The essence of each behavior strategy. Strategies for behavior in conflict situations

Self-test questions

1. Reveal the essence of each behavior strategy in productive conflict.

2. What strategy is typical for you?

In a conflict, it is not the mind that dominates in a person, but emotions, which leads to affect, when consciousness simply turns off and the person is not responsible for his words and actions. The great Persian writer and thinker Saadi (between 1203 and 1210-1292) wrote about this:

If you are angry, be patient, cool down a little, yield to reason, change your anger to mercy. Breaking any ruby does not take long and is not difficult, But it is impossible to put the fragments back together.

Experts in the field of conflict studies have developed a code of conduct in conflict. Let's get acquainted with some rules* (*Samygin S., Stolyarenko L.D. Psychology of management. - Rostov-on-Don 1997.-P. 468-472.):

1. Let your partner let off steam. If your partner is irritated and aggressive (overwhelmed with negative emotions), it is difficult and often impossible to come to an agreement with him, so try to help him reduce internal tension. During its “explosion” it is recommended to behave calmly, confidently, but not arrogantly.

2. Knock down aggression with unexpected techniques. For example, ask an unexpected question about a completely different, but significant matter for your partner, or confidentially ask your conflicting interlocutor for advice.

3. Don't give your partner negative assessments, but talk about your feelings. Do not say: “You are deceiving me,” it sounds better: “I feel deceived.”

4. Ask them to formulate the desired end result and problem as a chain of obstacles. A problem is something that needs to be solved, and the attitude towards a person is the background, the conditions in which a decision has to be made. If you have a hostile attitude towards a client or partner, you may not want to solve the problem. This cannot be done! Don't let your emotions control you. Together with your interlocutor, identify the problem and focus on it. In other words: separate the problem from the person.

5. Invite the client to express his thoughts on resolving the problem and his options for solutions. There is no need to look for those responsible and explain the current situation. Look for a way out of it. Don't stop at the first acceptable option, there should be many of them to choose the best one (alternative). At the same time, always remember that you should look for mutually acceptable solutions, i.e. you and the client (communication partner) must be mutually satisfied with the end result.

6. In any case, let your partner “save face.” Don’t allow yourself to let loose and respond to aggression with aggression and hurt your partner’s dignity; he will not forgive this, even if he gives in to pressure. Do not touch upon his personality, but evaluate only his actions and deeds, for example, you can say: “You have already failed to fulfill your promise twice,” but you cannot say: “You are an unnecessary person.”

7. Reflect, like an echo, the meaning of statements and claims. The use of phrases like “Did I understand you correctly?”, “You wanted to say...” eliminates misunderstandings and demonstrates attention to the interlocutor, which reduces his aggression.

8. Don't be afraid to apologize if you feel guilty. Confident and mature people are capable of apologizing, so it disarms the client and earns him respect and trust.

9. There is no need to prove anything. In a conflict, no one will ever be able to prove anything to anyone, since negative emotions block the ability to understand and agree with the “enemy.” A person at this moment does not think, his rational part is turned off, and therefore there is no need to try to prove anything. This is a waste of time and a useless exercise.

10. Be the first to shut up. If it so happens that you did not notice how you were “drawn” into a conflict (according to observations, 80% of conflicts arise beyond the wishes of their participants), try to do the only thing - shut up. Do not demand from your “enemy” interlocutor: “Shut up”, “Stop”, but from yourself. However, your silence should not be offensive to your partner and should not be tinged with gloating and defiance.

11. Don't characterize your opponent's condition. Avoid verbally stating your partner’s negative emotional state: “Why are you angry, nervous?”, “Why are you angry?” - such “pacifiers” only strengthen and intensify the conflict.

12. Regardless of the outcome of resolving the contradiction, try not to destroy the relationship. Express your respect and affection to the client, partner and agree on the difficulties that have arisen. If you preserve the relationship and allow the client to “save face,” you will not lose him as a future client or partner.

In Nelly Vlasova’s book “...And you’ll wake up as a boss,” it is formulated 11 taboos in a conflict situation.

It is forbidden:

1. Critically evaluate your partner.

2. Attribute base or bad intentions to him.

3. Show signs of your superiority.

4. Blame and attribute responsibility only to the partner.

5. Ignore the interests of the communication partner.

6. See everything only from your position.

7. Reduce the merits of the partner and his contribution to the common cause.

8. Exaggerate your merits.

9. Get irritated, scream and attack.

10. Touch your partner’s pain points and vulnerabilities.

11. Blast your partner with a lot of complaints.

In a conflict situation, you should always remember the “golden rule” of morality, the observance of politeness and tact (see sections 1.1, 1.2).

In life, it happens that people’s interests intersect and this does not always lead to good consequences. Quite often, when the interests of two or more people collide, a conflict situation arises. In this regard, it is very important to know and understand the entire process of conflict emergence and how you can influence its development. Therefore, the main goal of this article is to study the theory of conflict and teach ways to regulate it. To realize our goal, we will look at what it is and what types exist. And also at the end of the article you can watch a Soviet cartoon dedicated to conflict behavior.

Theoretical justification of any problem, in my opinion, is a mandatory attribute of its solution, because Without theory there is no practice, and without practice there is no theory. Therefore, first of all, we face The task is to give a scientific definition of conflict. However, solving this problem has some difficulties, because in foreign and domestic psychology there is no generally accepted concept of conflict.

If the word is translated from Latin, then first of all it means a clash of parties, forces, opinions, etc. But at the same time, this definition does not allow us to solve the task set before us, i.e. fully disclose the definition of conflict. In this regard, let us turn to the literature and consider the definitions of conflict between psychologists and sociologists.

Thus, the Polish sociologist J. Shepanski defines conflict as a clash caused by contradictions in attitudes, goals and methods of action in relation to a specific object or situation. This definition can be applied to various kinds of situations where contradictions exist, i.e. any contradiction between people, animals and other objects is a conflict.

According to K.A. Abulkhanova-Slavskaya the conflict must be viewed from several perspectives. Firstly, from an instrumental point of view, this phenomenon acts as a means of self-affirmation and overcoming tendencies denied by the individual. Secondly, the conflict can be considered as a process: in this case, it represents a situation of an unfound solution, the development of actions towards finding means of stabilizing relations. That is, on the one hand, with the help of a conflict situation, a person tries to achieve his goal, to assert himself with the help of this situation, on the other hand, conflict as a process of finding a solution to a problem. There is also an opinion that conflict is a contradiction between people, which is characterized by confrontation(N.V. Zhgutikova).

However, it seems possible to me to follow A.G. Kovalev and define conflict as a contradiction that arises between people in connection with the solution of certain issues of social and personal life. Moreover, according to the author, not every contradiction is a conflict. Conflicts arise when contradictions affect the social status of an individual or group, the material or spiritual values of people, the prestige and moral dignity of an individual.

Thus, in this article we will use a narrow definition of conflict that concerns only people and affects their personal interests.

Now that we have defined the concept of conflict, we need to move on to the main part of our article, i.e. consider strategies for dealing with conflict. Perhaps the reader will have a question: why know how a person will behave in a particular conflict situation? Let me explain, firstly, this knowledge will allow you to evaluate your behavior in a conflict and in the future not make many mistakes when a conflict situation arises. Secondly, you will be able to assess the behavior of your opponent and influence the conflict situation.

In psychology it is common to distinguish 5 strategies for dealing with conflict:

1. Evasion (avoidance)– a passive style of behavior in conflict, which is characterized by a person’s lack of desire to both meet the opponent halfway and protect his own interests. Moreover, this style of behavior in conflict exists in both conscious and unconscious forms. For example, a person who does not recognize the existence of a conflict situation, when this situation actually exists, also chooses, but on a subconscious level, a strategy of avoiding conflict.

It should be noted that frequent use of this style of behavior in conflict can lead to a decrease in a person’s self-esteem and a feeling of self-doubt. Therefore, when choosing evasion, you should first weigh all the pros and cons of such behavior.

2. Accommodation (concession) can be defined as a form of passive cooperation, which is distinguished by its tendency to mitigate a conflict situation and maintain existing relationships between people. At the same time, the person who chooses this behavioral strategy lacks the desire to achieve the goal, while the other side of the conflict retains interest in their own goals.

If you do not have time to resolve the conflict, then adaptation may be the most beneficial strategy for behavior in this situation. There are other advantages of adaptation, for example, such behavior allows you to maintain relationships between people, helps relieve tension, requires the least expenditure of resources from the individual, and leads to the peaceful existence of conflicting parties. But there are also disadvantages; such behavior may be perceived by the other party as a sign of weakness, which can lead to increased pressure and demands. At the same time, it is necessary to remember that by resorting only to this style of behavior in a conflict, you most likely will not be able to achieve what you want and satisfy your own interests.

3. Confrontation(competition, rivalry, dominance, suppression) is the active behavior of a person, which is aimed at satisfying one’s own interests, while to the detriment of the interests of the other party. A person who chooses competition as a strategy for behavior in a conflict strives to achieve satisfaction only of his own goals; for this, he can try to convince or force his opponent to make concessions.

The advantages of this style of behavior in conflict are the stimulation of development and progress, as well as high efficiency in achieving the necessary results. However, a person who constantly competes with those around him becomes conflicting for them. At the same time, a significant disadvantage of rivalry is the constant need for accurate information and the expenditure of human physical and mental strength, which can lead to stress.

4. The middle place among the various styles of behavior is occupied by such a strategy as compromise, which means the opponents’ predisposition to mutual concessions when achieving partial satisfaction of their aspirations. Otherwise, this behavior is referred to as a strategy of mutual concession, which is characterized by a balance of interests of all parties. However, compromise cannot be a permanent solution to the problem, since neither side fully satisfies its own interests, which is the basis for the continuation of the conflict.

A person’s ability to resolve conflicts through compromise is considered a sign of his high communication culture; such a quality is very important in negotiating and managing people. Yes, compromise is not a way to completely resolve the conflict, but it may well serve as an excellent method for regulating it.

5. Strategy cooperation(integration) is characterized by a focus on realizing the interests of all parties to the conflict. This style of behavior in a conflict is possible with accurate and timely diagnosis of the problem, identification of external and hidden causes of the conflict, and the readiness of the conflicting parties to act to achieve a common goal.

The basis for such a style of behavior in conflict as cooperation is the recognition by opponents of the value of interpersonal relationships. By choosing cooperation, you express your desire to resolve a conflict situation through joint efforts. However, to implement this strategy, it is necessary that all conflicting parties adhere to positions of cooperation with each other, which is not common in our world.

Do you know what strategy of behavior in conflict is typical for you? If you intend to learn how to choose the right path to conflict resolution, I recommend that you go through

Now that we already know that there are such strategies for dealing with conflict, like avoidance, accommodation, confrontation, compromise, cooperation, let's try to evaluate how it affects a person. The impact of the conflict largely depends on the following factors:

The expected result or goal to be achieved;

A person's attitude to conflict;

The behavior strategy that a person has chosen.

Each of these factors is sequentially related to each other, i.e. a person’s attitude to the conflict depends on the goal pursued, the strategy of behavior depends on the attitude and goal, but the future result depends on the strategy of behavior. Suppose a conflict arises between two people, but for one of them there is a certain goal that he wants to achieve through this conflict, and the other has no such goal. It would be correct to assume that the first participant in the conflict will experience the conflict situation more seriously than the second, because for him it is of great importance. Thus, depending on the goal, attitude and behavior strategy of a person, the conflict will have a certain impact on the person.

In order to remove the negative impact of conflict on a person, it is necessary to use certain techniques and tactics for resolving conflict, which we will discuss in the following articles. If you don't want to miss new articles, subscribe to the newsletter.

Thus, we examined the scientific concept of conflict, studied what strategies of behavior in conflict exist, and touched upon the problem of the influence of conflict on a person. What do you think about this? Which strategy of behavior in conflict is closer to you? Leave your comment!

Literature on the topic of conflicts:

Leonov N.I. Conflictology: Textbook. allowance / N. I. Leonov. - 2nd ed., rev. and additional - M.: Publishing house of the Moscow Psychological and Social Institute; Voronezh: Publishing house NPO "MODEK", 2006
Fundamentals of conflictology: textbook / edited by Dr. Econ. sciences, prof. S.G. Pleshchitsa. – St. Petersburg. : Publishing house St. Petersburg State University of Economics and Economics, 2012
Rubin J, Pruitt D, Hye Sung Kim. Social conflict: escalation, deadlock, resolution. – St. Petersburg, Prime Euroznak, 2001

Video about conflict behavior and strategies for dealing with conflict.

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

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

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

Introduction

Today, the problem of conflicts is one of the most important and requires increased attention. Throughout his life, a person faces many contradictions, acute and controversial situations and moments, the resolution of which does not always go smoothly and often results in negative phenomena of varying degrees, from a banal fight or family quarrel to wars between states. This is due to the growth of tension in various spheres of social interaction between various social structures and individuals.

Our society turned out to be unprepared for this difficult situation. The focus on “conflict-free” development made the issue of conflicts unpromising. This led not only to her actual exclusion from the field of her scientific research, but also to the fact that mechanisms for working with conflicts were not formed in society. Attempts to copy the experience of foreign conflict experts, especially in the field of social and industrial problems that are not designed for universal application in any socio-cultural conditions, are not very successful.

Memories of conflicts, as a rule, evoke unpleasant associations: threats, hostility, misunderstanding, attempts, sometimes hopeless, to prove that one is right, resentment. As a result, the opinion has developed that conflict is always a negative phenomenon, undesirable for each of us, and especially for leaders and managers, since they have to deal with conflicts more often than others. Conflicts are seen as something that negatively affects the psycho-emotional state and which should be avoided if possible.

But we should not forget that such problems in our lives concern everyone in general and everyone individually. Conflict situations acquire particular significance in labor relations, because here conflicts, if they turn out to be uncontrollable, can not only disorganize production, but also lead to great social upheavals. That is why knowledge of the nature of conflicts, their typology, features, possible methods of resolution seems to be a very important task.

The purpose of this work is to study conflict as a special social phenomenon. The main tasks of the work: to understand the essence of the concept of “conflict”; consider the main types of conflicts; identify the causes of their occurrence; study strategies of behavior in a particular conflict situation using the Thomas-Kilman grid.

1. The essence of the concept of conflict.Kindsconflicts

There are different definitions of conflict, but they all emphasize the existence of a contradiction that The swarm takes the form of disagreement when it comes to human interaction.

Conflict (lat. conflictus - collision) - a collision of opposing goals, interests, positions, opinions or views of opponents or subjects of interaction.

Conflicts can be hidden or overt, but they are always based on a lack of agreement. Therefore, we define conflict as a lack of agreement between two or more parties - individuals or groups.

The main role in the occurrence of conflicts is played by the so-called conflictogens - words, actions (or inactions) that contribute to the emergence and development of conflict, that is - leading to conflict directly.

However, a “single” conflictogen by itself, as a rule, is not capable of leading to conflict. There should be a “chain of conflictogens” - their so-called escalation.

Escalation of conflictogens - We try to respond to a conflictogen addressed to us with a stronger conflictogen, often the strongest among all possible ones.

For a conflict to begin to develop, an incident is necessary when one of the parties begins to act in a way that infringes on the interests of the other. An incident can occur either on the initiative of the subjects of the conflict (opponents), or independently of their will and desire - due to objective circumstances or accident.

Conflict situations can also arise at the initiative of opponents or objectively. In addition, a conflict situation can be inherited and passed on to new opponents. It can be created by opponents intentionally - in order to achieve certain goals in the future, but it can be generated, albeit intentionally, but without a specific goal, and sometimes to their detriment. The same applies to the incident.

There are four main types of conflict: intrapersonal, interpersonal, individual-group, and intergroup conflict.

Intrapersonal conflict occurs when conflicting demands are placed on one person. For example, a manager may require that a performer be constantly in the office of a travel company and “work” with clients on site. At other times, he already expresses dissatisfaction with the fact that his employee spends too much time on clients and does not engage in marketing activities.

Intrapersonal conflict can also arise as a result of the fact that production requirements are not consistent with personal needs or values. For example, a subordinate planned some family events on Saturday, his day off, and his boss announced to him on Friday evening that, due to production needs, he had to work on Saturday.

Interpersonal conflict. Most often, this is a manager’s struggle for limited resources, labor, finances, etc. Everyone believes that if resources are limited, then he must convince his superiors to allocate them to him and not to another leader.

Interpersonal conflict can also manifest itself as a clash of personalities, i.e. people with different characters and incompatible temperaments are simply unable to get along with each other.

Conflict between the individual and the group. In production groups, certain norms of behavior are established, and it happens that the expectations of the group are in conflict with the expectations of the individual. In this case, a conflict arises. In other words, a conflict arises between an individual and a group when this individual takes a position different from the position of the group.

Intergroup conflict. As you know, organizations consist of many both formal and informal groups. Even in the best organizations, conflicts can arise between them.

In addition, conflicts are also classified according to the degree of manifestation: hidden and open.

Hidden conflicts usually affect two people, who for the time being try not to show that they are in conflict. But as soon as one of them loses his nerve, the hidden conflict turns into an open one. There are also random, spontaneously arising, and chronic, as well as deliberately provoked conflicts. Intrigues are distinguished as a type of conflict. Intrigue is understood as a deliberate dishonest action that is beneficial to its initiator and which forces a team or an individual to commit certain actions that are harmful to themselves. Intrigues, as a rule, are carefully thought out, planned, and have their own storyline.

2. Two-dimensionalmodelThomas - Keellexchange

conflict behavior killerman

The concept developed by American psychologists K. Thomas and R. Killman has become widespread in conflict management. two-dimensional model of personality behavior strategy in conflict interaction. Its authors proceeded from the position that in any social conflict, each participant evaluates and correlates his own interests and the interests of his opponent. The reflection of these interests can occur more or less consciously. Based on the research results, the authors found that the less interests (one’s own and the opponent’s) are realized in a conflict, the more the participants’ behavior is saturated with powerful emotional tension. The authors identified as strategies five ways of conflict interaction: withdrawal, concession, compromise, cooperation, competition. The model view is shown in Fig. 1. When analyzing conflicts based on the two-dimensional Thomas-Killman model, it should be taken into account that the level of focus on one’s own interests or the interests of an opponent depends on three circumstances: a person is in a conflict situation; in order to more effectively solve the problem, it is necessary to choose a certain style of behavior, taking into account the style of other people, as well as the nature of the conflict itself.

There are five main styles of conflict resolution, which are based on a system called the Thomas-Kilman method (method developed by Kenneth W. Thomas and Ralph X. Kilman in 1972). The system allows each person to create their own style of conflict resolution. The main styles of behavior in a conflict situation are associated with the common source of any conflict - the divergence of interests of two or more parties.

3. Personal behavior strategies in conflict

Here is a description of the main strategies. The concept of strategy is a conceptual concept.

Strategy for dealing with conflict - this is a program and plan of action aimed at implementing the set chain in the conflict, in other words, it is a solution to the problem of satisfying one’s specific needs, one’s specific interest in a given conflict.

Tactics of behavior in conflict - these are the means that provide this strategy, which ultimately determine the style of human behavior in conflict.

Modern conflict theory distinguishes five main behavioral strategies: competition, avoidance, cooperation, accommodation and compromise. If the most significant principles of conflict behavior are reflected in the coordinate system, namely the interest in achieving personal chains and maintaining personal relationships, then we can graphically show the location of each behavior strategy (see Fig. 1). Below are five main strategies of behavior in conflict, each of which, for clarity, is given a figurative name that characterizes the main tactical actions of this strategy.

Concession or accommodation is expressed in the desire to maintain or establish favorable relations, to ensure the interests of an opponent by smoothing out differences. At the same time, there is a willingness to give in, neglecting one’s own interests. This is expressed in avoidance of discussing controversial issues, in agreement with demands and claims. This strategy can be considered rational if the subject of disagreement has less value for a person than the relationship with a rival.

Withdrawal or avoidance Avoidance involves the desire not to take responsibility for making a decision, not to see disagreements, to deny the conflict, to consider it safe. There is a desire to get out of the situation without giving in or insisting on one’s own, refraining from disputes, discussions and objections to the opposing side. Such behavior is appropriate if the subject of disagreement is not of great value to the person, and he himself is focused on resolving the situation by itself.

Rivalry or confrontation, competition is expressed in the desire to insist on one’s own through an open struggle for one’s interests, in taking a tough position of intransigence of antagonism in the event of resistance. There may be forms of rivalry, such as the use of power, pressure, or the use of the dependent position of the opponent. A conflict situation and especially its resolution are perceived as a matter of victory or defeat. This strategy is usually used when the focus on one’s own interests significantly exceeds the interests of the rival (competing) party. However, the disadvantage of this strategy is the possibility of repeated outbreaks of conflict due to the deterioration of relationships.

Competition style.

As the grid shows, a person who uses a competitive style is quite active and in the overwhelming majority goes to resolve the conflict in his own way. She is not very interested in cooperation with other people, but she is capable of strong-willed decisions. A person tries, first of all, to satisfy his own interests, without taking into account the interests of others, encouraging them to make their own solutions to problems. To achieve her goal, such a person uses her strong-willed qualities, and if her will is quite strong, then she succeeds.

Here are examples of when this style should be used: - The end result is very important to the person, and she places a big bet on her solution to the problem; - The person has enough authority to make a decision and it is obvious that the solution proposed to her is the best; - The decision must be made quickly, and the person has enough power to do this; - When a person feels that she has no other choice and has nothing to lose

TOcompetition- "Shark". This strategy is characterized by a type of behavior that can be figuratively represented by the behavior of a shark at the time of the attack. This type of behavior is strictly focused on winning, regardless of its own costs, which can be defined by the expression “rushing ahead.” The preference for such behavior in conflict is often explained by a subconscious desire to protect oneself from the pain caused by a feeling of defeat, because this strategy reflects a form of power struggle in which one side emerges as the clear winner. This strategy is necessary if a certain person in authority must restore order for the sake of everyone's well-being. It is certainly justified if someone takes control in order to protect people from violence or reckless behavior. However, the Shark's behavior strategy rarely brings long-term results - the losing side may not support a decision made against its will, or even try to sabotage it. Anyone who loses today may refuse to cooperate tomorrow.

Tactical actions of the "Shark":

Tightly controls the enemy’s actions and his sources of information;

Constantly and deliberately puts pressure on the enemy by all available means;

Uses deception and cunning, trying to gain control of the position;

Provokes the enemy to make ill-conceived steps and mistakes;

Expresses reluctance to enter into dialogue, because he is confident that he is right, and this confidence turns into self-confidence.

When faced with this type of behavior in a conflict, you need to remember that the “Shark” is afraid when information is collected about it, and tries to block all information sources about itself, and also does not want and is afraid of an open discussion of the conflict problem, since it does not interest it, For her, only her own position is important. When entering into a conflict process, she prefers that others avoid or resolve conflicts.

Personality qualities:

Impatience of disagreement and dissent;

Focus on preserving what exists;

Fear of innovations, ambiguous decisions;

Fear of criticism of one's behavior style;

Using your position with the chain of achieving power;

Ignoring collective opinions and assessments when making decisions in critical situations

Behavior strategy - Competition.

"Conflict Habits":

You continue to prove to a person that his point of view is wrong;

Express your irritation to him and demonstrate it until the person accepts your point of view;

You try to outsmart him;

Do you prefer to solve a problem by shouting?

You will begin to look for allies with a chain to exert the necessary influence on the enemy;

Firmly demand that the enemy concede for the sake of an agreement;

You may resort to physical or mental violence

Evasion style.

The second of the five main approaches to resolving a conflict situation occurs when a person does not defend his rights, does not cooperate with anyone to find a solution to the problem, or simply avoids resolving the conflict. This style can be used when the problem being addressed is not very important to the person, if she does not want to expend energy on solving it, or when she feels that she is in a hopeless situation.

Below are the most typical situations in which it is recommended to use the avoidance style: - The tension is very high and the person feels the need to relieve the tension; - A person knows that he cannot or even does not want to resolve the conflict in his favor; - A person wants to gain time, perhaps in order to obtain additional information; - The situation is very difficult and the person feels that resolving the conflict requires too much from her; - Trying to solve the problem immediately is dangerous, since opening and discussing the conflict can only make the situation worse.

In fact, leaving or delaying conflict resolution can be a fairly successful and constructive response to a conflict situation.

Uinclination -"Hturtle». This behavioral strategy can be compared to the behavior of a turtle, which hides in its shell at a time of danger. The Turtle's tactical motto is "Leave me a little and don't touch me." This is the passive-suffering attitude of a victim drawn into conflict by circumstances. The position of the victim is attractive due to certain compensatory factors: the victim receives significant support from the outside; they sympathize with her abundantly; she doesn't have to try to solve the problem herself. Behind the apparent helplessness may lie a feeling that the problem becomes more desirable and enjoyable than the risk and difficulty associated with solving it. If a victim faces violence or significant loss, she may assess the risk associated with changing her situation as unacceptably high. The tragedy of this role and the inability to get out of it lies in the deeply rooted attitude of helplessness and inability to change the situation. What causes these attitudes? Victims learn how to be victims from other victims. Parents teach this to their children; authoritarian parents, teachers, leaders and social systems intimidate people into accepting the role of victims. In some cases, overly cautious habits gradually lead people into the role of victim, as people refuse to change the situation or themselves, although with the appropriate approach they could bring about positive change relatively easily.

The “Skulls” behavior strategy can, however, be a completely reasonable step if the conflict does not affect the person’s direct interests or involvement in it does not affect his development. This step can also be useful if it draws attention to an ongoing problem.

On the other hand, such behavior may push the enemy to inflate demands or retaliate by withdrawing instead of participating in a joint search for solutions, and may also lead to an exorbitant growth of the problem. Often, conflict avoidance is used consciously or unconsciously as punishment to force the other party to change its attitude towards the conflict.

The behavior strategy of the “Turtle” leads to the fact that the true reasons are driven inside and the conflict remains, it seems to shift to another plane, becomes deeper and more complex.

An unresolved conflict is dangerous because it affects the subconscious and manifests itself in an increase in resistance in a variety of areas, even to diseases.

Tactical actions of the “Turtle”:

Refuses to engage in dialogue, using demonstrative withdrawal tactics;

Avoids the use of forceful techniques;

Ignores all information from the enemy, does not trust facts and does not collect them;

Denies the seriousness and severity of the conflict;

He systematically hesitates in making decisions, is always late, because he is afraid to make a response move. This is a situation of missed opportunities.

Personality qualities:

Shyness in communicating with people;

Impatience with criticism - accepting it as an attack on oneself;

Indecisiveness in critical situations, acts on the principle: “Maybe it will work out”;

Inability to prevent chaos and pointlessness in conversation.

Behavior strategy - Evasion.

"Conflict Habits":

Stop talking to this person;

You suppress your disagreement with him;

Take a position of being offended;

You feel depressed due to lack of understanding on his part;

Switch to a restrained tone in dealing with him and formal relations;

You will say unpleasant words about him, but not to him;

We intend to stop caring for him, supporting his actions, undertakings;

Mentally cross him off your list of friends or business partners.

Fixture style.

The third style is the adaptation style. It means that a person acts together with another, without trying to defend his own interests. Since, using this approach, a person pushes his interests aside, it is better to do this when the contribution in this case is not very large, or when the stake on a positive solution to the problem is not very high.

The style of accommodation may resemble avoidance. However, the main difference is that a person acts together with another, takes part in the situation and agrees to do what the other person wants.

Here are the most typical situations in which the coping style is recommended: - The person is not particularly concerned about what happened; - A person wants to maintain peace and good relationships with other people; - A person understands that the final result is much more important for another person; - The person believes that the other person can learn a useful lesson from this situation if she gives in to her desire. By giving in, agreeing or “sacrificing” your interests in favor of another person, you can soften a conflict situation and establish harmony.

Cooperation represents a search for solutions to a conflict that fully satisfy the interests of both parties through open discussion. There is a meaningful and frank analysis of disagreements during the development of decisions. This behavior is not aimed at defending one’s interests at any cost, but at finding a joint solution. Cooperation is rational if the subject of disagreement has equally high value for both you and your opponent.

The fourth is the collaborative style. Using this style, a person actively participates in conflict resolution and defends his own interests, but at the same time tries to cooperate with the other person. This style takes longer than other approaches to conflict because the person first lays out the needs and interests of both parties and then discusses them. This style is especially effective when the parties have different hidden needs. In such cases, it can be difficult to determine the source of dissatisfaction.

WITHcollaboration- "Owl". This strategy of behavior in conflict can be conditionally given the name of a bird, to which people have long attributed qualities such as wisdom and common sense. “Sova” openly acknowledges the conflict, presents its interests, expresses its position and offers ways out of the conflict. Expects reciprocal cooperation from the enemy. The basic principle of this strategy is: “Let’s leave mutual grievances, I prefer... What about you?” The cooperation strategy is aimed at constructively resolving conflict, that is, working with the problem rather than the conflict.

“Owl” does not accept avoidance tactics because it respects its partner; it does not exploit the weaknesses of “Turtle” and “Teddy Bear” because it strives for dialogue in solving the problem. In relation to the “Shark”, she also behaves honestly, opposes peaceful means and common sense to her. “Sova” is characterized by an attitude towards ending the conflict due to its escalation; if necessary, it is inclined to the negotiation process, where it always has a fan of alternative proposals.

When using a cooperation strategy, the parties to the conflict become equal partners, not opponents, who are interesting to each other as people with their own individualities. They are always interested not only in each other's conflicting needs, but also in their motivations. They strive for sincerity in relationships and maximum trust.

Partners acknowledge their conflict, emphasizing the common basis for interaction, which can even be a single desire to find a way out of the current situation together. They do not engage in mutual bickering and accusations - in the interests of the cause, emotions are discarded. When searching for joint solutions, partners may be interested in the history of the conflict, but this is not an end in itself. They soberly assess their capabilities and therefore are inclined to mediation, and, if necessary, to the negotiation process.

Tactical actions of "Owl":

Collects information about the conflict, the essence of the problem, and the enemy;

Calculates its own resources and those of the enemy to develop alternative proposals;

Discusses the conflict openly, is not afraid of disagreements, and tries to define the conflict;

If the enemy offers something sensible and reasonable, then it is accepted.

Personality qualities:

In any conflict, it is aimed at solving the problem, and not at blaming the individual;

Has a positive attitude towards innovations and changes;

Knows how to criticize without insulting individuals, as they say, “to the point,” based on facts;

Uses his abilities to influence people.

Behavior strategy - Cooperation.

"Conflict Habits":

Recognize the real conflict without illusions, without omissions;

Do not hide your interests, claims and demand this from your partner;

You give up your existing advantages, do not abuse your power potential, since you expect to act with your partner on equal terms (parity social relations);

Invite your partner to jointly search for solutions to a conflict problem;

Honestly accept responsibility for success and failure in resolving the conflict;

In case of failure, you try not to become enemies, but to continue to jointly search for a way out of the conflict situation.

This approach is recommended to be used in the situations described below: - Solving the problem is very important for both parties, and no one wants to completely dissociate themselves; - There is time to work on the problem that has arisen; - Opponents want to put some ideas on the table and work on their solution; - Both sides have equal power and do not notice the difference in position in order to “equally” seek a solution to the problem.

Compromise represents a desire to resolve differences through bilateral concessions. It is expressed in the search for such a solution. When outwardly no one wins, but no one loses either. In this case, the interests of both parties are not fully disclosed. This strategy leads to a reduction in hostility and allows the conflict to be resolved relatively quickly. At the same time, there is a possibility of dissatisfaction with “half-hearted” solutions.

Behavior strategy - Compromise.

"Conflict Habits":

You will give in a little, but in order to get a little more (dealing compromise).

It was found that a special place in the evaluation of strategies occupies value of interpersonal relationships (ILR), with an opponent. In practice, we encounter situations where the relatively low value of MLO contributes to or is associated with various destructive manifestations during the conflict and, accordingly, the choice of competition as a strategy, manifested in the forms of struggle or coercion.

The style of behavior in a particular conflict is determined by the extent to which a person wants to satisfy his own interests (acting passively or actively) and the interests of the other party (acting jointly or individually).

If you start from the side on which active and passive actions are marked, then if the reaction is passive, the person will try to get out of the conflict, but if it is active, then the person will try to resolve it.

The top of the grid reveals cooperative activities. If a person prefers joint action, then she will try to resolve the conflict together with another person or group of people who are involved in it. If she gives preference to individual actions, then she will look for her own way to solve the problem, or a way to avoid its solution.

In the middle of the grid is the compromise style. A person gives in a little on his interests in order to partially satisfy them, and the other side does the same. In other words, a person agrees to partially satisfy his desire and partially fulfill the desire of another person. Compromise is achieved at a more superficial level compared to cooperation.

The following are typical cases in which the compromise style is most effective: - Both parties have equal power and have mutually exclusive interests; - Other approaches to solving the problem turned out to be ineffective; - Satisfaction of desire is not very important for a person, and it can somewhat change the goal set at the beginning; - A compromise will allow you to maintain relationships and gain at least something rather than lose everything. Compromise is often a good retreat or even the last opportunity to reach any solution.

It is important to understand that each of these styles is only effective in a specific situation.

Behavior strategy - Compromise.

"Conflict Habits":

Offer to divide the “conflict pie” equally;

First of all, you need normal relations for the future (the fear of falling under the pressure of your opponent gives you a way out for a compromise);

You will give in a little, but in order to gain a little

Ugetting along, making concessionsA -"TEDDY BEAR". To illustrate this strategy of behavior in conflict, the conventional name of a soft toy is given, which, without any effort on our part, gives us a feeling of warmth and softness. The conflict resolution strategy is aimed at the maximum in relationships and the minimum in comprehending personal chains.

The basic principle of behavior: “Whatever you want, just let’s live together.” This is an attitude towards benevolence at the expense of one’s own losses, the so-called “game of hide and seek”, but, of course, to a certain limit, since the instinct of self-preservation is highly developed in all people. Altruists often adhere to this strategy, sometimes outwardly, and sometimes out of conviction. What is important here is the ratio of opponents. If the ratio is not in his favor and further struggle does not make sense, then a reorientation occurs to an attitude whose motto is: “I surrender to the mercy of the winner.”

A reconciliation strategy may be a smart move if confrontation over minor differences would place undue stress on the relationship at this point or if the other party is not willing to engage in dialogue.

In the event of a serious conflict, the “Teddy Bear” behavior strategy leads to the fact that the main controversial issues are not addressed and the conflict remains unresolved.

Tactical actions of "Teddy Bear":

Constant agreement with the enemy’s demands, i.e. makes maximum concessions;

Constant demonstration of aversion to victory or serious resistance;

Indulges the enemy, flatters.

Personality qualities:

Spinelessness - lack of one's own opinion in difficult situations;

The desire to please everyone, not to offend anyone, so that there are no discords and clashes;

Follows the lead of the leaders of informal groups, his behavior is often manipulated;

There is a predominant tendency to become distracted when participating in a conversation.

Behavior strategy - Settlement.

"Conflict Habits":

You pretend like nothing happened;

You prefer to agree to his terms for the sake of peace;

You scold yourself later for not being able to oppose anything;

Use all your personal charm to achieve your goal;

Do not offer anything to solve the problem, but think about how to organize intrigue;

You will do everything to hide your irritation, grief and powerlessness.

The modern analogue of a peaceful, civilized resolution of a conflict is a strategy of behavior cooperation, cooperation all actions and “conflict habits” of which pass under the motto: “I only want to win if you win too.” To effectively use this strategy, you need to work a lot on yourself, since it is based not only on a person’s high internal culture, but also on common sense and a perspective on the future. This must be constantly taken into account and this must be constantly learned.

Conclusion

In this work, the essence of the concept of “conflict”, types of conflicts and strategies of behavior in conflict were examined using the two-dimensional Thomas-Kilman model.

According to this, several conclusions can be drawn.

Conflicts arise in almost all spheres of human life. They can be hidden or overt, but they are always based on a lack of consent.

The main role in the emergence of conflicts is played by conflictogens - words, actions (or inactions) that contribute to the emergence and development of conflict, that is, leading directly to conflict

In the process of conflict interaction, its participants get the opportunity to express different opinions, identify more alternatives when making a decision, and this is precisely the important positive meaning of the conflict

There are several types of conflicts, each of which has its own characteristics: intrapersonal, interpersonal, conflict between the individual and the group, and intergroup conflict.

There are five main styles of conflict resolution, which are based on a system called the Thomas-Kilman method.

The basis here is the degree of orientation of the participants in the situation towards their own interests and the interests of the partner, while five main tactics or styles of behavior are identified. These are: avoidance, concession, confrontation, compromise, cooperation.

This only emphasizes the importance of the ability to manage conflict situations.

Bibliography

1. Andreev V.I. Self-development of a culture of conflict resolution / Reader on social psychology. - M.: International Pedagogical Academy, 1994.

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

3. Komarov E. Organizational and disorganizational management methods as components of the organizational and disorganizational culture of an enterprise // Personnel Management. No. 11 2000.

4. http://www.conflictology.com

5. http://ren.viptop.ru

6. Zerkin, D.P. Fundamentals of conflictology: Course of lectures. (Series “Textbooks and teaching aids”) / D.P. Zerkin/. Rostov-n/D.: Phoenix. - 1998

Posted on Allbest.ru

Basic strategies for dealing with conflict

And the first strategy we'll look at is competition.

Rivalry

Rivalry is a type of behavior when a subject strives to satisfy his own interests, causing damage to the interests of the opposing subject. Following the presented strategy, a person is confident that only one participant can gain the upper hand in a conflict, and victory for one will always mean defeat for the other. A person who prefers competition will “push his line” in every way available to him. They will not take into account the opposite position.

Basic human actions with the “Competition” strategy

Tight control over your opponent's actions
Constant and deliberate pressure on an opponent by any means
The use of deception and tricks to create an advantage in one’s favor
Provoking your opponent to make mistakes and ill-considered steps
Reluctance to engage in constructive dialogue due to overconfidence

Pros and cons of the “Rivalry” strategy

Rigidly defending one's position can, of course, help the subject gain the upper hand in the event of a conflict. But such a strategy cannot be applied if the subsequent interaction of people involves long-term relationships, for example, joint work, friendship, love. After all, relationships can develop and generally have the right to exist only if the desires and interests of all people are taken into account, and the defeat of one will mean defeat for everyone. Therefore, if the person with whom you have a conflict is dear to you or the relationship with him is important to you for some reason, it is better not to use the strategy of competition to resolve the conflict.

Device

Adaptation as a way of behavior in a conflict is characterized by the fact that the subject is ready to put his needs, desires and interests into the background and make concessions to the opponent in order to prevent confrontation. This strategy is often chosen by people with low self-esteem, insecure and who believe that their position and opinion should not be taken into account.

Basic human actions with the “Adaptation” strategy

Constant agreement with the opponent’s demands to please him
Active demonstration of a passive position
No claim to victory and resistance
Flattery, pandering to the opponent

Pros and cons of the Accommodation strategy

In the event that the subject of the conflict is not particularly important, and the main thing is to maintain constructive interaction, allowing the person to gain the upper hand, thereby asserting himself, can be the most effective way to resolve the conflict. However, if the cause of the conflict is something significant, something that affects the feelings of all people involved in the conflict, then such a strategy will not bring the desired result. In this case, the result will be only negative emotions of the one who made concessions, and all trust, mutual understanding and respect between the participants may completely disappear.

Avoidance

The essence of this strategy is that a person tries to do everything possible to postpone conflict and important decisions until later. With this strategy, a person not only does not defend his own interests, but also does not pay attention to the interests of his opponent.

Basic human actions with the “Avoidance” strategy

Refusal to interact with an opponent
Demonstrative withdrawal tactics
Refusal to use force
Ignoring any information from the opponent, refusing to collect facts
Denial of the importance and seriousness of the conflict
Deliberate slowness in decision making
Fear of making a retaliatory move

Pros and cons of the Avoidance strategy

The “Avoidance” strategy can be useful in a situation where the essence of the conflict is not particularly important or when there are no plans to maintain relations with the opponent. But here again: if a relationship with a person is important to you, then avoiding responsibility and shifting problems onto someone else’s shoulders will not resolve the situation, otherwise it threatens not only to worsen the situation, but also to deteriorate the relationship and even its final break.

Compromise

Compromise is a partial satisfaction of the interests of all subjects of conflict interaction.

Basic human actions with the “Compromise” strategy

Focus on equality of positions
Offering your own options in response to your opponent’s offer of options
Sometimes using cunning or flattery to gain favor from an opponent
Striving to find a mutually beneficial solution

Pros and cons of the “Compromise” strategy

Despite the fact that compromise implies satisfaction of the interests of all subjects of conflict interaction, which, in fact, is fair, it is important to keep in mind that in most situations this strategy should be considered only as an intermediate stage in resolving the situation, preceding the search for the most optimal solution, completely satisfactory to the conflicting parties.

Cooperation

By choosing a cooperation strategy, the subject of the conflict is determined to resolve the conflict in such a way that it is beneficial to all participants. Moreover, here the position of the opponent or opponents is not simply taken into account, but there is also a desire to ensure that their demands are satisfied as much as possible, as well as one’s own.

Basic human actions with the “Cooperation” strategy

Gathering information about the opponent, the subject of the conflict and the conflict itself
Calculating the resources of all participants in the interaction in order to develop alternative proposals
Open discussion of the conflict, the desire to objectify it
Consideration of opponent's proposals

Pros and cons of the Collaboration strategy

Cooperation is focused mainly on understanding the opposing position, paying attention to the opponent’s point of view, and finding a solution that suits everyone. Thanks to this approach, mutual respect, understanding and trust can be achieved, which best contributes to the development of long-term, strong and stable relationships. Cooperation is most effective when the subject of the conflict is important to all parties. However, it is important to note that in some situations it can be very difficult to find a solution that suits everyone, especially if the opponent is not cooperative. In this case, the “Cooperation” strategy can only complicate the conflict and delay its resolution indefinitely.

These are the five main strategies for dealing with conflict. As a rule, they are usually used in confrontations with other people. And this is quite justified, because... their effectiveness is undeniable. But, at the same time, other equally effective strategies, such as suppression and negotiations, can be used to resolve conflicts.

Additional strategies for dealing with conflict

Let's consider each of them separately.

Suppression

Suppression is used mainly if the subject of the conflict is not clear or if it has entered a destructive phase, i.e. has become a direct threat to the participants; and also when it is impossible to enter into an open conflict for any reason or when there is a risk of “falling face down in the mud”, losing authority, etc.

Basic human actions with the “Suppression” strategy

Targeted and consistent reduction in the number of opponents
Development and application of a system of norms and rules that can streamline relations between opponents
Creating and maintaining conditions that prevent or complicate conflict interaction between the parties

Pros and cons of the Suppression strategy

Effective suppression of conflict is possible if the essence of the conflict is not clear enough, because this will nullify the mutual attacks of opponents and protect them from senseless waste of their energy. Suppression can also be effective when continued conflict would cause serious harm to both sides. But when resorting to suppression, it is important to correctly calculate your strength, otherwise the situation may worsen and turn against you (if your opponent turns out to be stronger or has more resources). The issue of suppression should be approached by thinking through all the details.

Negotiation

Negotiation is one of the most common conflict resolution strategies. With the help of negotiations, both micro-conflicts (in families, organizations) and macro-level conflicts are resolved, i.e. conflicts on a global and national scale.

Basic human actions with the “Negotiations” strategy

Focus on finding a mutually beneficial solution
Stopping any aggressive actions
Showing attention to your opponent's position
Carefully consider next steps
Using an intermediary

Pros and cons of the Negotiation strategy

The Negotiation strategy allows the warring parties to find a common language without incurring any losses. It is very effective because... neutralizes aggressive confrontation and smoothes out the situation, and also provides the parties with time to think about what is happening and search for new solutions. However, if negotiations suddenly drag on for some reason, this may be perceived by either party as avoiding the conflict or unwillingness to solve the problem, which may lead to even more aggressive offensive actions.

You should choose a strategy for behavior in a conflict as thoughtfully, consciously, and taking into account the specifics of the situation itself. A correctly chosen strategy will give maximum results, while an incorrectly chosen one, on the contrary, can only aggravate the situation. Therefore, once again carefully study this material and try to apply the acquired knowledge in practice even in small things, because by learning to resolve small conflicts, you will be able to effectively influence large ones. And remember that it is best to prevent the emergence of a conflict situation than to eliminate an already “raging flame.”

Peace to your home!

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

1. The essence of the concept of conflict.Kindsconflicts

There are different definitions of conflict, but they all emphasize the existence of a contradiction that The swarm takes the form of disagreement when it comes to human interaction.

Conflict (lat. conflictus - collision) - a collision of opposing goals, interests, positions, opinions or views of opponents or subjects of interaction.

Conflicts can be hidden or overt, but they are always based on a lack of agreement. Therefore, we define conflict as a lack of agreement between two or more parties - individuals or groups.

The main role in the occurrence of conflicts is played by the so-called conflictogens - words, actions (or inactions) that contribute to the emergence and development of conflict, that is - leading to conflict directly.

However, a “single” conflictogen by itself, as a rule, is not capable of leading to conflict. There should be a “chain of conflictogens” - their so-called escalation.

Escalation of conflictogens - We try to respond to a conflictogen addressed to us with a stronger conflictogen, often the strongest among all possible ones.

Similar documents

Basic strategies for dealing with conflict

Rivalry

Basic human actions with the “Competition” strategy

Pros and cons of the “Rivalry” strategy

Device

Basic human actions with the “Adaptation” strategy

Pros and cons of the Accommodation strategy

Avoidance

Basic human actions with the “Avoidance” strategy

Pros and cons of the Avoidance strategy

Compromise

Basic human actions with the “Compromise” strategy

Pros and cons of the “Compromise” strategy

Cooperation

Basic human actions with the “Cooperation” strategy

Pros and cons of the Collaboration strategy

Additional strategies for dealing with conflict

Suppression

Basic human actions with the “Suppression” strategy

Pros and cons of the Suppression strategy

Negotiation

Basic human actions with the “Negotiations” strategy

Pros and cons of the Negotiation strategy