Basic principles and methods of constructive conflict resolution. Constructive ways to resolve conflicts

Topic: Social conflicts: ways to resolve

Type: Test | Size: 21.59K | Downloads: 58 | Added on 01/29/11 at 19:41 | Rating: +1 | More Examinations

University: VZFEI

Year and city: Moscow 2011

Table of contents
Introduction 2
Essence and characteristics of conflicts 3
Ways to resolve social conflicts. ten
Practical part 12
Conclusion 13
References 14

Introduction
The social heterogeneity of society, differences in income levels, power, prestige, often lead to conflicts. Conflicts are an integral part of social life. Conflicts are born on the basis of daily differences in views, disagreements and confrontation of different opinions, desires, interests, hopes, personal characteristics, lifestyles. The modern life of Russian society is especially rich in conflicts. All this leads to close attention to the study of conflicts. The widespread occurrence of this phenomenon served as the basis for this work.
The problem of social conflicts became the subject of study of sociologists only in the 19th and 20th centuries.
Within the framework of sociology, a special scientific direction has developed, which is currently referred to as the “sociology of conflict”. The problems of social conflicts (in particular, for the theoretical explanation of sociocultural changes in modern society) were paid attention in their works by many classics of sociology: G. Spencer, M. Weber, K. Marx, E. Durheim, R. Dahrendorf, K. E. Boulding and others.
The study of conflicts means, first of all, acquaintance with the very rich and diverse literature on this issue, the assimilation of theoretical and practical knowledge accumulated within the framework of this direction of sociological thought.
To develop the right line of conduct in various conflict situations, you need to know what conflict is and how people come to an agreement. Knowledge of conflicts increases the culture of communication and makes a person's life not only calmer, but also more stable psychologically.

Essence and characteristics of conflicts
Social conflict is a type of social interaction characterized by the confrontation of several individuals over the distribution of values, resources or power.
Social conflict is an attempt to achieve some reward by subjugating, imposing one's will, removing or destroying an opponent seeking to achieve the same reward.
A conflict is a real struggle between acting people or groups, regardless of the origins, methods and means mobilized by each of the parties. To understand the nature of the conflict, "Thomas's theorem" is of particular importance: "If people perceive a certain situation as real, then it will be real in its consequences." In relation to social conflict, this means that if people do not feel a mismatch of their interests, then conflict does not arise, and vice versa: if interests are common, but their carriers are hostile to each other, then conflict arises.
The causes of conflict are manifold and often intricately intertwined.
Conditionally, the following can be distinguished:
social inequality (i.e., the unequal position of individuals in society; wealth, power and high positions of some stand in contrast to the poverty and subordination of others);
lack of vital goods (material, spiritual, prestigious positions, jobs, etc.);
discrepancy between the values ​​of the individual and society (which is clearly manifested in sharp contradictions between the moral guidelines of the majority of people and the antisocial behavior of criminals);
opposition of people's interests;
selfishness of people.
Conflict arises only when the good (money, power, living space, resources, prestige, etc.) cannot be divided. If it could be quietly divided, then no quarrel, fight or war would arise. And this is the main thing - what is indivisible is divided between the two sides. On the bus, conflict arises over free space, conflict between nations over vital territory, between religions over a creed or the true interpretation of that symbol.
Thus, the main cause of social conflicts is the incompatibility of interests, goals, desires of the conflicting parties, because the needs (needs) of people are great and constantly growing, and the possibilities and resources to satisfy them are always limited. Therefore, the poorer the society and the scarcer the goods of life, the more often and sharper the conflicts between people in it.
Kinds

By participants (subjects)	By spheres	The nature	By way of regulation	By type of interaction
1. Intrapersonal 2. Interindividual 3. Between group and individual 4. Between the individual and society 5. Intergroup 6. Intra- and inter-institutional 7. Interstate	1. Economic 2. political 3. Ideological 4. International 5. Religious 6. Household and etc.	1. Genuine (real, arising from a really existing incompatibility of interests) 2. Imaginary (false, far-fetched or specially "fabricated")	1. Institutionalized 2. Non-institutionalized (depending on the existence or absence of generally accepted rules of conflict behavior, mutual obligations of the parties, the consent of the participants regarding the symbols victory or defeat, etc.)	1. Confrontation (struggle, incompatible interests) 2. Rivalry (assumes some unity of goals and interests of the participant) 3. Competition (the success of one side is possible only if the interests of the other are suppressed or infringed)

Role of conflicts
Thus, conflicts play a controversial role in society.
There are also other classifications of functions in the literature.
First of all, we note such a general function as information-cognitive. The conflict stimulates the knowledge of interests, values, positions, colliding subjects.
Another general function of conflict is integrative. The conflict contributes to integration, uniting people, establishing stability in society. Conflict resolution unites groups, communities, contributes to the harmonization of social relations.
One of the general functions of the conflict is the function of stimulating the adaptation of the subjects of the conflict to the changing environment. Social groups, individuals have to constantly face new conditions and new needs generated by ongoing changes. Hence the need for adaptation, adaptation to a new situation through a reassessment of values, criticism of outdated patterns of behavior and thinking.
The severity of the conflict
L.Kozer, having studied the conditions that affect the severity of the conflict, formulated the following conclusions:
the severity of the conflict depends on the conditions that cause it: the more such conditions, the sharper the resulting conflict,
the severity of the conflict is due to the degree of emotionality of the parties involved in the conflict,
in turn, emotional intensity depends on the number of groups involved in it, and the primacy of connections between their members; the smaller the group, the more primary the connections within it, the more emotional the resulting conflict can be,
the sharpness of the conflict depends on the rigidity of the social structure; the more rigid it is, the less institutionalized funds are available to pay it off,
the degree of severity of the conflict decreases when the parties involved in it pursue their real interests and, conversely, it increases if the conflicting groups oppose on abstract (torn off from reality or imaginary, far-fetched) issues,
conflicts over values ​​are more acute.
Subjects of the conflict. A participant in the conflict can be any person, organization, or group of persons who take part in the conflict, but are not aware for the purposes of the conflict contradiction.
The main subject of the conflict is an individual or large social groups capable of creating a conflict, i.e. firmly and relatively independently influence the course of the conflict in accordance with their interests, influence the behavior of others, cause various changes in social relations.
A well-known specialist in the field of conflict theory Ralf Dahrendorf refers to the subjects of the conflict three types of social groups. one). Primary groups - direct participants in the conflict, which are in a state of interaction regarding the achievement of objectively or subjectively incompatible goals. 2). Secondary groups - tend to be not directly involved in the conflict, but contribute to fueling the conflict. At the stage of exacerbation, they can become the primary side. 3). Third forces are interested in resolving the conflict.
The subject of the conflict is the main contradiction because of which and for the sake of resolving which the subjects enter into confrontation. It can be the territory of residence, money, housing, power, etc. The cause and cause of the conflict are different from the subject of the conflict. A minor incident can serve as a cause for conflict. Thus the First World War broke out.
The conflict takes different forms and scales. The most common form is an everyday quarrel between friends, relatives, strangers at home, on the street, in transport. This is an interpersonal conflict. A more serious form is a quarrel, a divorce, a strike. Riot, rebellion - a spontaneous mass form of protest, they can end in a revolution, war, coup. We are talking about the conflict between different ethnic groups, different generations (the conflict of fathers and children), between law-abiding citizens and criminals. The scale of the conflict refers to the number of people involved and the severity of the consequences.
Stages of social conflicts.
Any social conflict has a rather complex internal structure. It is advisable to analyze the content and characteristics of the course of a social conflict in four main stages:
- pre-conflict stage
- immediate conflict
- stage of conflict resolution
- post-conflict stage.
The pre-conflict stage is the period in which the conflicting parties evaluate their resources before deciding to take action or retreat. Such resources include material values, information, connections, prestige, power with which you can influence the opponent. At the same time, there is a consolidation of the forces of the opposing sides, the search for supporters and the formation of groups participating in the conflict. The pre-conflict stage is also characteristic in the formation of each of the conflicting sides of the strategy or even several strategies.
direct conflict. This stage is characterized primarily by the presence of an incident, i.e. social actions aimed at changing the behavior of rivals. This is an active, active part of the conflict. Thus, the entire conflict consists of a conflict situation, which is formed at the pre-conflict stage, and an incident.
Conflict resolution.
An external sign of conflict resolution may be the end of the incident. The resolution of social conflict is possible only when the conflict situation changes. This change can take many forms. But the most effective change in the conflict situation, which allows to extinguish the conflict, is considered to be the elimination of the cause of the conflict.
Modern conflictology has formulated the conditions under which a successful resolution of social conflicts is possible.
a) One of the important conditions is the timely and accurate analysis of its causes. And this involves the identification of objectively existing contradictions, interests, goals. On the basis of such an analysis, the so-called “business zone” of the conflict situation is determined.
b) Another, no less important condition is the mutual interest in overcoming contradictions on the basis of mutual recognition of the interests of each of the parties. To do this, the parties to the conflict must seek to free themselves from hostility and mistrust towards each other.
c) The third, indispensable condition is the joint search for ways to overcome the conflict. Here it is possible to use a whole arsenal of means and methods: direct dialogue of the parties, negotiations with the participation of a third party, etc.
Post-conflict stage
The final post-conflict stage is of great importance.
At this stage, efforts should be made to finalize
elimination of conflicts of interests, goals, attitudes, liquidated
socio-psychological tension and stopped any struggle.
The settled conflict contributes to the improvement of the social
psychological characteristics of both individual groups and
intergroup interaction. It promotes group cohesion
increases the level of identification of its members with common goals and
satisfaction in the group. At the same time, he develops a respectful
attitude towards former opponents, allows you to better understand their interests,
goals and motivations.

Ways to resolve social conflicts.
It is known that the time spent on the conflict itself is many times less than the time spent on post-conflict experiences. In the case of a tactless statement of a colleague at work, the latter is 14 times higher than the first, in the case of the rudeness of the boss - 20 times. Post-conflict tension - negative emotions, severe negative experiences - is a powerful destructive factor. It drastically reduces the productivity and cohesion of the group.
For this reason, it is wiser to prevent conflicts than to eliminate the consequences of a running conflict. Modern conflictology has accumulated an extensive arsenal of conflict resolution methods. These methods include:
compromise - solving a problem through mutual concessions;
adaptation - the desire to smooth out contradictions by changing one's position;
cooperation - an attempt to jointly develop a solution that takes into account the interests of all parties;
negotiations - a peaceful conversation of both sides to solve the problem;
mediation - the use of a third party in the absentee solution of the problem;
ignoring - an attempt to get out of the conflict, avoiding it;
rivalry, competition - an uncompromising struggle for victory by any means, stubbornly defending one's position;
prevention - an attempt to eliminate at an early stage the conditions for the emergence of a conflict;
arbitration - an appeal to a body of authority endowed with special powers for help in solving a problem;
management - regulation of the process in order to minimize losses and maximize gains;
the use of force, power, law - the unilateral use of power or force by the side that considers itself stronger.
In the technique of negotiating (business, political, etc.) they distinguish between interpersonal (for example, between a wife and a husband) and intergroup negotiations, in which representatives of two parties participate (negotiations between an employer and trade unions).
The most difficult case is the solution of interethnic, ethnic conflicts. In most ethnic conflicts, there is objectively no fair solution for all warring parties, because each is guided by its own truth, its own historical events and facts.
Experience shows that major conflicts involving countries, world systems, peoples and ethnic groups are resolved the faster the shorter the history of conflict relations. A vivid example of this is the war in Chechnya, which began even before the revolution with the liberation movement of Shamil, then calmed down for a while, after which it arose in the 30s after the deportation of Chechens by the Stalin regime. After that, the conflict subsided, but flared up twice in 1994 and turned into an open war with the use of a regular army, and in 1994. Between 1996 and the summer of 1999 there was a brief lull, which had a pronounced conflict character.

Practical part
The following expression belongs to the German sociologist R. Dahrendorf: “Who knows how to cope with conflicts by recognizing them, takes control of the rhythm of history. Whoever misses this opportunity gets the rhythm to resist.
The possibility of conflict exists in all spheres of society. Conflicts are born on the basis of daily differences in views, desires, lifestyles, personal characteristics. Difficulties and conflicts inevitably arise in relations between people; they are a natural part of our life. Few people approve of conflict processes, but almost everyone participates in them.
Often the condemnation of the fact of the existence of conflicts and the naive belief that one can live life without ever having a conflict with anyone are associated with insufficient distinctions between the conflict itself and the way it is resolved. But there are effective ways to resolve conflicts caused by differences in views, inconsistencies in goals and actions. They strengthen relationships and are therefore extremely valuable.
In my opinion, the sociologist R. Dahrendorf, with this expression, wanted to convey the following to us: in the current conflict situation, its participants must necessarily take measures to mitigate the conflict, remove its severity, and find methods for resolving it. Having settled the conflict, the participants take control of the further development of relations.
Successful conflict resolution together can bring people closer together. At the same time, it helps to develop a respectful attitude towards former opponents, allows you to better understand their interests, goals and motivations.
And the suppression and "cancellation" of the conflict leads to its aggravation.

Conclusion
Summing up the study of social conflicts, it can be argued that the existence of a society without conflicts is impossible. It is impossible to categorically call the conflict a manifestation of the dysfunction of organizations, deviant behavior of individuals and groups, a phenomenon of social life; most likely, conflict is a necessary form of social interaction between people.
So, we can draw the following conclusion. Since conflicts are inevitable in our lives, we need to learn how to manage them. Based on the experience accumulated in a very rich and diverse literature on this issue, the assimilation of theoretical and practical knowledge obtained within the framework of this area of ​​sociological thought, strive to ensure that they lead to the lowest costs for society and the individuals participating in them.
Understanding the nature of the conflict, the causes of its emergence and development will help to develop rules of conduct and ways to resolve the conflicting parties by mutual consent.

List of used literature
1. Conflictology: a textbook for universities / edited by prof. V.P. Ratnikova, 2nd ed. - M., 2005.
2. General sociology. A.I. Kravchenko / studies. manual for universities - M., UNITI-DANA, 2001 - 479 p.
3. Sociology: Textbook for universities / edited by prof. V.N. Lavrinenko, 3rd ed. - M., 2004.
4. Sociology. A.N. Ovshinov / textbook. allowance, ed. "Dzhangar" - Elista, 2006.
5. Sociology of conflict. Zdravomyslov A.G. / Uch. allowance. M., 2005.

To fully familiarize yourself with the control, download the file!

If it was not possible to prevent a vertical conflict and resolve the contradictions that have arisen in peaceful, non-conflict ways, then constructive methods can also be used to resolve the conflict. There are many ways to constructively resolve a conflict that has arisen.

1. interest, persuade the subordinate in the need to agree and accept the option of resolving the conflict that the leader needs. Create appropriate motivation for the subordinate;

2. Argumentation of own requirements in conflict, the reinforcement of the requirements of the legal basis;

3. Ability to listen and hear subordinates , the ability to understand his vision of the problem and its solution, focus on the important information that the subordinate can tell the leader;

4. Attention to the problems of the subordinate associated with the organization and streamlining of his labor activity and workspace, workplace;

5. The development of conflict only in the most extreme case ;

6. Refusal, minimizing the use of raised tone in conversation as an argument;

7. Respect for the personality and dignity of the subordinate and maintaining a working distance;

8. Reliance on your position , calmness, poise and confidence as the main arguments in the event that the leader is right;

9. Using support senior management and the public;

10. Do not abuse your position ;

11. Do not prolong conflict with subordinates , because, firstly, this leads to long-term loss of working time, and secondly, it creates a feeling of resentment among opponents;

12. Ability to compromise;

13. Ability to yield to a subordinate if the leader is wrong, so as not to delay or aggravate the conflict;

14. Ability to resolve pre-conflict and conflict situations in non-conflict, constructive ways increases the authority of the leader in the eyes of subordinates.

In the conditions of the vertical, the leader may find himself in the role of a subordinate of his superiors. At least two are involved in a vertical conflict - a leader and a subordinate. The subordinate can also use in his behavior various tactics and techniques aimed at resolving the conflict. The behavior of a subordinate in a conflict situation in order to resolve it and achieve his goals should be based on the following rules:

- refusal to immediately oppose the leader the ability to pause and calmly understand what happened;

- if you are right, you must not concede on the main points , but it makes sense to compromise on the little things, and you can also turn to other employees or senior management for help;

- active position in conflict resolution , i.e. offering not one, but several options for solving the problem, as this increases the likelihood of finding a solution that will be acceptable to both parties and as a result of which both parties will be able to achieve their goals and satisfy their interests;

- you can't insult your opponent and use harsh language;

- exploiting weaknesses in leadership ;

- desire for a frank, direct conversation with the leader ;

- substantiation of one's position to subordinates if it is correct should be carried out in a personal conversation with the head without the presence of other employees and unauthorized persons;

When, if the subordinate is wrong, he should yield to the leader ;

Study and taking into account the individual psychological characteristics of the leader;

- the solution proposed by the subordinate should not be radically different from the decision on which the leader insists;

- on low moral qualities, the resolution of the conflict by peaceful, constructive means will be much more difficult.

Using these techniques, the manager can competently regulate and resolve emerging conflict situations without damaging his authority and without violating the psychological climate in the work team. Undoubtedly, the personality of the leader, his decency and culture of communication are of great importance in conflict management.

Conclusion

The emergence of conflicts is determined by complex situations in the activities of labor collectives, and shortcomings in the management system, and the individual characteristics of workers. The modern approach to conflict situations in an organization does not consist in suppressing them in one way or another (avoidance of the conflict, administrative influence, etc.), but in a comprehensive analysis of the conflict and the development of a joint solution with the participation of all interested parties. When communicating with people, there can be no ready-made recipes for behavior for all occasions. Real practical experience, the development of one's skills in analyzing the situation, the motives of people's behavior, the skills of influencing a person - all this is a necessary basis on which the ability to understand the most difficult situation and make the right decision arises.

Prevention or prevention of destructive conflicts should be in the constant field of view of the administration of the organization. Lack of attention to this issue can cause conflict situations, with a high degree of probability developing into conflicts. The creation of an environment in a large and small team that promotes freedom and respect for the individual, showing initiative, fair remuneration for work, and preventing the negative consequences of any conflicts, especially those that arise on the basis of discontent, depends primarily on the leader, as a potential subject of a conflict situation. working and social conditions. Activities to promote the establishment of goodwill between people (the so-called public relations) can contribute to increasing the effectiveness of mediation efforts in resolving conflicts. It favors the communication of workers, their disposition to each other.

As it turned out, the role of the leader in managing conflicts is very large, and sometimes decisive. The ability to analyze the current situation, the choice of the right strategy for getting out of it, the ability to direct events and their participants in a positive direction - these are the distinguishing features of a competent leader who is able to maintain a healthy working environment in the team.

If the conflict failed to foresee or assess the seriousness of the contradictions and prevent it, and it nevertheless flared up, then the main task is to constructively resolve it, draw appropriate lessons from it and, if possible, even benefit.

First of all, do not try to deny the conflict, hush up or pretend that everything is in perfect order. The well-known ostrich posture will not benefit either of the conflicting parties. It can only postpone the settlement of the conflict for a while, but this will not make its resolution any easier. Most often the opposite happens. The longer measures are not taken to resolve the conflict, the more severe the retribution. Cases when the conflict is painlessly resolved by itself do occur, but very rarely.

Most common principles and rules for conflict resolution involve the following actions:

• take control of emotions, realize the cause of anger or resentment;
• to understand the true causes of the conflict, to realize what goals the participants in the conflict are pursuing;
• listen carefully to the opponent and understand his position, ask for facts and arguments, not speculation;
• establish a friendly tone of conversation;
• localize the conflict, do not put forward several reasons at once, do not recall past grievances;
• disassemble the conflict point by point, trying not to convince the opponent (this is usually an unpromising matter), but to come to an agreement;
• find a commonality of views and interests, agree on what the opponent is right about;
• if necessary, you can resort to the services of an "arbitrator" - an authoritative third party, i.e. intermediary.

It must also be borne in mind that one should never hide the problem underlying the conflict. Having stated to the opponent the true cause of the conflict, thereby it is necessary to show a sincere interest in resolving it. It is also necessary to make every effort to ensure that this position is correctly understood by the opponent. At the same time, attention should not be focused on the differences in the interests of the parties. The main thing is to find common interests and appeal to them. If possible, it is desirable to involve allies, to refer to the fact that other members of the organization share this point of view, especially if they are authoritative persons.

Conflict Resolution Styles

In modern conflictology, there are five basic styles of conflict resolution , which are based on a system called the Thomas-Kilmenn method (developed by Kenneth W. Thomas and Ralph H. Kilmenn). The system allows you to create for each person their own style of conflict resolution.

• 1. Competition style. The person using this style is very active and prefers to go his own way to resolve the conflict. He is not very interested in cooperation with other people, but he is capable of strong-willed decisions. With this style, you try to satisfy your own interests first, forcing other people to accept your solution to the problem. This can be an effective style when you have some power. You know that your decision or approach in a given situation is correct, and you have the ability to insist on it. But if this style is applied in a situation in which you do not have enough power, for example, when on some issue your point of view differs from the point of view of the boss, you can get burned. This style is also recommended when your proposed solution to a problem is of great importance to you; when you feel that you need to act quickly to implement it; and when you believe in victory, because you have sufficient resources, will and power for this.
• 2. Evasion style. It is realized when you do not stand up for your rights, do not cooperate with anyone to develop a solution to the problem, but simply shy away from resolving the conflict. You can use this style when the issue at hand is not that important to you, when you don't want to spend energy on it, or when you feel like you're in a hopeless situation. This style is also recommended when you feel wrong or when your opponent has more power. This style is also appropriate when you feel you don't have enough information to solve a particular problem.
• 3. Fitting style. It means that you act together with another person, without trying to defend your own interests. You can use this approach when the outcome of a case is extremely important to the other person and not very important to you. This style is also useful in situations where you cannot prevail because the other person has more power; thus, you concede and resign yourself to what your opponent wants. This style should also be used when you feel that you have little to lose by giving in a little. By yielding, agreeing or sacrificing your interests in favor of another person, you can soften the conflict situation and restore harmony.
• 4. Collaborative style. Following this style, you actively participate in resolving the conflict and defend your interests, but at the same time try to cooperate with the other person. This style requires more painstaking and lengthy work than most other approaches to conflict, since all cards are first laid out on the table: the need, concerns and interests of both parties, and then discussed. If you have the time and solving the problem is important enough to you, then this is a good way to find a mutually beneficial result and satisfy the interests of both parties. The collaborative style encourages each person to openly discuss their interests. However, in order to successfully use this style, it is necessary to spend some time searching for hidden reserves in order to develop a way to satisfy the true desires of both parties. Collaboration among other styles is the most difficult, but it is this style that allows you to work out the most satisfying solution for both parties in difficult and important conflict situations.
• 5. compromise style. Every compromise requires mutual concessions. This style is that you give in a little in your interests in order to satisfy them in the rest, the other side does the same. You do this by trading concessions and haggling to work out a compromise solution. Such actions may to some extent resemble cooperation. However, compromise is reached at a more superficial level than cooperation. Compromise is the "umbrella" and cooperation is the "roof". Collaborative style is different in that you try to work out long-term and reliable solutions using it. Compromise is often a successful retreat or even the last opportunity to come to some kind of solution.

Among the various conflict resolution methods the most constructive method is negotiation. Negotiation - this is a joint discussion by the conflicting parties (with the possible involvement of a mediator) of controversial issues in order to reach an agreement. According to well-known American conflictologists R. Fisher and W. Urey, this method is characterized by four main rules.

• 1. Make a distinction between the negotiators and the negotiator, "separate the person from the problem." Criticism of the personal qualities of the negotiators only exacerbates the conflict or, at least, does not contribute to the search for ways to resolve it.
• 2. Focus on interests , not in positions. Opponents can hide the true goals of their positions and even more so their interests. Meanwhile, conflicting positions are always based on interests. Therefore, instead of arguing about positions, one should examine the interests that determine them.
• 3. Develop mutually beneficial options. Interest-based negotiation promotes the search for a mutually beneficial solution by exploring options that satisfy both parties. In this case, the dialogue becomes a discussion with an orientation - "we are against the problem", and not "I am against you."
• 4. Find objective criteria. Consent as the goal of negotiations should be based on such criteria that would be neutral in relation to the interests of the conflicting parties. Only then will consent be fair, stable and lasting. If the criteria are subjective, i.e. are not neutral with respect to any party, then the other party will feel disadvantaged, and therefore, the agreement will be perceived as unfair.

A widespread and fairly effective way to resolve conflicts is to delegate the right to solve the problem. mediator - "arbitrator". This is where the third party, the intermediary, plays a key role. The head of the organization, by virtue of his status, often has to act as such an intermediary in resolving conflicts. In this case, in order to successfully resolve the conflict, he should keep in mind some basic mediation principles:

• the mediator must enjoy authority among all parties to the conflict;
• the dispute should not be allowed to move into the area of ​​personal relationships, as this will lead the dispute far to the side;
• it is necessary to maintain good and equal relations with both parties to the conflict;
• the mediator should take responsibility only for the process of solving the problem, and not for the essence of the solution found;
• avoid giving any assessments concerning the essence of the problem, because this may cause a negative reaction on the part of the subjects of the conflict.

Particular attention should be paid to the question of how behave in conflict with people who are difficult to communicate with. And in the case of mediation, and in the process of business communication, in general, there are people who are difficult to communicate with. In a situation of conflict, they represent a particular difficulty for its resolution. It can be difficult to find a "common language" with them, since they either "know everything" themselves, or are constantly looking for a reason to argue, regardless of the problem and its degree of importance. Anita and Klaus Bishof offer some advice on how to best deal with difficult conflict participants.

• Wrangler. Listen to him calmly, respond to the case. With provocative questions, do not get involved in a dispute, but redirect them to other participants in the meeting.
• know-it-all. It will be possible to include him in the work of the group if he is constantly asked to express his opinion and attitude to the problem.
• Timid. We must praise him, from time to time ask him easy questions. This will strengthen his self-esteem. But you can not overdo it, otherwise he will again hide in his shell.
• Thick-skinned. He is indifferent, in order to draw him into a conversation, it is advisable to ask about the range of his work duties or interests.
• Proud. You have to be careful with him, as he is sensitive to criticism.
• Talker. It should be limited in time for performance. The three-minute rule, for example, is very suitable for this: everyone has the right to speak for only three minutes.
• Silent. Some participants initially wait a long time before taking the floor. This may have various reasons: restraint, insecurity, conceit, etc. It is necessary to find out the strengths of this participant and include him in the overall work.
• Simple talker. He just loves to talk. You should tactfully interrupt him and ask him to quickly say the most important thing, since there is not much time left.

• Cm.: Fisher R „ Urey W. The path to agreement, or negotiations without defeat. M., 1992.
• Cm.: Bischof A., Bischof K. Secrets of effective business communication. M.: Omega-L, 2012.

Since the typologies of conflicts are very ambiguous, changeable and dissimilar, therefore there is no single form of conflict resolution.

L. A. Kozer believed that in a social conflict, a clear agreement should be established between rivals regarding its completion. In the event that no mutual agreements have been reached by a certain moment of the struggle, its end becomes possible only as a result of the death of at least one of the opponents. This means that the end of the conflict contains a number of problems that are not inherent in the final processes.

American researcher R. Dahl identifies three possible

completion alternatives: stalemate, violence and peaceful settlement. Those. the conflict ends with the death of one or both parties, "is suspended until better times" or receives one or another constructive resolution. But the death of both or one side does not mean that the conflict is resolved. The end of a conflict is any end of it, termination for any reason, and resolution is a positive action (decision) by the participants in the conflict or a third party, the end of the confrontation and the removal of the contradiction by peaceful or forceful means. The prerequisites for a constructive conflict resolution are determined to a large extent by the capabilities of the parties and other participants. And the main prerequisite for ending the conflict is the elimination of the objective causes that gave rise to the conflict situation. Thus, the object-subject nature of the emergence of the conflict implies the object-subject nature of the resolution of the latter.

L. A. Petrovskaya believes that conflict resolution is possible:

1. By transforming the most objective conflict situation;

2. By transforming the images of the situation, the existing parties.

Moreover, both full and partial resolution of the conflict is possible both at the objective and subjective levels.

According to the researchers, in order to resolve and resolve the conflict, you need to find out the conditions:

1) necessary for the resolution, institutionalization and regulation of the conflict;

2) creating an opportunity to resolve the conflict directly

by the parties included in it;

3) facilitating competitive or cooperative conflict resolution.

The main prerequisites for conflict resolution:

1. The conflicting parties must be organized by themselves.

2. Each of the conflicting parties must be ready to recognize the legitimacy of the demands of the other party and accept the result of the conflict settlement, even if it turned out to be beyond its interests. If this kind of readiness is not felt by the warring parties, then they will not have the desire to resolve the conflict, especially if it infringes on their interests in some way.

3. The conflicting parties must belong to the same social community. In this case, the proximity of normative systems, common values ​​and traditions facilitates communication between the parties to the conflict and accelerates its resolution.

Currently, within the framework of the object-subject approach, two models of conflict resolution are known: the arbitration model and the mediation model. The arbitrator examines the essence of the problem, discusses it with the parties to the conflict, and then makes a final and binding decision.

A. G. Kovalev reduces different ways of resolving conflicts in a production organization to a pedagogical and administrative solution.

1. The pedagogical path involves the objectification of the conflict (transferring it from the emotional to the rational level), the ability to distinguish between the interests and positions of the participants in the conflict and convince them of the need to resolve the situation, taking into account their individual psychological characteristics.

2. The administrative path involves taking into account the possibilities of affect from both or one of the parties, collecting the necessary information about the conflicting parties and choosing the appropriate way to resolve the conflict, organizing monitoring of those who have left the conflict.

T. M. Dankova considers it an effective way to resolve conflicts by bringing them to the discussion of the team and making a group decision.

S. E. Aksenenko identifies two ways to resolve conflicts:

1. self-generalization, i.e., creating conditions for a productive exchange of information in a conflict;

2. intervention of other persons, surrounding, and first of all officials. The author considers this way to be the most suitable for use in organizational and pedagogical work.

A. B. Dobrovich believes that the source of the conflict is often the failure to confirm the role expectations presented to each other by communication partners or the relative psychological incompatibility of people who are forced to contact each other.

Offers the following direct conflict resolution methods:

1. The leader in turn invites the warring parties, asks to state the essence of the cause of the collision, clarifies the facts and makes a decision.

2. The teacher or leader invites conflicting people to express their claims to each other in a group, at a meeting. The subsequent decision is made on the basis of the speeches of the meeting participants on this issue.

3. If, despite these measures, the conflict does not subside, the teacher or leader resorts to sanctions against those in conflict (from criticism to administrative penalties).

4. If this does not help, a way is found to separate the conflicting parties into different classes, workshops.

Dobrovich believes that direct methods of conflict repayment are less effective than indirect ones, therefore he proposes some principles for indirect conflict repayment:

1) The principle of “exit of feelings” is to allow a person to freely express his negative emotions, and then they will gradually give way to positive ones by themselves; after the “exit of feelings”, a person more easily accepts the reasonable arguments of the teacher.

2) The principle of "emotional compensation". You agree that he feels like a “victim” of the conflict (even if he is not), then appealing to his reason and conscience (if he is wrong) will be effective and will lead to repentance.

4) The principle of “exposing aggression” is that the psychologist or teacher deliberately provides the warring parties with the opportunity to express their dislike for each other, encourages them to quarrel in his presence and, having let them speak out, continues to “work” with them.

5) The principle of “compulsory listening to the opponent” is, the author believes, that usually during a quarrel, the conflicting parties do not listen to each other, attributing to the offender a tone and words that were not actually there. Fixing the attention of the conflicting parties on this can remove or reduce the intensity of the struggle.

6) The principle of "exchange of positions". Encourage those in conflict to look at the quarrel through the eyes of the opponent. This technique, according to A. B. Dobrovich, has universal effectiveness and is appropriate in resolving conflicts of any type.

7) The principle of "expanding the spiritual horizon" of the arguing is to analyze the quarrel, to show the dishonesty of the argument, the pettiness and unprincipledness of the causes of the conflict. It is necessary to show those who are in conflict that in the values ​​of a higher order they are united, and not hostile.

In addition to the above principles of conflict resolution, the author suggests using special psychological games that contribute to a more successful resolution and prevention of interpersonal conflicts.

V. M. Afonkova believes that at high stages of development of the team, self-regulation of the conflict is possible. When this does not happen, then it is advisable to intervene in the conflict, which can be full or partial and go in two ways:

1. Direct - the method of "explosion" according to A. S. Makarenko, individual and group conversations, collective decision, collective therapy, compromise.

2. Indirect (pedagogical maneuver) - a change in the number of participants in the conflict, a change in activities, a theoretical analysis of similar situations, switching the attention of those in conflict to another object.

1) cessation of real confrontation;

2) elimination of traumatic factors;

3) achievement of the goal of one of the conflicting parties as a result of its successful strategy and tactics of behavior;

4) change in the position of the individual (meaning the removal or weakening of emotional tension);

5) the presence of the skill of active behavior of the individual in similar situations in the future.

Intermediary (mediator) activity to resolve conflicts is a new psychological reality. Seriously this question is considered in the works of NV Grishina. She believes that in domestic practice, leaders and teachers, sociologists and psychologists engaged in practical activities can be attributed to “natural” intermediaries.

1) Understanding the specific nature of mediation, the principles of the behavior of the mediator;

2) Opportunities for the intermediary to go beyond the usual scope of their professional experience.

J. McGrath puts forward three main multidirectional "forces" that influence the behavior of each of the participants and pursue goals:

1. defend the position that is entrusted to defend;

2. find agreement with the opposing party;

3. develop a solution that would be assessed as a qualitative and constructive mediator, representing the social community in which the conflict is “inscribed”.

The mediator himself is the object of the action of two "forces" that set different goals:

1) bring the negotiators to the position that will be approved by the social system behind them;

2) contribute to reaching an agreement between the parties.

Osgood proposed the PRISN method (successive and reciprocal initiatives to reduce stress), which is used in resolving conflicts of various levels: international, intergroup, interpersonal.

The method includes the following rules:

1. Make sincere public statements that one of the parties to the conflict wants to reduce tension and stop the escalation of the conflict.

2. Explain that conciliatory steps will definitely be taken. It is imperative to communicate what, how and when will be done.

3. Keep promises.

4. Encourage the opponent to exchange concessions, but do not demand them as a condition for fulfilling one's own promises.

5. Concessions must be made for a sufficiently long time and even if the other side does not reciprocate.

But the concessions made should not lead to an increase in defenselessness and vulnerability of the party making them.

Conflict resolution is the achievement of an agreement on a controversial issue between the participants. Therefore, it is useful that all actions to resolve the conflict are carried out not only by a third party, but also by the subjects themselves. Clarification of the essence of the conflict situation, its adequate

awareness by the parties to the conflict can serve as the basis for developing a constructive solution, and in some cases completely resolve the conflict if it turns out that it is based on a distorted perception of the situation by the participants in the conflict.

The main emphasis in the success of conflict resolution is shifted to the personality, its adaptive capabilities and resources. In this case, we are talking about the transition from subject-object forms of communication to subject-subject ones, where each participant in the situation is the subject of activity and is responsible for everything that happens to him at the moment.

The situation of communication is the creativity of both parties, and the elimination of any contradiction between people should be based on respect for each individual and at the same time on the conviction that a person has many-sided capabilities, for the most part is capable of self-government and work on himself.

Based on the foregoing, it can be concluded that forecasting and preventing conflict is an important component of a person’s work on himself. This increases his personal characteristics, therefore, helps to manage the dynamics of events in his own life. And also the social conflict has its own cyclicity in its origin, peak and attenuation. The ability to determine the stage of the course of the conflict forms the further choice of people's strategy.

Main criterion resolved conflict - satisfaction of the parties result. For those around, such parameters as the degree of resolution of the contradiction underlying the conflict (the degree of normalization of relations between the parties and relationships with other people) and the victory of the right opponent depend on this.

Partner type conflict resolution - conflict resolution through the use of constructive methods.

Its main features are that there is:

Constructive interaction of the leader with the conflicting parties. In order for the arguments of the head of the organization to be accepted or at least listened to, the head needs to inspire confidence in himself, eliminate negative feelings, observe etiquette, correctness in address;

Perception of the arguments of the opposite side;

Willingness to compromise, mutual search for solutions; development of mutually acceptable alternatives;

The desire to combine personal and organizational factors;

Perception as a normal factor of activity.

The partnership type of conflict has its advantages. It is closer to the real solution of the problem, it allows you to find unifying factors, i.e. satisfy (maybe not always fully) the interests of the parties. Of great importance is:

creating a favorable work environment,

friendly interpersonal relations of team members in the process of work,

The ability to distinguish causes from causes,

Choose the best way to resolve conflicts.

Conditions for a constructive conflict resolution:

Ø termination of conflict interaction;

Ø search for close or even common points of contact (conflict map);

Ø decrease in the intensity of negative emotions;

Ø elimination of the "image of the enemy";

Ø reduction of negative emotions in the opponent;

Ø an objective view of the problem;

Ø taking into account each other's statuses;

Ø selection of the optimal resolution strategy.

Constructive conflict resolution factors:

Ø Time: reduction of time leads to an increase in the probability of choosing aggressive behavior;

Ø Third side: the participation of third parties seeking to resolve the conflict leads to a more peaceful course and a speedy resolution;

Ø Timeliness: the sooner the parties break into a settlement, the better;

Ø balance of power: if the parties are approximately equal, they have no other choice than to seek a compromise;

Ø culture: a high level of the general culture of opponents reduces the likelihood of a violent development of the conflict;

Ø Unity of values: the presence of agreement between the conflicting parties on what should constitute an acceptable solution;

Ø An experience: experience in resolving the conflict of at least one of the parties leads to an acceleration of its resolution

Ø Relations: good relations of the parties before the conflict accelerate its resolution.

Stages of conflict resolution

Conflict resolution is a multi-stage process that has its own logic, i.e. stages.

1. Analytical eta P(collection and evaluation of information on the following issues):

Ø - object of conflict

Ø - opponent

Ø - own position

Ø - causes and immediate cause

Ø - social environment

Ø - secondary reflection (revision of the situation, taking into account the elements analyzed above).

2. Forecasting a solution option:

Ø - the most favorable

Ø - the least favorable

Ø - what will happen if you just stop acting.

3. Definition of criteria for conflict resolution.

4. Actions to implement the plan.

5. Monitoring the effectiveness of actions.

6. Analysis of errors.

Ways to resolve the conflict

The main tactics of influencing the opponent in the conflict.

Tactics- this is a set of methods of influencing the opponent, a means of implementing the strategy. In conflicts, the development of options for the use of tactics usually goes from soft to harder.

Conflict resolution strategies are the main lines of action of opponents to influence the conflict situation.

Tough tactics

pressure tactics- presentation of demands, instructions, orders, threats, up to an ultimatum, presentation of compromising materials, blackmail. In vertical conflicts, it is used in two of three options.

Tactics of physical violence (harm)- destruction of material values, physical impact, infliction of bodily harm, blocking of someone else's activity.

Tactics for capturing and holding an object conflict a. It is used in interpersonal, intergroup, interstate conflicts, where the object is material.

Tactics of psychological violence (damage) - insult, rudeness, negative personal assessment, discriminatory measures, disinformation, deceit, humiliation, etc.

Neutral tactics

coalition tactics. The goal is to strengthen your rank in the conflict. It is expressed in the formation of unions, an increase in the support group at the expense of leaders, friends, appeals to the media, authorities.

Authorization. Influencing the opponent with the help of a penalty, an increase in the workload, the imposition of a ban, an open refusal to carry out orders.

Demonstrative tactics. It is used to draw attention to one's person (public statements, health complaints, absence from work, hunger strikes, demonstrations, etc.).

soft tactics

Tactics of fixing one's position. Based on the use of facts, logic to confirm one's position (most often used).

Friendly tactics. Includes the correct address, emphasizing the general, demonstrating a willingness to solve a problem, providing the necessary information, offering help, etc.

Deal tactics. Provides for the mutual exchange of benefits, promises, concessions, apologies.

The same tactic can be used in different strategies.

Types of tactics and their specifics.

Ways, or tactics, of resolving conflicts are as diverse as the conflict situations themselves. However, they can all be reduced to the following:

(1) tactics of withdrawal or conflict avoidance;

(2) forceful suppression or method of violence;

(3) the method of unilateral concessions or accommodations;

(4) tactics of compromise or cooperation.

It is easy to see that the basis for this classification of conflict management tactics is the degree of willingness of the parties to meet each other halfway in the confrontation that has arisen.

Tactics of withdrawal or avoidance of conflict

The least degree of such readiness is the tactic of avoiding the conflict, which is sometimes called the tactic (method) of avoidance. Nevertheless, it is a very popular way of behaving in a conflict situation; it is often resorted to both by the participants in the conflict and by those who, according to their official status, should act as an intermediary in its settlement.

The essence of this tactic consists in ignoring the conflict situation, refusing to recognize its existence, leaving the "stage" on which the conflict unfolds, self-elimination, either physically or psychologically. This tactic means that a person who finds himself in a conflict situation prefers not to take any constructive steps to resolve or change it.

At first glance, it may seem that this tactic should be evaluated only negatively. But on closer examination, it turns out that, like any method, this line of behavior in a conflict has its pros and cons.

The advantages of avoidance tactics are as follows:

(1) it is quickly feasible, since it does not require the search for either intellectual or material resources. So, for example, a leader, avoiding conflict, may not respond to the next written request of a subordinate to provide him with certain benefits, since this request is unreasonable;

(2) it provides an opportunity to delay or even prevent conflict, the content of which is insignificant from the point of view of the strategic goals of a given organization or group. So, parents can close their eyes, "not mess" with an adult daughter due to the fact that the skirts she wears are not the length that, in their opinion, meets the requirements of decency.

But this tactic also has its downsides. Thus, under certain conditions, it can lead to an escalation of the conflict, since the reason that caused it is not overcome by the tactics of avoidance, but is only preserved. And if this problem is real, significant, then this delay can only lead to an aggravation, and not a settlement of the conflict. However, despite its shortcomings, this tactic can still be applied.

The tactics of leaving, or avoidance, is also characterized by certain actions of the participants in the conflict, specific forms of their behavior: withholding, classifying the information necessary to resolve the conflict that has arisen, in order to prevent its possible aggravation when familiarizing people with "explosive" information;

Refusal to recognize the very fact of the existence of the causes of the conflict, in the expectation that it will somehow resolve itself, without the active participation of the warring parties;

By delaying, under one pretext or another, the final solution of the problem that caused the confrontation.

Conditions under which the tactics of withdrawal are applied.

(1) With a small significance of the reasons that gave rise to confrontation; if the immediate cause that gave rise to the conflict is only the “tip of the iceberg”, it only indicates the presence of other underlying prerequisites for the conflict. Naturally, under these conditions, one should refrain from wasting energy on insignificant problems, saving them for solving other deep problems when they are fully revealed.

(2) Under certain time parameters of the conflict: if the conflict arose at a time when it is not possible to spend it on resolving the confrontation, because there are other urgent problems that are more significant from the point of view of the organization's goals.

(3) When the available information about the conflict is limited, the necessary information is not available, and additional work is not possible to collect data that would ensure the effective conclusion of the conflict.

(4) If one of the conflicting parties does not have sufficient forces that are able to quickly and successfully resolve the conflict. Thus, an experienced military leader refrains from a full-scale battle until the reserves arrive, and only after their arrival begins a powerful offensive against the enemy. It was this tactic that Kutuzov adhered to during the Patriotic War of 1812.

Forceful suppression tactics

In many respects, the method of forceful suppression is opposite to the considered method of leaving. Its use indicates a higher degree of readiness to resolve the conflict on at least one of the parties. Its essence lies in the forced imposition of its decision on one of the parties. There are also certain prerequisites for the use of this tactic that favor its success.

Prerequisites for the use of force methods.

(1) The decisive superiority of one of the parties in the available material and psychological resources, for example, the superiority of the administration, which is in conflict with the working collective of the plant.

(2) The occurrence of an emergency requiring immediate action.

(3) A sudden need to make an unpopular decision, which will obviously be negatively received by the other side. This was precisely the decision of the Russian government in August 1998 to stop payments on state credit obligations, a default, which led to a deep financial crisis. The actions of the same order also include decisions of the administration of the enterprise to reduce wages or increase the working day in conditions of bankruptcy threatening the enterprise.

(4) Subject to the indisputable legitimacy of the actions of the party having the power advantage, when these actions are related to the provision of vital problems for this structure, for example, the immediate dismissal of an employee who committed an act that caused serious material or moral damage to the organization; such actions may include disclosure of trade secrets by an employee, failure by a medical worker to provide emergency care to a patient, disruption of classes by a teacher, etc.

(5) In case of any manifestations of destructive forms of behavior on the part of members of the organization, such as, for example, drunkenness, drug addiction, theft of property, absenteeism, violation of safety regulations, etc.

Power tactics also have their specific manifestations at the behavioral level. Here it is expressed in the following behavioral forms:

The use of predominantly coercive, forceful methods of influence with limited involvement of educational means, which, under the conditions considered, may turn out to be as ineffective as they turned out to be unsuitable in the situation described by I.A. Krylov in the famous fable "The Cat and the Cook";

The use of a rigid, commanding style of communication, calculated on the unquestioning subordination of one side of the conflict to the other; the use of the mechanism of competition to ensure the success of power tactics, which was already known to the ancient Romans under the name of the “divide and conquer” method, and which is often used today under the more streamlined name of the “mechanism of checks and balances”; these mechanisms are most often used in practice in the form of a combination of punishments for negligent and incentives for conscientious workers.

They are opposed to civilized, thoroughly rationalized methods based on the "win-win" principle, primarily the tactics of unilateral concessions and the tactics of compromises, mutually beneficial agreements or cooperation.

These tactics are more diverse and rich in content, although they are more difficult to implement in practice, since they require a certain level of conflictological literacy from the participants in the conflict. They are characterized by a focus on a constructive resolution of the conflict, a decrease in the level of tension that has arisen, and an increase in the level of cohesion of the organization. Mastering these tactics is a necessary condition for the effectiveness of modern managerial activity.

Method of unilateral concessions, or adaptations

One of the varieties of tactics of this kind is the method of unilateral concessions, or adaptations. For the successful application of this method, there are also a number of specific prerequisites associated with the specific features of the conflict situation.

Such conditions may include the following.

(1) A clear mistake discovered during the conflict made by one of the parties, for example, the administration of the plant, when setting the standards for the production of manufactured products. Under these conditions, neither avoidance of the conflict nor its forceful suppression is possible, and the only possible tactic that will help the administration "save face" will be a concession to workers in the form, for example, of lowering production standards to a reasonable limit. Such a step by the administration will undoubtedly be perceived as a manifestation of its self-criticism, the ability to objectively assess the requirements of employees, which will ultimately lead to strengthening the unity of the team and increasing the efficiency of its work.

(2) In conditions where the significance of the necessary concession for one of the parties turns out to be incomparable with its significance for the other party. In these circumstances, by making some small concessions, one side prevents the possibility of a significant release of conflict energy by the other side and thereby again achieves the restoration of agreement. So, by satisfying the employee's request for a short-term extraordinary leave for family reasons, the manager not only prevents a possible conflict, but also acquires a new ally in the person of this employee.

(3) On the eve of possible crisis events for the group in the near future, when it is necessary to conserve strength, energy, resources for this future and, at the cost of concessions, to maintain peace and tranquility in this period. This is what governments do, for example, when a military threat arises, hastily resolving disputes with neighboring states by means of individual concessions in the hope of winning them over to their side as allies in the coming war.

(4) One has to resort to the tactics of concessions involuntarily when refusing them threatens one of the parties with much more serious direct damage, when there is a situation of choice, as they say, "between life and wallet." A similar situation often arises when negotiating with criminals who have taken hostages.

Nevertheless, the method of unilateral concessions also has its weaknesses, since it does not fully, but only partially, implement the “win-win” principle. After all, when it is used, only one side benefits, and the other one somehow ends up at a loss, which sooner or later may turn out to be a source of new tension.

Tactics of compromise, mutual concessions

Therefore, the tactic of compromise, mutual concessions, which in the future can become the most reliable basis for long-term cooperation, is recognized as a more reliable, effective method of conflict resolution. This tactic is increasingly being used in democratic countries and is considered in conflictology as a classic, that is, exemplary, way of resolving conflict situations.

A compromise is understood as a path of mutual concessions, a mutually beneficial deal, the creation of conditions for at least partial satisfaction of the interests of the warring parties. A compromise, therefore, is a type of agreement based on the mutual adjustment of the positions of both parties on the issues under discussion, the search for a mutually acceptable position on controversial issues. Of course, a certain complex of favorable conditions is also necessary for the successful implementation of this method. These conditions include:

(1) the readiness of both parties to achieve their goals through mutual concessions on the principle of "win - win" or "give - receive";

(2) the impossibility of resolving the conflict by force or by means of withdrawal, that is, according to the "win-lose" principle.

It is in the implementation of this method that such a universal mechanism for regulating conflict as negotiations plays an important role. The negotiation process, holding discussions to the greatest extent allow to identify points of contact between the interests of opponents, the so-called "zones of agreement". It is extremely useful to start negotiations with just the questions that are included in this zone and allow the other side to say: “Yes!” But for the success of negotiations, it is necessary to comply with a number of conditions, for example, determining the place and timing of their holding, the composition of the participants, the presence of mediators, the form of decision-making, and a number of other conditions. Of course, the tactics of compromise, the most important element of which are negotiations, is not a universal, fail-safe master key to all types of conflict situations. Its application, as well as the use of other considered methods, is problematic, associated with a number of difficulties that arise in the practical use of compromise tactics.

The most common difficulties are:

(1) the refusal of one of the parties from the originally taken position due to the discovery during the negotiations of its unrealistic;

(2) the worked out solution, due to the mutual concessions contained in it, may turn out to be contradictory, unclear, and therefore difficult to implement. Thus, promises made by both parties to expedite the fulfillment of mutual obligations may not be backed by resources;

But, despite these and some other difficulties, compromise solutions are optimal for resolving a conflict situation, since they:

Contribute to the identification and consideration of mutual interests, being aimed at a mutually beneficial result on the principle of "win - win";

Demonstrate respect for the professionalism and dignity of each other.

This is the main content of the tactics of mutually beneficial cooperation, which is recognized by science as the most effective way to regulate the conflict.

Mechanisms for Implementing Compromise Tactics

That is why the most effective in comparison with this tactic, as well as in comparison with the tactics of withdrawal, the use of force and the use of unilateral concessions, is recognized as the tactic of mutual gain. The advantage of the "win-win" approach is that both parties benefit, in connection with which the decision made becomes more durable and sustainable. In the conflictology literature, this tactic has been developed most deeply and in detail, including not only its prerequisites, advantages and disadvantages, but also the mechanisms for its practical implementation. These mechanisms are designed to solve two main tasks:

(1) collection of comprehensive information, a complete database on the conflict;

(2) development of the main forms of behavior of the participants in the conflict, ensuring its successful settlement.

The solution of the first of these tasks is provided by an in-depth study of the conflict situation, taking into account all the factors that caused the conflict. The most convenient way to implement it in practice is the conflict map. The main elements of the conflict map: a description of the essence of the problems that caused the conflict, a definition of the nature of the conflict, psychological or social, a list of participants in the conflict (individuals, groups, departments, organizations), and most importantly, a description of the needs of the participants in the conflict, and possibly their needs fears in connection with the appearance of obstacles that prevent the satisfaction of certain needs.

However, mastering information about the conflict is a necessary but not sufficient condition for its successful regulation. To achieve this complex goal, it is also necessary to solve the second task - to ensure, on the basis of this information, organized actions and behavior of the participants in the conflict in a certain way. Information taken by itself is an invisible, ephemeral, poorly controlled phenomenon. It acquires visible forms only in the communication of people, verbal and non-verbal. Born in the process of communication, the conflict can be overcome only in the process of communication.

The Four-Step Method for Resolving Conflict Based on Compromise

The transformation of conflict relationships into a relationship of consent is achieved, as experience shows, as a result of the following actions or steps.

(1) It is necessary to allocate special time for communication, conversation, discussion. At the same time, it is often necessary to overcome the desire of the other side to get away from contact, to resort to tactics of withdrawal. To overcome such a desire, it is important to convince the other that overcoming differences is beneficial to him. It is important not to bind the other side with any preliminary obligations, except for participation in the upcoming dialogue and the exclusion of intimidation and threats during its conduct, that is, attempts at forceful pressure. However, it is very important to agree in advance on the adoption of a decision to end the meeting only by mutual agreement in order to prevent, as far as possible, its premature end, that is, its termination before creating conditions for moving on to the next stage. But for this you need to follow some other steps.

(2) A favorable environment should be provided for the duration of the meeting. To do this, you should create the necessary amenities for a smooth meeting. In the room where the conversation is being conducted, there should be no strangers; Phone calls should also be avoided. It is useful to pay attention to such trifles as room temperature, lighting, etc. It is necessary to prepare in advance for a long discussion of the conflict and serious nervous tension. It is useful to keep the content of the conversations secret until the full settlement of the conflict. Only compliance with these basic conditions for holding a meeting will ensure the success of the main, third step of conflict management.

(3) Compliance with the basic rules for discussing the problem. These negotiating techniques will be discussed in detail in a later chapter. Basic rules for discussing the problem Before starting a dialogue, one should express an optimistic hope that a mutually beneficial solution will be reached as a result, and then it is useful to recall the need to comply with the previously agreed conditions for conducting a conversation: do not interrupt discussions prematurely, refrain from power games, etc. After these introductory remarks, it is advisable to move on to the next moment of the conversation: to formulate the essence of the problem that has arisen and invite the interlocutor to state his vision of the situation that has arisen, which will mean the beginning of the main negotiation process. In the process of its development, one should not be distracted from the problem posed, discuss the weather, tell jokes, etc. Nor should one express doubts about the success of the meeting. You need to make every effort to direct the conversation towards a constructive result. You can, for example, express regret about your behavior in the past, declare your readiness to make concessions on a controversial issue, express understanding of the interlocutor's problems, good feelings, respect for him, and the desire to find mutually acceptable solutions. When such a process of exchange of gestures of reconciliation is established, the decisive moment of the dialogue finally comes, as a result of which tension weakens, trust increases and a desired breakthrough in relations is achieved, which allows concluding an agreement to resolve the conflict on mutually beneficial terms.

(4) The conclusion of an agreement is the final part of the conflict resolution process based on compromise tactics. But in order for a treaty to become durable and feasible, it must be mutually beneficial, balanced, and compromise. Moreover, the decision should be specific, determine exactly who should do what and when, and not consist of general phrases about mutual respect, sincerity, etc. The agreement reached is best, without relying on one's memory, to be drawn up in writing, and a copy of it given to each side of the conflict. Of course, when discussing family problems, a written contract may not be needed, but in a production conflict it is necessary.

The considered process of conducting a dialogue in order to resolve the conflict on the basis of compromise tactics was called the four-step method. It is recommended by conflictologists as the most effective way to transform conflict behavior into a collaborative relationship. These are some methods of conflict resolution through withdrawal, force, unilateral and mutually beneficial concessions. Each of these tactics is implemented with the help of specific means and mechanisms inherent only to it.

Four groups of positive methods of conflict management

Positive methods of conflict regulation are of a completely different nature. They serve not only the purposes of resolving conflict situations, but can also play a preventive role, preventing conflicts, especially destructive ones. They can be roughly divided into four groups.

(1) Recommendations of the most general nature, relating not only to conflict interaction, but also to any kind of human communication. These include such rules as constant attention to the interlocutor, the ability to patiently listen to him; benevolent, friendly, respectful attitude towards him; constant maintenance of feedback with the interlocutor, appropriate response to his behavior; some slowdown in the pace, rhythm of the conversation in the event that it is found that the interlocutor is overly excited; the desire to empathize with a partner, to experience the same feelings that are characteristic of a person who is next to you, that is, to show the ability to sympathize, empathy.

(2) A block of methods that are used in the initial, mostly still verbatim phase of conversations, negotiations conducted in order to resolve a conflict situation. At this phase, it is important to give the interlocutor the opportunity to speak out more fully, without trying to interrupt him, to give him the opportunity, as they say, to “let off steam”; show with facial expressions, gestures that you understand the state of the partner; reduce the social distance that usually separates you, even touch his shoulder, smile.

(3) The main recommendations in the second, main phase of a conversation or negotiation can be summarized as follows: you need to distract or switch the attention of the interlocutor from the subject of the conflict, at least for a short time, give him a little respite from emotional stress, offering at least a cup of coffee, a smoke or just tell him something pleasant: offer to sit down, but preferably not opposite to each other, since such a position, according to psychologists, does not reduce, but enhances confrontation, but side by side, at a distance of up to half a meter, at an angle to each other; only after these preliminary behavioral actions should one begin to discuss the problem that caused the conflict. At the same time, it is useful, if necessary, to admit one's guilt for the appearance of confrontation; it is necessary to recognize the correctness of the interlocutor in those points where he turned out to be right; it is important in the process of discussion to emphasize commonality, and not just differences in the interests of the parties; it is equally important to pay attention to the best qualities of the interlocutor that are in the partner and which will help him cope with his excitement and find the best way out of the current situation; of course, it is best to resolve the issue that led to the disagreement immediately or try to resolve it as soon as possible, because delay, as a rule, only aggravates the situation.

(4) Recommendations of a universal nature, forming a block of special, operational techniques that can be used in complex conflict situations. They involve taking into account weaknesses, vulnerabilities in the position of the interlocutor, as well as some of his pain points as a person. So, in some cases, you should show the interlocutor that he is too harsh, adopting an emphatically polite tone for this purpose; sometimes it is necessary to show a stronger aggression to a partner than the one he demonstrated.

You can tell the interlocutor about the negative consequences of the conflict situation that may follow for him personally; and finally, sometimes it should be shown that the satisfaction of his requirements can lead to negative consequences for the people whose opinion he values.

Of course, all of these tactics and techniques can be refined and improved when they are used to regulate specific conflict situations, each of which is unique. An experienced leader, gradually accumulating experience in managing conflicts, gradually turns it into a kind of set of rules, a code of principles.