3 Reaching an agreement. This stage of negotiation completes a long and difficult search for a solution to the problem: the conflicting parties begin to develop final agreements. When working on an agreement, the negotiators will have to make the final choice, which should be in the zone of decisions acceptable to both parties. Tolerable decisions suggest a measure of what the opponents can in principle agree to.

This area where it is possible to reach an agreement is called the negotiation space. Any agreements can only be reached within its framework. R. Fischer and W. Urey give a vivid example in support of this. If you're in an antique shop to buy an antique silver service worth thousands of dollars and you only have a hundred bill, don't expect skillful negotiation to make up the difference. Bargaining is inappropriate here.

Graphically, the simplest version of the negotiation space can be represented in Fig. 18.2.
Rice. 18.2

The limits of acceptable decisions for each of the parties may be located very far from the originally declared positions. Therefore, an agreement is more likely to be reached in the central zone of the negotiation space, relatively equally distant from the boundaries of what is acceptable. In this case, the decision taken is perceived by the opponents as quite satisfactory. The farther the chosen pair m is from the central zone, the more the agreement reached corresponds to the goals of one side and is of a forced nature for the other. The latter is inclined to assess such a development of the event as a defeat, although the decision made is in the area of ​​the negotiation space.

1 Fisher R., Yuri W. Uka:1. op. S. 109.

The graphic image of the negotiation space is more like a bargaining space. But even if this strategy is implemented, the possible interaction of the parties in the exchange of concessions does not always fit into such a simple scheme. If we talk about negotiations based on interests, then they can be held without concessions at all. Therefore, in reality, the negotiation space is more complex and, according to M. M. Lebedeva, multidimensional.

An agreement can be reached on the basis of three types of solutions:

Middle:

Asymmetrical:

Fundamentally new solution.

A typical negotiation decision is middle, or compromise, decision. In this case, the conflicting parties make mutual concessions. In this case, the concessions should be approximately equivalent. It is better if the equality of steps towards each other can be expressed in numerical values, then the definition of the "middle" will not be difficult. The easiest way to do this is in a buy-sell situation. The seller asks the maximum price for his product, and the buyer offers the minimum. If the parties are interested in concluding a deal, then “ negotiation minuet': seller and buyer. without losing sight of their own benefit, they make consistent concessions.

However, negotiators are more often in a situation where it is difficult to determine the equivalence of concessions. The exchange of concessions can be carried out in accordance with their different significance for the conflicting parties: by yielding to the opponent in one issue - less important for himself, the negotiator receives in return an advantage in another issue - more significant for him. An indispensable condition in such a search for a compromise is that concessions do not cross the boundaries of the minimum values ​​​​of the interests of both parties (Fig. 18.3). Otherwise, the decision will be outside the scope of the negotiation space. This condition is called Pareto principle, named after the famous Italian sociologist and economist V. Pareto (1848-1923), who developed this principle in 1904. The shaded sector represents a negotiating space in which opponents can make mutual concessions (see Figure 18.3).

R



is 18.3

A similar solution was found in the conflict that unfolded around the Panama Kapal. Since 1903, the United States controlled the zone of this kapal, investing huge sums in its construction. For decades, the Panamanians have demanded that the canal be taken over by them. By the mid-1970s, the conflict confrontation had escalated so much that the parties were forced to enter into negotiations. In 1977, an agreement was signed to transfer the canal (which has brought more than one billion dollars in revenue over the past 20 years) to Panama by 2000.

The second type of solutions asymmetric solution, in which the concessions of one of the parties to the conflict significantly exceed the concessions of the other. An agreement based on such a decision is most often adopted in situations where:

There is a significant difference in the balance of forces between the conflicting parties;

One of the negotiators considers further confrontation risky and threatening with even greater losses;

1 Antsupov A. Ya., Shipilov A. I. Conflictology. – M.: UNITI. 1999. - From 501 - 502.

The problem that needs to be solved is much less important for one of the opponents in comparison with the prospects for further relationships.

All these factors can take place, for example, in a conflict between parents and their teenage son, who eventually agrees to an asymmetric decision, receiving clearly less than the conditional half.

The degree of asymmetry can be different. Its extreme expression is the almost complete disregard for the interests of one of the conflicting parties. This was precisely the nature of the Versailles Treaty of 1919, concluded after the end of the First World War, in relation to Germany. And if an asymmetric solution is generally the least stable, then with significant asymmetry it is often perceived as a temporary concession to the opponent. In this case, the losing side has a desire to take revenge as soon as the opportunity presents itself. The development of historical events after the conclusion of the Treaty of Versailles until the outbreak of World War II is a vivid and tragic illustration of the consequences of an asymmetric decision.

The third type of solution - fundamentally new solution, in which the contradiction is completely resolved or becomes insignificant, and the relations of the conflicting parties change dramatically. The search for such a solution is the most difficult and requires the painstaking work of the negotiators, who are oriented towards the complete end of the conflict.

A fundamentally new solution can be found on the basis of a thorough analysis of the balance of interests of the parties. This allows you to identify non-overlapping interests and thereby resolve the conflict to the mutual satisfaction of opponents. The effectiveness of this path can be seen in the classic example of two sisters quarreling over an orange. In the end, they compromised and split the orange in half. After that, one sister squeezed the juice from her half, throwing away the peel, and the other used the peel for the cake, throwing the fruit itself. If one sister got all the fruit and the other got all the peel, they would eat both without losing each other.

Another way to a fundamentally new solution is possible through a change in interests or their reassessment. In this case, the problem under discussion is included in a broader context. This happens, for example, when opponents unite in the face of a common, more serious danger, and their particular contradictions are perceived differently. For example, in the era of republican Rome, during a period of complex internal political struggle, an agreement was concluded - the famous Triumvirate (60 BC) - between the powerful figures of Rome - Caesar. Pompey and Crassus, who united their efforts in opposing the senate.

Describing a fundamentally new solution, it should be noted that in practice it often includes, to one degree or another, elements of a compromise.

^ Work on the agreement can be done in two ways. The first involves first concluding an agreement in general terms, and then agreeing on the details on each controversial issue. Another way is also possible. In this case, the negotiators resort to consistent agreement on each contentious issue, which creates a series of detailed agreements. The combination of these particular decisions constitutes the final agreement. Whichever option is chosen, working on an agreement involves a series of sequential steps.

First of all, negotiators should develop objective criteria allowing to evaluate the developed options for solving the problem. 1 The following criteria can be used as such criteria:

Common values, moral principles;

Customs and traditions respected by both parties;

Laws, regulations, professional standards;

Expert assessments;

precedents;

1 Fisher R., Jura W. Decree. op. pp. 95 - 108.

The criteria used must be independent of the wishes of the parties, otherwise they will not be perceived as fair. Criteria should be practical and suit all negotiators. Neglect of these characteristics can lead to an unreasonable agreement and have unfortunate consequences. Look at the geographical map of the world and pay attention to the contour of the borders of Israel. In many areas it is a straight line. One of these lines appeared after the First World War and cut the Golan Heights into two parts so that the Lake of Galilee (the main reservoir of drinking water in the region) turned out to be on the same territory (later Israel), and the sources of many rivers flowing into this lake - in another territory (later - near Syria). Such an ill-conceived decision is still making itself felt in the Middle East conflict.

The next step for negotiators when working on an agreement is in choosing the most acceptable solution using objective criteria. Whether we are talking about positional bargaining or negotiations based on interests, one can count on the strength of agreements when they are based on a solution that suits both sides.

And finally, the last - approval of the decision based on the chosen method. In bilateral negotiations, the decision-making procedure is quite simple. If the opponents are guided by a bargaining strategy, then the decision is made if both sides agree with it or one side simply capitulates. In a situation of negotiations on the basis of interests, not only does the parties have mutual consent, but there is also no forced nature of such a step. In multilateral negotiations, the following decision-making methods are applied; 1) consensus, 2) majority vote.

The consensus method (from the Latin. consensus - consent, unanimity) implies the consent of all participants in the negotiations with the developed decision. The method is based on the "recognition of other people's interests as a condition for the implementation of their own interests." Agreements developed on the basis of consensus are the most durable, since this method is incompatible with the negative position of at least one of the opponents. However, consensus has not only advantages, but also disadvantages;

If at least one of the opponents objects, then the decision will not be approved, and the negotiations will come to a standstill;

The need for multiple approvals can be used to delay the negotiation process;

The danger of negotiations breaking down near the finish line could force conflicting parties to adopt vague wording of decisions.

1 Conflicts in modern Russia / Ed. E. I. Stepanova. - M: Editorial URSS. 1999 - S. 196.

If the negotiators use the majority method to approve the decision, then they are more likely to reach an agreement. However, in this case, the problem of fulfilling the agreements becomes relevant. An example is the conflict in the whaling business that began back in the 80s. The threat of extermination of whales and the pressure of the world community forced the International Whaling Commission to decide on a moratorium on the commercial production of these animals, approved by a majority of votes. However, the four members of this organization, which accounted for about 80% of the world fishery, refused to obey the decision of the majority, which almost turned the moratorium into a fiction. True, this method of decision-making makes it possible to state the position of the majority.

If negotiations are successful, they end fixing the decision in the final documents or limited to verbal agreements– depending on the formality of the situation. It is clear that the written fixing of agreements reduces the possibility of their arbitrary interpretation in the future. However, in situations of interpersonal conflicts, this practice is actually absent. This gives the parties the opportunity, if they wish, to more easily violate the terms of the contract or cancel it altogether.

It should be borne in mind that negotiations are not always conducted in strict accordance with the outlined scheme. As they move towards the outcome of the negotiations, the conflicting parties may return to clarifying the issues considered earlier. But the general logic of the sequence of stages of negotiation should be preserved. Its violation can lead to a delay in the negotiation process or its breakdown.

^ Analysis of results

negotiations and implementation

agreements reached

The period of direct interaction between the parties has ended, but it would be premature to talk about the end of negotiations. Opponents leave the “negotiating table”, and the negotiation process itself enters the final stage of analyzing the results of the negotiations and implementing the agreements reached.

First of all, each of the parties needs to analyze the past negotiations, regardless of whether they were successful or not. and decide:

How well the preparations for the negotiations were carried out;

Whether the planned program of negotiations was observed;

What was the nature of the relationship with opponents;

Which arguments were convincing for the opponents, and which ones they rejected and why:

Did you have to make concessions and what will be their consequences;

What difficulties arose during the negotiation process;

What are the prospects for further relationships;

What negotiation experience can be used in the future;

What are the main reasons for the results achieved.

A visible criterion for the effectiveness of negotiations is the agreement reached, but its presence should not be interpreted as an unconditional success. For evaluating the success of negotiations a number of criteria can be used.

1) The most important indicator of success is the degree of problem solving. The agreement reached during the negotiation process is evidence of a solution to the problem. However, depending on the nature of the agreements the outcome of the confrontation of the parties is different:

Completion of the conflict within the framework of the “win-win” model finally removes the problem from the agenda;

Completion of the conflict according to the "win-lose" or "lose-lose" scenario does not exclude conflict interaction in the future.

2) Another important criterion for success is subjective assessments of negotiations and their results. Negotiations are successful if both sides are satisfied with their results and regard the agreement reached as a fair solution to the problem. However, it is possible that later these measurements will change.

3) The success of the negotiations allows us to evaluate such a criterion as fulfillment of the terms of the agreement. Even the most brilliant result of the negotiations will noticeably fade if there are problems with the fulfillment of the obligations assumed by the parties. Therefore, the best way to ensure the long-term effect of negotiations is to include in the agreement a plan for its implementation. 1 It is important that it clearly states what needs to be done, by when, by whom.

There should also be a system for monitoring the implementation of the agreement. It was this function that was entrusted to the writer and diplomat A. S. Griboedov, who ensured that Persia fulfilled the conditions of the Turkmenchay peace (1828). He had to collect indemnity and return Russian subjects to their homeland. Recall that while carrying out this mission, he died in Tehran at the hands of fanatics.

1 Conflicts in modern Russia / Ed. E. I. Stepanova.- M.: Editorial URSS. 1999 - S. 303.

In addition, the final document can also stipulate the procedure for a possible revision of the agreement or its parts. An illustration of this can be found again in the history of Russian-Persian relations. Such a procedure was provided for at the conclusion of the Gulistan Peace (1813) between Russia and Persia. This treaty contained a separate act stipulating the right of Persia to apply to Russia with a request to revise the terms of peace. It must be said that the struggle for its revision went on for four years, until, finally, this agreement was recognized by Persia, and the separate act was canceled.

Summing up, it should be noted that the negotiators should start fulfilling their obligations as soon as possible. Since the delay in implementation may cause doubts and mistrust of the parties to each other.

^ 18.4. Negotiation tactics

In studies on the negotiation process, special attention is paid to influence on the opponent and the use of various techniques. 1 Let us briefly describe the main tactics used in the framework of a particular negotiating strategy.

^ Tactics in positional trading

Techniques related to negotiations of this type are the most well-known and diverse.

1 « Overstating the requirement". Its essence lies in the fact that opponents begin negotiations by putting forward significantly inflated demands, which they do not expect to be met. The opponents then retreat to more realistic demands through a series of apparent concessions. However, with scrap, they achieve real concessions from the opposite side. If the initial demand is excessively high, then it will be regarded as illegal and will not cause reciprocal concessions.

2 « ^ Placement of false accents in one's own position ". It consists in demonstrating extreme interest in resolving some minor issue, and subsequently withdrawing the requirements under this item. This roll of action looks like a concession, which causes a reciprocal concession from the opponent.

1 See Antsupov A. Ya .. Shipilov A. I. Conflictology. – M.: UNITI. 1999; Lebedeva M. M. You will have negotiations. – M.: Economics. 1993; Fisher R., Uri W. The path to agreement, or negotiations without defeat. – M.: Science. 1992.

3" waiting" is used to force the opponent to first express his opinion, and then, depending on the information received, to formulate his own point of view.

4 " Salami"is expressed in providing information to the opponent in very small portions. This ploy is used to get as much information as possible from the opponent or to drag out negotiations.

5 " ^ Stick arguments” are used in cases where one of the negotiators has difficulty with counterarguments or wants to psychologically suppress the opponent. The essence of this technique lies in the fact that as an argument they appeal to the highest values ​​and interests, starting with statements like: “Do you understand what you are encroaching on ?!”.

6" ^ Deliberate deception » is used either to achieve or to avoid any consequences and is: misrepresentation of information; communication of deliberately false information; lack of authority to make decisions on certain issues; lack of intention to comply with the terms of the agreement.

7" ^ Making demands in ascending order ". If one of the participants in the negotiations agrees with the proposals being made, the other participant may resort to putting forward more and more new demands.

eight " ^ Making demands at the last minute ". It is used at the end of negotiations, when all that remains is to conclude an agreement. In this situation, one of the participants puts forward new demands, hoping that his opponent will make concessions in order to maintain what has been achieved.

nine " ^ Double interpretation "is that when developing the final document, one of the parties "lays" in it wording with a double meaning. Subsequently, such a trick allows you to interpret the agreement in your own interests.

ten " ^ Putting pressure on the opponent ” is used to extract concessions from him and force him to agree to the proposed solution. It can be implemented through: an indication of the possibility of terminating negotiations; show of force; presentation of an ultimatum; warning of consequences unpleasant for the opponent.

^ Tactical tricks

when negotiating

based on interests

If the use of the first group of techniques demonstrates the attitude towards the opponent as an adversary, then the second group of techniques is focused on a partner approach.

1 « ^ Gradual increase in the complexity of the issues discussed ". The essence of this technique is to start the discussion with those issues that cause the least disagreement. And then the negotiators move on to more complex issues. Using this technique allows you to avoid active opposition from the parties from the very beginning of the negotiations and create a favorable atmosphere.

2 « ^ Dividing the problem into separate components “is not to try to solve the whole problem at once, but, having singled out individual aspects in it, gradually reach mutual agreement.

3 « ^ Bracketing controversial issues »» is used when it is difficult to reach an agreement on the whole range of issues. The technique is as follows: controversial issues are not considered, which allows reaching partial agreements.

4 " ^ One cuts, the other chooses ". The reception is based on the principle of fair division: one is given the right to divide (pie, powers, territory, functions, etc.), and the other - to choose one of the two parts. The meaning of this technique is as follows: the first, fearing to receive a smaller share, will strive to divide as accurately as possible.

5 " ^ Commonality Emphasis ". The trick is to point out those aspects that unite the opponents: interest in a positive outcome of the negotiations; interdependence of opponents; the desire to avoid further material and moral losses; the existence of a long-term relationship between the parties before the conflict.

^ tactics,

ambivalent

It is possible to single out a third group of techniques that are similar in their manifestation, but have a different meaning depending on the strategy within which they are used.

1 Grachev G. V., Melnik I. K. Manipulation of personality: organization, methods and technologies of information and psychological impact. – M.: IF RAN. 1999. - S. 189.

1 « ^ Anticipating objections ". 1 The technique boils down to the fact that the negotiator, who starts the discussion, points out his weaknesses, without waiting for the opponent to do so. The use of this technique as part of a bargain to a certain extent knocks the ground out from under the opponent's feet and makes it necessary to correct the arguments "on the go". When trying to negotiate on the basis of interests, the method signals a desire to avoid a sharp confrontation, recognizing a certain legitimacy of the opponent's claims.

2" ^ Economy of arguments » 1 lies in the fact that all the available arguments are not expressed immediately, but in stages. If the negotiators are guided by positional bargaining, then this technique allows them to “hold” some of the arguments in order to use them in a difficult situation. In interest-based negotiation, there is another variant of this technique. "Economy of arguments" facilitates the perception of information, avoids ignoring one or another argument by the opponent.

3" ^ Return to discussion ". The reception boils down to the fact that the issues that have already been discussed are again put on the agenda. In a bargaining situation, this technique is used to delay the negotiation process and avoid acceptance of an agreement. Negotiators oriented towards a partnership approach use this technique in the event that for some of them the issue really remains unclear.

4 " Packing". It consists in the fact that several issues are linked and proposed for consideration together (in the form of a "package"). The “package” within the framework of the bargain includes both attractive and unacceptable offers for the opponent. Such a “package deal” is called a “load sale”. The party offering the "package" assumes that the opponent, who is interested in several offers, will accept the rest. In interest-based negotiation, this technique has a different meaning. Here, the "package" is focused on linking interests with a possible gain for all participants.

5 " ^ Block tactics ". It is used in multilateral negotiations and consists in coordinating one's actions with other participants acting as a single block. If opponents are guided by a partnership approach, then this technique allows you to first find a solution for a group of participants and thereby facilitate the search for the final solution. In positional bargaining, the technique of "block tactics" is used to combine efforts that block the realization of the interests of the opposite side.

1 Grachev G. V., Melnik I. K. Decree. op. S. 187.
6" Care» (avoidance tactic) can be expressed in transferring the discussion to another topic or another issue, in a request to postpone consideration of the problem. As part of positional trading, it is used with a view to;

Do not give the opponent accurate information;

Do not enter into a discussion if, for example, the position on this issue is poorly developed;

Reject in an indirect form an undesirable offer;

Drag out the negotiations.

Interest-based negotiators use "leaving" in cases where it is necessary to: 1) consider the proposal; 2) agree on the issue with others.

The characteristics of tactical techniques used at various stages of negotiation allows us to pay attention to an important aspect that distinguishes some techniques from others. This criterion is the purpose for which a technique is used. And these goals are either 1) in the desire to facilitate the achievement of a mutually beneficial result. 2) in the pursuit of a one-sided win.

In the first case, the actions of the participants in the negotiations are more likely to be distinguished by sincerity and openness, and the tactics used in this case are correct. If the opponents are focused on obtaining unilateral advantages, then their actions are often hidden. The techniques that are used in this case are called differently: unacceptable, speculative, impermissible. But most of all, their essence is reflected in the term " manipulative". Manipulation can be defined as a type of psychological influence used to achieve one-sided gain through the hidden motivation of another to perform certain actions. 1 In order to neutralize the manipulative influence, first of all, it is necessary to know the methods of such influence and their timely detection.

1 Cited. by: Grachev G. V., Melnik I. K. Decree. op. S. 67.

^ 18.5. Mediation in the negotiation process

In those situations when the possibilities of unilateral actions of the parties to the conflict are practically exhausted or the cost of continuing the conflict becomes too high, the opponents still have a chance to resolve the problem through negotiations. However, the situation does not always develop in such a way that countries are ready to conduct direct negotiations. In this case, a way out can be found through the involvement of a neutral third party in the interaction. Its participation is expedient even when direct negotiations between the conflicting parties have reached an impasse.

^ Forms of Participation

third party

The term "third party" is broad and collective. There are three main forms of participation of a third party in the settlement and resolution of the conflict.

1) Court- it is distinguished by a clearly developed, legislatively fixed procedure for the proceedings, as well as the obligation for the parties to the conflict to comply with decisions taken by a third party. In this case, the participation of a third party is characterized by the maximum degree of intervention in the conflict.

2) Arbitration- characterized by the absence of strict rules governing the process of discussing the problem; the right to choose a third party by the parties to the conflict themselves; binding decisions made by a third party.

3) Mediation- this is a special form of participation of a third party in the settlement and resolution of the conflict in order to facilitate the process of negotiations between the parties to the conflict. While facilitating a constructive discussion and the search for a solution to the problem, the mediator cannot at the same time determine the choice of the final solution, which is the prerogative of the conflicting parties. Therefore, the mediator should immediately emphasize the fact that the responsibility for the failure of the negotiations and the further escalation of the conflict lies not with a third party, but with the parties to the conflict themselves.

It is important to pay attention to the fact that among the above forms of participation of a third party in the settlement and resolution of the conflict, only the latter is focused on the use of a negotiation approach.

The intervention of an intermediary is advisable in the following cases:

The conflicting parties are ready to jointly search for a solution to the problem, but cannot find common ground;

The direct communication of the parties to the conflict is seriously complicated or terminated, and the participation of a third party may contribute to changing this situation;

For the conflicting parties, it is important to maintain and continue the relationship;

Participants in the conflict are interested in control over the decisions made;

For opponents, an important aspect of overcoming disagreements is confidentiality.

^ Choice of intermediary

The choice of a mediator by the conflicting parties is carried out in accordance with a number of requirements for a third party.

1 A necessary condition for the consent of opponents to the intervention of a mediator is his competence, which implies, first of all, the ability to thoroughly analyze the conflict situation and mastery of mediation skills. This requirement also largely determines the effectiveness of the mediator's efforts to resolve the conflict. Insufficient competence of the mediator, on the contrary, can lead to a breakdown in negotiations and an increase in confrontation between the parties.

2 Another important requirement for an intermediary is that impartiality, which lies in the fact that the mediator should take a neutral position, without supporting any of the parties to the conflict. It should be noted that the mediator's disinterest is still relative, since he is at least interested in the success of his activities. Therefore, in this case, the main thing is not the actual impartiality of the third party, but the perception of it as such by the participants in the conflict. It was this aspect that played a decisive role in the choice of a mediator in the peaceful settlement of the Yugoslav conflict (1999). They became Martti Ahtisaari, President of Finland - a country that is not part of NATO.

3 Another important requirement is that prestige. The involvement of public organizations or individuals in mediation is largely due to this. For example, the participation of representatives of the Catholic Church in the negotiations between the ruling party in Poland and the opposition movement "Solidarity" in 1989 was determined, first of all, by the fact that in this country the authority and influence of the Church is very strong. The authority that a mediator has in the eyes of the conflicting parties determines his ability to influence the participants in the conflict. It is only important that he, in turn, not be influenced by any of them and thus not call into question his neutrality.

^ Intermediary influence

to the conference room

process

The extent to which the mediator meets these requirements directly affects his ability to influence the negotiation process, and hence, ultimately, the results of his mediation activities. The main aspects of this influence include the following.

1 Facilitating the beginning of negotiations between the parties to the conflict or their continuation, the mediator offers certain options for the meeting place of the parties. In this case, the territory of the mediator is often chosen for negotiations. Repeatedly fulfilling a mediating mission in the Middle East conflict, the United States provided its territory, for example, in 1978 for negotiations between Egypt and Israel or in 1999 for negotiations between Syria and Israel.

2 The mediator takes an active part in setting the agenda. Together with the conflicting parties, he forms the range of issues for discussion and the order in which they are considered. At the same time, the task of the mediator is to convince opponents to start negotiations with simpler issues, and to consider the most difficult ones to go last. The mediator's task is also to regulate the sequence and duration of speeches, not allowing the priority of one side or the other.

3 It is no secret that the relations of the parties to the conflict are characterized by hostility, mistrust, and suspicion. Therefore, a significant contribution of the mediator to the success of the negotiation process is shaping the working atmosphere at the negotiations. In many ways, the very fact of the presence of a third party is able to keep opponents from showing hostility towards each other. However, the mediator should not limit himself to this and must make every effort to reduce the level of negative emotions of the conflicting parties. A noticeable influence on the atmosphere during negotiations is exerted by the manifestation of emphasized respect on the part of the mediator for the opponents and understanding of their problems, the encouragement of certain steps of the opponents towards the normalization of relations and a positive attitude towards joint work. The mediator also helps the conflicting parties to overcome negative stereotypes in relation to each other and the negative influence of various perception phenomena.

4 Assistance in finding a solution is a key aspect in the mediator's influence on the negotiation process. To optimize this search, the intermediary performs the following actions:

Provides participants with assistance in studying the situation, analyzing disagreements, evaluating proposals;

Draws the attention of the parties to the existence of a commonality in their interests or creates such a commonality by placing the issue in a broader context, say, the prospect of large-scale economic cooperation;

Helps to discover non-overlapping interests and thereby increases the negotiation space, in the zone of which a solution can be found;

Acts as an additional source of ideas and options for solving the problem;

Provides assistance to opponents in the search and selection of objective criteria for evaluating the developed options for solving the problem;

Offers a general formula for a possible agreement.

The effectiveness of these efforts of the mediator largely depends on how complete information about the participants in the conflict, disputed issues, the balance of forces of the parties, their interests and positions, possible approaches to solving the problem, the degree of their involvement in the conflict, etc. has an intermediary.

5 Determination of deadlines for completing negotiations can play a certain role in stimulating the search for a mutually acceptable solution by the mediator. If the conflicting parties, realizing their responsibility for the failure of negotiations, strive to reach an agreement, then a fixed time frame will ensure a stable dynamics of the negotiation process.

1 Conflicts in modern Russia / Ed. E.I. Stepanova.- M.: Editorial URSS, 1999 - C 317.

6 In the event that the negotiations are successful, the mediator assumes control over the implementation of the agreement. As noted above, the success of the negotiation process is determined not only by the achievement of an agreement, but also by the fulfillment of its conditions. Therefore, the mediator needs to ensure that the final agreement includes a time frame for the parties to fulfill their obligations. It is also possible to establish something like a probationary period, i.e. the time during which the parties could assess the effectiveness of the agreement reached. 1 In addition, the mediator can act as a guarantor of the implementation of agreements. Such a mission is quite within the reach of, say, a leader in resolving a conflict between subordinates.

^ Mediation Models

The components of the influence of the mediator on the negotiation process described above characterize, first of all, traditional mediation, without focusing on the specific features of its various modifications. Such features distinguish the following models of intermediary activity: 2

Facilitation;

Consulting mediation;

Mediation with elements of arbitration.

The main difference between them lies in the role of the third party in the negotiations and the degree of its participation in the development of the final decision. From this point of view, we will characterize the distinguished varieties of mediation.

1 Facilitation. The role of the third party comes down mainly to the fact that the facilitator (from English, facilitate - facilitate) assists the parties to the conflict in organizing negotiations and holding meetings. The role of the facilitator in conflict resolution is to help the conflicting parties prepare the meeting; ensure their equal participation in the discussion; to ensure strict observance of the agenda and procedures of the negotiations. At the same time, the facilitator does not take part in the debate of the parties and the development of decisions.

2 ^ Consulting mediation . The specificity of this type of mediation is as follows: the conflicting parties receive the preliminary consent of the mediator that if they cannot find a solution to the problem on their own, then he will express his point of view in consultation. This opinion of the mediator is not binding on the parties and is heard only if the negotiations are deadlocked. However, the parties to the conflict can use the opinion of the mediator to reach an agreement.

1 Conflicts in modern Russia / Ed. E.I. Stepanova.- M.: Editorial URSS. 1999 - p. 317.

2 Ibid. P. 315. P. 319.
3 Mediation with elements of arbitration. Within the framework of this model, the influence of the mediator on the negotiation process is maximum. This is due to the fact that the parties to the conflict, before the start of negotiations, agree that if the negotiations reach an impasse, the mediator will make a binding decision on the controversial issue. This agreement encourages the parties to the conflict, who are interested in controlling the results achieved, to make every effort to find a solution on their own. In any case, this procedure guarantees that an agreement between the parties will be reached. Whatever variant of mediation is implemented in the negotiation process, the main thing is that it be successful. Of course, the best result of mediation is the resolution of the conflict. For example, the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (USA) has more than 500,000 resolved conflicts in its 50 years of operation. 1 However, much depends not only on the mediator himself, but also on the stage of development of the conflict, the nature of the relationship between the parties, the availability of alternatives to a negotiated agreement, the balance of forces of the participants in the conflict, the influence of the environment in which the conflict proceeds, etc. In the presence of such a large number of diverse factors, the involvement of an intermediary may not bring the desired result. But it is not always right to speak of failure in such cases.

^ Efficiency mark

mediation

activities

When evaluating the effectiveness of mediation, several criteria should be used.

1) Objective criteria allowing

consider mediation intervention successful:

The end of the conflict;

Reducing the severity of conflict interaction;

The transition from unilateral actions of the parties to the conflict to attempts to jointly search for a solution to the problem;

Normalization of relations between opponents.

1 See: K. D. Rostiashvili, Federal Service for Mediation and Reconciliation. // USA: economy, politics, ideology. 1991. - No. 4. - S. 109-110.

2) It is also important to focus on subjective indicators that reflect the degree of satisfaction of the parties to the conflict with mediation. To do this, it should be determined whether the conflicting parties believe that

In assisting the negotiation process, the mediator was objective in relation to opponents;

It would be difficult for the parties to do without his efforts;

The results achieved with the help of an intermediary are not imposed, but, on the contrary, represent a mutually acceptable outcome.

When evaluating the degree of success of the mediation, it is necessary to take into account, in addition, the assessments of the mediator and external observers.

The various aspects of mediation discussed above lead to the following conclusion. The activities of the mediator are associated with a number of problems, difficulties and obstacles that he needs to overcome. At the same time, the success of the efforts of the mediator is not always obvious, his activity in itself does not yet guarantee the resolution of the conflict, and sometimes it can cause an escalation of the conflict confrontation. However, the very fact that a mediator is involved in the settlement and resolution of the conflict indicates the desire of the parties to find a way out using the path of negotiations, and gives hope for a successful outcome.

Concluding the consideration of negotiations in the conditions of conflict, let us recall the point of view of modern researchers already known to you, according to which conflict is recognized as an integral property of social relations. This means that each of us became a participant in this or that conflict, maintaining such a perspective in the future. Negotiations (direct or with the participation of a third party) can be considered the most preferable and often the best way to resolve and resolve conflicts. Therefore, the study of the diverse aspects of the negotiation process is not only a promising area of ​​scientific research, but also relevant for any of us. At the same time, it must be borne in mind that mere knowledge of the negotiations is not yet a sufficient basis for success. Equally important is the formation and development of negotiation skills. And the ability to negotiate is acquired only by putting the existing knowledge into practice. And finally, we should not forget that negotiations can achieve their goal only if their participants are sincere in their desire to jointly search for a solution to the problem. Otherwise, the conflicting parties are more likely to demonstrate determination than to seek a solution.

Among the control actions in relation to the conflict, the central place is occupied by its resolution. Not all conflicts can be prevented. Therefore, it is very important to be able to get out of the conflict.

Conflict resolution is a joint activity of its participants, aimed at stopping opposition and solving the problem that led to the collision. Conflict resolution involves the activity of both parties to transform the conditions in which they interact, to eliminate the causes of the conflict. To resolve the conflict, it is necessary to change the opponents themselves, their positions, which they defended in the conflict. Often conflict resolution is based on a change in the attitude of opponents to its object or to each other.

Conflict resolution can be defined even more simply - as "reaching an agreement on a controversial issue between the participants." For modern conflictology, "reaching agreement" as an element of conflict resolution is actually considered mandatory. At the same time, such an understanding is not obvious and is the result of a certain evolution of views in this area. For example, back in 1964, the well-known conflictologist J. Galtung wrote: “To resolve a conflict means: 1) to decide who is the winner and who is the loser, what will be the future distribution of values; 2) to carry out this distribution of values; 3) come to the conclusion that the conflict is completely over."

It is logical to associate conflict resolution with a change in the conflict situation, and methods of resolution - with ways to change it. Indeed, a conflict situation can exist without passing into the stage of an incident, but an incident cannot begin without a conflict situation, just as there cannot be a continuation of this incident with a change in the conflict situation. Consequently, the given conflict stops together with the change of the given conflict situation, and by changing the conflict situation, we can replace one elementary conflict with another, controlling the course of the conflict as a whole.

Conflict resolution is a multi-stage process that includes analysis and assessment of the situation, the choice of a conflict resolution method, the formation of an action plan, its implementation, and an assessment of the effectiveness of one's actions.

There are many ways to manage conflicts. They can be represented in the form of several groups, each of which has its own scope:

Intrapersonal, i.e. methods of influencing an individual;

Structural, i.e. methods to eliminate organizational conflicts;

Interpersonal methods or styles of behavior in conflict;

Negotiation;

retaliatory aggressive action. This group of methods is used in extreme cases, when the possibilities of all previous groups have been exhausted.

1) Intrapersonal methods consist in the ability to properly organize one's own behavior, express one's point of view without causing a defensive reaction from the other person. Some authors suggest using the “I am a statement” method, i.e. a way of conveying to another person your attitude to a certain subject, without accusations and demands, but in such a way that the other person changes his attitude. This method helps to hold your position without turning the other person into your enemy. "I am a statement" can be useful in any situation, but it is especially effective when a person is angry, annoyed, dissatisfied. It should immediately be noted that the application of this approach requires skills and practice, but this can be justified in the future. “I am a statement” is constructed in such a way as to allow the individual to express his opinion about the situation, to express his position. It is especially useful when a person wants to convey something to another, but does not want him to take it negatively and go on the attack.

2) Structural Methods , those. methods of influencing mainly organizational conflicts arising from the incorrect distribution of powers, labor organization, the adopted incentive system, and so on. These methods include: clarification of job requirements, coordination and integration mechanisms, corporate goals, use of reward systems.

Explain job requirements. One of the best management techniques to prevent dysfunctional conflict is to clarify what results are expected from the employee or group. Here the following should be mentioned: level of results, sources of information, system of powers and responsibilities, policies, procedures and rules defined. Moreover, the leader clarifies all these issues not for himself, but so that his subordinates understand well what is expected of them in each situation.

Coordination and integration mechanisms. This method is based on the correct use of the formal structure of the organization, in particular, the hierarchy and the principle of unity of command. The principle of unity of command (sometimes not quite correctly called the principle of unity of command) facilitates the use of hierarchy to manage a conflict situation, since the subordinate knows perfectly well whose orders he must obey.

In managing a conflict situation, methods are useful that are used to integrate the structure (ie, prevent the occurrence of a "swan, cancer and pike" situation).

Comprehensive corporate goals. The effective achievement of complex goals requires the joint efforts of two or more employees, so setting goals that are common to all employees can serve as a method of conflict prevention.

For example, if three shifts in a production department conflict with each other, goals should be formulated for the entire department, rather than for each shift individually. Likewise, setting clear goals for the entire organization as a whole will also help leaders to make decisions that benefit the entire organization, not just their functional area.

Structure of the reward system . The system of rewards (tangible and intangible) can both contribute to the occurrence of conflicts and reduce the possibility of their occurrence. The reward system should be organized in such a way as to encourage those employees whose actions contribute to the implementation of corporate goals, try to approach problem solving in a complex way. On the contrary, the system of remuneration should not encourage employees who achieve the solution of narrow problems at the expense of other departments and divisions. For example, salespeople should not be rewarded for increasing sales if they achieved this by giving customers a wide range of discounts at the expense of the overall profit of the firm.

3) Interpersonal methods of conflict resolution.

In the interpersonal method, there are five ways to resolve conflict:

- evasion;

- smoothing;

- compulsion;

- compromise;

- problem solving.

Evasion. This style implies that the person is trying to get away from the conflict. "... Do not get into situations that provoke the emergence of contradictions, do not enter into discussions of issues fraught with disagreements. Then you will not have to come into an excited state, even if you are solving the problem."

Smoothing. This style is characterized by behavior that is dictated by the belief that it is not worth getting angry, because "we are all one happy team, and we should not rock the boat." The smoothing style can eventually lead to serious conflict, as the problem underlying the conflict is not resolved. The "Smoothener" achieves temporary harmony among workers, but negative emotions live inside them and accumulate.

Compromise. This style is characterized by taking the other side's point of view, but only to some extent. The ability to compromise is highly valued in managerial situations, as it minimizes ill will and often makes it possible to quickly resolve the conflict to the satisfaction of both parties. However, the use of compromise in the early stages of a conflict over a serious problem can interfere with the diagnosis of the problem and shorten the search for possible alternatives. As a result, the decisions made may not be optimal. Compromise is focused on solving a controversial problem through the joint efforts of the parties, and mainly consists of mutual concessions. This approach is the "classic" method of simple conflict resolution at all levels; its technology is simpler and often does not solve the dispute, but, as it were, temporarily postpones it to a later date. It is usually used when the problem is obvious, resources and time to solve the problem are limited, other technologies do not work.

Compulsion. Within this style, attempts to force people to accept their point of view at any cost prevail. The one who tries to do this is not interested in the opinions of others, behaves aggressively and uses power through coercion to influence others. This style can be effective in situations where the boss has significant power over subordinates. The disadvantage of this style is that it suppresses the initiative of subordinates, creates the danger that when making a managerial decision, any important factors will not be taken into account, since only one point of view is presented. This style can cause resentment, especially among younger and more educated staff.

Problem solving . This style is an acknowledgment of differences of opinion and a willingness to get acquainted with other points of view in order to understand the causes of the conflict and find a course of action acceptable to all parties. The one who uses this style does not seek to solve their problems at the expense of others, but rather seeks the best way to resolve the conflict situation. "... Differences in views are seen as an inevitable result of the fact that smart people have their own ideas about what is right and what is not. Emotions can only be eliminated through direct dialogues with a person who has a different view from you. Deep analysis and resolution conflicts are possible, only this requires maturity and the art of working with people ... Such constructiveness in resolving the conflict (by solving the problem) helps to create an atmosphere of sincerity, which is so necessary for the success of the individual and the company as a whole"

3) Negotiations represent a broad aspect of communication, covering many areas of an individual's activity. As a method of conflict resolution, negotiations are a set of tactics aimed at finding mutually acceptable solutions for the conflicting parties.

In order for negotiations to become possible, certain conditions must be met:

The existence of interdependence of the parties involved in the conflict;

The absence of a significant difference in the capabilities (strength) of the subjects of the conflict;

Correspondence of the stage of development of the conflict with the possibilities of negotiations;

Participation in the negotiations of the parties that can actually make decisions in the current situation.

Each conflict in its development goes through several stages. On some of them, negotiations may not be accepted, since it is still too early, and on others it will be too late to start them, and then only aggressive retaliatory actions are possible.

It is believed that it is expedient to conduct negotiations only with those forces that have power in the current situation and can influence the outcome of the event. There are several groups whose interests are affected in the conflict:

Primary groups - their personal interests are affected, they themselves participate in the conflict, but the possibility of successful negotiations does not always depend on these groups.

Secondary groups - their interests are affected, but these forces do not seek to openly show their interest, their actions are hidden until a certain time. There may also be third forces that are also interested in the conflict, but even more hidden.

Properly organized negotiations go through several stages in sequence:

Preparation for the start of negotiations (before the opening of negotiations);

Preliminary position selection (initial statements of the participants about their position in these negotiations);

Search for a mutually acceptable solution (psychological struggle, establishing the real position of opponents);

Procedural issues are also being worked out: where is it better to conduct negotiations? what atmosphere is expected in the negotiations? Is a good relationship with an opponent important in the future?

Experienced negotiators believe that the success of all further activities depends on 50% of this stage, if it is properly organized.

Completion (exit from the crisis or negotiation impasse).

1. Preparation for the start of negotiations. Before starting any negotiations, it is extremely important to prepare well for them: to diagnose the state of affairs, determine the strengths and weaknesses of the parties to the conflict, predict the balance of power, find out who will negotiate and the interests of which group they represent.

In addition to collecting information, at this stage it is necessary to clearly articulate your goal of participation in the negotiations. In this regard, the following questions should be answered:

What is the main purpose of negotiations?

What alternatives are available? In reality, negotiations are carried out in order to achieve results that would be the most desirable and acceptable;

If an agreement is not reached, how will this affect the interests of both parties?

What is the interdependence of opponents and how is it expressed outwardly?

2. The initial choice of position (official statements of the negotiators). This stage allows you to realize two goals of the participants in the negotiation process: to show opponents that you know their interests and you take them into account; determine the room for maneuver and try to leave as much room for yourself in it as possible.

Negotiations usually begin with a statement by both parties about their desires, desires and interests. With the help of facts and principled arguments (for example, “company objectives”, “general interest”), the parties try to strengthen their positions.

If the negotiations are held with the participation of an intermediary (leader, negotiator), then he must give each party the opportunity to express and do everything in his power so that the opponents do not interrupt each other.

In addition, the facilitator determines and manages the deterrents of the parties: the allowable time for the issues discussed, the consequences of the inability to reach a compromise. Suggests ways of making decisions: simple majority, consensus. Identifies procedural issues.

3. The third stage is to find a mutually acceptable solution, a psychological struggle.

At this stage, the parties check each other's capabilities, how realistic the requirements of each of the parties are and how their implementation may affect the interests of the other participant. Opponents present facts that are beneficial only to them, declare that they have all sorts of alternatives. Here, various manipulations and psychological pressure on the leader are possible, to seize initiatives in all possible ways. The goal of each of the participants is to achieve balance or a little dominance. The task of the mediator at this stage is to see and put into action the possible combinations of interests of the participants, to contribute to the introduction of a large number of solutions, to direct the negotiations towards the search for specific proposals. In the event that the negotiations begin to acquire a sharp character, affecting one of the parties, the leader must find a way out of the situation.

4. Completion of negotiations or a way out of the impasse. By this stage, a significant number of different proposals and options already exist, but agreement on them has not yet been reached. Time begins to run out, increases tension, a decision is required. A few final concessions on both sides could save the day. But here it is important for the conflicting parties to clearly remember which concessions do not affect the achievement of their main goal, and which nullify all previous work.

Thus, in complex situations where a variety of approaches and accurate information are essential for making sound decisions, the emergence of conflicting opinions should even be encouraged and managed using a problem-solving style.

In conflictology, a fundamental difference is made between "forceful" and "negotiated" methods of conflict resolution.

"Force" methods of conflict resolution. P. Carneval and D. Pruitt believe that the frequent use of forceful methods of conflict resolution is determined by the following main factors: difficulties in communication between the parties, misunderstanding of each other; low level of trust between the parties; the conviction that more can be achieved through struggle than through negotiations; response to the forceful actions of the opposing side.

The use of "forceful" methods of conflict resolution has deep cultural roots. Orientation to win is the main incentive to use "struggle", "strength" methods to achieve their goals. The ideals of intransigence, readiness to "go to the end", standards of "fight to the last" led to the frank dominance of forceful methods of influencing a partner in a conflict. In a conflict, the initial is a “test” of forceful methods (from attempts to insist on one’s own, to persuade, to prove the priority of one’s position, and so on, to “hard” pressure, threats, forms of blackmail, etc.) and only after that - if success is not achieved - partners forced into negotiations.

The participation of a third party can also limit the development of a conflict and mitigate it, if it manages to influence the development of standards of honesty, social responsibility, the adequacy of concessions and the search for alternative options.

There are several possible forms of third party intervention. This is, first of all, mediation, mediation, or mediation, in which advisory recommendations do not necessarily have to be taken into account by the disputing parties. Further, it is reconciliation, in which the emphasis is not so much on resolving issues, but on the process by which the conflict ends. Another form of third party intervention is arbitration, in which the recommendations of the third party are binding.

Depending on the degree of third party control over the decision, Antsupov and Shipilov identify several of its possible roles in conflict resolution: arbitrator, arbitrator, mediator, assistant and observer. The arbitrator, who makes an uncontested decision, has the greatest opportunities. The arbitrator has the right to make a decision, but it can be appealed by the parties. The mediator provides a constructive discussion of the problem.

When summarizing the practice of regulating all types of conflicts, it is worth paying attention to the following: it is wrong to qualify conflicts only as winning or losing - only a few of them are such. And if the conflict is not assessed as win-lose, it is necessary to develop a cooperative orientation for solving the problem and try to establish an open communication process based on mutual responsibility, during which the parties could express and form opinions about each other's interests. Communication should use methods designed to support "honest negotiations", reduce the possibility of using "dishonest tricks" and prevent conflicts from turning into destructive processes.

Let's look briefly at some of these methods.

Binding Arbitration. The conflicting parties choose one or more neutrals to review their dispute and make a final, binding decision. Like litigation, arbitration is an adversarial process aimed at resolving disputes between parties. Arbitration differs from the judicial procedure, since there are no rules governing the process of providing and evaluating evidence, and there is no specific procedure for the proceedings. Binding arbitration awards are generally enforceable by the courts, unless there were gross errors in the arbitral process itself. The arbiter may use the help of a so-called neutral listener. A neutral listener is some individual or collective entity chosen by the disputants to receive proposals from each of the parties to resolve the dispute.

Advisory Arbitration. This procedure is similar to the binding arbitration procedure, with the only difference that the decision made by a neutral person is more of an advisory nature. The parties have the opportunity to accept it, or reject and refer the case to court, or resort to a binding procedure. Along with the “neutral listener”, an expert can also participate - a person or organization who is required to provide the parties with some kind of qualified opinion on controversial issues.

Arbitration of the "final offer". It is a type of binding arbitration in which each of the parties must submit for consideration its own version of the decision on this dispute. The arbitrator has the right to choose any of them without any changes.

Limited Arbitrage. Another type of binding arbitration, where the parties limit their risk of defeat by setting certain limits on concessions prior to the commencement of arbitration proceedings. Upon completion of the proceedings, if the arbitrator's decision goes beyond the specified limits, mutual claims are satisfied in accordance with the previously reached agreement.

Mediation arbitration is a form of mixed conflict resolution where the parties agree that issues not resolved through mediation will be resolved through arbitration. The parties may choose a certain person who will combine the functions of both mediator and arbitrator, although such a combination is not always useful. Mediators are invited to consult only on the procedure for resolving the dispute, and not to examine the subject of the dispute itself.

Arbitration court. The parties determine a private person authorized to consider and resolve the conflict between them. The procedure itself can be exclusively the subject of an agreement between the parties, or the subject of legislative regulation.

Conflict resolution is often multi-layered. Thus, the first step towards resolving the conflict is usually considered to be the consolidation of one form or another of negotiations between the parties. The next step is mediation, which helps reach an agreement. The last step is the issuance of a binding decision either by arbitration, or by an arbitral tribunal, or through the court directly.

If the problem could not be solved, it is necessary to repeat all the previous steps, while trying to be aware of the experiences that arise both in the case of a successful solution to the problem, and in the event that the desired results were not achieved again.

The described stages of conflict resolution contain only some indications, the implementation of which requires the involvement of a person on your part.

All the described stages of a way out of the conflict must be undertaken by both parties in each specific case. The basis for joint searches can be an exchange of opinions, proposals, thoughts about each specific stage.

e) Development of mutually beneficial solutions through negotiations

If you decide that the problem is worth the effort to resolve it, without shying away from the conflict, yielding to each other in some ways and insisting on your own solution, then you should act through negotiations. To find a mutually beneficial solution, you should find common ground. The two paths of such negotiations are through compromise or cooperation.

The information below will help you distinguish between situations in which compromise is preferable and situations in which cooperation is most effective. Choose a compromise when:

• ? the problem is relatively simple and clear;
• ? you do not have much time to resolve the conflict or you want to resolve it as quickly as possible;
• ? it would be better to reach an interim agreement, and then return to this problem and re-analyze its hidden causes;
• ? the problem and its solution are not too important for both parties;
• ? you failed to achieve a solution through cooperation, or you failed to achieve your own through the use of your own power. Choose cooperation when:
• ? the subject of the dispute is clearly complex and requires detailed discussion and the development of a compromise solution;
• ? both parties are willing to spend time choosing hidden needs and interests;
• ? for both parties, their interests are very important and compromise is unacceptable for them;
• ? the parties are friendly to each other, ready to listen and respect the opposite point of view;
• ? both sides want a long-term agreement, not a temporary one, and do not want to delay it.

Thus, the proposed general model can be easily adapted to negotiation. You start by working on your emotions and taking control of them. Then you listen carefully to the other side, their interests, needs and desires, and at the same time make it clear that the words of the other person and other people have been heard by you. In doing so, you state your own desires and interests, describing them as specifically (and honestly) as possible. Finally, you move on to the stage of collecting intuitively found solutions, the number of which should not be limited. After that, you consider all possible options, choosing the best one that satisfies both parties. Your conflict will be resolved, and each of the participants will benefit.

Page
16

When justifying a management decision, it is important to be able not only to identify key, main and secondary factors. It is necessary to soberly assess which of them can be influenced most significantly. Before making a management decision, it is necessary to make a forecast of the control object. Mentally imagine and evaluate possible options for the development of the control object in the future, thereby building a predictive model. It allows you to answer the question: “What will happen?”.

The forecast should assume three main options for future changes in the control object:

1) the future under the condition of the most unfavorable set of circumstances: the worst possible scenario;

2) the best possible scenario for the development of events;

3) the most probable forecast for the development of the control object.

The fourth stage of preparing decisions is called building goal models. This model allows you to answer the question: “What do we want?”.

In order for the goals not to turn into idle slogans, it is necessary to develop clear criteria for achieving goals at all levels.

Once the goals are defined, management decisions can be made. It should answer the question "What to do?". The sixth stage in making a managerial decision is the answer to the question: "How to do it?".

Implementation of the decision into practice is the seventh, most difficult stage of management activity. The eighth stage is the evaluation of the performance results. The next ninth stage is the decision to continue or terminate the activity. The last, tenth stage is the generalization of the experience gained. This is also an independent very important stage, since learning by doing is practically one of the most effective ways to improve the performance of a leader. Assessing the state of affairs in the organization, it is necessary first of all to determine the condition of the people working in it, their quantity and quality. It is important to assess their professional readiness, moral qualities, goals and interests, identify social groups and the nature of relationships both within groups and between them, determine group interests, etc. Thus, sound management decisions, competent management of employees and teams are important conditions for preventing conflicts between people, maintaining a good socio-psychological climate in teams. Competent from a psychological point of view, management, competent mutual assessment by superiors and subordinates of the results of employees' activities can prevent a significant part of conflicts between them. The main positive method of conflict resolution is negotiation.

There are three types of joint decisions of negotiators:

Compromise, or "middle solution";

Asymmetric solution, relative compromise;

Finding a fundamentally new solution through cooperation.

There are various approaches to the classification of negotiations. One of them is based on the allocation of various goals of their participants.

1. Negotiations on the extension of existing agreements.

2. Negotiations on normalization. They are carried out with the aim of transferring conflict relations to more constructive communication of opponents. Often conducted with the participation of a third party.

3. Negotiations for redistribution. One of the parties demands changes in their favor at the expense of the other. These demands are usually accompanied by threats from the attacking side.

4. Negotiations on the creation of new conditions. Their goal is to form new relationships, conclude new agreements.

5. Negotiate to achieve side effects. Secondary issues are resolved (demonstration of peacefulness, clarification of positions, diversion of attention, etc.).

Depending on the goals pursued by the negotiators, there are various functions of negotiations.

Informational (the parties are interested in the exchange of views, but are not ready for any reason for joint action);

Communicative (establishing new connections, relationships);

Regulation and coordination of actions;

Control (for example, regarding the implementation of agreements);

Distractions (one of the parties seeks to buy time to regroup and build up forces);

Propaganda (allows one of the parties to show themselves in a favorable light in the eyes of the public);

Procrastination (one of the parties goes to negotiations in order to inspire hope in the opponent to solve the problem, to calm her down).

Negotiations as a complex process, heterogeneous in terms of tasks, consists of several stages: preparation for negotiations, the process of their conduct, analysis of the results, and implementation of the agreements reached.

Psychological mechanisms of conducting the negotiation process. There are the following mechanisms: coordination of goals and interests; striving for mutual trust of the parties; ensuring a balance of power and mutual control of the parties. Another psychological negotiation mechanism is to ensure a balance of power and mutual control of the parties. This lies in the fact that during the negotiations the parties seek to maintain the initial or emerging balance of power and control over the actions of the other side. In this organization, the director needs to show rigidity and control over subordinates. The director of this enterprise faces the problem of choosing tactics to influence an individual employee, how an employee can behave in a given situation, what will be the behavior and, most importantly, the reaction of a person. Thus, the head of the enterprise must take into account the characteristics of each employee individually, his psychological traits, character, empathy for people, behavior in a team. The manager asks himself two questions: “How long will it take me to prove my point?” and “With what strength and activity will I communicate with other people?” The developed program makes it possible to present everything that directly concerns the conflict itself and the participants in conflict actions. When conducting and analyzing this work, the director must each time carefully and reliably prepare for all upcoming conversations, meetings and negotiations with conflicting people. The director should without fail identify the conflicting parties to the conflict, who is more prone to conflict, and who constantly turns out to be a kind of “scapegoat”. This topic allows you to identify troublemakers for the organization.

Evaluation of the effectiveness of the proposed activities

The proposed measures to resolve conflicts are one of the most effective methods of conflict management in the organization "LLC" TRADING HOUSE "STM". Using these methods of conflict resolution in the organization, a strategy and tactics for the development of the enterprise are developed, plans and management decisions are justified, their implementation is monitored, a comparative analysis of marketing activities is carried out, which includes a comparison of the actual development of events with the expected one for a certain period of time, analysis of specific consumers and assessment by the latter of the quality of manufactured goods, an assessment of the financial and economic activities of the enterprise, its financial stability in the market is carried out. The developed methodological toolkit makes it possible to study the internal and external environment of the company, evaluate the performance of the entire enterprise, its structural divisions, and individual employees. The role of the analysis of conflict resolution methods in the organization as a means of managing a commercial enterprise is increasing every year. First, the need for a steady increase in the efficiency of labor productivity. Secondly, to reduce staff turnover in the organization. And, thirdly, to increase the profit of the enterprise.

MANAGEMENT AND ECONOMY

EVALUATION OF THE EFFICIENCY OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MANAGEMENT STRATEGY OF ORGANIZATIONAL

CONFLICTS

A.A. VORONOV, Doctor of Economics, Professor of the Department of Economics and Management E-mail: [email protected] A.R. MURATOVA, Candidate of Economic Sciences, Senior Lecturer, Department of Economics and Management E-mail: [email protected] Krasnodar Cooperative Institute

The article presents the author's strategy for managing labor conflicts in the organization and the algorithm for introducing proposals into the management strategy of a particular economic unit. An assessment of the effectiveness of the implementation of the strategy for managing labor conflicts at the micro level was carried out, a methodology for conducting an assessment based on the calculation of a number of aggregate indices was described. Graphs illustrating the dynamics of the calculated indicators are constructed. Conclusions about the effectiveness of the strategy are formulated, ways of its improvement are outlined.

Key words: strategy, labor conflict, protest activity, contradictions, level of corporate culture, negotiation practice.

The transitional stage of development of the Russian economy is accompanied by intensive economic, social, political and spiritual transformations that change the nature of social relations. In the context of globalization in Russia, there is an aggravation of social contradictions and an increase in the growth of conflicts.

In a market economic system, the interests of employers and employees are inherently different. The employee is the owner of his labor force, realizing which in the labor market, he receives payment for labor from the entrepreneur, who has the right of ownership of the means of production. The reproductive function of wages is manifested in the provision of normal conditions for the reproduction of the labor force. In addition, wages are the main source of income for the worker and his family, so the worker is interested in increasing it. For the employer, the wages of employees are one of the items of his costs, the reduction of which allows him to increase his profits.

The conflict is a real and objective manifestation of the contradictions that constantly exist in people's lives, since without them the development of either an individual, or groups of people, or society as a whole is impossible. However, we must not forget the destructive consequences of the development of labor conflicts. Often conflict or a conflict situation is the cause of

stressful situations in the course of work.

The subject of social conflict are those contradictions that arise between the parties to the conflict and which they are trying to resolve through confrontation. In a market economy, the difference in goals is the nature of the relationship between the owners of capital and labor. As a result of contradictions in the social and labor sphere, disagreements are generated, which are the subject of labor disputes. Unlike the subject of the conflict, which is expressed in contradictions between the parties to the conflict, which they are trying to resolve through confrontation, the object of the conflict is a part of the reality in which its subjects are involved.

A labor conflict differs from other types of conflicts in an organization not only in its specific subject, but also in its subject composition. The parties to this type of conflict are always an employee or a group of employees, on the one hand, and the administration, on the other. The state in labor conflicts acts as an employer, and trade unions and other public organizations - as representatives of an employee or a group of employees. Sometimes an interpersonal conflict in an organization, the participants of which are an employee and a representative of the administration, is presented as a labor conflict. It is necessary to carefully identify and analyze the causes of the conflict.

The system of social partnership is aimed at combating systemic causes and reduces the intensity and scale of mixed causes. The use of social partnership tools in conflict management allows you to resolve not only a specific conflict, but also creates conditions for reducing the risk of resumption or the emergence of prerequisites for the development of new conflicts in an organization, economy, region, country. The main principles of the formation of social partnership at the present stage are borrowed from the practice of developed countries. However, there is no single model of social partnership. The institution of socio-economic partnership is currently in its infancy in Russia, but it is he who should act as a consolidating factor in relations between business and the state.

The factors hindering the strengthening of social partnership in Russia include

sufficient institutionalization of its subjects, weak social responsibility of the parties to partnerships, underdevelopment of the system of corporate ethics and culture of most business entities, legal nihilism and inaction of trade unions regarding informing workers about their labor rights, dependence of some trade unions on the employer, etc.

The acceleration of the process of establishing a welfare state and the constructive regulation of social and labor relations will entail the strengthening of the national economy and political system.

Of course, the system of social partnership is not limited to the fight against labor conflicts, it is a system of relations and activities that ensure the achievement of a balance of interests of employers, employees and the state. However, we must not forget that the prerequisites for the formation of a system of social partnership in the West appeared as a result of the pressure of the working masses, and achieving a balance of goals and maintaining it is possible only if labor conflicts are prevented or their negative consequences are minimized. Social partnership reflects the historically conditioned compromise of interests of the main subjects of economic processes.

In the coming years, the Russian economy will operate in a more challenging environment of oil price stabilization and moderate capital flows to emerging markets. With this in mind, Russia needs to develop and implement a new development model that would rely not on expanding demand from external sources, but on intensifying the investment process, improving business conditions, modernizing the economy and preparing the transition to innovative development. Therefore, a prerequisite for the further development of the economy is a radical improvement of institutions.

The use of social partnership tools in managing the development of labor conflicts, especially in the early stages of development, to eliminate the systemic causes of their occurrence will allow:

1) resolve contradictions in the social and labor sphere;

2) eliminate the possibility of resumption of conflicts by eliminating systemic causes;

3) ensure further interaction of participants in social and labor relations on the basis of constructive cooperation;

4) create conditions for the further development of the system of social partnership itself;

5) increase the competitiveness of the national economy through the development of human potential and the creation of conditions for the future development of business based on the principle of social justice.

Effective management of labor conflicts requires a comprehensive strategy for the development of the organization's management system, the development of social partnership at all levels and the improvement of the legal framework in the regulation of labor relations. The scientific literature notes that in understanding strategic planning it is necessary to avoid two extremes: on the one hand, understanding the strategic plan as an ordinary urgent plan, all the features of which are associated exclusively with a long time period (i.e. the usual long-term plan), and on the other hand , reducing the strategic plan to a set of unclear, only qualitatively characterized areas of socio-economic development without indicating any specific measures that ensure the achievement of the goals set.

As a result of a research search to improve the personnel management system of a commercial organization, proposals were formulated for the formation of a strategy for managing social and labor conflicts at the corporate level using social partnership tools. The proposals have been successfully implemented and are being used in the process of managing the organization LLC “MAGIK”, Krasnodar.

The process of forming and implementing a strategy includes solving interrelated tasks: analyzing a conflict situation, defining goals, developing strategies for achieving goals, implementing and implementing strategies, and evaluating results. The application of a strategic approach to the process of managing labor conflicts requires certain conditions. For example, D.P. Zerkin refers to these:

An objective understanding of the conflict as a reality;

Recognition of the possibility of active influence on the conflict and its transformation into a factor of self-regulation and self-correction of the system;

The presence of material, political and spiritual resources, as well as the legal basis for management, the ability of public actors to coordinate their positions and interests, views and orientations.

To this list I would like to add a certain share of the internal social responsibility of the organization. In companies that do not comply with the norms established by law, stipulated in labor and collective agreements, uncontrollable labor conflicts will constantly take place. Therefore, the social responsibility of an organization is a prerequisite for the implementation of strategies for managing labor conflicts at the micro level, and the greater the share of social responsibility, the more productive the implementation of this strategy will be. In order to increase the level of social responsibility of business in 2010, it was decided to hold a regional competition "The Best Collective Agreement of the Krasnodar Territory" once every two years. The regional stage of the All-Russian competition “Russian Organization of High Social Efficiency”1 is also held.

At the regional level, in the system of social partnership, sectoral agreements are of great importance, the parties to which, as a rule, are associations of employers, regional territorial bodies of trade unions and, in some cases, departments of the region. For example, one of the parties to the Industry Agreement on Construction and Building Materials Industry of the Krasnodar Territory for 2013-2016 is the Department of Construction of the Krasnodar Territory.

Resolution of existing contradictions,

Formation of a favorable microclimate in the team,

Prevention of labor conflicts.

Accordingly, the development, implementation and

evaluation of its effectiveness will be carried out in these areas. The development of measures for the management of labor conflicts and the choice of appropriate tools were carried out in accordance with the goals set (Table 1).

"Analytical information on the development of social partnership in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation following the results of 2010. URL: ohranatruda.ru/news/files/informatciya1.pdf.

Table 1

Goals Tasks Instruments Activities

Strategic (long-term) Reducing the level of protest activity of the staff. Formation of partnerships in the team Collective negotiations. Collective agreement Corporate social responsibility. Investments in human capital Project preparation and conclusion of a collective agreement. Development of programs for training and advanced training of employees. Preparation of a draft "corporate culture code". Monitoring the fulfillment of contractual obligations

Medium-term Decreased intensity and scope of labor conflicts. Evaluation of the effectiveness of measures to resolve the conflict Collective negotiations. Corporate social responsibility. Questionnaires, surveys and trainings to identify protest moods and conflict situations. Personnel development programs Negotiating the settlement and prevention of labor disputes. Preparation and implementation of programs to improve professional ethics and corporate culture. Implementation of training and advanced training programs for employees

Short-term Resolution (settlement) of conflicts. Elimination of situational causes of labor conflicts. Liquidation of consequences of labor conflicts Collective negotiations. Personnel development programs. Programs to reduce social and labor conflicts Negotiations on the settlement and prevention of labor disputes. Organization of events for the formation and development of corporate culture. Attracting business coaches to create a favorable microclimate in the team

To assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the implementation of the proposed strategy, several indicators were selected that are measured at a quantitative level. Among them is the aggregate index "Level of protest activity", calculated on the basis of data obtained in the course of a monthly survey of company employees during the evaluation stage of the implementation of proposals.

Methodology for calculating the index "Level of protest activity". The index is measured in points from 0 to 100. An index value of less than 50 points indicates a predominance of positive answers or positive assessments, an index value of less than 50 points indicates a predominance of negative answers and negative assessments in respondents' answers. The value of 50 points is achieved with a balance between positive and negative answers and with a 50% answer to the third question.

This index is aggregate, as it is built on the basis of several indicators, namely the answers of respondents to five questions:

1) Have you noticed protest moods in the team during the last month?

2) Do you think that in the last month the readiness of your colleagues to come into conflict with the administration has been increasing or decreasing?

3) Are you personally dissatisfied and prone to conflict?

4) If there is a protest action next week, will you take part in it?

5) In your opinion, what percentage of employees today is ready to enter into conflict with the administration (for example, to express dissatisfaction)?

For each of the first 4 questions, a diffuse index is built. For each positive answer, 100 points are assigned, for each negative - 0 points. For the 5th question, a number of points equal to the named percentage is assigned. The result is averaged over all respondents, and the final index "Level of protest activity" is determined by adding the indices of all questions and dividing by 5.

Elements of the strategy for managing social and labor conflicts began to be implemented from 06/01/2012 to assess the effectiveness of the implementation of proposals. The first survey to collect data for the calculation of performance indicators was conducted before the start of the strategy on May 25 with a sample of 86 people. Then the surveys were repeated monthly in the period from 25th to 26th day from May to October 2012 inclusive. As a result, the authors were

The dynamics of the level of protest activity in the organization, shown in fig. one.

The rise in the level of protest activity in the team, observed in the first months of the implementation of the strategy for managing labor conflicts with a peak in August 2012, is a normal reaction of the work team to the introduction of innovations, which is based on psychophysiological features, however, when developing a theoretical model of strategies, this fact was not was taken into account. Therefore, some adjustment is needed, namely, the introduction of adaptation measures at the initial stage of the strategy implementation. Among these activities are:

1) wide dissemination of the necessary information about upcoming changes;

2) involvement of a wide range of employees in the process of implementing changes, this will cause a sense of responsibility of each participant for the result;

3) carrying out, if necessary, personnel changes.

Administrative pressure as a result of innovations is one of the methods for adapting the team to changes. However, the authors consider this method to be destructive, lying outside the framework of partnerships, and therefore unacceptable for effective personnel management.

A decrease in the level of protest activity after the end of the period of adaptation of the company's employees to the ongoing changes indicates a positive trend in management processes and proves the effectiveness of the proposed changes. The authors believe that in the future the rate of decline in the level of protest activity will decrease and stabilize at a certain level, for

Rice. 1. Dynamics of the level of protest activity in the staff of MAGIK LLC in 2012

to maintain which it is necessary to monitor the state of the index "Level of protest mood" and, if necessary, adjust short- and medium-term activities in accordance with the identified goals and tasks.

To assess the change in the level of corporate culture, the aggregate index "Level of corporate culture" was calculated based on data obtained in the course of monthly surveys of the staff.

Methodology for calculating the "Level of corporate culture" index. The index is measured in points from 0 to 100. An index value of less than 50 points indicates a predominance of positive assessments, a value of less than 50 points indicates a predominance of negative assessments in respondents' answers. This index is aggregate, as it is built on the basis of several indicators, namely, the answers of respondents to three questions:

1) Do you consider the level of corporate culture in the organization to be high or low?

2) Do you think intercompany relations have improved or worsened in the last month?

For each of the first two questions, a diffuse index is constructed. For the answers “high”, “improved”, 100 points are assigned for each, for the answers “low” and “worse” - 0 points, for the answers “average” and “did not change” - 50 points. For the third question, a number of points is assigned equal to the number of points given by the respondents, multiplied by 10. The result is averaged over all respondents, and the final index "Level of corporate culture" is determined by adding the indices of all questions and dividing by 3.

The survey of employees to collect data and calculate the numerical indicator was carried out similarly to the survey on the level of protest activity with a sample of 86 people. As a result, the authors compiled the dynamics of the level of corporate culture in the organization, shown in Fig. 2.

The high growth rate of the “Level of corporate culture” index indicates the effectiveness of the measures taken to form

September October

o k i k n y L o s

the formation and development of the corporate culture of the enterprise, as well as their positive assessment by the personnel of the organization and the readiness of the team to actively participate in the development of corporate norms and rules.

To supplement the obtained numerical indicators with qualitative characteristics, we present the results of a survey of employees on the subject of their attitude to changes in the organization's management system (Table 2). Questioning of employees was carried out in 2 stages - before the start of the implementation of strategic actions and after 5 months. project implementation. The questionnaire included 5 open-ended questions.

An analysis of the data obtained during the survey of personnel before the start of the implementation of changes in management and at the time of assessing their effectiveness shows that most employees felt the effectiveness of the measures taken. The number of positively evaluating the relationship between the workforce and the administration increased from 24.4% to 36.1%, as well as the number of employees who consider it possible to conduct a dialogue between the workforce and management representatives (from 40.7% to 55.8% ). It should be noted that the percentage of those wishing to change jobs remains almost unchanged at a high level. The authors propose to introduce programs

June July August September October

Rice. 2. Dynamics of the level of corporate culture in the team of MAGIK LLC in 2012

additional social guarantees, which will help ensure the permanence of staff and prevent the turnover of qualified employees. In order to clarify the reasons for the dissatisfaction of employees with work in the organization, an additional question was asked: “What does not satisfy you in the work of the company?”. The possibility of answering the question was limited by the choice of only one answer (Fig. 3). 13.3% of respondents noted an uncomfortable psychological climate, 17.3% of employees are not satisfied with the high intensity of work, among other answers - the lack of career prospects (26.3%), low wages (25.6%), inconsistency of work regimes and recreation (17.5%).

Respondents cite the reasons for the level of wages and the lack of

table 2

The ratio of employees to changes in the management system in 2012 in % of the total number of respondents

Question Rather yes Rather no Difficult to answer Rather yes Rather no Difficult to answer

1. Do you feel changes in 17.5 55.8 26.7 80.2 3.5 16.3

control system?

2. Do you think the relationship 24.4 40.7 34.9 36.1 30.2 33.7

between your administration

firms and workforce favorable?

3. In your opinion, is it involved 12.7 73.3 14 16.2 55.8 28

team in taking control

solutions?

4. In your opinion, it is possible 40.7 17.4 41.9 55.8 12.8 31.4

whether the dialogue between administrations and

work team?

5. With a favorable opportunity - 39.5 8.2 52.3 34.9 9.3 55.8

Would you change your job?

career prospects, in connection with which it can be concluded that the desire to change jobs at a favorable opportunity is caused more by external factors than by elements of the management system. Despite this, attention should be paid to dissatisfaction with the high intensity of work and the discrepancy between work and rest regimes.

Despite the readiness of the management of MAGIK LLC to develop negotiation practices, the low percentage of employees who indicate participation in managerial decision-making indicates the inefficiency of this direction of the strategy and requires additional measures.

In general, the implementation of the strategy for managing social and labor conflicts at the enterprise, which is based on the proposals formulated in the course of the study, is considered to be successfully implemented, however, it is necessary to evaluate its effectiveness even after a longer period of time, since its main goals and objectives are strategically oriented.

To form an effective system for managing social and labor conflicts, the proposed methods for developing a social partnership system at the corporate level are an addition to the system for developing social partnership at the regional level, developed and presented by the authors in a previous publication on the regulation of social and labor relations.

A strategic approach to the management of the organization's personnel and labor conflicts, as well as the development of partnerships, will allow Russian companies to reach a higher and more civilized level of the personnel management system and the management of the organization as a whole. Ignoring the situational causes that form social and labor contradictions will entail the development of conflict situations, the destruction of partnerships between the administration and the team, which will undoubtedly lead to a decrease in labor productivity, disruptions in the work of the company and a decrease in its competitiveness.

Bibliography

1. Bambaeva N.Ya. Methodology for the development and implementation of a strategic plan for social

Rice. 3. Reasons for staff dissatisfaction with work in the organization:

1 - high labor intensity; 2 - uncomfortable psychological climate; 3 - lack of career prospects; 4 - low wages; 5 - discrepancy between work and rest regimes

economic development of the territory // Regional economy: theory and practice. 2006. No. 7. S. 20-24.

2. Voronov A.A., Muratova A.R. Directions for the development of social partnership as a mechanism for resolving labor conflicts // National interests: priorities and security. 2013. No. 14. P.2-9.

3. Zerkin D.P. Fundamentals of conflictology: a course of lectures. Rostov-on-Don: Phoenix. 1998. 480 p.

4. Kudrin A. Consequences of the crisis and prospects for the socio-economic development of Russia // Questions of Economics. 2011. No. 3. C. 4-18.

5. Lazarenko A.L., Kuznetsova I.V. Socio-economic partnership in Russia and prospects for its development // Regional economy: theory and practice. 2008. No. 20. C. 2-7.

6. Muratova A.R. Resolution of social and labor contradictions through the system of social partnership // Regional economy: theory and practice. 2012. No. 42. S. 8-13.

7. Nekhoda E.V. Social development of a person and changing ideas about the subject of labor in the system of labor relations // Bulletin of the Tomsk State University. 2008. No. 3. P.23-45.

8. Panina E.S. Labor conflicts at enterprises // Fundamentals of Economics, Management and Law. 2012. No. 6. P. 132-135.

9. Cherepkova N.V., Chugunkin S.A. Socio-psychological climate as an integral part of the labor process in a team. Bulletin of medical Internet conferences. 2011. Volume 1. No. 1. S. 45-48.

management and economy

ASSESSMENT OF STRATEGY EFFECTIVENESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICTS MANAGEMENT

Aleksandr A. VORONOV, Adeliia R. MURATOVA

The article reveals the content of the authors" labor-conflict strategy in an organization . It submits the algorithm of introduction of suggestions in the strategy of an economic unit"s management. The authors estimate the labor-conflicts efficiency at a micro-level of strategy realization. The submitted diagrams show the dynamics of the estimated figures . The authors make certain conclusions on the efficiency of a strategy, and they outline the ways of improving.

Keywords: strategy, labor conflict, protest activity, contradiction, corporate culture level, negotiation practice

1. Bambaeva N . Ia. Metodika razrabotki i realizatsii strategicheskogo plana sotsial "no-ekonomicheskogo razvitiia territorii. Regional "naia ekonomika: teoriia i praktika - Regional economics: theory and practice, 2006, no. 7, pp. 20-24.

2. Voronov A.A., Muratova A.R. Napravleniia razvitiia sotsial "nogo partnerstva kak mekhanizma razresheniia trudovykh konfliktov. Natsional"nye interesy:pri-oritety i bezopasnost" - National interests: priorities and security, 2013, no. 14, pp. 2-9.

3 . Zerkin D. P. Osnovy konfliktologii: kurs lektsii. Rostov-on-Don, Feniks Publ., 1998, 480 p.

4 . Kudrin A . Posledstviia krizisa i perspektivy sotsial "no-ekonomicheskogo razvitiia Rossii. Voprosy ekonomiki - Problems of economics, 2011, no. 3, pp. 4-18.

5. Lazarenko A.L., Kuznetsova I.V. Sotsial "no-ekonomicheskoe partnerstvo v Rossii i perspektivy ego

development. Regional "naia ekonomika: teoriia i praktika - Regional economics: theory and practice, 2008, no. 20, pp. 2-7.

6. Muratova A . R. Razreshenie sotsial "no-tru-dovykh protivorechii cherez sistemu sotsial" nogo partnerstva. Regional "naia ekonomika: teoriia i praktika - Regional economics: theory and practice, 2012, no. 42, pp. 8-13.

7. Nekhoda E.V. Sotsial "noe razvitie cheloveka i izmenenie predstavlenii o sub" ekte truda v sisteme trudovykh otnoshenii. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta-Bulletin of Tomsk State University, 2008, no. 3, pp. 23-45.

8. Panina E.S. Trudovye konflikty na predpriiati-iakh. Osnovy ekonomiki, upravleniia i prava - Principles of economics, management and law, 2012, no. 6, pp. 132-135.

9. Cherepkova N.V., Chugunkin S.A. Sotsial "no-psikhologicheskii klimat kak neot" emlemaia chast "trudovogo protsessa v kollektive . Biulleten " med-itsinskikh internet-konferentsii - Bulletin of medical Internet-conferences, 2011, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 45-48.

Aleksandr A. VORONOV

Krasnodar Cooperative Institute, Krasnodar, Krasnodar region, Russian Federation voronov. [email protected]. ru Adeliia R. MURATOVA Krasnodar Cooperative Institute, Krasnodar, Krasnodar region, Russian Federation muratova . [email protected]. en