carefully study the views of your opponents. If they are acceptable, then based on them a working solution to the problem is developed and offered for discussion to the partner.
In difficult situations, refusal to negotiate entails large losses; a method of gradually reaching an agreement can be used. The essence of this method is to achieve agreement under conditions of gradual full or partial review of requirements, depending on the emergence of new circumstances and the opening of new opportunities.
In practice, there are many different ways in which managers resolve conflicts between subordinates.
2.2 Examples of conflict management in an organization
Let's consider conflict situations using the example of the trading company Edelweiss LLP. Trade is considered a conflict area. Every day in the process of activity there arises a large number of disagreements that develop into conflicts. Conflicts occur between:
· Between employees as a result of receiving false information.
· Between buyers and sales managers.
· Between subordinates and managers.
· Between the company and suppliers.
· Between the company and the city administration.
· Between the company and competitors.
· Between the company and the tax office.
This company specializes in the sale of sugar. It has been operating on the market for 11 years. It also exports its products to countries such as Holland, Japan, Morocco, Uzbekistan, Latvia, and Estonia. Its products are considered one of the environmentally friendly pure product food, which does not include chemical additives. In 2012, we supplied more than 3,500 tons of sugar. We can conclude that this company has maintained its reputation at a high level for many years.
To resolve a conflict, a leader or mediator must know or have an understanding of psychological portrait every employee of the company, that is, to know his weaknesses and strengths. Thereby foreseeing his possible behavior in a conflict.
Let us briefly characterize the personnel of this company in terms of behavior in conflict situations and ways out of them.
The head of the company, Inkov Alexander Anatolyevich, is quite patient and reserved for the head of a company. It is very difficult to piss him off. It comes into conflict very rarely. If it is not possible to avoid a conflict, the manager tries to quickly and constructively find a way out of the conflict situation, using various resolution methods. Alexander Anatolyevich always tries to find a compromise solution. He gets along well with people, understands others' situations and can always help. The team tries to create favorable environment. But, like any living person, he can break down as a result of any troubles at work or in his personal life.
Deputy Head Maykov Oleg Evgenievich. He is very responsible, strict, loves everything to be done the way he wants, loves to find fault, but at the slightest failure he begins to panic and develop conflict. He is sensitive to the words of others. It starts up quickly, but leaves just as quickly. In a conflict with subordinates, he tries in every possible way to impose his opinion.
Seller Baskakov Maxim Nikolaevich. The best seller companies. Purposeful in his work, professional in his field. Always communicates well with people, very kind. But has one negative trait like spinelessness. With such a person it is easy to resolve conflicts and disagreements if they arise.
Sales Manager Eduard Romanovich Tretyakov. Very Difficult person, loves to argue, insist on his own, even if he is wrong. This employee always has conflicts with clients, but despite this, Tretyakov copes well with his duties and always fulfills the set plan. When working with clients, he does not tolerate rudeness and disrespect. In the event of a conflict, it “explodes” strongly and is very difficult to stop; one has to resort to the participation of a third party.
Let us consider the conflict that arises in a company between employees in the course of their activities.
· Lack of funds leads to conflict. The manager unfairly blames the sales manager for the shortage; later it turned out that the manager made a mistake in the calculations.
· The director of the company travels very often on business trips, so his duties are performed by the deputy. In the absence of the manager, the deputy gives his instructions to his subordinates, not paying attention to the fact that the director has given other instructions.
· The sales manager is fond of basketball, as a result of which he often asks for time off; if the manager leaves earlier, he also leaves workplace, shifting authority to other employees. In this case, a conflict arises.
As a result, for normal operation the manager accepted the following measures:
One of these measures is to get rid of slackers, since they themselves do not bring benefits to the enterprise and show bad example others working. The manager monitors the work of the staff, if during the work it turns out that the person does not have the desire to work efficiently and effectively, he is fired.
The next condition for preventing conflicts in a company is concern for fairness. The manager treats employees fairly, without punishing the innocent, and before doing anything, he carefully thinks through what the consequences may be.
The manager is very fair about payments wages, as well as bonuses. It only pays those who have done really well. The company has a rule: work that is done with high quality and on time is well paid. Salary depends on % of total sales.
There is an agreement in the company to make all decisions collectively. All amendments are discussed together with everyone.
The relationship between buyer and seller is very complicated. A trading company always makes concessions to the client, as a result the company suffers, since the decision made or some agreement is always violated by the buyer.
The client purchased a consignment of goods and took upon himself transportation. But once the goods arrive at the warehouse, the buyer makes a claim regarding the quality of the goods. Although the product is of good quality, the company strictly monitors it. Accordingly, a conflict arises between the company and the client. There are three versions of a low-quality product:
· Poor transportation.
· Warehouse storage is not up to standard.
· Error from the laboratory the client contacted.
The client ordered a batch of product, but when the goods arrived at the warehouse, it turned out that all the goods did not match the weight and type of product. Although the company says that this is the product that the client ordered. The situation is aggravated by the fact that the buyer’s production depended on that order, and due to the fact that the order was not fulfilled, production was suspended. Reasons put forward:
· Misinformation within the company.
· Poor communication of information within the client company.
·Bad connection.
The manager takes measures to check all warehouse premises for compliance with the standard; double check, confirmation of orders.
It is always easier to prevent conflict within a company than outside it. To prevent conflict, the company uses the principle of objectivity and compliance. The principle of clarity and goodwill is also used.
If disagreements occur in the process of activity, then, first of all, you need to analyze the situation critically in order to present the main and initial positions, both your own and your opponent’s. Employees analyze the enemy's position. As a result, misunderstandings may emerge and the conflict will lose its basis. This will allow you to avoid mistakenly attributing a hostile position to your enemy, as well as neutralize the situation.
To resolve a conflict between a client and a seller, the following techniques are used:
separation of conflicting parties.
This option is effective in case of conflict between the client and the sales manager. In these cases, hidden disconnection is used. A manager who cannot cope with the situation is replaced by one of the company’s employees who does not irritate the opponent.
During the activities of a trading company, various factors and methods of conflict resolution are used. Conflict resolution begins with the fact that opponents stop seeing each other as an adversary. To do this, you need to analyze your own positions and actions. Admitting your own mistakes reduces the negative perception of your opponent. The opponent also tries to understand the interests of the other. This expands your understanding of your opponent, making him more objective. There is something positive in every person that you can rely on when resolving a conflict. Then employees reduce negative emotions.
Then the optimal style of resolving a conflict situation is selected: avoidance, smoothing, coercion, compromise, problem solving.
Conclusion
Conflict can be understood as a temporary emotional change mood in connection with the failure to receive or receive information, leading to a lack of agreement between individuals, groups and a violation of the normative activities of these individuals and groups.
Conflict can be beneficial for employees and the organization as a whole, and unhelpful, reducing productivity, personal satisfaction and eliminating cooperation between employees of the organization.
Having examined the causes of a conflict situation, it should be noted that in certain situations, the source of the conflict may be the leader himself. Many unwanted conflicts are generated by the personality and actions of the leader himself, especially if he allows himself personal attacks, incorrectness, and publicly shows his likes and dislikes. Lack of restraint, the inability to correctly assess the situation, cannot find the right way out of it, the inability to take into account and understand the way of thinking and feeling of other people gives rise to a conflict situation.
Conflict in an organization can be managed. The manager always has the opportunity to anticipate the conflict and intervene, make adjustments and optimally resolve the conflict situation. The leader must first find out the cause of the conflict, find out the goals of the conflicting parties, and find optimal solution. It is important to remember that just as no one leadership style can be effective in all situations, no one style of resolving a conflict situation (be it evasion, compromise, smoothing, problem solving, coercion) can be singled out as the most best.
In my opinion, a more effective way to resolve conflicts is negotiation. This is a very constructive way. An effective negotiation strategy is, first of all, a strategy of agreement, a search for common interests and the ability to combine them so as not to subsequently cause a desire to violate agreement reached.
In life, managers often simply lack knowledge and experience, negotiation skills, and the desire to communicate with conflicting parties. Therefore, it is necessary to study conflict situations based on the experience of specialists. The ability to manage conflicts in an organization is the key to a leader’s success in his activities.
Bibliography
1. Kozyrev G.I. Fundamentals of conflictology: textbook. G.I. Kozyrev 2nd ed.; reworked and additional -M.: Publishing House "Forum": INFRA-M, 2010. - 240s.
2.Psychology from A to Z [ electronic resource]
Shevchuk D.A.; "Conflict Management. All about conflict situations at work, in business and personal life" M: GrossMedia, 2010 - 440 p.
Sheinov V.P.; "Conflict Management. Theory and practice" M: Harvest, 2010. - 912s.
Kabinova A.Ya. Organizational personnel management: Textbook. M.: Infra-M, 2010. - 695s.
Luashevich V.V. Fundamentals of personnel management. Tutorial M: KNORUS, 2010 - 114 p.
Psychological library [electronic resource]. http://bookap.info, free access (access date: 04/20/2013).
Platonov Yu.P. psychology of conflict behavior. St. Petersburg: Speech 2009 - 544 p.
Tutoring
Need help studying a topic?
Our specialists will advise or provide tutoring services on topics that interest you.
Submit your application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.
There are several ways to manage conflict, which can be divided into two categories: structural and interpersonal.
Structural methods:
Clarification of work requirements;
Use of coordination and integration mechanisms (through teams, hierarchy of officials, divisions, functions, services, etc.);
Defining common organizational comprehensive goals to direct the efforts of all employees to achieve a common goal;
Using a reward system (bonuses, material incentives, promotion, etc.).
There are five main interpersonal ways to resolve conflict:
Evasion, avoidance;
Smoothing, adaptation;
Coercion, competition;
Compromise;
Problem solving (collaboration).
Let's take a closer look at these styles.
Evasion, avoidance. This style consists in the fact that a person tries to move away from the conflict. The main ways to avoid conflict are: avoiding situations that provoke the emergence of contradictions and avoiding discussing issues that may cause disagreement.
Smoothing, adaptation. This style is characterized by behavior that is dictated by the desire to make logical rather than emotional decisions. But suppressing emotions will ultimately negatively impact the entire team. On the contrary, it is necessary to stimulate a sense of community among team members.
Coercion, competition. Within this style, the dominant desire is to force someone to accept one's view by any means. Anyone who tries to do this is not interested in the opinions of other people, behaves aggressively and uses the power of coercion to influence others. This style is effective in situations where the leader has great power over subordinates. Its disadvantage is that it suppresses the initiative of subordinates and creates a high probability of ignoring many organizational factors, since it reflects only one view.
Compromise. This style is characterized by accepting other people's opinions, but only to a certain point. The ability to compromise is highly valued in management situations because it minimizes ill will and often makes it possible to resolve a conflict to the satisfaction of all parties. However, using this style on early stage development of a conflict may undermine the diagnosis of the problem and prevent the opportunity to evaluate all alternative approaches to solving it.
Problem solving (collaboration). This style of conflict resolution is characterized by an acceptance of differences of opinion and a willingness to listen to other opinions in order to understand the causes of the conflict and find a solution acceptable to all parties.
Depending on the effectiveness of conflict management, the following consequences are distinguished:
Functional (positive):
Making effective decisions;
Tendency to cooperate;
Improving relationships between employees, subordinates and managers;
The emergence of additional ideas;
The emergence of additional alternatives, etc.
Dysfunctional (negative):
Deterioration of relationships between employees;
Unsatisfactory moral climate, decreased labor productivity, staff turnover;
Weakening of future cooperation;
Non-productive competition with other groups or workers;
Search for “enemies”;
Reducing interaction between parties to the conflict;
Increased hostility between the parties to the conflict;
Exaggerating the meaning of “victory”, etc.
Let's take a closer look at the main methods of conflict resolution, which are based on a system called the Thomas-Kilmann method (the method was developed by K. Thomas and R. Kilmann in 1972). This system allows each manager to define his own style and select methods for resolving conflict. The choice of specific methods depends on how much the manager strives to satisfy his own interests (acts passively or actively) and the interests of the parties (acts individually or jointly).
If we depict this graphically, we get the Thomas-Kilmann grid, which makes it possible to determine the place and name for each of the five main methods of conflict resolution (Fig. 1). This grid will help the manager determine his own style or the style of another person. Each leader can use all of these styles to one degree or another, but, of course, chooses the priority one. In addition, certain methods may be most effective for resolving certain types of conflicts. Method of confrontation. It can be effective when the manager is vested with a certain amount of power; he knows that his decision or approach in a certain situation is correct, and has the opportunity to insist on it. However, this is not a method that should be used regarding personal relationships; if the leader strives for trust relationships, then this style of competition will predetermine alienation among subordinates. It is most effective for resolving organizational conflicts.
Rice. 1.
And if you apply this method in a situation where there is not enough power, and the opinion of the leader does not coincide with the opinion of both parties to the conflict, then the conflict can only worsen. That is, in fact, the conflict is resolved with the help of an authoritarian decision, by the administrative method, as we talked about earlier. The parties to the conflict are forced to change their behavior in accordance with this decision, and no negotiations or debates are provided for.
Here are examples of cases when you should use this style:
The result is very important for the organization, and the manager places a big bet on his own solution to the problem;
The decision must be made quickly;
There is no choice;
A non-standard solution is required.
The avoidance method can be used when the problem has little impact on the organization, and the manager has more important tasks. Delegation of authority can be used as one of the techniques.
This method is also recommended in cases where the manager is not sure of the correctness of his decision and does not fully understand the conflict situation and its causes. The manager may try to change the topic of the conversation, leave the room, or do something that will deflect or delay the confrontational behavior of subordinates.
Some researchers consider the avoidance method to be an “escape” from problems and responsibilities, rather than an effective approach to resolving conflict. In fact, avoidance at a certain stage can be a completely appropriate and constructive response to a conflict situation.
The adaptation method is beneficial to use when the result of the case is extremely significant for the parties to the conflict and is not significant for the organization. This method is also useful in situations where management has to give in to subordinates for one reason or another. It involves the active use of negotiations and discussions. The method is suitable for resolving interpersonal conflicts with various, incl. unknown reasons for their occurrence.
If the manager cannot give in to his subordinates, one of the parties to the conflict, given the importance of the issue for the entire team or organization, this method is obviously unacceptable. It may also be unsuitable in a situation where the leader realizes that the other person has no intention, therefore, to concede in anything.
This style should be used when the leader realizes that by giving a little, he will lose little. You can turn to this strategy if you need to soften a conflict situation for a while, and then return to this issue and resort to other methods and techniques for resolving conflicts.
Here are the most typical situations in which it is recommended to use the adaptation method:
The situation is not critical and does not affect the organization’s results;
The manager realizes the importance of the issue for one person or group of people among subordinates.
The leader realizes that one of the parties to the conflict is wrong;
The leader does not have enough power;
It is necessary to teach a lesson of tolerance to subordinates and colleagues.
Collaboration method. Using this method, the manager actively takes part in resolving the conflict and protects the interests of the organization, but seeks to cooperate with other people.
This method requires more work than other approaches to conflict because the leader first lays out the needs and interests of both parties and then discusses them with them. The method is used to resolve industrial and interpersonal conflicts with clearly defined reasons for their occurrence.
However, if there is enough time, and solving the problem is important for the manager and the organization, then cooperation is the most acceptable way to obtain a mutually beneficial solution. The basis of the method is negotiations.
This method is especially effective when the parties have different hidden needs. Although at first it may seem that the parties want the same thing, they may have different strategic goals and plans for the future, which is the immediate source of conflict.
The solution to the problem is very important for both sides and no one wants to completely get rid of it;
The leader has close, long-term and interdependent relationships with opponents;
The manager has enough time to work on the conflict;
The needs of both sides are fairly well understood;
The leader and the parties to the conflict are able to explain the essence of their interests and listen to each other.
Here we can also see that a negotiation technique is being used. Negotiations should be based on finding objective ways to resolve the conflict, and not discussing personalities, be as impartial as possible, and conducted in a calm atmosphere.
Compromise is achieved at a superficial level compared to cooperation. The compromise solution method is most effective in cases where the parties strive for the same goal, but realize that the goal is unattainable for them. It can only be used as a temporary method of partially resolving interpersonal, and sometimes organizational and industrial conflicts.
In general, a manager should strive to improve the psychological atmosphere in the team and build an effective organizational culture among subordinates.
Conflict resolution strategies and styles
There are five basic conflict resolution strategies, which are based on a system called the Thomas-Kilmann method. The method was developed in 1972. The system allows each person to create their own conflict resolution style. The style of behavior in a particular conflict is determined by the extent to which a team member wants to satisfy his own interests (acting actively or passively) and the interests of the other party (acting jointly or individually). If you represent this graphically, you get a Thomas-Kilmann grid that allows you to identify a place and name for each of the five basic conflict resolution strategies.
Evasion style involves avoiding conflict and is associated with a lack of personal persistence and desire to cooperate with others to resolve it. Usually in this case a person tries to stand aside from the conflict and strives to become neutral. This style is used when the problem is not that important, when the person does not want to spend effort on solving it, feels wrong, or when the other person has more power. Using this style may indicate an individual's decision to allow the conflict to develop. This style may also be associated with an aversion to tension and frustration. IN in some cases trying to avoid conflict can reduce its intensity. However, ignoring disagreement can cause even greater discontent; with this approach to the conflict, both sides lose.
Competition style or resolving a conflict by force, is characterized by great personal involvement and interest in eliminating the conflict, but without taking into account the positions of the other side. This is a win-lose style. To use this style, you must have power or physical advantages. This style can in some cases help achieve individual goals. It requires a person to use strong-willed qualities. However, others have an unfavorable impression of the individual using this style.
Collaboration style different as high degree personal involvement in it, and a strong desire to join forces with others to resolve interpersonal conflict. With this approach, each party benefits. People who use this style usually have the following characteristics:
They view conflict as a normal event that helps and even (if managed correctly) leads to a more creative solution;
At the same time, they show trust and frankness towards others;
They recognize that with such a mutually satisfactory outcome of the conflict, all its participants, as it were, assume an obligation within the framework of a common solution;
They believe that each participant in the conflict has equal rights in resolving it and everyone’s point of view has the right to exist;
They believe that no one should be sacrificed to the common interests.
Often such individuals are considered dynamic individuals, about whom others have a favorable opinion.
Fixture style, encouraging one to enter into the position of the other party, is behavior based on the desire to cooperate with others, but without introducing one’s own strong interest into this cooperation. This lose-win style has a connotation of altruism and may express a long-term strategy to develop in others a cooperative orientation to resolve interpersonal conflict. This style helps in the desire to realize the desires of others. Those who use the adaptation style are generally assessed positively by others, but are perceived as weak natures, easily susceptible to the influence of others.
Compromise style consists in such behavior in resolving interpersonal conflict that moderately takes into account the interests of each party. The implementation of this style is associated with negotiations, during which each party makes certain concessions. Compromise is widely used in conflict resolution, and those who use it are generally viewed favorably by others. This is a “no-lose-no-win” style. In many situations, the compromise style helps to quickly resolve a conflict, especially when one of the parties has clear advantages.
Summarizing the described strategies and methods for resolving conflicts, you can independently develop a model of behavior in a conflict or conflict-fraught situation and achieve your goals in each specific case. It is necessary to take into account that important role The following factors play a role in constructive conflict resolution:
Adequacy of conflict reflection;
Openness and efficiency of communication between conflicting parties;
Creating a climate of mutual trust and cooperation;
Determining the essence of the conflict.
Let's consider each of these factors separately.
Adequate perception of the conflict. Very often, in a situation of conflict, we incorrectly perceive our own actions, intentions and positions, as well as the actions, intentions and points of view of our opponent. Typical perceptual distortions include:
Illusions of one's own nobility. In a conflict situation, we often believe that we are a victim of attacks from an evil enemy, moral principles which is very doubtful. It seems to us that truth and justice are entirely on our side and testify in our favor. In most conflicts, each opponent is confident that he is right and strives for a fair resolution of the conflict, convinced that only the enemy does not want this. As a result, suspicion often stems naturally from existing prejudice.
Searching for the straw in another's eye. Each of the opponents sees the shortcomings and errors of the other, but is not aware of the same shortcomings in himself. As a rule, each of the conflicting parties tends not to notice the meaning of their own actions in relation to the opponent, but reacts with indignation to his actions.
Double ethics. Even when opponents realize that they act in the same way towards each other, everyone still perceives their own actions as acceptable and legal, and the opponent’s actions as dishonest and impermissible.
All clear. Very often, each of the partners oversimplifies the conflict situation, and in such a way that it confirms general idea that his actions are good and correct, and his partner’s actions, on the contrary, are bad and inadequate.
These and similar misconceptions inherent in each of us in a conflict situation usually aggravate the conflict and prevent a constructive way out of the problem situation. If the perceptual distortion in conflict is excessive, there is a real danger of becoming trapped by one's own bias. As a result, this can lead to the so-called self-confirming assumption: assuming that the partner is extremely hostile, you begin to defend against him, going on the offensive. Seeing this, the partner experiences hostility towards us, and our preliminary assumption, although it was incorrect, is immediately confirmed. Knowing about such ideas in a conflict situation, try to more carefully analyze your feelings in specific cases.
Open and effective communication between conflicting parties.
Communication is the main condition for constructive conflict resolution. Unfortunately, in a conflict situation, communication often deteriorates. Opponents mainly try to hurt each other, while they themselves take a defensive position, hiding any information about themselves. Meanwhile, communication will help resolve the conflict only when both parties are looking for a way to reach mutual understanding.
Control of the emotional sphere. When a person is overwhelmed by emotions and caught up in conflict, it is difficult for him to express his thoughts and listen carefully to his opponent. One effective way to deal with anger is to help each other release these feelings. People get psychological relief if they simply talk about their grievances. Therefore, sometimes it makes sense at the very beginning of a conflict to take a risk and express to each other as fully as possible, even in a harsh form, what you feel.
The Japanese, for example, came up with a kind of ritual for this and soft pillows for beating. Sometimes even a scream or hitting the table with a pillow is better than a calm, cool rebuke to your opponent.
Still, it is risky to reveal your feelings if it leads to emotional reaction. When you don't keep an eye on this, a big fight can break out. Therefore, if you feel that as you present your complaints you are becoming more and more irritated and at the same time you find that your complaints only intensify the negative emotions of your opponent, you need to tell yourself: “I should stop. I have to think about what I can do to solve this problem in the future.” After this, make it clear to the enemy that you want to stop the boiling of passions. It should be made clear that you do not intend to neglect your opponent's emotions or deny their validity, but only want to contain them. It's advisable to say something like, “Yes, I see we're both annoyed, but being annoyed won't get us anywhere. I would like you to forget about him. Let's agree that something wrong happened in the past, causing both of us to be irritated. But now let’s think together about what we could do in the future.” This can be a particularly useful approach if you have come into conflict with someone with whom you will need to continue communicating.
It would be good if each of the opponents could at least partially communicate the following to the other:
What would I like to do to resolve the conflict?
What reactions do I expect from the other?
What consequences do I hope for if an agreement is reached?
From the book Social Psychology author Melnikova Nadezhda Anatolyevna22. Ways to resolve conflicts The model of human behavior in a conflict situation from the point of view of its compliance with psychological standards is based on the ideas of E. Melibruda, W. Siegert and L. Lange. Constructive conflict resolution depends on the following:
From the book Personality Psychology author Guseva Tamara Ivanovna35. Basic Interpersonal Conflict Resolution Styles K. Thomas points out that there are five basic styles of behavior in conflict: accommodation, compromise, cooperation, avoidance, rivalry, or competition. The competitive style can be used,
From the book Personality Psychology: lecture notes author Guseva Tamara IvanovnaLECTURE No. 20. Basic interpersonal styles of conflict resolution Basic interpersonal styles of conflict resolution were developed by K. Thomas. He points out that there are 5 main styles of behavior in conflict: accommodation, compromise, cooperation,
From book Organizational behavior: Cheat sheet author author unknown From the book Conflict: participate or create... author Kozlov VladimirTechnology 6.2.1 Negotiations as a method of conflict resolution Negotiations are the process of finding joint solutions between two or more parties who have different points of view on the same subject, different preferences and priorities. Negotiations are seen as search
From the book Conflict Management author Sheinov Viktor Pavlovich3.5. Conflict resolution algorithm A conflict situation is a diagnosis of a disease in a relationship called “conflict”. Treatment of any disease is effective only if it is correctly diagnosed. Therefore, establishing a diagnosis is the first place to start.
From the book The Advantages of Introverts by Laney MartyConflict resolution style The most productive in resolving any conflicts, including interpersonal ones, is the style of cooperation, focused on finding a solution that suits both parties to the conflict (the so-called integrative solution, about such
From the book Conflict Management Cheat Sheet author Kuzmina Tatyana VladimirovnaAbout a unified algorithm and formulas for conflict resolution. The significant number (more than 50) of real conflicts in organizations considered in this chapter showed that: 1. Proposed in Chapter 3 universal algorithm Finding the root causes of conflicts is very effective. With him
From the book Conflictology author Ovsyannikova Elena Alexandrovna11.6. Conflict resolution style For the most effective resolution conflict, you need to choose the optimal style of behavior, taking into account your own preferred style, the style of other people involved in the conflict, as well as the specifics of the conflict itself.
From the author's bookBasic styles of conflict resolution “Your style of behavior in a particular conflict is determined by the extent to which you want to satisfy your own interests (acting passively or actively) and the interests of the other party (acting jointly or individually). If
From the author's book11.7. Negotiations as a means of conflict resolution Negotiations with the participation of conflicting parties are quite effective means their constructive resolution (achieving a mutually beneficial solution or at least a compromise). An alternative to negotiations (especially in
From the author's bookMeasures taken to resolve conflicts 1. All parties to the conflict must acknowledge the existence of a problem.2. Analyze how your introversion and your opponent's extraversion affect the problem.3. Try to look at it from your colleague's point of view.4. The problem is resolved
From the author's bookWAYS OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION There are two main ways to resolve conflict: 1) forceful suppression; 2) negotiations. Forceful suppression (both moral and physical) occurs, as a rule, after the conflicting participants use a strategy of rivalry.
From the author's bookNEGOTIATION METHODS FOR CONFLICT RESOLUTION Negotiation is a method of conflict resolution, possible when the conflicting parties realize the futility of the conflict and strive for a settlement. Negotiations are based on making joint decisions between conflicting parties
The literature distinguishes between “power”, compromise and “integrative” models. The power model leads to two types of conflict outcomes: “victory-defeat”, “defeat-defeat”. The other two models lead to a possible resolution of the conflict according to the “win-win”, “win-win” type. The forceful form is typical for legal conflicts.
Depending on possible models of conflict resolution, interests and goals of conflicting entities, five basic conflict resolution styles, described and used in foreign management training programs. This: styles of competition, avoidance, adaptation, cooperation, compromise. The characteristics of these styles, the tactics of their choice and the technology of application are described by the American researcher of conflictology problems, Doctor of Philosophy D. G. Scott, in her work “Conflicts, ways to overcome them.”
Competition style is used when the subject is very active and intends to move towards resolving the conflict, seeking primarily to satisfy his own interests to the detriment of the interests of others, forcing other people to accept his solution to the problem.
Evasion style is used in a situation where the subject is unsure of a positive solution to the conflict, or when he does not want to waste energy on resolving it, or in cases where he feels wrong.
Fixture style characterized by the fact that the subject acts together with others, without trying to defend his own interests. Consequently, he yields to his opponent and accepts his dominance. This style should be used if you feel that by giving in on something you have little to lose. The most typical are some situations in which the adaptation style is recommended: the subject strives to maintain peace and good relations with others; he understands that the truth is not on his side; he has little power or little chance of winning; he understands that the outcome of the conflict resolution is much more important for the other subject than for him.
Thus, in the case of applying the accommodation style, the subject strives to develop a solution that satisfies both parties.
Collaborative style. By implementing it, the subject actively participates in resolving the conflict, while defending his interests, but trying, together with another subject, to look for ways to achieve a mutually beneficial result. Some typical situations when this style is used: both conflicting subjects have equal resources and opportunities to solve the problem; resolving the conflict is very important for both sides, and no one wants to get rid of it; the presence of long-term and interdependent relationships among the subjects involved in the conflict; both subjects are able to express the essence of their interests and listen to each other, both are able to explain their desires, express their thoughts and develop alternative solutions to the problem.
Compromise style. It means that both sides of the conflict are looking for a solution to the problem based on mutual concessions. This style is most effective in situations where both opposing parties want the same thing, but are sure that it is impossible for them to do it at the same time. Some cases in which the compromise style is most appropriate: both parties have the same resources and have mutually exclusive interests; both parties may be satisfied with a temporary solution; both parties can reap short-term benefits.
The compromise style is often a successful retreat or a last chance to find some solution to a problem.
Methods conflict resolution. It is advisable to divide the entire set of methods, depending on the types of conflict resolution models, into two groups. We will conditionally call the first 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 activities In conflict management, these methods often complement each other.
Let's consider some methods used in the struggle between conflicting parties. One of these methods is to achieve victory by obtaining the necessary freedom of action. This method is implemented using the following techniques: creating freedom of action for yourself; fettering the opponent’s freedom; even at the cost of some material or other losses, the acquisition of better positions in the confrontation, etc. For example, effective method discussion is to impose on the enemy, as a subject of discussion, issues in which he has little competence and where he can compromise himself.
An effective method is for one side to use the functions and reserves of the enemy for its own purposes. Techniques for this may include using the opponent’s arguments in the discussion; forcing the enemy to take actions beneficial to the other side.
Very important method struggle - disabling, first of all, the control centers of opposing complexes: leading individuals of teams and institutions, the main elements of the enemy’s position. In the discussion, the main emphasis is on discrediting its leading participants representing the enemy’s side, on refuting the main theses of his position.
Despite the fact that one of the main principles of conflict resolution is the principle of timeliness and efficiency, the method of delaying the matter, or otherwise the “delaying method,” can be successfully used in the struggle. This method is a special case of choosing the appropriate place and time to deliver a decisive blow, creating an advantageous balance of forces and an advantageous situation for such a choice. The slowness of the transition to decisive action is justified by the need to concentrate large forces and resources to achieve victory.
Specific types of struggle as a means of conflict resolution are selected and applied taking into account the specifics of the conflicts being resolved and the environment in which these actions are carried out.
The main positive method of conflict resolution is negotiation. Negotiation- this is a joint discussion between 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 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.
This style implies that a person is trying to avoid conflict. His position is not to get into situations that provoke the emergence of contradictions, not to enter into a discussion of issues that are fraught with disagreement. Then you won’t have to get into an excited state, even if you are working on solving a problem.
Smoothing
With this style, the person is convinced that there is no point in getting angry because “we are all one happy team and we shouldn’t rock the boat.” Such a “smoother” tries not to let out the signs of conflict, appealing to the need for solidarity. But at the same time, you can forget about the problem underlying the conflict. The result may be peace and quiet, but the problem will remain, which will ultimately lead to an “explosion.”
Compulsion
Within this style, attempts to force people to accept their point of view at any cost prevail. Anyone who tries to do this without being interested in the opinions of others usually behaves aggressively and uses power through coercion to influence others. This style can be effective where the leader has great power over subordinates, but it can suppress the initiative of subordinates, creating a greater likelihood that the wrong decision will be made, since only one point of view is presented. It can cause resentment, especially among younger and more educated staff.
Compromise
This style is characterized by accepting the other party's point of view, but only to some extent. The ability to compromise is highly valued in management situations, as it minimizes ill will, which often makes it possible to quickly resolve a conflict to the satisfaction of both parties. However, using compromise early in a conflict over an important issue can reduce the time it takes to find alternatives.
Solution
This style is an acknowledgment of differences of opinion and a willingness to engage with other points of view in order to understand the causes of the conflict and find a course of action acceptable to all parties. Someone who uses this style does not try to achieve their goal at the expense of others, but rather looks for the best solution. This style is the most effective in solving organizational problems. Here are some suggestions for using this style of conflict resolution: Define the problem in terms of goals rather than solutions. Once the problem is identified, identify solutions that are acceptable to all parties. Focus on the problem, not on the other party's personal qualities. Create an atmosphere of trust by increasing mutual influence and information exchange. During communication, create a positive attitude towards each other by showing sympathy and listening to the other party's opinion.
Conflict resolution
To date, experts have developed many different recommendations regarding various aspects of people’s behavior in conflict situations, the selection of appropriate strategies and means of resolving them, as well as their management.
It is important to consider both the actions of the participants in the conflict themselves, and the actions and role of the mediator, who can be the leader
Leader behavior in conflict.
The primary task of a leader who has to resolve a conflict is to find out the true cause of the conflict, which is often quite difficult to do, since consciously or unconsciously it is most often masked by the participants in the conflict. For example, concern for business or adherence to principles in many cases mask selfish interests, hurt pride, a desire for revenge for old or new grievances, etc. The complexity of the situation lies in the fact that substitution of the cause of the conflict can occur not only for the purpose of explaining one’s position to others, but also for the purpose of explaining this to oneself. Here the psychological mechanism of self-defense is triggered when a person, in addition to the unseemly reasons for his actions that actually drive him, comes up with some noble goals and gradually begins to believe that he is driven by the desire to achieve them. In such a situation, the manager can proceed from two positions:
1) try to answer for yourself the question of who benefits from this or that conflict resolution;
2) a person’s behavior in a personal-emotional conflict is characterized by unusual verbosity, agitation, and reluctance to listen to his interlocutors.
The manager’s actions aimed at constructively resolving the conflict are:
institutionalization of the conflict , i.e. determination of some administrative or moral rules or norms of behavior of opponents in a conflict;
legitimization of the conflict, or recognition by the conflicting parties of the rules of conduct established by the leader;
structuring conflicting groups , i.e. determining the interests pursued by each of the conflicting individuals, and determining the extent and reasons for deviations of these interests from the order established in the organization;
reduction , i.e. gradual weakening and subsequent resolution of the conflict.
Many methods of conflict resolution can be divided into structural and interpersonal.
Structural methods of conflict resolution include clarification of job requirements; use of coordination and integration mechanisms; establishment of organization-wide comprehensive goals; using a fair reward system.
Clarifying the job requirements and the results expected from each employee and department is one of the most effective methods preventing destructive conflicts, since in this situation the “business cover” of personal hostility of employees is eliminated.
The use of coordination and integration mechanisms is based on the principle of unity of command. Their essence is to inform subordinates of their right to contact their leader if any contradictions arise between them. In this case, subordinates simply follow the manager's decision. It is also important to create services or positions engaged in integration activities, i.e. implementing the relationship between linear and functional divisions of the enterprise.
Establishing organization-wide, comprehensive goals.
The reward system used in the organization will be fair if it, firstly, encourages employees to achieve corporate goals; secondly, it does not encourage unconstructive behavior of employees and departments.
The interpersonal methods of conflict resolution used are largely determined by the goals that the leader pursues when intervening in the conflict. Chief among these goals are increasing the productivity of the led team; maintaining and improving the socio-psychological climate in the team; growth of the leader's authority.
The set of interpersonal conflict resolution methods used determines the manager’s style of behavior in conflict. These styles are: competition when the leader encourages opponents to compete, reserving the right to make the final decision; evasion , when the leader takes the position of an outside observer, not considering it advisable to spend his time and energy on resolving the conflict ; cooperation when the manager forms a single working group from the conflicting parties to resolve the problem under his own leadership; device when the leader is forced to accept the result of the conflict as it is, regardless of his own interests; compulsion , when the manager makes a sole decision, with little interest in the opinions and feelings of his subordinates; this method can be effectively used by a manager if his competence significantly exceeds the competence of his subordinates; at the same time, its use causes hidden or open dissatisfaction, especially on the part of younger or more intellectual personnel; compromise, when the leader is able to offer a solution that satisfies himself and both conflicting parties.
Evaluate effectiveness one or another style of behavior in a conflict situation can be determined according to various criteria.
Conflict personalities. Throughout their working career, some people manage to be drawn into any conflict only a few times, while others cannot imagine conflict-free relationships at work. The latter are called conflicting personalities and among them six main types can be distinguished.
Demonstrative personalities who strive to always be in sight and enjoy everyone's attention. If they do not have other qualities that allow them to stand out, then conflicts are the only way for them to express themselves.
Rigid(non-plastic, inflexible) personalities who are distinguished by increased self-esteem, ambition, inability and unwillingness to take into account the opinions of others. Once and for all, the established opinion of a rigid personality inevitably comes into conflict with changing conditions and causes conflict with others, towards whom they are unceremonious and sometimes simply rude.
Super accurate personalities being the most conscientious, scrupulous workers. They approach everyone, starting with themselves, from a position of inflated demands. Anyone who does not meet these requirements, and these are the majority, is subjected to sharp criticism, but at the same time they themselves are very sensitive to the assessment of others, especially their superiors. These features of their behavior often lead to conflicts.
Uncontrollable personalities characterized by impulsiveness, thoughtlessness and unpredictability of behavior, and lack of self-control. Therefore, their behavior is perceived as aggressive and causing a desire to put such a person in his place.
Selfish individuals who are always ready for conflict if, according to their rational calculations, it can be used to achieve their careerist or mercantile goals.
Weak-willed individuals the absence of their own beliefs and principles makes them a tool in the hands of the initiators of the conflict. The danger of such people is that they have a reputation for being kind, unselfish people. Therefore, the performance of such a person as the initiator of the conflict attracts other people to him, who are more eager to protect him than to understand the cause of the conflict.
