100 r first order bonus
Select the type of work Course work Abstract Master's thesis Report on practice Article Report Review Test work Monograph Problem solving Business plan Answers to questions Creative work Essay Drawing Compositions Translation Presentations Typing Other Increasing the uniqueness of the text Candidate's thesis Laboratory work On-line help
Ask for a price
Under conflict is understood as the most acute way of resolving significant contradictions that arise in the process of interaction, which consists in counteracting the subjects of the conflict and is usually accompanied by negative emotions.
Necessary and sufficient conditions for the emergence of a conflict are the presence of oppositely directed motives or judgments in the subjects of social interaction. As well as the state of confrontation between them.
If the subjects of the conflict resist, but do not experience negative emotions, or, conversely, experience negative emotions but do not show them outwardly, then such situations are pre-conflict situations. Counteraction of the subjects of the conflict can unfold in three areas: communication, behavior, activities.
Functions conflicts are twofold. One and the same conflict can play a positive and negative role in the life of opposite, conflicting parties, and it can be constructive and destructive at different moments of its development. It is necessary to take into account for which of the participants this conflict is constructive, and for which it is destructive. If the goal of one of the parties may be to resolve the contradiction, then the goal of the other side may be to maintain the status quo, avoid conflict, or resolve the conflict without confrontation.
So, in relation to the participants in the conflict, it can perform constructive and destructive functions.
Design features:
1) The conflict eliminates, in whole or in part, the contradictions arising from the imperfection of the organization of activities, management errors, performance of duties, etc.
2) The conflict allows you to more fully assess the individual psychological characteristics of the people participating in it.
3) The conflict allows you to weaken the psychological tension, which is the reaction of the participants to the conflict situation.
4) Conflict serves as a source of personality development, interpersonal relationships.
5) Conflict can improve the quality of individual performance.
6) When defending just goals, the authority of one of the participants increases, the attitude of colleagues towards him noticeably improves.
7) Interpersonal conflicts serve as a means of human socialization, contribute to the self-affirmation of the individual.
Destructive functions:
1) Expressed negative impact most conflicts in mental condition participants.
2) Unfavorably developing conflicts can be accompanied by psychological and physical violence, injury to opponents.
3) The conflict is accompanied by stress.
4) The conflict forms a negative image of the other - "the image of the enemy."
Structure of social conflict
Conflict as a multidimensional phenomenon has its own structure. Structure conflict is understood as a set of stable links of the conflict, ensuring its integrity, identity to itself, difference from other phenomena of social life, without which it cannot exist as a dynamically interconnected integral system and process.
Every conflict situation has objective content And subjective meaning. Let's consider them in more detail. Let's start with objective content conflict situation.
1. Participants in the conflict. In any social conflict, be it interpersonal or interstate conflict, the main actors are people. They can act in the conflict as individuals (family conflict), as officials (vertical conflict), or as legal entities(representatives of institutions and organizations).
2. The subject of the conflict. As we noted earlier, the core of any conflict is contradiction. It reflects the clash of interests and goals of the parties.
3. The object of the conflict. It is not always possible to immediately distinguish it in each case. The object is the core of the problem. The object of the conflict can be a material (resource), social (power) or spiritual (idea, norm, principle) value, which both opponents strive to possess or use.
4. Micro and macro environment- the conditions in which participants operate. The microenvironment is the immediate environment of the parties. Macro-environment - social groups, of which the party is a representative and whose qualities it has inherited.
In addition to the objective components of the conflict, there are also subjective components - the aspirations of the parties, the strategies and tactics of their behavior, as well as their perception of the conflict situation, i.e. those information models of the conflict that each of the parties has and in accordance with which the opponents organize their behavior in the conflict. Now we should understand some of the components of the social conflict that S. Frolov singled out. Any interference that creates a barrier to meeting the needs of an individual or a social group can be called a blockade. When a blockade appears, a person or social group requires a reassessment of the situation, a rejection of the desired need or the setting of a new goal, the adoption of a new plan of action. The blocking situation is always some initial confusion varying degrees intensity (from mild bewilderment to shock), and then the motivation for new actions, the search for workarounds. Meeting a person or social group with an insurmountable difficulty in satisfying a desired need causes frustration. The reaction to frustration can develop in two ways: deviation from the intended goals or aggression. Aggressive behavior can be directed at another person, a group of people. From this moment, in fact, social conflict begins. However, not every state of frustration and the emotional stress caused by it lead to social conflict. Emotional tension associated with unsatisfied needs must cross a certain boundary, beyond which aggression appears in the form of directed social action. This border is determined by the state of public fear, the authority of power structures, cultural norms, action social institutions. If processes of disorganization occur in a society or a social group, the authority and effectiveness of the actions of social institutions decrease, then the participants in a social conflict easily cross the line that separates them from the conflict itself.
Classification of social conflicts
The classification of conflicts is necessary in order to understand the essential causes of conflicts. Each type of conflict has its own specific causes and therefore requires certain tactics to resolve or prevent it.
Several parties always take part in a conflict (it doesn’t matter if these are departments of the psyche of one person, or different people, or groups of people). Therefore, the basic classification of the conflict is made precisely according to the nature and characteristics of the parties involved in the conflict. Therefore, the basic classification of conflict is as follows:
Besides, the most important feature conflict is the nature of the need for the satisfaction of which a person is fighting. You are probably familiar with A. Maslow's hierarchy of needs. According to his theory, needs can be grouped into five hierarchically related levels: physiological, safe and secure, social needs, in respect, the need for self-expression.
If any of these needs are not met, conflict may arise. If we combine some groups of needs and present them in the form of material, social and spiritual needs, then the classification of conflicts will also have the following form:
There are many classical typologies of social conflicts.
Based on the findings of G. Simmel and L. Koser, all conflicts can be divided into realistic (generated by objective circumstances) and unrealistic (characterized by the predominance of emotions).
A. Rapoport, arguing that it is impossible to fit all conflicts under one scheme, identifies three main types of conflict: war ("fight"), disputes ("debate") and games.
All conflicts can be divided into constructive (functional) and destructive (dysfunctional), positive and negative, antagonistic and compromise.
These or those types and kinds of conflicts manifest themselves in different ways in different societies.
Thus, we can conclude that conflicts are diverse both in their nature and in their characteristics, but the conflict in most cases is a clash of interests of a person as part of society, therefore, in the broadest sense, we can call any conflict social.
CONFLICT AS A SOCIO-PSYCHOLOGICAL PHENOMENON AND A METHOD OF SOCIAL INTERACTION.
There is a common perception that conflict is always a negative phenomenon that causes threats, hostility, resentment, misunderstanding, that is, it is something that should be avoided if possible. Representatives of the early scientific schools of management also believed that conflict is a sign of ineffective organization and poor management. However, at present, management theorists and practitioners are increasingly inclined to the point of view that some conflicts, even in the most efficient organization with the best employee relations, are not only possible, but also desirable. You just need to manage the conflict. Many different definitions of conflict can be found, but all of them emphasize the existence of a contradiction, which takes the form of a disagreement if we are talking about human interaction.
To make the picture clearer, let us introduce three definitions of conflict.
Cognitive definition of conflict, based on the intellectual component of the conflict: conflict is a clash of different types of thinking, each of which claims to be representative.
Interactive definition of the conflict, focusing on the specifics of interaction on different stages conflict: conflict is the process of development of the interaction of subjects from confrontation to communication.
A reflexive definition of a conflict based on an analysis of all components of a conflict situation: a conflict is a situation in which there is an opportunity for an in-depth study of an object (environment). You can then move on to explore your own ways of thinking and find out why opinions about facts and issues do differ.
Now let's look at all this in more detail, chapter by chapter.
I. Conflict as a socio-psychological phenomenon and a way of social interaction .
Communication is the most important thing in human interaction.
In psychology, the concept of conflict is used quite widely, in fact, addressing all heterogeneous phenomena associated with the psyche of people. A conflict is also called interpersonal difficulties, and intrapersonal experiences, and crisis phenomena (the subject of psychotherapeutic work), and the collision of algorithms for solving learning problems in a student, etc.
The source of activity of any living being, including man, is his needs. Needs, causing motivation (“I want!”), encourage Living being to activity. To maintain vital connections with the outside world and arising in the process of activity, is communication.
On the scale of human life, communication, i.e. interaction with other people, is the main condition for survival, and also ensures the implementation of the functions of training, education and development of the individual.
Table 1
Thomas of interpersonal communication
Man
Woman
Child
Man
M+M
M+F
m+r
Woman
F+M
F+F
F+R
Child
R+M
R+F
R+R
By assigning different social roles to each member of the community, we get at the intersection of rows and columns all the variety and diversity of options for interaction between people:
MAN - MAN: father - adult son, friend - friend, brother - brother (adults), colleague - colleague, boss - subordinate, etc.
MAN - WOMAN: boss - subordinate, husband - wife, colleague - colleague, lover - lover, father - adult daughter, brother - sister, etc.
MAN - CHILD: father - son (or daughter), teacher - student, coach - student, etc.
WOMAN - WOMAN: boss - subordinate, girlfriend - girlfriend, sister - sister, colleague - colleague, mother - adult daughter, etc.
Claims - dissatisfaction of any needs.
Since life is a continuous process of communication in social and professional activity and in personal life, then in the relationship between the members of these couples often there are claims - expressed or hidden dissatisfaction of people with each other, associated, as a rule, with the dissatisfaction of any needs.
In general, the sources of claims (from one of the participants to another or mutual claims) are contradictions that arise where there are:
1) mismatches value orientations according to moral standards, views, beliefs, differences in beliefs and moral incompatibility. The emergence of claims in such cases is inevitable;
2) mismatch of expectations and positions. Such a misunderstanding usually occurs between people of different ages, professional affiliations, life experience and interests. And the greater these differences, the deeper the misunderstanding between them, which can give rise to mutual hostility;
3) mismatch of knowledge, skills, abilities, personal qualities. Differences in the level of education lead to the fact that people become of little interest to each other. There are psychological barriers due to possible individual differences of an intellectual nature (“too smart!”), Which can generate dislike and lead to enmity. Such individual personality differences in the properties of temperament, such as impulsiveness, irascibility, and such character traits as the desire to dominate, arrogance in handling, and others, give rise to tension in human relations(for more on this, see Chapter 5);
4) mismatches in understanding, interpretation of information. Not all people are naturally endowed with the same ability to understand what is happening to them and around them. What is obvious to one person may become an insoluble problem for another (These issues are discussed in socionics, neurolinguistic programming, psychology of understanding, hermeneutics, etc.);
5) mismatch of assessments, self-assessments. In relation to themselves and the situation for each of the participants, they can be adequate, underestimated or overestimated and not the same;
6) mismatches of physical, emotional and other states (“a well-fed one is not a friend to the hungry”);
7) mismatch of goals, means, methods of activity. Potentially explosive is a situation in which two or more people have conflicting, incompatible with each other motives of behavior. Each of them, pursuing their personal goals, consciously or unconsciously hinders the achievement of goals by other individuals;
8) mismatch of management functions;
9) mismatch of economic, technological and other processes.
The most acute form of discontent manifests itself as a process of a sharp aggravation of the contradiction and the struggle of two or more parties involved in solving a problem that has personal importance for each of its members.
In psychology, such relationships are defined asconflict - a collision of oppositely directed, incompatible with each other tendencies, a single episode in the mind, in interpersonal interactions or interpersonal relationships individuals or groups of people associated with negative experiences. What are the sources of contradictions that give rise to conflicts in the process of communication? From the point of view of the concept of "system", communication is an association of subjects designed to satisfy one or more types of needs and creating interpersonal relationships with their association.
This definition allows you to identify the conditions under which communication will be positive, and the main sources mutual claims, which can develop into a contradiction and end in a conflict. This is, first of all, the attitude to the main function: if all subjects (participants in communication) equally understand and accept the main function, in other words, if their needs coincide, then communication, even in the presence of mutual claims, will be in the nature of cooperation, healthy competition and will lead to to positive results. So in a successfully working production team, all employees make their professional and psychological contribution (not always even visible!) To its work. In a friendly family, all its members support and strengthen each other.
But the attitude to the main function may not coincide, because the interests of people are significantly different, and their needs are such that they can often be satisfied only by violating the interests of other people or neglecting them. For example, a boss needs a subordinate to work hard and well for minimum wage, while the subordinate desires are completely opposite. Parents want their child to devote more time to school, music and a foreign language, and the child wants to have more time for sports, reading and socializing with peers. And so on.
From all of the above, we can conclude:
The presence of multiple causes of conflicts increases the likelihood of their occurrence, but does not necessarily lead to conflict interaction. Sometimes the potential benefits of participating in a conflict are not worth the cost. However, having entered into a conflict, each of the parties, as a rule, begins to do everything to ensure that its point of view is accepted, and prevents the other side from doing the same. Therefore, in such cases, it is necessary to manage conflicts in order to make their consequences functional (constructive) and reduce the number of dysfunctional (destructive) consequences, which, in turn, will affect the likelihood of subsequent conflicts.
There are structural (organizational) and interpersonal methods of conflict management.
TOstructural methodsinclude:
-clearthe formulation of requirements, that is, an explanation of the requirements for the results of the work of both each individual employee and the unit as a whole, the presence of clearly and unambiguously formulated rights and obligations, rules and performance of work.
- observance of the principle of unity of command, when the subordinate knows whose requirements he must fulfill, as well as the creation of special integration services that should link the goals of various units.
Establishing common goals and the formation of common values, that is, informing all employees about the policy, strategy and prospects of the organization, as well as about the state of affairs in various departments. The use of a reward system based on performance criteria, excluding the clash of interests of various departments and employees.
In conclusion, I would like to say thatThe content of conflict research in social psychology has much in common with research in sociology, political science, and other social sciences Oh. The specificity lies in the fact that in social psychology the emphasis is on a finer differentiation different states groups close or similar to the conflict. Special Analysis showed that it is possible to single out four interrelated and at the same time relatively independent states that are studied in social psychology: socio-psychological contradiction, socio-psychological tension of the group, psychological readiness individual or group subject to conflict behavior and actually conflict behavior. Each of the identified phenomena can exist as an autonomous and have different intensity of their expression in different groups, while the group does not pass from one state to another. However, the same socio-psychological states can act as stages, or stages, of the group’s movement towards conflict: from the awareness of the contradiction to tension, from it to the formation of a social attitude towards conflict behavior, and then to the actual conflict. Moreover, different groups these stages-states pass at different speeds.
INsocial psychology in more not a general theoretical approach to conflicts is being developed, but rather a typological one, which is why numerous differentiations of conflicts into Various types, species, etc., and for a variety of reasons-criteria. This is due to the fact that the socio-psychological nature of the conflict is very “sensitive” to a change in the type of conflict, therefore it is fundamentally important to divide conflicts according to their subjects into intrapersonal, interpersonal, intergroup and between an individual and a group, etc. Socio-psychological mechanisms work fundamentally according to differently in the listed or some other types of conflicts. Leading here can be not so much general patterns how many features, i.e., typological in this case.
results special studies The socio-psychological consequences of conflicts in groups convince us of their not only unambiguously negative nature, but also of their constructiveness. This is especially true for the effectiveness of creative types of joint activities, for example: scientific, artistic, etc. Therefore, in recent decades, many qualifications of the conflict have appeared in the socio-psychological literature, such as: reasonable, rational, useful, positive, constructive, developing, etc. All it determined new promising directions research, from which new interesting results should be expected in the near future.
AtPart of practical social psychologists in resolving conflicts has more in common with representatives of other social sciences and, above all, with sociologists, than specifics. This is explained by the fact that practical tasks there are tasks that are always complex, so they require either the integration of knowledge of various sciences, or the unification of the efforts of their representatives (the second is somewhat more complicated), which makes the work of different specialists similar in practice. However, it is necessary to say about one feature of the work of practical psychologists. The psychologist organizes the work in such a way that the participants themselves become the main actors in resolving conflicts: through the awareness of contradictions as the subject of the conflict, through inner work personality, reflection in one’s mind of one’s own behavior, and not just of other participants in the conflict, through the perception of the other as oneself, etc. But there are two serious limitations in this: firstly, such methods of conflict resolution work most effectively on reflective personalities, and not all are so; Secondly, psychological methods conflict resolution in the vast majority of conflict situations can only act as a complement to other methods. By themselves, they rarely lead to a sustainable (not temporary or situational) resolution of interpersonal and, even more so, intergroup conflicts.
IN last years In general, many publications devoted to conflict management are published in conflictology, disputes around this issue do not subside in social psychology. The terms initiated, managed, controlled, planned, organized, projected and other conflicts are firmly fixed. For social psychologists, this form practical work with groups has been known since the 30s of the 20th century, from the so-called “explosion” method of a group, which was successfully used by A.S. Makarenko to change negative informal leaders in youth groups. Since that time, both the high labor intensity and the riskiness of such methods have been well known. But no matter how many such technologies of controlled conflicts are developed, they always remain very difficult even for a single application, and even more so impossible for widespread use. And this is for the best, because not only narrowly professional questions arise here, but above all ethical ones: about the moral right of the organizer (and now they are already saying “designer”) to provoke a conflict situation and include in it various people actually manipulating them. But ethical issues are usually resolved in favor of professional ones, although in no case should the issue of responsibility for the negative consequences of projected conflicts be removed. And they are real and dangerous, both on the personal and group levels..
Speaking about the specifics of the socio-psychological analysis of the conflict, one cannot help but raise the question of the significance situational approach. For a social psychologist, conflict is not an abstract phenomenon, it is always concrete, mediated by individuals, a group, a situation, and thus does not repeat from situation to situation, but is in its own way single and unique in each specific social situation.
When working on the article, the following literature sources were used:
Grishina N.V.
Lorenz K. Aggression (so-called “evil”). M., 2004.
Khasan B. I. Psychotechnics of conflict and conflict competence. Krasnoyarsk, 1996.
Grishina N. B. Psychology of conflict. SPb., 2000.
Veresov N. N. The formula of confrontation, or how to eliminate conflict in a team. M., 1998.
Festinger L. The theory of cognitive dissonance. SPb., 1999.
Grishina N.V. Psychology of conflict. SPb., 2010.
Grishina N.V. Psychology of conflict. SPb., 2000.
This concept in the scientific literature, however, as in journalism, is ambiguous. There are many definitions of the term "conflict". Most general approach to the definition of conflict consists in defining it through contradiction as more general concept and, above all, through social contradiction. According to A.A. Modestova et al. (2004), conflict is the lack of agreement between two or more parties, which may be specific individuals or groups of individuals.
It is well known that the development of any society is a complex process that takes place on the basis of the emergence, deployment and resolution of objective contradictions. Their reasons may be different problems life: material resources, the most important life attitudes, powers of authority, status-role differences in social structure, personal (emotional-psychological) differences, etc. Conflicts cover all spheres of people's life, the totality of social relations, social interaction. The conflict, in fact, is one of the types of social interaction, the subjects and participants of which are individuals, large and small social groups and organizations. Conflict interaction involves the confrontation of the parties, i.e. actions directed against each other (Vershinin M.S., 2003).
The conflict is based on subjective-objective contradictions, but these two phenomena (contradictions and conflict) should not be identified. Contradictions can exist for a long period and not develop into a conflict. Therefore, it must be borne in mind that the conflict is based only on those contradictions caused by incompatible interests, needs and values. Such contradictions, as a rule, are transformed into an open struggle of the parties, into a real confrontation.
The confrontation can be more or less intense and more or less violent. “Intensity,” according to R. Dahrendrff, “means the energy invested by the participants, and at the same time the social importance of individual conflicts.” The form of clashes - violent or non-violent - depends on many factors, including the presence of real conditions and possibilities (mechanisms) of non-violent resolution of the conflict and goals pursued by the subjects of confrontation.
So, social conflict is an open confrontation, a clash of two or more subjects of social interaction, the causes of which are incompatible needs, interests and values. Social conflict also includes the activity of an individual or groups that block the functioning of the enemy or cause damage to other people (groups). Note that the issue of conflicts also uses such terms as disputes, debates, bargaining, rivalry and controlled battles, indirect and direct violence.
IN domestic literature the most complete definition of social conflict was given by E.M. Babosov (“Sociological Dictionary”): “Social conflict is an extreme case of exacerbation of social contradictions, expressed in a clash of interests of various social communities - classes, nations, states, various social groups, social institutions, etc., due to opposition or essential difference in their interests, goals, development trends. A social conflict develops and is resolved in a specific social situation in connection with the emergence of a problem requiring resolution. social problem. It has well-defined causes, its social carriers, has certain functions, duration and severity.
True, this definition captures the main essence of the matter, without reflecting all the features of the conflict - its psychologism in particular. This feature can be traced in the work of Yu. Zaprudsky “Social Conflict”, where it is said: “Social conflict is a clear or hidden state of confrontation between objectively divergent interests, goals and trends in the development of social subjects, a direct or indirect clash of social forces on the basis of opposition to the existing social order , a special form of historical movement towards a new social unity. I think it's said too broadly. There was no place for everyday, family, labor - in a word, conflicts of a "lower" level. And they should not be ignored. Here is another definition due to T.V. Novikova. Social conflict is "a situation where the parties (subjects) of interaction pursue some of their own goals that contradict or mutually exclude each other." Here, as can be seen, the personal, psychological aspect(Frolov S.S., 2006 etc.).
When studying various forms public life researchers usually use the so-called conflictological approach: any act is considered as the result of a conflict between people, the mechanism of its occurrence is traced.
A special case is represented by games, including sports. Some of them are designed as conflicts (like boxing). However, it is obvious that, in essence, we are talking about simulating a conflict. When the game ends, so do the “conflict” relationships. The dislike between players of different teams that remains after the competition is the exception rather than the rule, and it is by no means encouraged in sports.
Conflict as a psychological phenomenon
Conflict is a signal about what needs to be done, changed. Conflict in and of itself is neither good nor bad. After all, what is conflict? It's when I think one way and you think differently. What is good or bad about it. It all depends on how we behave in this situation. Therefore, one should not be afraid of the very fact of disagreements, different opinions.
In Chinese, conflict is represented by a two-part character. The first part means “risk”, “danger”, and the second one means “opportunity”. And it's very precise definition conflict. Is there risk in conflict, is there danger? Undoubtedly. Destruction of relationships, aggression, tension - a variety of destructive consequences, but it is believed that there is an opportunity in it. For example, to feel a signal that something is wrong.
You can draw an analogy with pain. Pain shows where the focus of inflammation (disease) is located. You can drown out this pain - take a pill and forget for a while. But this is not quite the right solution. You can get away from the conflict without resolving it. But this will remain in the soul as a "burden" that will require discharge. Most dangerous diseases are those without pain. They are devoid of a signal, sneaking up imperceptibly. And these diseases without pain are the acquisition of civilization, i.e. AIDS, cancer, hepatitis, heart attacks. In the early stages, they are invisible. Habitual illnesses (colds, tonsillitis) in humans are programmed as painful. Those. pain is positive. When it appears, immediate action must be taken. And the sooner measures are taken, the sooner the disease will be cured. Conflicts have the same function.
Conflict helps us sort things out, relieve tension. In our work, to focus on the positive beginning of the conflict is undoubtedly the main thing. Still, you must agree that conflicts can be both constructive and destructive, destructive, carry a negative impact, but many of the conflicts that we face are important to us, because they help us understand how to reduce the destructive beginning, negative side conflict.
Another psychological phenomenon The conflict lies in the fact that a person claims some value or resource, and therefore, in order to take possession of this, he exerts a psychological influence on a competitor. To do this, he uses psychological methods of influence such as dialogue, psychological pressure, manipulation, and sometimes suggestive methods (suggestion, hypnotic trance). The same psychological methods are also used to attract supporters or sympathizers, since the number of participants also has a psychological feature. It gives imaginary confidence to the conflicting one that he is right and has a depressing effect on the competitor.
As A.S. Karmin, the word conflictology came to Russian and other languages from Latin. This is one of the international words that delight translators - they do not need translation because they are understandable and so: both their sound and their meaning are approximately the same in all languages. In Russian, the word conflict began to be used from the 19th century. In the classic Explanatory Dictionary of the Living Great Russian language Vladimir Dal is not there yet. A modern Dictionary Russian language S.I. Ozhegova not only contains this word, but also explains it with examples, from which it is clear that in the 20th century it had a very wide scope: family conflict, armed conflict at the border, conflict with colleagues, conflict commission. In Ozhegov's dictionary, the word conflict is interpreted as a clash, a serious disagreement, a dispute.
You can live without the word conflict, but you cannot live without conflicts. If this word, borrowed from Latin, did not exist, then in any modern languages there would still be such words as clash, disagreement, dispute, fight, struggle, etc. And, probably, there would be some word to denote the general meaning that such words have.
So what is conflict? What comes to mind first when associated with this word? Confrontation, confrontation, contradiction, division of opinions.
Firstly. It is always a clash of contradictions in different forms. It could be an argument, it could be a fight. But not every contradiction causes conflict.
Secondly. The conflict necessarily affects things that are very significant for a person. A person goes to fight if something basic in this situation is affected, i.e. there are no conflicts over trifles.
Third. Emotional involvement in the conflict. Conflict is always emotions. This is important because it creates a very serious problem in dealing with conflicts. Emotional manifestations, experiences make it difficult to resolve conflicts.
Fourth. In a conflict there is always a moment of confrontation, counteraction to activity aimed at changing the situation, i.e. people do things to change the situation in their favor.
Summarizing all these components, we can give the following definition:
Conflict is a clash of opposing views, positions, interests, goals of two or more people.
It is unlikely that among adults there will be at least one who would not fall into any conflict situation. Among conflictologists, there is even a joke: “If there are no conflicts in your life, check if you have a pulse.” This is the same natural state as the opposite consent; peace, unity. But, if the idea of lightness and comfort is attached to the second, the first is associated with problems, resource costs, restrictions, etc. In connection with this common idea, people strive for everything possible ways avoid conflicts, avoid them. Conflictologists-practitioners are well aware of the following pattern: the participants in the conflict do not want to admit that there is a conflict between them, most often they call it disagreement, disagreement, etc. However, our desires and objective reality do not always coincide with each other. And it must be recognized that the state of conflict is as natural to human interaction as peace.
Moreover, if there are no conflicts in a family, organization or country, does this mean that peace and harmony reign in it? The absence of disagreement often indicates double standard than about harmony; about stagnation, complacency and degradation, and not about development; about psychosomatic illnesses, not self-control.
Emelyanov S.M. determines the possibility of finding the necessary and sufficient conditions for the emergence of a conflict. It seems to us that such an attempt is fruitful.
Necessary the conditions for the existence of a conflict are:
interaction of 2 or more subjects;
the interdependence of subjects, which encourages them to participate in the interaction;
the presence of differences underlying social interaction;
awareness of these differences;
Sufficient the condition is the incompatibility of the claims of the parties (incompatibility of interests or positions of the subjects), the zero amount of conflict interaction: the gain of one side is equivalent to the loss of the other, and each opponent seeks to acquire something for himself at the expense of the opponent (unlike the discussion of experts), which leads to confrontation as a form of such interaction, direct actions against each other using pressure.
Therefore, conflicts must be studied and it is necessary to know what to do with conflicts so that they do not spoil our lives.
One of the domestic researchers in the field of conflictology V.P. Sheinov in his book "Conflicts in our life and their resolution" gives three formulas of conflicts (A, B and C). Practical value conflict formulas lies in the fact that they allow you to quickly analyze many conflicts and find ways to resolve them. At the same time, it should be remembered that the formulas given below cannot be a universal method for assessing and resolving any conflicts. In many cases, they can only serve as a guide in the complex and controversial process of conflict management.
First formula reflects the dependence of the conflict (CF) on conflictogens (CFG).
conflictogens are words, actions (or lack of actions) that can lead to conflict.
The mechanisms of conflict development according to the first formula are based on the negative perception and negative reaction of the person against whom the conflictogen is applied. In the absence of volitional regulation of such a reaction, it tends to develop according to the law of escalation, that is, growth.
More specifically, the first conflict formula can be schematically expressed as follows.
The issue of conflict is raised in domestic and foreign social psychology quite often. The conflict is studied from the positions of various directions. N.V. Grishina distinguishes 3 traditional approaches in considering psychological conflicts in general and interpersonal conflicts in particular - motivational, situational and cognitive. WELL. Zaichenko identifies 6 main approaches from which conflicts are studied: cognitive, motivational, analytical, activity, energy-emotional, organizational and systemic. Within the framework of the motivational approach, interpersonal conflict was analyzed by K. Levin. The conflict was considered as a consequence of multidirectional "forces" (motives) acting on a person - in a situation of interpersonal conflict, these are "own" and "forcing" forces. Also, the motivational approach includes a psychoanalytic concept, in which interpersonal conflict was considered as a phenomenon determined by intrapersonal characteristics or manifestations of the person himself.
Within the framework of the situational direction, interpersonal conflict was studied by M. Deutsch, R. Mack, R. Snyder and other authors. In this approach, the conflict is understood as the result of a certain situation of competitive or cooperative interaction between people. In the traditions of the cognitive approach, interpersonal conflict is seen as the result of an unbalanced structure of human relationships. F. Haider, who developed the theory of structural balance, adhered to a similar point of view. He notes that a conflict arises if it is not possible to balance the structure of relationships due to the inverse relationship between the structures of both people, i.e. striving for the balance of the structure of one person excludes the balance of the structure of another.
Within the framework of the analytical approach, interpersonal conflict is considered by such authors as A.Ya. Antsupov, A.I. Shipilov, L.A. Petrovskaya and others. This approach reveals in detail the main components of conflict interaction. The activity approach considers interpersonal conflict within the framework of joint activities of people. A.Ya. Antsupov, V.M. Afonkova, F.M. Borodkin, N.M. Koryak, N.V. Grishina, A.I. Dontsov, T.A. Polozova, E.A. Donchenko, T.M. Titarenko, A.I. Shipilov and others.
Let's take a look at some of them for comparison.
For example, A.I. Alekseeva defines interpersonal conflict as the conditionality of people's opposition to each other. In an interpersonal conflict, there is a clash of goals, interests of people, and the real rivalry of its participants is also expressed in it.
K.A. Abulkhanova-Slavskaya approaches the definition of conflict from several positions. "From an instrumental point of view, the conflict acts as one of the means of self-affirmation, overcoming the tendencies denied by the personality. The conflict can also be understood as a process: in this case it is a situation of an unfound way out, the development of actions towards the search for means of stabilizing relations" .
According to I.P. Andriadi, conflict is "the presence of contradictions, the resolution of which is a progressive movement in the development of intrapersonal, interpersonal and intergroup relations" .
A.A. Ershov defines interpersonal conflict as "a clash of personalities due to the incompatibility of needs, motives, goals, attitudes, views, behavior in the process and as a result of communication between these personalities" .
WELL. Zaichenko believes that interpersonal conflict is, Firstly, "a socio-psychological phenomenon determined by intrapersonal problems"; secondly, "the manifestation of the imperfection of the energy-emotional-informative content of the social space (the active level of the vital activity of matter), highlighted by the circumstances of occurrence (physical, psycho-physiological, social)"; thirdly, "the confrontation between subjective and objective tendencies, which manifests itself in confrontation on any occasion"; fourthly, "mutual imposing and mutual resistance in a situation of a negative form of interaction relations between subjects, determined by their psychological positions, socio-psychological processes (facilitation and inhibition), psychophysiological states, behavioral and speech manifestations" and fifthly, "multi-level interaction, aggravated negative emotional background and stress reactions" .
Some authors adhere, including when defining interpersonal conflicts, the definition of L. Koser, which is considered classical in Western sociology: "Social conflict can be defined as a struggle over values or claims for status, power or limited resources, in which the goals of the conflicting parties are not only to achieve the desired, but also to neutralize, damaging or eliminating an opponent." Although L. Koser himself attributes this definition and to interpersonal conflicts, noting that conflict "always takes place in an interaction between two or more persons".
Thus, while differing in particulars, the definitions of conflict (including interpersonal conflict) converge, which, for example, is also indicated by the studies conducted by A.Ya. Antsupov and A.I. Shipilov, where the authors analyzed more than 50 definitions of conflict in the works of domestic authors.
N.V. Grishina analyzed the understanding of the conflict in the representations of various psychological concepts, on the basis of which the following mandatory signs of the conflict were identified to her: bipolarity, activity and the presence of a subject of subjects. Analyze conflict L.A. Petrovskaya proposes as follows: the structure of the conflict, its dynamics, functions and typology. A single classification of interpersonal conflicts generally recognized by all researchers, as well as a definition, does not exist.
Various options for dividing conflicts, including at the interpersonal level, can be found in V.I. Andreeva, A.Ya. Antsupova and A.I. Shipilova, F.M. Borodkin and N.M. Koryak, O.N. Gromova, M. Deutsch, S.V. Kudryavtseva and other authors.
For example, V.I. Andreev proposes the following classification: - according to the severity of conflicts: discontent, disagreement, opposition, discord, enmity; - on a problem-activity basis: managerial, pedagogical, industrial, economic, creative, etc.; - according to the degree of people's involvement in the conflict: interpersonal, intergroup, intercollective, interstate, interparty conflicts.
AND I. Antsupov, A.I. Shipilov include animal conflicts in the general classification of conflicts along with conflicts involving humans. They divide the latter into intrapersonal and social, which, in turn, are divided into interpersonal, conflicts between the individual and the group, between small social groups, between medium social groups, between large social groups and interstate, each of which, according to the opinion, is also divided into smaller types. Directly interpersonal conflicts are subdivided by the authors on the basis of the spheres of activity of people: family conflicts, conflicts between managers and subordinates, conflicts in conditions learning activities, as well as innovation conflicts
F.M. Borodkin and N.M. Koryak distinguishes four types of conflicts according to the nature of their occurrence: objective purposeful, objective non-purposeful (these two types of conflict are generated by objective circumstances), subjective purposeful and subjective non-purposeful (these two types of conflict are generated by a person, group, organization ...).
HE. Gromova proposes to divide conflicts depending on the following factors: on the method of resolution (violent and non-violent), on the nature of their occurrence (political, social, economic, organizational), on the needs affected (conflicts of interest, views, or cognitive), on the direction of influence (vertical , horizontal), on the presence of an object of conflict (objectless, object), on the degree of severity (open, hidden), on the number of participants (intrapersonal, interpersonal, intergroup).
In addition, domestic authors usually adhere to the following classification of conflicts: social, socio-psychological, psychological, as indicated, in particular, by V.S. Ageev, N.V. Grishina, L.A. Petrovskaya. Recently, however, social psychologists have rarely resorted to such a classification.
Also, one of the classifications of interpersonal conflicts, singled out quite often, is their division into domestic and industrial. Features of such conflicts are considered in the works of F.M. Borodkina, N.M. Koryak, N.V. Grishina, A.A. Ershova, A.I. Kitova, B.B. Kosov and other authors.
In addition to these classifications, in the psychological and sociological literature, the division of conflicts (including interpersonal) according to the type of consequences for the parties is quite common. In this case, indicate a constructive or destructive conflict. Almost all authors adhere to this classification to one degree or another, sometimes without directly singling it out. For example, O.N. Gromova excluded from her typology the classification of conflicts according to the consequences for the participants (originally distinguished).
In contrast to the definition of conflict and the typology of conflicts, highlighting structural elements conflicts does not cause similar controversy in the literature. For example, R. Mack and R. Snyder mean the following by the structure of the conflict:
- 1) the presence of at least two parties having contact with each other;
- 2) mutual incompatibility of the values and intentions of the parties;
- 3) behavior aimed at destroying the plans and destroying the intentions of the other party in order to gain something at its expense;
- 4) the opposition of the actions of one side to the other and vice versa;
- 5) the use of force to influence the behavior of the other party in the desired direction.
However, in this view, elements of the dynamics of conflicts are visible from the point of view of domestic science.
In domestic psychological studies devoted to the problems of conflict, the views of L.A. Petrovskaya on this problem. Analyzing the structure of the conflict, L.A. Petrovskaya distinguishes the following basic concepts: the parties (participants) of the conflict, the conditions for the course of the conflict, the images of the conflict situation, possible actions participants in the conflict, outcomes of conflict actions.
Developing the views of L.A. Petrovskaya on this issue, the authors, however, follow somewhat different paths. For example, A.Ya. Antsupov, A.I. Shipilov proposes to consider the structure of the conflict as follows:
- Firstly, the conflict situation, which includes the participants, the subject, the object of the conflict, the elements of the micro- and macro-environment associated with the conflict;
- Secondly, the psychological components of the conflict (the motivation of the parties, the strategies and tactics of the behavior of the parties and the information models of the conflict, or the image of the conflict situation).
N.V. Grishina refers to the structural components: the parties (participants) of the conflict, the conditions of the conflict, the subject of the conflict, the actions of the participants in the conflict, the outcome (result) of the conflict.
It is obvious that the main positions of the structure of the conflict among different authors coincide, but in particular issues there is no such "unanimity". social psychological conflict
Thus, a theoretical analysis of the literature shows that there is no unambiguous, universally recognized classification of conflicts. However, most authors acknowledge some general points. In particular, a common classification of conflicts is based on the number of participants (intrapersonal, interpersonal, intergroup) in various small variations - such a classification is followed, in particular, by A.Ya. Antsupov, A.I. Shipilov, N.V. Grishina, O.N. Gromova and other authors. We will adhere to the following definition of conflict: conflict as a result of an unbalanced structure of human relationships.
It is quite obvious that without clarifying the causes of conflicts, we will not be able to do anything more or less effective for their successful resolution, and even more so for prevention.
There are four types of conflict causes:
Objective reasons, as a rule, lead to the creation of a pre-conflict situation. Sometimes they can be real, and sometimes imaginary, and in this case they will only be an excuse, artificially invented by a person.
Subjective reasons begin to act when the pre-conflict situation develops into a conflict. In almost any pre-conflict situation, a person is left with the choice of a conflict or one of the non-conflict ways of resolving it. Only on the basis of individual psychological characteristics a person chooses one behavior or another. In a dispute, as in a quarrel, there is no one to blame. There are always two sides to fight. There is no need to absolve yourself of responsibility and find out who started it first. You supported, therefore, you yourself chose the conflict. If you need to avoid arguing, for example, with your superiors, you will find many ways to avoid conflict. But if your "opponent" is equal to you or weaker, then you are unlikely to yield.
Of course, in one conflict, objective causes and subjective ones are clearly distinguished. The line is quite difficult to draw. The same objective premise is conflictogenic for some people, not for others, therefore the objective reasons themselves are largely subjective. On the other hand, subjective reasons are largely objective, because the aggressiveness of a person, as we said in the first lesson, is largely shaped by the aggressiveness of the environment in which he was formed as a person.
And, nevertheless, objective and subjective causes of the conflict are conventionally distinguished.
The most common objective reasons include the following:
- - a natural clash of material and spiritual interests of people in the process of life.
- - Poor development of legal norms regulating non-conflict problem solving.
The second group of objective causes of conflicts is organizational and managerial in nature. These reasons have an element of subjectivism to a somewhat greater extent than objective reasons. Organizational and managerial causes of conflicts are associated with the creation and functioning of organizations, teams, groups. Structural and organizational causes of conflicts lie in the inconsistency of the structure of the organization with the requirements of the activity in which it is engaged. The structure of the organization should be determined by the tasks that this organization will solve or solve, the structure is created for the tasks. However, it is almost impossible to achieve an ideal correspondence between the structure of the organization and the tasks to be solved.
The third group of causes is of a socio-psychological nature. One of these reasons is the possible significant loss of information and distortion of information in the process of interpersonal and intergroup communication.
