The question of the nature of the conflict causes a lot of controversy. Here are the opinions of several modern Russian scientists.
A. G. Zdravomyslov. "This is a form of relationship between potential or actual subjects of social action, the motivation of which is due to opposing values and norms, interests and needs."
E. M. Babosov. “A social conflict is the ultimate case of social contradictions, expressed in various forms of struggle between individuals and various social communities, aimed at achieving economic, social, political, spiritual interests and goals, neutralizing or eliminating an imaginary rival and not allowing him to achieve the realization of his interests.”
Yu. G. Zaprudsky. "Social conflict is a clear or hidden state of confrontation between objectively divergent interests, goals and trends in the development of social subjects ... a special form of historical movement towards a new social unity."
What unites these opinions?
As a rule, one side has some tangible and intangible (primarily power, prestige, authority, information, etc.) values, while the other side is either completely devoid of them or does not have enough. At the same time, it is not excluded that the predominance may be imaginary, existing only in the imagination of one of the parties. But if one of the partners feels disadvantaged in the possession of something of the above, then a conflict state arises.
It can be said that social conflict is a special interaction of individuals, groups and associations in the clash of their incompatible views, positions and interests; confrontation of social groups over the diverse resources of life support.
Two points of view are expressed in the literature: one is about the dangers of social conflict, the other is about its benefits. In essence, we are talking about the positive and negative functions of conflicts. Social conflicts can lead to both disintegrative and integrative consequences. The first of these consequences increases bitterness, destroys normal partnerships, distracts people from solving pressing problems. The latter help to solve problems, find a way out of the current situation, strengthen the cohesion of people, allow them to more clearly understand their interests. It is almost impossible to avoid conflict situations, but it is quite possible to ensure that they are resolved in a civilized manner.
There are many different social conflicts in society. They differ in their scale, type, composition of participants, causes, goals and consequences. The problem of typology arises in all sciences that take place with a multitude of heterogeneous objects. The most simple and easily explainable typology is based on the identification of spheres of manifestation of the conflict. According to this criterion, economic, political, interethnic, domestic, cultural and social (in the narrow sense) conflicts are distinguished. Let us explain that the latter include conflicts arising from conflicts of interests in the sphere of labor, health care, social security, education; for all their independence, they are closely related to such types of conflicts as economic and political.
Changes in social relations in modern Russia are accompanied by an expansion of the sphere of manifestation of conflicts, since they involve not only large social groups, but also territories, both nationally homogeneous and inhabited by various ethnic groups. In turn, interethnic conflicts (you will learn about them later) give rise to territorial, confessional, migration and other problems. Most modern researchers believe that in the social relations of modern Russian society there are two types of hidden conflicts that have not yet been clearly manifested. The first is the conflict between hired workers and the owners of the means of production. This is largely due to the fact that after half a century of social security and all the rights in the field of social policy and labor relations that they were endowed in Soviet society, it is difficult for workers to understand and accept their new status as a wage worker forced to work in market conditions. The other is the conflict between the poor majority of the country and the wealthy minority, accompanying the accelerated process of social stratification.
Many conditions influence the development of social conflict. These include the intentions of the parties to the conflict (to reach a compromise or completely eliminate the opponent); attitude to the means of physical (including armed) violence; the level of trust between the parties (as far as they are ready to follow certain rules of interaction); the adequacy of assessments by the conflicting parties of the true state of affairs.
All social conflicts go through three stages: pre-conflict, directly conflict and post-conflict.
Let's consider a specific example. At one enterprise, because of the real threat of bankruptcy, it was necessary to reduce the staff by a quarter. This prospect worried almost everyone: employees were afraid of layoffs, and management had to decide who to fire. When it was no longer possible to postpone the decision, the administration announced a list of those who were to be fired in the first place. On the part of the candidates for dismissal, legitimate demands to explain why they were being fired followed, applications began to be received by the commission on labor disputes, and some decided to go to court. The settlement of the conflict took several months, the company continued to work with a smaller number of employees. The pre-conflict stage is the period during which contradictions accumulate (in this case, caused by the need to reduce the staff). The direct conflict stage is a set of certain actions. It is characterized by a clash of opposing sides (administration - candidates for dismissal).
The most open form of expression of social conflicts can be various kinds of mass actions: presentation of demands to the authorities by discontented social groups; use of public opinion in support of their demands or alternative programs; direct social protests.
Protest forms can be rallies, demonstrations, picketing, civil disobedience campaigns, strikes, hunger strikes, etc. Organizers of social protest actions must be clearly aware of what specific tasks can be solved with the help of a particular action and what kind of public support they can rely on. -read. Thus, a slogan that is sufficient to organize a picket can hardly be used to organize a campaign of civil disobedience. (What historical examples of such actions do you know?)
To successfully resolve a social conflict, it is necessary to determine its true causes in a timely manner. The opposing sides should be interested in a joint search for ways to eliminate the causes that gave rise to their rivalry. At the post-conflict stage, measures are taken to finally eliminate contradictions (in the example under consideration, the dismissal of employees, if possible, the removal of socio-psychological tension in the relationship between the administration and the remaining employees, the search for optimal ways to avoid such a situation in the future).
Conflict resolution can be partial or complete. Complete resolution means the end of the conflict, a radical change in the entire conflict situation. At the same time, a kind of psychological restructuring takes place: the “image of the enemy” is transformed into the “image of a partner”, the attitude to fight is replaced by the attitude to cooperation. The main disadvantage of a partial resolution of the conflict is that only its external form changes, but the reasons that gave rise to the confrontation remain.
Let's look at some of the most common methods of conflict resolution.
The method of avoiding conflict means leaving or threatening to leave, it consists in avoiding meetings with the enemy. But the avoidance of conflict does not mean its elimination, because its cause remains. The negotiation method assumes that the parties exchange views. This will help reduce the severity of the conflict, understand the arguments of the opponent, objectively assess both the true balance of power and the very possibility of reconciliation. Negotiations allow you to consider alternative situations, achieve mutual understanding, reach agreement, consensus, open the way to cooperation. The method of using mediation is expressed as follows: the warring parties resort to the service of intermediaries (public organizations, individuals, etc.). What conditions are necessary for successful conflict resolution? First of all, it is necessary to determine its causes in a timely and accurate manner; identify objectively existing contradictions, interests, goals. The parties to the conflict must free themselves from distrust of each other and thereby become participants in the negotiations in order to publicly and convincingly defend their positions and consciously create an atmosphere of public exchange of views. Without such a mutual interest of the parties in overcoming contradictions, mutual recognition of the interests of each of them, a joint search for ways to overcome the conflict is practically impossible. All participants in the negotiations should show a tendency towards consensus, i.e., to agree.
Depending on how effective conflict management is, its consequences will become functional or dysfunctional, which, in turn, will affect the possibility of future conflicts: eliminate the causes of conflicts or create them.
There are the following main functional (positive) consequences of conflicts for the organization:
1) the problem is solved in a way that suits all parties, and as a result, people feel involved in solving an important problem for them;
2) a joint decision is implemented faster and better;
3) the parties gain experience of cooperation in resolving disputes and can use it in the future;
4) effective resolution of conflicts between the leader and subordinates destroys the so-called "submission syndrome" - the fear of openly expressing one's opinion, different from the opinion of seniors;
5) relations between people improve;
6) people cease to consider the existence of disagreements as "evil", always leading to bad consequences.
The main dysfunctional (negative) consequences of conflicts:
1) unproductive, competitive relationships between people;
2) lack of desire for cooperation, good relations;
3) the idea of the opposite side as an "enemy", of one's own position as exclusively positive, of the opponent's position as only negative. And people who think that they alone own the truth are dangerous;
4) curtailment or complete cessation of interaction with the opposite party, which impedes the solution of production problems.
5) the belief that "winning" the conflict is more important than solving the real problem;
6) feelings of resentment, dissatisfaction, bad mood, staff turnover.
Of course, both the negative and positive consequences of conflicts cannot be absolutized, considered outside the specific situation. The real ratio of functional and dysfunctional consequences of the conflict directly depends on their nature, their causes, as well as on the skillful management of conflicts.
4. Handling conflicts.
4.1. Leadership attitude towards conflict.
There are four types of manager's attitude to a conflict situation.
1. The desire to avoid trouble, suffering. The elder acts as if nothing happened. He does not notice the conflict, avoids resolving the issue, lets things take their course, does not violate apparent well-being, does not complicate his own life. His moral infantilism often ends in disaster. Discipline violations grow like a snowball. More and more people are drawn into the conflict. Unresolved disputes destroy the team, provoke its members to even more gross violations of discipline.
2. Realistic attitude to reality. The manager is patient, sober about what is happening. He adapts to the requirements of the conflicting ones. In other words, he follows their lead, trying to mitigate conflict relations with persuasion and exhortation. He behaves in such a way that, on the one hand, he does not disturb the team and the administration, and, on the other hand, does not spoil relations with people. But persuasion, concessions lead to the fact that the elder is no longer respected and laughed at.
3. Active attitude to what happened. The leader recognizes the presence of a critical situation and does not hide the conflict from superiors and colleagues. He does not ignore what happened and does not try to please "both ours and yours", but acts in accordance with his own moral principles and beliefs, ignoring the individual personality traits of conflicting subordinates, the situation in the team, the causes of the conflict. As a result, there is a situation of external well-being, cessation of quarrels, violations of discipline. But at the same time, the lives of members of the team are often crippled, their destinies are broken, and a steady hostility is caused to the boss and the team, and sometimes to the organization as a whole.
4. Creative attitude to conflict. The senior behaves in accordance with the situation and resolves the conflict with the least losses. In this case, he consciously and purposefully, taking into account all the accompanying phenomena, finds a way out of the conflict situation. He takes into account the objective and subjective causes of the conflict, for example, not knowing the motive for insulting one employee to another, he does not make a hasty decision.
A creative attitude, a thorough analysis of what happened is especially necessary when perceiving criticism. If the critic seeks to improve work efficiency, correct shortcomings that interfere with full-fledged work, social work, it is necessary to record valuable advice, try to correct omissions, and in your free time, when the speaker cools down, if necessary, criticize him for tactlessness, explain what criticism should be , and be sure to praise for a serious attitude to work, for the desire to correct shortcomings.
If the critic is settling personal scores or seeking to present himself, to show his integrity, it is best to try to enlist the support of those present and avoid further contact with the speaker. It is useless to explain anything in this case. It is better to calmly explain to those present the reason for the indignation of the critic, to show what caused the desire to “boldly” speak out against the gaps in the work.
Particularly unpleasant forms of criticism are performances in order to improve one's status in the team and criticism in order to receive an emotional charge. In both cases, the conflicting party is not at all interested in the matter. The reason is frankly selfish motives or love for squabbles, the joy of emotional discharge, the need for it. In both situations, one should not succumb to emotional influence, become a target for the critic. If possible, you should leave the room, if not, calmly, with dignity, talk with the team on an interesting topic or do some business, in no case demonstrating contempt for the critic, without stimulating his emotional intensity even more.
These forms of criticism are rarely found in their pure form and are by no means always used consciously and deliberately. Therefore, they are difficult to recognize and correctly interpret. However, having understood their causes, it is easier to determine the goal of the critic and outline tactics for preventing a quarrel and getting out of a conflict situation.
The manager's indifferent attitude to the events in the team, the passive reaction to the seemingly insignificant friction of the employees often cause stable uncontrollable conflicts. Therefore, it is advisable not to bring things to serious clashes, not to wait until good relations are established by themselves. It is necessary, setting a specific goal for the subordinate, organizing his activities aimed at achieving this goal, cultivating camaraderie, friendship in the team, increasing the cohesion of its members, making the team resistant to disagreements and conflicts.
If this is not possible, the conflict has arisen, it is necessary to eliminate it with the least losses for the participants, the team, the manager himself.
In the most general form, the subjective causes of any organizational conflicts related to people, their consciousness and behavior, as a rule, are caused by three factors:
- interdependence and incompatibility of the goals of the parties;
- awareness of this;
- the desire of each of the parties to realize their goals at the expense of the opponent.
1. Resource allocation. In almost any organization, resources are always limited, so the task of management is the rational distribution of materials, people and money between various departments and groups. Since people tend to strive for the maximum receipt of resources and overestimate the significance of their work, the distribution of resources almost inevitably leads to all sorts of conflicts.
2. Interdependence of tasks. The possibility of conflict exists wherever, in the performance of its functions, one person (group) depends on another person (group). In view of the fact that any organization is a system consisting of a number of interdependent elements - departments or people, if one of them does not work adequately, as well as if their activities are not coordinated enough, the interdependence of tasks can cause conflict.
3. Differences in purpose. The possibility of conflict increases with the complexity of organizations, their further structural division and the autonomy associated with it. As a result, individual specialized units (groups) begin to largely independently formulate their goals, which can significantly diverge from the goals of the entire organization. In the practical implementation of autonomous (group) goals, this leads to conflicts.
4. Differences in perceptions and values. Different ideas, interests and desires of people influence their assessment of the situation, lead to a biased perception of it and a corresponding reaction to it. This gives rise to contradictions and conflicts.
5. Differences in behavior and life experience. Differences in life experience, education, length of service, age, value orientations, social characteristics and even just habits hinder mutual understanding and cooperation of people and increase the possibility of conflict.
6. Poor communications. Lack, distortion, and sometimes an excess of information can serve as a cause, effect, and catalyst of conflict. In the latter case, poor communication exacerbates the conflict, making it difficult for the participants to understand each other and the situation as a whole.
This classification of the causes of the conflict can be used in its practical diagnosis, but in general it is rather abstract. R. Dahrendorf offers a more specific classification of the causes of the conflict. Using and supplementing it, the following types of causes of social conflicts can be distinguished:
1. Personal reasons ("personal friction"). These include individual traits, likes and dislikes, psychological and ideological incompatibility, differences in education and life experience, etc.
2. Structural reasons. They show up as imperfections.
- communication structure: lack, distortion or inconsistency of information, weakness of contacts between management and ordinary employees, mistrust and inconsistency of actions between them due to imperfection or disruption of communications, etc.;
- role structure: inconsistency in job descriptions, various formal requirements for an employee, official requirements and personal goals, etc.;
- technical structure: unequal equipment of different departments with equipment, exhausting pace of work, etc.;
- organizational structure: the disproportion of various departments that violates the general rhythm of work, the duplication of their activities, the lack of effective control and responsibility, the conflicting aspirations of formal and informal groups in the organization, etc.;
- power structures: disproportion of rights and duties, competencies and responsibilities, as well as the distribution of power in general, including formal and informal leadership and the struggle for it.
4. Conditions and nature of work. Unhealthy or dangerous working conditions, unhealthy ecological environment, poor relations in the team and with management, dissatisfaction with the content of work, etc. - all this also creates fertile ground for the emergence of conflicts.
5. Distribution relations. Remuneration in the form of wages, bonuses, rewards, social privileges, etc. not only serves as a means of satisfying the diverse needs of people, but is also perceived as an indicator of social prestige and recognition from the leadership. The cause of the conflict may turn out to be not so much the absolute amount of payment, but the distribution relations in the team, evaluated by workers in terms of their fairness.
6. Differences in identification. They are manifested in the tendency of employees to identify themselves mainly with their group (division) and exaggerate their importance and merits, while underestimating the importance of others and forgetting about the overall goals of the organization. This kind of inclination is based on the intensity and emotional coloring of communications in primary groups, the relatively large personal significance of such groups and the issues addressed in them, group interests and group egoism. Causes of this type often determine conflicts between different departments, as well as between individual teams and the center, the leadership of the organization.
7. The desire of the organization to expand and increase its significance. This trend is reflected in the well-known Parkinson's law, according to which every organization seeks to expand its staff, resources and influence, regardless of the amount of work performed. At the heart of the trend towards expansion lies the interest of each unit, and above all real and potential leaders, in obtaining new, including higher and more prestigious positions, resources, power, and authority. On the way to the implementation of the expansion trend, there are usually similar or restraining positions of other departments and management (the center), which tries to limit aspirations and keep the power, control functions and resources of the organization mainly at home. As a result of this kind of relationship, conflicts arise.
8. Difference of starting positions. This may be a different level of education, qualifications and values of the staff, and unequal working conditions and material and technical equipment, etc. various departments. Such reasons lead to misunderstanding, ambiguous perception of tasks and responsibilities, lack of coherence in the activities of interdependent units and, ultimately, to conflicts.
The last three reasons characterize mainly interorganizational conflicts. In real life, conflicts are often generated not by one, but by several reasons, each of which, in turn, is modified depending on the specific situation. However, this does not remove the need to know the causes and sources of conflicts for constructive use and management.
The causes of conflicts largely determine the nature of their consequences.
Negative Consequences of the Conflict
There are two ways to assess the consequences of conflicts: functionalist(integration) and sociological(dialectical). The first of them, which is presented, for example, by the famous American experimental scientist E. Mayo. He considers conflict as a dysfunctional phenomenon that disrupts the normal existence of the organization, reducing the effectiveness of its activities. The functionalist direction focuses on the negative consequences of the conflict. Summarizing the work of various representatives of this direction, we can distinguish the following negative consequences of conflicts:
- destabilization of the organization, generation of chaotic and anarchic processes, reduced controllability;
- distracting staff from the real problems and goals of the organization, shifting these goals towards group selfish interests and ensuring victory over the enemy;
- dissatisfaction of the participants in the conflict with being in the organization, growth of frustrations, depressions, stresses, etc. and, as a result, a decrease in labor productivity, an increase in staff turnover;
- an increase in emotionality and irrationality, hostility and aggressive behavior, distrust of management and others;
- weakening opportunities for communication and cooperation with opponents in the future;
- distracting participants in the conflict from solving the problems of the organization and fruitless waste of their strength, energy, resources and time to fight each other.
In contrast to the functionalists, supporters of the sociological approach to conflicts (they are represented, for example, by the largest modern German conflictologist R. Dahrendorf) consider them as an integral source of social change and development. Under certain conditions, conflicts are functional, positive results for the organization:
- initiating change, renewal, progress. The new is always the negation of the old, and since certain people always stand behind both new and old ideas and forms of organization, any renewal is impossible without conflicts;
- articulation, clear articulation and expression of interests publicizing the real positions of the parties on a particular issue. This allows you to see the urgent problem more clearly and creates fertile ground for its solution;
- mobilization of attention, interest and resources for solving problems and, as a result, saving the organization's time and money. Very often urgent issues, especially those that concern the entire organization, are not resolved until a conflict arises, because in the case of conflict-free, “normal” functioning, out of respect for organizational norms and traditions, as well as out of a sense of politeness, managers and employees often bypass sharp questions;
- the formation of a sense of belonging among the participants in the conflict to the decision taken as a result of it, which facilitates its implementation;
- encouraging more thoughtful and informed action in order to prove their case;
- encouraging participants to interact and develop new, more effective solutions eliminating the problem itself or its significance. This usually happens when the parties show understanding of each other's interests and realize the disadvantage of deepening the conflict;
- development of the ability of the parties to the conflict to cooperate in the future, when the conflict is resolved as a result of the interaction of both parties. Competitive fair competition enhances the mutual respect and trust necessary for further cooperation;
- relaxation of psychological tension in relations between people, a clearer clarification of their interests and positions;
- overcoming the traditions of groupthink, conformity, "syndrome of humility" and the development of free-thinking, the individuality of the worker. As a result of this, the ability of the staff to develop original ideas, to find the best ways to solve the problems of the organization increases;
- involvement of the usually passive part of employees in solving organizational problems. This contributes to the personal development of employees and serves to achieve the goals of the organization;
- identification of informal groups, their leaders and smaller groupings, which can be used by the leader to improve management efficiency;
- development of the participants in the conflict of skills and abilities relatively painless solution of problems that arise in the future;
- increased group cohesion in case of intergroup conflicts. As is known from social psychology, the easiest way to unite a group and muffle or even overcome internal discord is to find a common enemy, a competitor. An external conflict is able to extinguish internal strife, the causes of which often disappear over time, lose their relevance, sharpness and are forgotten.
Based on the assessment of the consequences of conflicts, a strategy for dealing with them in the organization is built.
Conflict is a very capacious concept. It is studied from different positions and in various aspects by many sciences: philosophy, sociology, psychology, jurisprudence, history and political science. The conflict underlies any contradiction, and it, in turn, is an incentive for any changes, sometimes constructive and progressive, and sometimes destructive, destructive. Most often, the concept of conflict is considered in the relationship of people and social groups, in psychology, conflict is also deep intrapersonal experiences and contradictions that give rise to life crises, depression, but this does not always lead to negative consequences. Very often, an internal conflict is a stimulus for development, opening up new life horizons and hidden potential hidden by a person.
The study of conflict is based on a combination of various concepts that make up this complex phenomenon: its dynamics, methods of conflict management and its typology. Moreover, these concepts can be correlated with various conflicts - social, interpersonal and intrapersonal, but in each of them they will have their own characteristics.
Dynamics of the conflict
Conflict is a dynamic, evolving process. The following main stages of its development are distinguished: the pre-conflict situation is an open conflict and the stage of its completion.
The latent stage preceding an open conflict is the formation of all its structural elements. First of all, the cause of the confrontation arises and its participants appear, and then there is an awareness by the parties of the confrontation of the current situation as a conflict. The dynamics of the conflict may develop further if, at the first stage, the main contradictions are not resolved peacefully and amicably.
The second stage is the transition of its participants to conflict behavior, the features of which are defined in psychology and conflictology. The dynamics of the conflict at this stage is characterized by an expansion in the number of participants in the confrontation, disorganizational actions of the parties directed against each other, a transition from solving problems by business methods to personal accusations, and very often with a sharply negative emotional attitude, as well as a high degree of tension leading to stress.
The dynamics of the development of the conflict at this stage is denoted by the term escalation, i.e. an increase in destructive, destructive actions of the conflicting parties, often leading to irreversible catastrophic consequences.
Finally, the dynamics of the conflict in the last stage is the search for ways to resolve it. Various methods, techniques and strategies for managing conflict are used here, conflict specialists and psychologists are involved. As a rule, resolution is carried out in two ways: the transformation of the reasons underlying it, and the restructuring of the subjective ideal perception of this situation in the minds of its participants.
It should be noted that conflict resolution strategies do not always lead to complete success. Quite often, everything ends with a partial result, when the visible forms of the emergence and course of a conflict situation are eliminated, and the emotional stress of the participants is not removed, which can cause new confrontations.
The full resolution of the conflict situation occurs only when all its external contradictions and causes are removed, as well as all internal, emotional and psychological factors are eliminated.
The most difficult task at the last resolution stage of the conflict is the transformation, the change in the subjective ideal perception of the causes of the confrontation in the minds of the participants in each of the parties. If this goal is achieved by the mediators or the management of the organization, then the conflict resolution will be successful.
The conflict, interpersonal or intrapersonal, proceeds according to the standard scheme and has the same stages and methods of resolution, only, of course, with its own specifics.
