In the most general form, the subjective causes of any organizational conflicts related to people, their consciousness and behavior, as a rule, are caused by three factors:

1. interdependence and incompatibility of the goals of the parties;
2. awareness of this;
3. the desire of each of the parties to realize their goals at the expense of the opponent.

M. Mescon, M. Albert and F. Khedouri give a different, more detailed classification of the common causes of conflicts, who identify the following main causes of conflict.

1. Resource allocation. In almost any organization, resources are always limited, so the task of management is the rational distribution of materials, people and money between various departments and groups. Since people tend to strive for the maximum receipt of resources and overestimate the significance of their work, the distribution of resources almost inevitably leads to all sorts of conflicts.

2. Interdependence of tasks. The possibility of conflict exists wherever, in the performance of its functions, one person (group) depends on another person (group). In view of the fact that any organization is a system consisting of a number of interdependent elements - departments or people, if one of them does not work adequately, as well as if their activities are not coordinated enough, the interdependence of tasks can cause conflict.

3. Differences in purpose. The possibility of conflict increases with the complexity of organizations, their further structural division and the autonomy associated with it. As a result, individual specialized units (groups) begin to largely independently formulate their goals, which can significantly diverge from the goals of the entire organization. In the practical implementation of autonomous (group) goals, this leads to conflicts.

4. Differences in perceptions and values. Different ideas, interests and desires of people influence their assessment of the situation, lead to a biased perception of it and a corresponding reaction to it. This gives rise to contradictions and conflicts.

5. Differences in behavior and life experience. Differences in life experience, education, length of service, age, value orientations, social characteristics and even just habits hinder mutual understanding and cooperation of people and increase the possibility of conflict.

6. Poor communications. Lack, distortion, and sometimes an excess of information can serve as a cause, effect, and catalyst of conflict. In the latter case, poor communication exacerbates the conflict, making it difficult for the participants to understand each other and the situation as a whole.

This classification of the causes of the conflict can be used in its practical diagnosis, but in general it is rather abstract. R. Dahrendorf offers a more specific classification of the causes of the conflict. Using and supplementing it, the following types of causes of social conflicts can be distinguished:

1. Personal reasons ("personal friction"). These include individual traits, likes and dislikes, psychological and ideological incompatibility, differences in education and life experience, etc.

2. Structural reasons. They show up as imperfections.

• communication structure: lack, distortion or inconsistency of information, weakness of contacts between management and ordinary employees, mistrust and inconsistency of actions between them due to imperfection or disruption of communications, etc.;
• role structure: inconsistency in job descriptions, various formal requirements for an employee, official requirements and personal goals, etc.;
• technical structure: unequal equipment of different departments with equipment, exhausting pace of work, etc.;
• organizational structure: the disproportion of various departments that violates the general rhythm of work, the duplication of their activities, the lack of effective control and responsibility, the conflicting aspirations of formal and informal groups in the organization, etc.;
• power structures: disproportion of rights and duties, competencies and responsibilities, as well as the distribution of power in general, including formal and informal leadership and the struggle for it.

3. Organization change, and above all technical development. Organizational change leads to a change in role structures, leadership and other employees, which often causes discontent and conflict. Quite often they are generated by technical progress, leading to job cuts, labor intensification, and higher qualification and other requirements.

4. Conditions and nature of work. Unhealthy or dangerous working conditions, unhealthy ecological environment, poor relations in the team and with management, dissatisfaction with the content of work, etc. - all this also creates fertile ground for the emergence of conflicts.

5. Distribution relations. Remuneration in the form of wages, bonuses, rewards, social privileges, etc. not only serves as a means of satisfying the diverse needs of people, but is also perceived as an indicator of social prestige and recognition from the leadership. The cause of the conflict may turn out to be not so much the absolute amount of payment, but the distribution relations in the team, evaluated by workers in terms of their fairness.

6. Differences in identification. They are manifested in the tendency of employees to identify themselves mainly with their group (division) and exaggerate their importance and merits, while underestimating the importance of others and forgetting about the overall goals of the organization. This kind of inclination is based on the intensity and emotional coloring of communications in primary groups, the relatively large personal significance of such groups and the issues addressed in them, group interests and group egoism. Causes of this type often determine conflicts between different departments, as well as between individual teams and the center, the leadership of the organization.

7. The desire of the organization to expand and increase its significance. This trend is reflected in the well-known Parkinson's law, according to which every organization seeks to expand its staff, resources and influence, regardless of the amount of work performed. At the heart of the trend towards expansion lies the interest of each unit, and above all real and potential leaders, in obtaining new, including higher and more prestigious positions, resources, power, and authority. On the way to the implementation of the expansion trend, there are usually similar or restraining positions of other departments and management (the center), which tries to limit aspirations and keep the power, control functions and resources of the organization mainly at home. As a result of this kind of relationship, conflicts arise.

8. Difference of starting positions. This may be a different level of education, qualifications and values ​​of the staff, and unequal working conditions and material and technical equipment, etc. various departments. Such reasons lead to misunderstanding, ambiguous perception of tasks and responsibilities, lack of coherence in the activities of interdependent units and, ultimately, to conflicts.

The last three reasons characterize mainly interorganizational conflicts. In real life, conflicts are often generated not by one, but by several reasons, each of which, in turn, is modified depending on the specific situation. However, this does not remove the need to know the causes and sources of conflicts for constructive use and management.

The causes of conflicts largely determine the nature of their consequences.

Negative Consequences of the Conflict

There are two ways to assess the consequences of conflicts: functionalist(integration) and sociological(dialectical). The first of them, which is presented, for example, by the famous American experimental scientist E. Mayo. He considers conflict as a dysfunctional phenomenon that disrupts the normal existence of the organization, reducing the effectiveness of its activities. The functionalist direction focuses on the negative consequences of the conflict. Summarizing the work of various representatives of this direction, we can distinguish the following negative consequences of conflicts:

• destabilization of the organization, generation of chaotic and anarchic processes, reduced controllability;
• distracting staff from the real problems and goals of the organization, shifting these goals towards group selfish interests and ensuring victory over the enemy;
• dissatisfaction of the participants in the conflict with being in the organization, growth of frustrations, depressions, stresses, etc. and, as a result, a decrease in labor productivity, an increase in staff turnover;
• an increase in emotionality and irrationality, hostility and aggressive behavior, distrust of management and others;
• weakening opportunities for communication and cooperation with opponents in the future;
• distracting participants in the conflict from solving the problems of the organization and fruitless waste of their strength, energy, resources and time to fight each other.

Positive Consequences of the Conflict

In contrast to the functionalists, supporters of the sociological approach to conflicts (they are represented, for example, by the largest modern German conflictologist R. Dahrendorf) consider them as an integral source of social change and development. Under certain conditions, conflicts are functional, positive results for the organization:

• initiating change, renewal, progress. The new is always the negation of the old, and since certain people always stand behind both new and old ideas and forms of organization, any renewal is impossible without conflicts;
• articulation, clear articulation and expression of interest publicizing the real positions of the parties on a particular issue. This allows you to see the urgent problem more clearly and creates fertile ground for its solution;
• mobilization of attention, interest and resources for solving problems and, as a result, saving the organization's time and money. Very often urgent issues, especially those that concern the entire organization, are not resolved until a conflict arises, because in the case of conflict-free, “normal” functioning, out of respect for organizational norms and traditions, as well as out of a sense of politeness, managers and employees often bypass sharp questions;
• the formation of a sense of belonging among the participants in the conflict to the decision taken as a result of it, which facilitates its implementation;
• encouraging more thoughtful and informed action in order to prove their case;
• encouraging participants to interact and develop new, more effective solutions eliminating the problem itself or its significance. This usually happens when the parties show understanding of each other's interests and realize the disadvantage of deepening the conflict;
• development of the ability of the parties to the conflict to cooperate in the future, when the conflict is resolved as a result of the interaction of both parties. Competitive fair competition enhances the mutual respect and trust necessary for further cooperation;
• relaxation of psychological tension in relations between people, a clearer clarification of their interests and positions;
• overcoming the traditions of groupthink, conformity, "syndrome of humility" and the development of free-thinking, the individuality of the worker. As a result of this, the ability of the staff to develop original ideas, to find the best ways to solve the problems of the organization increases;
• involvement of the usually passive part of employees in solving organizational problems. This contributes to the personal development of employees and serves to achieve the goals of the organization;
• identification of informal groups, their leaders and smaller groupings, which can be used by the leader to improve management efficiency;
• development of the participants in the conflict of skills and abilities relatively painless solution of problems that arise in the future;
• increased group cohesion in case of intergroup conflicts. As is known from social psychology, the easiest way to unite a group and muffle or even overcome internal discord is to find a common enemy, a competitor. An external conflict is able to extinguish internal strife, the causes of which often disappear over time, lose their relevance, sharpness and are forgotten.

Of course, both the negative and positive consequences of conflicts cannot be absolutized, considered outside the specific situation. The real ratio of functional and dysfunctional consequences of the conflict directly depends on their nature, their causes, as well as on the skillful management of conflicts.

Based on the assessment of the consequences of conflicts, a strategy for dealing with them in the organization is built.

The concept of social conflict.conflict functions.

Generally conflict can be defined as a clash of individuals, social groups, societies associated with

existence of contradictions or opposing interests and goals.

The conflict attracted sociologists of the late nineteenth and early XX in. Karl Marx proposed a dichotomous model of conflict. According to her, the conflict is always bob- . two sides are treated: one of them represents labor, the other capital. Conflict is the expression of a given

confrontation and ultimately leads to the transformation of society.

In the sociological theory of G. Simmel, the conflict was presented as a social process that has not only negative functions and does not necessarily lead to a change in society. Simmel believed that conflict consolidates society, as it maintains the stability of groups and strata of society.

However, in the middle of the last century, the interest of scientists in the conflict has noticeably decreased. In particular, the reason for this was such a feature of the concept of functionalists as the consideration of culture and society as unifying and harmonizing mechanisms. Naturally, from the point of view of such an approach, the conflict could not be described.

Only in the second half XX century, or rather, starting around the 1960s, the conflict began to gradually restore its rights as a sociological object. During this period, scientists, based on the ideas of G. Simmel and K. Marx, tried to revive the consideration of society from the point of view of conflict. Among them, first of all, R. Dahrendorf, L. Kozer and D. Lockwood should be mentioned.

There are two main approaches to understanding conflict.

The Marxist tradition considers conflict as a phenomenon whose causes lie in society itself, primarily in the confrontation between classes and their ideologies. As a consequence, the entire history in the writings of Marxist-oriented sociologists appears as the history of the struggle between the oppressors and the oppressed.

Representatives of the non-Marxist tradition (L. Koser, R. Dahrendorf, and others) consider conflict as part of the life of society, which must be managed. Naturally, there are substantive differences in their approaches, but it is fundamentally important that non-Marxist sociologists view conflict as a social process that does not always lead to a change in the social structure of society (although, of course, such an outcome is possible, especially if the conflict subjected to conservation and was not resolved in a timely manner).

Elements of a conflict situation. In any conflict situation, the participants in the conflict and the object of the conflict are distinguished. Among participants in the conflict distinguish opponents(i.e. those people who are interested in the object of the conflict), involved groups and interest groups. As for the involved and interested groups, their participation in the conflict is caused by two reasons or a combination of them: 1) they are able to influence the outcome of the conflict, or 2) the outcome of the conflict affects their interests.

Object of conflict- this is the resource to which the interests of the parties apply. The object of the conflict is indivisible, since either its essence excludes division, or it is presented within the framework of the conflict as indivisible (one or both parties refuse to divide). Physical indivisibility is not a necessary condition for a conflict, since it is not uncommon for an object to be usable by both parties (for example, one party forbids the other from using a particular parking space without having the right to do so).

All of these criteria refer to the static consideration of the conflict. As for its dynamics, the following are usually distinguished stages of the conflict:

1. Hidden stage. At this stage, the conflict participants are not aware of the contradictions. Conflict manifests itself only in explicit or implicit dissatisfaction with the situation. The discrepancy between values, interests, goals, means to achieve them does not always result in a conflict: the opposite side sometimes either resigns itself to injustice, or waits in the wings, holding a grudge. Actually the conflict begins with certain actions that are directed against the interest of the other side.

2. Formation of the conflict. At this stage, contradictions are formed, claims are clearly recognized that can be expressed to the opposite side & in the form of requirements. Groups taking part in the conflict are formed, leaders are nominated in them. There is a demonstration of one's own arguments and criticism of the opponent's arguments. At this stage, it is not uncommon for the parties to conceal their plans or arguments. Provocation is also used, that is, actions that are aimed at forming a public opinion that is beneficial to one side, that is, favorable about one side and unfavorable about the other.

3. Incident. At this stage, an event occurs that transfers the conflict to the stage of active actions, that is, the parties decide to enter into an open struggle.

4. Active actions of the parties. Conflict requires a lot of energy, so it quickly reaches a maximum of conflict actions - a critical point, and then quickly subsides.

5. Completion of the conflict. At this stage, the conflict ends, which, however, does not mean that the claims of the parties are satisfied. In reality, there may be several outcomes of the conflict.

In general, we can say that each of the parties either wins or loses, and the victory of one of them does not mean that the other has lost. On a more concrete level, it is fair to say that there are three outcomes: win-lose, win-win, lose-lose.

However, this representation of the outcome of the conflict is rather inaccurate. The fact is that there are options that do not fully fit into the original scheme. As for the “win-win” case, for example, a compromise cannot always be considered a victory for both parties; a side often seeks a compromise only to prevent its opponent from believing that he has won, and this happens even if the compromise is as unprofitable for him as losing.

As for the “lose-lose” scheme, it does not fully fit the cases when both parties become victims of some third party that takes advantage of their contention to gain benefits. In addition, the existence of a conflict may cause a disinterested or little interested third party to transfer value to a person or group that was not involved in the conflict at all. For example, it is not difficult to imagine a situation in which the head of an enterprise refuses a position contested by two employees and gives it to a third party only because, in his opinion, only a person who does not enter into conflicts can perform these duties.

According to L. Koser, the main functions of the conflict are:

1) the formation of groups and the maintenance of their integrity and boundaries;

2) establishment and maintenance of relative stability of intragroup and intergroup relations;

3) creating and maintaining a balance between the opposing sides;

4) stimulating the creation of new forms of social control;

5) creation of new social institutions;

6) obtaining information about the environment (more precisely, about social reality, its shortcomings and advantages);

7) socialization and adaptation of specific individuals. Although the conflict usually brings only disorganization and harm, the following can be distinguished: positive functions of conflict:

1) communicative function: in a situation of conflict, people or other subjects of social life are better aware of both their aspirations, desires, goals, and the desires and goals of the opposite side. Thanks to this, the position of each of the parties can both be strengthened and transformed;

2) tension discharge function: expressing one's position and defending it in confrontation with the enemy is an important means of channeling emotions, which can also lead to finding a compromise, since the “emotional supply” of the conflict disappears;

3) consolidating function: the conflict can consolidate society, since an open clash allows the parties to the conflict to better know the opinion and claims of the opposite side.

Factors affecting the formation, course and resolution of the conflict, associated with the state of the social systems in which it unfolds (the stability of the family, etc.). There are a number of such conditions:

1) features of the organization of conflict groups;

2) the degree of identification of the conflict: the more the conflict is revealed, the less intense it is;

3) social mobility: the higher the level of mobility, the less intense the conflict; the stronger the connection with social position, the stronger the conflict. And indeed, the renunciation of claims, the change of place of work, the ability to obtain the same benefit in another place are the condition that the conflict will be ended at the cost of getting out of it;

4) the presence or absence of information about the real resources of the participants in the conflict.

Conflict is a very capacious concept. It is studied from different positions and in various aspects by many sciences: philosophy, sociology, psychology, jurisprudence, history and political science. The conflict underlies any contradiction, and it, in turn, is an incentive for any changes, sometimes constructive and progressive, and sometimes destructive, destructive. Most often, the concept of conflict is considered in the relationship of people and social groups, in psychology, conflict is also deep intrapersonal experiences and contradictions that give rise to life crises, depression, but this does not always lead to negative consequences. Very often, an internal conflict is a stimulus for development, opening up new life horizons and hidden potential hidden by a person.

The study of conflict is based on a combination of various concepts that make up this complex phenomenon: its dynamics, methods of conflict management and its typology. Moreover, these concepts can be correlated with various conflicts - social, interpersonal and intrapersonal, but in each of them they will have their own characteristics.

Dynamics of the conflict

Conflict is a dynamic, evolving process. The following main stages of its development are distinguished: the pre-conflict situation is an open conflict and the stage of its completion.

The latent stage preceding an open conflict is the formation of all its structural elements. First of all, the cause of the confrontation arises and its participants appear, and then there is an awareness by the parties of the confrontation of the current situation as a conflict. The dynamics of the conflict may develop further if, at the first stage, the main contradictions are not resolved peacefully and amicably.

The second stage is the transition of its participants to conflict behavior, the features of which are defined in psychology and conflictology. The dynamics of the conflict at this stage is characterized by an increase in the number of participants in the confrontation, disorganizational actions of the parties directed against each other, a transition from solving problems by business methods to personal accusations, and very often with a sharply negative emotional attitude, as well as a high degree of tension, leading to stress.

The dynamics of the development of the conflict at this stage is denoted by the term escalation, i.e. an increase in destructive, destructive actions of the conflicting parties, often leading to irreversible catastrophic consequences.

Finally, the dynamics of the conflict in the last stage is the search for ways to resolve it. Various methods, techniques and strategies for managing conflict are used here, conflict specialists and psychologists are involved. As a rule, resolution is carried out in two ways: the transformation of the reasons underlying it, and the restructuring of the subjective ideal perception of this situation in the minds of its participants.

It should be noted that conflict resolution strategies do not always lead to complete success. Quite often, everything ends with a partial result, when the visible forms of the emergence and course of a conflict situation are eliminated, and the emotional stress of the participants is not removed, which can cause new confrontations.

The complete resolution of the conflict situation occurs only when all its external contradictions and causes are removed, as well as all internal, emotional and psychological factors are eliminated.

The most difficult task at the last resolution stage of the conflict is the transformation, the change in the subjective ideal perception of the causes of the confrontation in the minds of the participants in each of the parties. If this goal is achieved by the mediators or the management of the organization, then the conflict resolution will be successful.

The conflict, interpersonal or intrapersonal, proceeds according to the standard scheme and has the same stages and methods of resolution, only, of course, with its own specifics.

I am engaged in "Five with a plus" in the group of Gulnur Gataullovna in biology and chemistry. I am delighted, the teacher knows how to interest the subject, find an approach to the student. Adequately explains the essence of his requirements and gives realistic homework (and not like most teachers in the year of the exam, ten paragraphs at home, but one in the class). . We study strictly for the exam and it is very valuable! Gulnur Gataullovna is sincerely interested in the subjects she teaches, she always gives the necessary, timely and relevant information. Highly recommend!

Camilla

I'm preparing for "Five with a plus" for mathematics (with Daniil Leonidovich) and the Russian language (with Zarema Kurbanovna). Very satisfied! The quality of classes is at a high level, at the school there are now only fives and fours in these subjects. I wrote test exams for 5, I'm sure that I will pass the OGE perfectly. Thank you!

Airat

I was preparing for the exam in history and social science with Vitaly Sergeevich. He is an extremely responsible teacher in relation to his work. Punctual, polite, pleasant in communication. It can be seen that the man lives his work. He is well versed in adolescent psychology, has a clear method of preparation. Thank you "Five with a plus" for the work!

Leysan

I passed the exam in the Russian language with 92 points, mathematics with 83, social studies with 85, I think this is an excellent result, I entered the university on a budget! Thanks Five Plus! Your teachers are true professionals, with them a high result is guaranteed, I am very glad that I turned to you!

Dmitry

David Borisovich is a wonderful teacher! I was preparing in his group for the Unified State Examination in mathematics at the profile level, I passed by 85 points! although knowledge at the beginning of the year was not very good. David Borisovich knows his subject, knows the requirements of the Unified State Examination, he himself is a member of the commission for checking examination papers. I am very glad that I was able to get into his group. Thank you "Five with a plus" for this opportunity!

Violet

"Five with a plus" - an excellent center for preparing for exams. Professionals work here, a cozy atmosphere, friendly staff. I studied English and social studies with Valentina Viktorovna, passed both subjects with a good score, satisfied with the result, thank you!

Olesya

In the "Five with a plus" center, she studied two subjects at once: mathematics with Artem Maratovich and literature with Elvira Ravilievna. I really liked the classes, a clear methodology, an accessible form, a comfortable environment. I am very pleased with the result: mathematics - 88 points, literature - 83! Thank you! I will recommend your educational center to everyone!

Artem

When I was choosing tutors, I was attracted by good teachers, convenient class schedule, free trial exams, my parents - affordable prices for high quality. In the end, we were very pleased with the whole family. I studied three subjects at once: mathematics, social studies, and English. Now I am a student of KFU on a budgetary basis, and all thanks to good preparation - I passed the exam with high scores. Thank you!

Dima

I very carefully selected a tutor in social studies, I wanted to pass the exam for the maximum score. "Five with a plus" helped me in this matter, I studied in the group of Vitaly Sergeevich, the classes were super, everything is clear, everything is clear, and at the same time fun and at ease. Vitaly Sergeevich presented the material in such a way that it was remembered by itself. I am very happy with the preparation!