The style of resolving interpersonal conflict by force is. Conflict Resolution Styles (for Conflict Participants)

1. Competition style. Person using given style, is very active and prefers to resolve the conflict in his own way. He is not interested in cooperation with other people, but is capable of strong-willed decisions. This style can be effective when you have a certain amount of power, are confident that your decision or approach in a given situation is correct and have the opportunity to insist on your own.

Competition style is preferred when:

The outcome is very important to you, and you make a big bet on the resolution of the problem that has arisen;

The decision must be made quickly and you have enough power to do so;

You feel like you have no other choice and nothing to lose.

2. Style of evasion. This style is realized when a person does not defend his rights, does not want to cooperate to develop a solution to the problem, or simply avoids resolving the conflict. You can use this style when the issue at hand is not that important to you, when you don't want to spend energy on it, or when you feel like you're in a hopeless situation. It is also recommended when you feel wrong and suspect the other person is right, or when that person has more power, or you have no good reason to continue with this person. Maybe you need a respite for the moment - time to think about the situation or calm down.

3.Fitment style. A person using this style acts in conjunction with a communication partner, without trying to defend their own interests. You can use it when the outcome of a case is extremely important to another person and not very significant to you. This style is also useful in situations where you cannot prevail because the other person has more power. You can resort to such a strategy if at the moment you need to soften the situation a little, and then you intend to return to this issue and defend your position. This style is also useful if you feel that it is more important to maintain a good relationship with someone than to defend your interests.

4.Style cooperation. Following the style of cooperation, a person actively participates in resolving the conflict and defends his position, but at the same time tries to take into account the interests of the other side. This style requires more work than other approaches to conflict, since the needs, concerns and interests of both parties are first openly stated (“put on the table”), and then they are discussed. It is advisable to use this particular style if the solution of the problem is very important for both parties, and no one wants to be excluded from the solution; if you have a close long-term and interdependent relationship with the other party and both of you are able to state the essence of your interests and listen to each other; if both parties involved in the conflict have equal power or do not notice the difference in position in order to seek a solution to the problem on an equal footing.

5.Compromise style. Using it, people agree on the partial satisfaction of the desires and interests of each conflicting party. The compromise style is most effective when you and the other person want the same thing, but know that it's impossible for you to do it at the same time. You want to come to a decision quickly, you can be satisfied with a temporary solution, you are ready to change the original goal. Compromise will allow you to maintain a good relationship.

CONFLICT. STYLES OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION

Conflict is a phenomenon that occurs as a result of a collision of opposing actions, views, interests, aspirations, plans of different people or motives, needs of one person. In the latter case, one speaks of an internal conflict.

In general, conflicts are a natural part of our lives. They may expect us when we meet a new person or a new situation. To some extent, they are even necessary for the development of the situation and relationships, for the growth of the individual, otherwise stagnation may occur. Although most often we experience a conflict situation as a serious nuisance.

Basic Conflict Resolution Styles

In a conflict situation, people consciously or subconsciously usually choose a particular style of behavior. AT specific conflict the style of behavior is determined by how important it is for you to satisfy your own interests (acting passively or actively) and the interests of the other party (acting jointly or individually).

There are five basic conflict resolution styles.

1. Competition style is preferred when:

a person using this style is very active and prefers to resolve the conflict in his own way. He is not interested in cooperation with other people, but is capable of strong-willed decisions.
when you have a certain power, you are sure that your decision or approach in a given situation is correct and you have the opportunity to insist on your own.

Competition style is preferred when:

the outcome is very important to you, and you make a big bet on solving the problem that has arisen;
the decision must be made quickly and you have enough power to do so;
you feel like you have no other choice and nothing to lose.

2. Avoidance style is preferred when:

a person does not defend his rights, does not want to cooperate to develop a solution to the problem, or simply avoids resolving the conflict;
the problem is not so important to you, and you do not want to spend energy on solving it;
you feel like you are in a hopeless situation.
you feel wrong and anticipate the rightness of the other person, and when this person has more power, or you have no good reason to continue the relationship with this person. Maybe you need a respite for the moment - time to think about the situation or calm down?

3. Fixture style is preferred when:

a person acts together with a communication partner, not trying to defend his own interests;
the outcome of the case is extremely important for the other person and not very significant for you;
you cannot prevail because the other person has more power. You can resort to such a strategy if at the moment it is necessary to soften the situation somewhat, and then you intend to return to this issue and defend your position;
you feel that it is more important to maintain a good relationship with someone than to defend your interests.

4. Collaborative style is preferred when:

a person actively participates in resolving the conflict and defends his position, but at the same time tries to take into account the interests of the other side. This style requires more work than other approaches to conflict, since the needs, concerns and interests of both parties are first openly stated (“laid out on the table”), and then they are discussed.
it is desirable to use this particular style if the solution of the problem is very important for both parties, and no one wants to be eliminated from the solution;
if you have a close long-term and interdependent relationship with the other party, and both of you are able to state the essence of your interests and listen to each other;
if both parties involved in the conflict have equal power or do not notice the difference in position in order to seek a solution to the problem on an equal footing.

5. Compromise style is preferred when:

people agree on the partial satisfaction of the desires and interests of each conflicting party;
you and the other person want the same thing, but you know that at the same time it is impossible for you;
you want to come to a decision quickly, you can be satisfied with a temporary solution, you are ready to change the original goal. Compromise will allow you to maintain a good relationship.

You have seen that one or two styles are preferred for you. It's natural, but a rigid preference can limit your options. You need to learn how to use each style effectively and consciously make one or another choice, given the specific circumstances.

What behavior in a conflict situation will be the most advantageous?

1. The dynamics of the conflict. Conflict is a perceived contradiction between people that needs to be resolved. Conflict is not always effective way resolution of contradictions, because due to the resulting strong emotions thinking slows down, perception narrows, more primitive layers of the psyche become actualized. And yet, if a sober analysis shows that there is no choice, and the conflict seems to be the only available way to resolve the contradiction, one should initiate the conflict himself, since with a conscious entry into the conflict, the possibility of managing it is much higher. It should be remembered that "conflict in large doses is harmful to health."

2. Constructive conflict resolution. For constructive resolution conflict situations, the following recommendations should be followed: There are no winners in a conflict: two sides always lose. Therefore, it makes no sense to calculate who is more to blame, and take the pose of "insulted pride." Dare to take the first step - this is an indicator of the strength of your character and your self-respect. Start the conversation by describing a specific situation that you don't like. Try to be as objective as possible. The more detailed you are about it, the better. If possible, please provide specific examples.

Tell me how you feel about this situation. Many conflicts between people are complicated by the presence of unspoken thoughts and feelings. Sometimes just their statement, the exchange of these negative feelings, allows you to improve the situation. Take advantage of this in simple words: “I was offended”, “I was scared”, “I was angry”.

Try to listen to the opposite side (although this is quite difficult). It must be remembered that you have different thoughts, different perception situations and that is what caused the conflict. Therefore, treat what was said not as the truth, but as a reflection of the position, desires and interests of your opponent.

Listen carefully, do not interrupt, do not argue. Show the interlocutor that you are listening to him really seriously and strive to come to an agreement. You can also emphasize this by nodding your head in approval, asking for a specific example, which will help you better understand feelings and actions. opposite side, and your interlocutor - to tune in to a frank conversation.

If the conflict is very serious, then turn to an “outsider” person who would help you listen to each other without getting lost in mutual reproaches and accusations.

It is very useful to sort out innermost thoughts. Secret thoughts are assumptions, fears, guesses about the feelings and thoughts of another. To make sure your assumptions are correct, it is best to ask the person himself. If you are asked about it, try to be quite frank, because guesses, as a rule, have real grounds. Refrain from commenting when ending any conversation. Focus on issues on which your thoughts, feelings, actions are the same, and not on problems that are shared - this will limit the zone of contradictions.

Find an opportunity to make specific proposals regarding a change in the situation, behavior, relationships (“I ask you ...”, “I would like ...”, “I hope it’s not hard for you ...”). At the end of the conversation, say what exactly will change if you transform the situation or your relationship. It is inappropriate to threaten and resort to ultimatums - after all, positive prospects are more attractive. Note that the person will benefit if they change their behavior or attitude at your request. This way of resolving the conflict requires a certain determination. However, if you are frank and honest in this conversation, then your relationship will not worsen, and you will earn more respect.

3. Principles of conflict management.

Psychologists believe that conflict can be managed. The principles of conflict management are as follows:

1. Determination of the need to escalate the conflict, which is achieved through an honest and impartial response to next questions(these answers can be given aloud or written down, but they cannot be discussed):

A) Is it possible and desirable to eliminate the contradiction (as you know, the contradiction is the engine of progress)? b) If so, are there more peaceful, economical and "cleaner" ways to resolve it? c) If not, are you strong enough to win the conflict? d) If not, how long can it last (you need to know this in order to get out of the conflict with a minimum expenditure of mental and physical strength)?

2. Complete control over your own emotions, which, as a rule, interfere with assessing what is happening.

3. Analysis of the real causes of the conflict, which opponents can hide behind imaginary reasons.

4. Localization of the conflict, i.e., the establishment of its clear framework and the maximum desire to narrow the area of contradiction.

5. Refusal to focus on self-defense, since the enthusiasm for one's own defensive actions usually prevents people from noticing changes in the environment and behavior of the "opposite side" in time.

6. Reformulating the opponent's arguments, which simply should not be refuted in the order and in the proportions in which they are presented - it is better to try to "translate" them into a language you understand, highlighting the key semantic points.

7. Sufficient activity, since, even "retreating along the entire front", you can maintain the initiative by setting:

A) the emotional tone of the relationship ("Let's talk calmly"); b) the topic of the conversation (“We are not talking about that, we will return - how to ...”); in) language style(without rudeness and vulgarity); d) the roles and the degree of strictness of the rules of the game (the conflict can and should be played, resolving contradictions, in the form of a semblance of a theatrical action with specified roles and roles).

4. Control of emotions. Very important and perhaps the most difficult is the second of these principles - the control of emotions.

It happens that someone deliberately “turns on” us in order to draw us into a conflict. It is very difficult to remain calm when baseless accusations are made, or you are insulted, or make ridiculous, from your point of view, demands and claims.

It is especially important that your emotions do not prevent you from trying to understand what makes a person act in this way. If you find yourself in a situation in which someone begins to show their emotions too much, then this, as a rule, indicates that the conflict is caused by some deep interests that you need to take into account in order to find a solution to the problem and restore the relationship.

In particular, you can keep in mind the following program of action:

If a person's reaction is too different from what one would expect in the current situation, stop and think: what underlying problems or needs does it reflect?
Try to take the position of another person and look at things through his eyes: what can he think about the current situation?
Look at your behavior from the other person's point of view. Have you done something that is unpleasant or incomprehensible to him? It is especially important to practice this in order to reduce the intensity of conflicts with parents that flare up. (If, for example, they restrict your freedom and constantly "nag" you for coming home late, try to look at your behavior through their eyes. And you will find a whole "bouquet" of reasons for their irritation: both the feeling that you neglect the care of your parents, and fear for you, and resentment, and fear of losing control of the situation.)
Think about whether this person is currently under pressure from some circumstances that could cause such a reaction?
Consider subtly suggesting a discussion of the real causes of the conflict.
Demonstrate that you are receptive to the needs of another person, that you care about him; show that you are willing to take the time to understand it.
Be willing to put your own interests aside so that you can focus on the needs of the other person. You can take care of your interests later, but now it is important to show the person that you recognize his needs and are ready to do everything in your power to satisfy them, because you see how difficult it is for him now.

It is not so easy to follow these recommendations, because instead of the position of natural egoism, one must learn to take a “meta-position”: to be, as it were, both inside the situation and outside it; separate your interests, your point of view, your experience from what happens to another person, and accept his interests and needs as an objective reality, regardless of your attitude to it.

You can take care of your interests later, but now it is important to show the person that you recognize his needs and are ready to do everything in your power to satisfy them, because you see how difficult it is for him now. It is not so easy to follow these recommendations, you need to separate your interests, your point of view, your experience from what is happening with another person, and accept his interests and needs as an objective reality, regardless of your attitude to this.

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

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

Hosted at http://www.allbest.ru/

in the discipline "Sociology and Political Science"

on the topic "Conflict. Conflict Resolution Styles »

1.Conflict

a). General information

b). The positive impact of conflict

in). Negative impact of conflict

2. Conflict Resolution Styles

a). Coercion style

b). Evasion Style

in). Compliance style

G). Collaboration Style

e). Compromise style

Bibliography

1.Conflict

a) General information

Conflict is a phenomenon that occurs as a result of a collision of opposing actions, views, interests, aspirations, plans of different people or motives, needs of one person.

Conflicts are a natural part of our lives. They may expect us when we meet a new person or a new situation. There is a common perception that conflict is always a negative phenomenon that causes threats, hostility, resentment, misunderstanding, that is, it is something that should be avoided if possible. Representatives of the early scientific schools of management also believed that conflict is a sign of ineffective organization and poor management. However, at present, management theorists and practitioners are increasingly inclined to the point of view that some conflicts, even in the most effective organization with the best employee relations, are not only possible, but also desirable for personal growth, otherwise stagnation may occur. Although most often we experience a conflict situation as a serious nuisance.

The conflict is most often seen as competition in the satisfaction of interests. What is a conflict situation? Thomas' theorem answers this question: if situations are defined as real, then they are real in their consequences, that is, a conflict becomes a reality when it is experienced as a conflict by at least one of the parties.

The conflict can also be viewed as a state of shock, disorganization in relation to the previous development and, accordingly, as a generator of new structures. In this definition, M. Robert and F. Tilman point to the modern understanding of conflict as a positive phenomenon.

J. Von Neumann and O. Morgenstein define conflict as the interaction of two objects that have incompatible goals and ways to achieve these goals. People can be considered as such objects, individual groups, armies, monopolies, classes, social institutions, etc., whose activities are somehow connected with setting and solving problems of organization and management, with forecasting and decision-making, as well as with planning targeted actions.

K. Levin characterizes a conflict as a situation in which oppositely directed forces of approximately equal magnitude simultaneously act on an individual. Along with the "power" lines of the situation active role in the resolution of conflicts, their understanding and vision, the personality itself plays. Therefore, Levin's works deal with both intrapersonal and interpersonal conflicts.

In L. Koser's theory of social conflict, conflict is a struggle over values and claims due to a lack of status, power and means, in which the goals of opponents are neutralized, infringed or eliminated by their rivals. The author also notes the positive function of conflicts - maintaining the dynamic balance of the social system. If the conflict is related to goals, values or interests that do not affect the foundations of the existence of groups, then it is positive. If the conflict is connected with the most important values of the group, then it is undesirable, since it undermines the foundations of the group and carries a tendency to destroy it.

b) The positive impact of the conflict

According to W. Lincoln, the positive impact of the conflict is manifested in the following:

1. Conflict accelerates the process of self-awareness;

2. Under its influence, a certain set of values is affirmed and confirmed;

3. Promotes a sense of community, as it may be that others have similar interests and strive for the same ends and results and support the use of the same means - to such an extent that formal and informal alliances arise;

4. Leads to the unification of like-minded people;

5. Promotes détente and pushes other, insignificant conflicts into the background;

6. Promotes prioritization;

7. Plays the role of a safety valve for safe and even constructive way out emotions;

8. Thanks to him, attention is drawn to dissatisfaction or suggestions that need to be discussed, understood, recognized, supported, legal registration and permission;

9. Leads to working contacts with other people and groups;

10. It stimulates the development of systems for the equitable prevention, resolution and management of conflicts.

c) The negative impact of the conflict

The negative impact of conflict often manifests itself in the following:

1. The conflict is a threat to the declared interests of the parties;

2. He threatens social system ensuring equity and stability;

3. Prevents the rapid implementation of change;

4. Leads to loss of support;

5. Makes people and organizations dependent on public statements that cannot be easily and quickly abandoned;

6. Instead of a carefully considered response, it leads to quick action;

7. As a result of the conflict, the trust of the parties to each other is undermined;

8. Causes disunity among those who need or even strive for unity;

9. As a result of the conflict, the formation of alliances and coalitions is undermined;

10. Conflict tends to deepen and widen;

11. Conflict shifts priorities to such an extent that it threatens other interests.

2. Conflict Resolution Styles

There are five basic conflict resolution styles. They are described and widely used in case management training programs based on a system called the Thomas-Kilmenn method (developed by Kenneth W. Thomas and Ralph H. Kilmenn in 1972).

The system allows you to create for each person their own style of conflict resolution. The main styles of behavior in a conflict situation are associated with a common source of any conflict - a mismatch of interests of two or more parties.

Your style of behavior in a particular conflict is determined by the extent to which you want to satisfy your own interests (acting passively or actively) and the interests of the other party (acting jointly or individually).

If we represent this in graphical form, we get a grid

Thomas-Kilmenn, which allows you to determine the place and name for each of the five main styles of conflict resolution.

style conflict misunderstanding

a) Coercive style

As the grid shows, the person using the coercive style is very active and prefers to go their own way to resolve the conflict. He is not very interested in cooperation with other people, but he is capable of strong-willed decisions. A rationalist might say, “I don't care what other people think. I'm going to prove to them that I have my own solution to the problem." Or, as Thomas and Kilmenn describe the dynamics of the process, you try to satisfy your own interests first at the expense of the interests of others, forcing other people to accept your solution to the problem. To achieve the goal, you use your strong-willed qualities; and if your will is strong enough, then you succeed.

This can be an effective style when you have some power; you know that your decision or approach in a given situation is correct, and you have the opportunity to insist on it. However, this is probably not the style you would like to use in a personal relationship; you want to get along with people, but the coercive style can make them feel alienated.

And if you use this style in a situation where you do not have enough power, for example, when on some issue your point of view differs from the point of view of your boss, you can get burned.

When you use this approach, you may not be very popular, but you will gain supporters if it works. But if your main goal is popularity and good relations with everyone, then this style should not be used. It is recommended rather in cases where the solution you suggested has a problem for you. great importance when you feel that you need to act quickly to implement it, and when you believe in victory because you have sufficient will and power to do so.

b) Evasion Style

The second of the five basic approaches to conflict occurs when you don't stand up for your rights, don't work with anyone to work out a solution, or simply avoid resolving the conflict.

You can use this style when the issue at hand is not that important to you, when you don't want to spend energy on it, or when you feel like you're in a hopeless situation. This style is also recommended when you feel wrong and anticipate that the other person is right, or when that person has more power. All these are serious grounds for not defending one's own position. You might try to change the subject, leave the room, or do something that will eliminate or delay the conflict: You might think, "I'm not going to do this now." In short, you are not trying to satisfy your own interests or the interests of another person. Instead, you walk away from the problem by ignoring it, shifting responsibility for solving it to someone else, seeking a delay in solving it, or using other methods.

The avoidance style may be appropriate in cases where you are forced to communicate with a difficult person and when there is no good reason to continue contact with him. This approach can also be helpful if you are trying to make a decision but don't know what to do and you don't need to make the decision now. Instead of creating tension by trying to fix the problem immediately, you can afford the luxury of delay and can deliberately avoid making a choice today. You may need to give the impression that you will return to the subject at an opportunity; in other words, this approach may look like procrastination or evasion. This style is also appropriate when you feel you don't have enough information to solve a particular problem.

If you have to wait and see and time itself can give you the answer, then it's best to admit it and say to yourself, “I can't do this right now. I'll wait".

Although some may consider the avoidance style to be an "escape" from problems and responsibilities rather than an effective approach to conflict resolution, in fact, withdrawal or delay can be a very appropriate and constructive response to a conflict situation. It is likely that if you try to ignore her, not express your attitude towards her, get away from the decision, change the subject or shift your attention to something else, then the conflict will resolve itself. If not, you can tackle it later when you're more ready for it.

c) Compliance style

The third style is the compliance style. It means that you act together with another person, without trying to defend your own interests. You can use this approach when the outcome of a case is extremely important to the other person and not very important to you. This style is also useful in situations in which you cannot prevail because the other person has more power; thus, you concede and resign yourself to what your opponent wants.

Thomas and Kilmenn say that you act in this style, when you sacrifice your interests in favor of another person, giving in to him and pitying him. Since you put your own interests aside by using this approach, it is better to do so when your contribution to this case not too big, or when you don't bet too much on a positive solution to a problem for you. This allows you to feel comfortable with the other person's desires. But you don't want to fit in with someone if you feel offended. If you feel that you are giving in on something important to you and you feel dissatisfied with it, then the yielding style is probably not acceptable in this case. It can also be unacceptable in a situation where you feel that the other person is not going to give up something in turn, or that this person will not appreciate what you have done. This style should be used when you feel that you have little to lose by giving in a little. Or you can resort to such a strategy if at the moment you need to soften the situation a little, and then you intend to return to this issue and defend your position.

The compliance style can be a bit like the avoidance style, as you can use it to get a reprieve on a problem. However, the main difference is that you are acting together with another person; you participate in the situation and agree to do what the other wants. When you use the avoidance style, you are not doing anything to serve the interests of the other person. You are simply pushing the problem away.

By yielding, agreeing or sacrificing your interests in favor of another person, you can mitigate the conflict situation and restore harmony. You can continue to be satisfied with the result if you consider it acceptable for yourself. Or you can use this quiet period to gain time so that you can then reach the final decision you want.

d) Collaborative style

The fourth is the collaborative style. With this style, you actively participate in conflict resolution and defend your interests, but at the same time try to cooperate with the other person. This style requires more work than most other approaches to conflict, as you first "put on the table" the needs, concerns and interests of both parties, and then discuss them. However, if you have the time and solving the problem is important enough to you, then this is a good way to find a mutually beneficial result and satisfy the interests of all parties.

This style is especially effective when the parties have different hidden needs. In such cases, it is difficult to determine the source of dissatisfaction.

At first it may seem that both want the same thing or have opposite goals for the distant future, which is an immediate source of conflict. However, there is a difference between external declarations or positions in a dispute and underlying interests or needs that serve as the true causes of a conflict situation.

For example, the apparent cause of conflict at work may be the slowness of an employee. But this slowness may mask a deeper conflict, which is caused by job dissatisfaction (lack of respect, recognition, or lack of responsibility that alienates a person from his job). If only superficial manifestations are affected, then it will be like just an external cosmetic repair, the low effectiveness of which will manifest itself over time, since the roots of the problem remain. A person may stop being slow, but then he will resort to unconscious sabotage, arranging additional breaks in work or using work equipment for personal purposes, convincing himself that he has the right to do so, because his work is appreciated and paid insufficiently. And that will be his way of getting some compensation. The collaborative style encourages each person to openly discuss their needs and desires. An employee in the situation described above can directly state that he needs recognition, higher appreciation and responsibility. If his boss understands this, then he will meet this person halfway, and as a result, the employee will devote himself to work to a greater extent, and thus the problem of procrastination will be solved with additional positive effects.

In other words, the successful use of the collaborative style requires spending some time looking for hidden interests and needs in order to develop a way to meet the true desires of both parties. Once you both understand what the cause of the conflict is, you have the opportunity to work together to look for new alternatives or work out acceptable compromises.

Cooperation is a friendly, wise approach to the task of identifying and meeting the interests of both parties. However, this requires some effort. Both parties should set aside some time for this, and they should be able to explain their desires, express their needs, listen to each other, and then work out alternative options and problem solving. The absence of one of these elements makes this approach ineffective. Collaboration among other styles is the most difficult, but it allows you to work out the most satisfying solution for both parties in difficult and important conflict situations.

e) Style of compromise

In the middle of the grid is the compromise style. You give in a little in your interests to satisfy them in the rest, the other side does the same. In other words, you converge on the partial satisfaction of your desire and the partial fulfillment of the desire of another person.

You do this by trading concessions and haggling to work out a compromise solution. Such actions may to some extent resemble cooperation. However, compromise is reached at a more superficial level than cooperation; you are inferior in something, the other person is also inferior in something, and as a result, you can come to a common decision. You are not looking for hidden needs and interests as you would with a collaborative style. You only consider what you say to each other about your desires.

The compromise style is most effective when you and the other person want the same thing, but know that it's impossible for you to do it at the same time. For example, you both want to take the same position or, being on vacation together, you want to spend it differently. Hence, you work out some kind of compromise based on minor give and take. For example, in the case of a joint vacation, you can agree as follows: "Okay, we will spend part of the holiday in the mountains, and part - on the seashore."

The collaborative style is different in that, using it, you would try to find hidden interests and work out a solution based on them. When using the collaborative style, you focus on meeting hidden needs and desires; in the style of compromise, you take the conflict situation for granted and look for a way to influence or change it by giving or exchanging concessions. The purpose of cooperation is to develop a long-term mutually beneficial solution; in case of a compromise, this may be a momentary suitable option.

As a result of a successful compromise, a person can express his agreement in the following way: "I can put up with it." The emphasis is not on a solution that satisfies the interests of both parties, but on an option that can be expressed in the words: "We cannot both fully fulfill our desires, therefore, it is necessary to come to a solution that each of us can accept."

In such situations, cooperation may even be impossible. It is possible that neither of you has the time or energy needed for it, or your interests are mutually exclusive. And then only compromise can help you.

Compromise is often a happy retreat, or even a last chance to reach a solution. You can choose this approach from the start if you don't have enough power to get what you want, if cooperation is impossible, and if no one wants unilateral concessions. Thus, you partially satisfy your interests, and the other person partially satisfies theirs, while you can always try to use a different approach to resolving the conflict in the future, if the initial compromise, as you think, does not eliminate the problem for a long time.

When you are trying to find a compromise with someone, you should start by clarifying the interests and desires of both parties. After that, it is necessary to outline the area of coincidence of interests. You must put forward proposals, listen to the proposals of the other side, be ready for concessions, exchange of favors, etc. Continue negotiations until you are able to work out a formula of mutual concessions acceptable to both parties. Ideally, a compromise will suit both of you.

Bibliography

1. http://ru.wikipedia.org/

2. http://psyfactor.org/

3. J. G. Scott "Methods of Conflict Resolution", VIS Publishing House, 1994

Hosted on Allbest.ru

Conflict Resolution Styles

Scientists distinguish 5 main styles:

rivalry (competition)
cooperation
compromise
avoidance (avoidance)
fixture

Competition style

If a person is active and intends to resolve a conflict situation in order to satisfy his own interests, the style of competition has to be applied. As a rule, a person, moving to resolve the conflict in his favor, sometimes to the detriment of other people, forces them to accept his way of solving the problem.

In this case, choosing the style of competition, you need to have the resources to resolve the conflict in your favor, or be sure that the result obtained is the only correct one. For example, a leader may make a tough authoritarian decision, but in the future it will give the desired result. This style prepares employees for submission without unnecessary ranting, especially in difficult times for the company.

It happens that such a model of behavior is resorted to because of weakness. If a person is no longer confident in his victory in the current conflict, then he may begin to kindle a new one. This can be seen most clearly in the relationship between two children in a family, when the younger one provokes the older one to some act, receives a “bashing” from him, and already from the position of the victim complains to his parents.

Also, a person can enter into such a conflict solely due to his inexperience or stupidity, simply not realizing the consequences for himself.

Collaboration Style

The style of cooperation means that the subject tries to resolve the conflict in his own favor, but at the same time must take into account the interests of the opponent. Therefore, the resolution of the conflict involves the search for an outcome beneficial to both parties. The most typical circumstances when this style is used are the following:

if both parties to the conflict have the same resources and capabilities;
if the resolution of this conflict is beneficial, and neither side is removed from it;
if there is a long-standing and mutually beneficial relationship between opponents;
if each of the parties has quite understandable goals that they can explain;
if each of the parties has other ways out of the crisis.

Collaborative style is used when each side has time to find common interests. But such a strategy requires tolerance and is effective if no changes in the alignment of forces of the opposing sides are foreseen in the future.

Compromise style

Compromise means that the opponents are trying to find a solution in which there will be some kind of mutual concessions. The use of this style is possible if the parties have the same resources, but their interests are mutually exclusive. Then the parties will come to some kind of temporary solution, and the benefits they will receive will be short-lived.

The most interesting thing is that it is the compromise that sometimes becomes the only possible way out from the conflict. When opponents are sure that they are striving for the same result, but they understand that it is impossible to achieve this at the same time.

Avoidance (avoidance) style

The avoidance style is usually used when the potential loss in a particular conflict is much higher than the moral cost of avoiding. For example, executives very often evade making a controversial decision, postponing it indefinitely.

If we talk about other positions, for example, a middle manager, then he can allegedly lose documents, voice useless information, refer to the fact that the superior is on a business trip. But delaying the decision on this issue can further complicate the problem, so the avoidance style is best used when it will not have serious consequences.

Fixture style

The style of adaptation is manifested in the fact that a person performs any actions, focusing on the behavior of other people, but at the same time does not seek to defend his own interests. He, as it were, recognizes in advance the dominant role of the opponent and concedes to him in their confrontation. Such a model of behavior can be justified only when, by yielding to someone, you lose too much.

when it is necessary to maintain peaceful relations with another person or even a whole group;
when there is not enough power to win;
when victory is more important for your opponent than for you;
when it is necessary to find a solution that suits both parties;
when it is impossible to avoid conflict, and resistance can hurt.

For example, a competing company appears on the market, but with more significant financial, administrative and other resources. You can use all your strength to fight a competitor, but there is a high probability of losing. In this case, using the style of accommodation, it is better to look for a new niche in the business or sell the company to a stronger competitor.

Basic ways to resolve conflicts

All currently available conflict resolution methods can be divided into two groups:

negative
positive

Negative, that is, destructive, methods mean that victory will be achieved only by one of the parties, and then the result of the confrontation will be the destruction of the unity of the parties participating in the conflict.

Positive methods, on the contrary, allow maintaining the unity of the conflicting parties. But it is important to understand that such a division is rather arbitrary, since in practice both systems can be used simultaneously, while harmoniously complementing each other. After all, it is only in armed conflicts that the condition for victory is to achieve the superiority of one of the opponents.

In peaceful life, the main goal of the struggle is to change the conflict situation. But this can be achieved different ways. The most famous are:

to the impact on the opponent and his environment;
to a change in the balance of power;
to false or true information of the enemy about his intentions;
to obtain a correct assessment of the situation and capabilities of the enemy.

Negative methods of conflict resolution

1. Restriction of the opponent's freedom

For example, in the course of a discussion, one can impose on an opponent a topic in which he is incompetent and can discredit himself. And you can also force the enemy to take actions that will be useful to the opposing side.

2. Disabling the governing bodies

In the course of the discussion, the policy of the leaders is actively discredited, and their position is refuted. For example, during the election campaign, many people resort to criticizing their opponents and even demonstrating their failure as politicians in favor of their position. Here, much depends on the amount of information received, which is distorted, as well as on the oratory of one of the opponents.

3. The delay method

This method is used to select suitable conditions for the final blow or to create a favorable balance of power. AT war time actively used to lure enemy soldiers to their side. For peaceful purposes, it is successfully manifested in the discussion, if you take the floor last and give arguments that have not yet been criticized.

Using this method there is a chance to lure the enemy into a trap prepared in advance and gain time or change the situation to a more favorable one.

Positive methods of conflict resolution

1. Negotiations

Negotiations are one of the most effective methods in conflict resolution. To achieve a truce, the form of open debate is used, which provides for mutual concessions, as well as full or partial satisfaction of the interests of both parties.

2. Method of principled negotiations

Unlike conventional negotiations, this form of conflict resolution involves following four basic rules (principles) that cannot be derogated from.

Definition of the concepts "participant in negotiations" and "subject of negotiations". For the first concept, not just a person is important, but someone with certain character traits: stress resistance, the ability to control one's behavior and emotions, the ability to listen to an opponent, the ability to restrain oneself and avoid offensive words and actions.

Orientation to common interests, and not to the position of each of the parties. After all, it is in opposing positions that the difference of interests manifests itself. Search general conditions can reconcile conflicting parties.
Thinking through solutions that are beneficial for both parties. The analysis of options that satisfy both parties leads to an agreement in any area.

Search for objective criteria. If the criteria are neutral for both parties, this will quickly lead the conflict to a logical resolution. But subjective criteria will always infringe on the interests of one of the parties. But objectivity will be achieved only if all aspects of the problem are understood.

Whatever methods and styles you use to find a way out of controversial situation, it is important to understand that a bad world is better good quarrel. Unresolved conflict will take a lot of more strength, time and health. Therefore, it is necessary to apply maximum efforts for its possible resolution.

Test

in the discipline "Social psychology"

Option 9

1. Tasks of social psychology and problems of society

2. Phenomenon group pressure

3. Choice best style behavior in conflict situations daily communication

Power Ratio Estimation

Determining Your Priorities

Definition real problems and interests

Definition of reaction options

Using a style set

Bibliography

1. Tasks of social psychology and problems of society

Social psychology is a branch of psychological science that studies the patterns of emergence and functioning of psychological phenomena, the existence of which is due to the interaction of people in society and their inclusion in various social groups. In addition, social psychology is an academic discipline studied by students in classical, pedagogical and social universities in the specialties "Psychology", "Pedagogy", "Psychology and Pedagogy", "Social Work", "Sociology", "Public Relations", "Advertising", "Management", "Management", as well as in other universities on the cycle " General humanitarian and socio-economic disciplines" of the federal component of the state educational standard higher vocational education.

People live and work, interact and communicate with each other, show certain feelings, concrete way relate to themselves and the world around them. All this is social life, reflected in their minds as a psychological reality. Social psychology as a science studies this reality, expressing it in the form of a system of socio-psychological knowledge, which includes:

scientific ideas about numerous and diverse socio-psychological phenomena and processes, conditions, patterns and mechanisms of their occurrence and functioning, as well as branches of social psychology;

most general views on the directions of development of social psychology and the use of the experience of comprehension accumulated by it public life and public relations, specific results of her research.

Initially emerging (basic) socio-psychological phenomena are interaction, intergroup and interpersonal relations, communication and mutual perception of people. In comparison with them, all other socio-psychological phenomena and processes (for example, the moods and feelings of people, the psychological climate in various social groups, etc.) are secondary.

Socio-psychological patterns are objectively existing, stable, recurring causal relationships that determine the nature of the emergence and dynamics of the functioning of socio-psychological phenomena and processes.

Socio-psychological mechanisms are transformations through which the laws of their functioning are manifested, and socio-psychological systemicity is carried out. Common mechanisms in social psychology are usually understood as imitation, infection, identification and manifestation of social attitudes. The private, as a rule, include conformism, empathy, attraction, attribution, reflection, etc., the manifestation of which characterizes only certain socio-psychological phenomena.

Branches of social psychology - its components that study specific classes of social psychological phenomena.

Views on the directions of development of social psychology and the use of the experience accumulated by it depend on many reasons, among which are: the interests of society and its individual groups; the demand for socio-psychological knowledge and the significance of the latter in the life of people, as well as the possibility of their use; the degree of education and preparedness of the society itself, etc. In general, they are realized through: the implementation of diagnostics (expertise) of the nature and content of relations between people; providing them with assistance and support, their counseling and social and legal education; organization of socio-psychological support for professional and political activity in society: training of social psychologists.

Social psychology, like any other science, has its own object, subject and tasks, develops its own methodological and theoretical foundations, conceptual apparatus, methods and methods of research.

Object, subject and tasks of social psychology.The object of social psychology is specific social communities (groups of people) and their individual representatives.

Its subject is the regularities of the emergence and functioning of socio-psychological phenomena and processes (socio-psychological phenomena * ), which are the result of the interaction of people as representatives of various social communities.

Socio-psychological phenomena and processes can be classified according to different grounds: according to belonging to various social communities and subjects, according to their relation to various classes of psychological phenomena, according to stability, according to the degree of awareness, etc.

Fundamental and methodologically more significant is the classification of socio-psychological phenomena according to their belonging to various communities and subjects, since it is this criterion that determines most of the patterns and features of their occurrence and functioning.

First, they distinguish between socio-psychological phenomena that arise in organized communities of people, which include large and small groups.

AT large groups- ethnic groups (nations), classes, religious denominations, political and public organizations (parties, social movements etc.) - specific socio-psychological phenomena function, which received the generalized names "psychology of the nation", "class psychology", "religious psychology", "psychology of politics". They are distinguished by complex content, ambiguously interpreted by many scientists, various forms of manifestation. They are studied by the relevant branches of social psychology: ethnic psychology, psychology of classes, psychology of religion, political psychology.

In small groups, there are mainly such socio-psychological phenomena as interpersonal relationships, group aspirations, moods, opinions and traditions. It should be remembered that it is in small groups that direct and close contacts are made between all the people who make them up. While in large groups such comprehensive contacts between all their members are impossible. The branch of social psychology that studies socio-psychological phenomena and processes in small groups is called the psychology of a small group.

Secondly, in addition to organized communities, there are also unorganized communities, by which it is customary to understand the masses of people (the crowd and their other varieties). The socio-psychological phenomena that arise here are usually called mass-like, and the behavior of people in them is called spontaneous. These usually include the psychology of the crowd, the psychology of panic and fear, the psychology of rumors, the psychology of mass communications, the psychology of propaganda (influence), the psychology of advertising, the psychology of public relations, etc. The branch of social psychology that studies these phenomena is called the psychology of mass socio-psychological phenomena.

Thirdly, social psychology also studies the personality, since the latter, in the process of interaction and communication with other personalities, is a completely different phenomenon than an individual who is not included in various social groups and interpersonal relationships. Moreover, under the influence of these relationships, the personality is often transformed. All this takes into account a special branch - the social psychology of personality.

According to their relation to various classes of psychological phenomena, socio-psychological phenomena can be divided into rationally meaningful (social views, ideas, opinions, beliefs, interests and value orientations, traditions of people and their groups), emotionally ordered ( social feelings and moods, psychological climate and atmosphere) and mass-like (spontaneous).

In addition, according to the same criterion, socio-psychological phenomena can be considered as phenomena, as processes, and as formations. However, this classification cannot be absolute, since psychological science considers it possible to study the same phenomenon both as a phenomenon, and as a process, and as complex education. It all depends on what goals a particular researcher pursues.

In terms of sustainability, socio-psychological phenomena are divided into: dynamic (for example, different kinds communication), dynamic-static (for example, opinions and moods) and static (for example, customs, traditions).

And, finally, according to the degree of awareness, socio-psychological phenomena can be conscious and unconscious.

The tasks of social psychology are:

Identifying or clarifying with others social sciences: a) the specifics and originality of the phenomena that make up the psychological essence and content of the social consciousness of people and the psychology of their large and small groups; b) the relationship between their various components; c) the influence of the latter on the development of social life and social relations.

Comprehensive understanding and generalization of data: a) on the sources and conditions for the emergence, formation, development and functioning of socio-psychological phenomena and processes; b) about their impact on the behavior and actions of people as representatives of various social communities.

Research the most significant features and differences of socio-psychological phenomena and processes from other psychological and social phenomena in various groups Oh.

Identification of patterns of occurrence, formation, development and functioning of socio-psychological phenomena and processes in society.

Socio-psychological analysis of interaction, intergroup and interpersonal relationships, communication, perception and knowledge of each other by people, as well as factors that determine the specificity and effectiveness of the influence of these basic socio-psychological phenomena on their joint activities and behavior.

A comprehensive study of the socio-psychological characteristics of the individual and the originality of its socialization in various social conditions.

Understanding the specifics of the functioning of socio-psychological phenomena and processes in a small group and their influence on the emergence of conflicts, the formation psychological climate and atmosphere in it.

Generalization of existing ideas about motivational, intellectual-cognitive, emotional-volitional, communicative-behavioral and other characteristics of representatives of various nations and classes.

Identification of the role and significance of religious psychology in the life of society, its socio-psychological content and forms of functioning, as well as the features of its influence on the interaction and communication of both believers and non-believers.

Comprehensive study of psychological content political life and political activity of people and their groups, the originality of the transformation of the consciousness of society under the influence political processes developing in it.

The study of various mass socio-psychological phenomena and processes, their significance in public life, as well as the identification of their influence on the actions and behavior of people in ordinary, extreme and other conditions.

Socio-psychological interpretation of the essence, content, forms and methods of intergroup and interpersonal influence of people on each other.

Forecasting political, national and other processes in the development of the state (society) on the basis of taking into account socio-psychological factors and the patterns of their formation and development.

The solution of the problems facing social psychology can be achieved in various ways. First, a thorough and comprehensive development of the theoretical and methodological foundations of this branch of knowledge should be carried out. Secondly, a wide field for research activities is the comparative study of socio-psychological phenomena and processes occurring in our country and abroad. Thirdly, social psychology is obliged to cooperate with representatives of other sciences - sociologists, political scientists, teachers, ethnographers, anthropologists, etc.

A feature of social psychology is its broad inclusion in the life of society. When studying the psychological characteristics of both large and small groups, it is associated with specific tasks that society faces. certain type, its traditions and culture.

In connection with the changes taking place in society in recent times, there is a growing need for socio-psychological theory.There is a reassessment of values, a breaking of stereotypes, a change in role behavior, ethno-political conflicts. Real problem mental health society. The new social reality puts forward new tasks.

The main of these tasks are:

) theoretical understanding of the place and role of man in a changing world; identification of types of socio-psychological characters;

) the study of the whole variety of relationships and communication, their changes in modern society;

) the development of a socio-psychological attitude to the nature of the state, politics, economy and society;

) development of theories of social conflicts (political, interstate, ethnic, etc.);

) production theoretical foundations socio-psychological diagnostics, counseling and the provision of various types of assistance to the segments of the population in need of this assistance.

Social psychology should help to understand the mechanisms of criminal behavior, the phenomena of mass strikes and protests of the population, to negotiate for the release of hostages, that is, to take part in solving the problems of a particular society.

Society dictates the problems of social psychology, therefore the main task social psychologist - be able to identify these problems. This part of the work is the most important in the construction of an integral edifice of socio-psychological science.

2. The phenomenon of group pressure

This phenomenon has received in social psychology the name of the phenomenon of conformism. The very word "conformity" in ordinary language has a very definite content and means "adaptation." At the level of everyday consciousness, the phenomenon of conformism has long been recorded in Andersen's fairy tale about the naked king (Kon, 1967). Therefore, in everyday speech, the concept acquires a certain negative connotation, which is extremely harmful to research, especially if they are conducted at the applied level. The matter is further aggravated by the fact that the concept of "conformity" has acquired a specific negative connotation in politics as a symbol of conciliation and conciliation.

In order to somehow separate these different meanings, in the socio-psychological literature they often talk not about conformism, but about conformity or conformal behavior, meaning purely psychological characteristics the position of the individual relative to the position of the group, the acceptance or rejection by him of a certain standard, opinion, characteristic of the group, the measure of the individual's subordination to group pressure. In works recent years the term "social influence" is often used. The concepts opposite to conformity are the concepts of "independence", "independence of position", "resistance to group pressure", etc. On the contrary, similar concepts can be the concepts of "uniformity", "conventionality", although they also contain a different connotation. Uniformity, for example, also means the adoption of certain standards, but the adoption is not carried out as a result of pressure.

Conformity is stated there and then, where and when the existence of a conflict between the opinion of the individual and the opinion of the group is fixed and the overcoming of this conflict in favor of the group. A measure of conformity is a measure of subordination to a group in the case when the opposition of opinions was subjectively perceived by the individual as a conflict. Distinguish between external conformity, when the opinion of the group is accepted by the individual only externally, but in fact he continues to resist it, and internal (sometimes this is what is called true conformism), when the individual really assimilates the opinion of the majority. Internal conformity is the result of overcoming the conflict with the group in its favor.

In studies of conformity, another possible position was discovered, which turned out to be available to be fixed at the experimental level. This is a negative position. When a group puts pressure on an individual, and he resists this pressure in everything, demonstrating at first glance an extremely independent position, by all means, denying all the standards of the group, then this is a case of negativism. Only at first glance, negativism looks like an extreme form of negation of conformity. In fact, as has been shown in many studies, negativism is not true independence.

On the contrary, we can say that this is a specific case of conformity, so to speak, "conformity inside out": if an individual sets as his goal at any cost to resist the opinion of the group, then he is in fact again dependent on the group, because he has to actively produce anti-group behavior, an anti-group position or norm, i.e. be tied to group opinion, but only with the opposite sign ( numerous examples negativism demonstrates, for example, the behavior of adolescents). Therefore, the position that opposes conformity is not negativism, but independence, independence.

The conformity model was first demonstrated in famous experiments S. Asch, carried out in 1951. These experiments are considered classic, despite the fact that they have been subjected to very serious criticism. A group of students was asked to determine the length of the presented line. To do this, each was given two cards - in the left and right hands. On the card in the left hand, one line segment was depicted, on the card in right hand- three segments, and only one of them is equal in length to the segment on the left card. The subjects were asked to determine which of the segments of the right card is equal in length to the segment shown on the left card. When the task was performed individually, everyone solved the problem correctly.

The meaning of the experiment was to reveal the pressure of the group on the opinions of individuals using the "dummy group" method. The experimenter entered into an agreement in advance with all the participants in the experiment, except for one ("naive subject"). The essence of the conspiracy was that when all members of the "dummy" group were sequentially presented with a segment of the left card, they gave a deliberately wrong answer, calling this segment equal to a shorter or longer segment of the right card.

The “naive subject” was the last to answer, and it was important to find out if he could stand up to own opinion(which in the first series was correct in the individual decision) or succumb to the pressure of the group. In Asch's experiment, more than one-third (37%) of the "naive subjects" gave erroneous answers, i.e. demonstrated conformal behavior. In subsequent interviews, they were asked how the situation given in the experiment was subjectively experienced. All the subjects claimed that the opinion of the majority presses very strongly, and even the "independent" admitted that it is very difficult to resist the opinion of the group, since every time it seems that it is you who are mistaken.

There are numerous modifications of Asch's experimental method (for example, the method of R. Crutchfield), but its essence remains unchanged - this is the "dummy group" method, and the group itself was recruited specifically for the purposes of the experiment in the laboratory. Therefore, all attempts to explain both the phenomenon itself and the degree of conformity of various individuals must take into account this essential feature of the group. Based on the self-reports of the subjects and the conclusions drawn by the experimenters, numerous dependencies were identified. Although, on the basis of their own assessments of the results of the experiment by the subjects, the cause of compliance was seen in their personal characteristics (either due to low self-esteem, or due to the recognition of some defects in their own perception), in most explanations, the researchers accepted that conformity is not a strictly personal characteristic of the individual.

Of course, these indicators are significant enough; for example, it was found that the degree of conformity is affected by less developed intellect, and a lower level of development of self-consciousness, and many other circumstances of a similar kind. However, another conclusion was just as definite, namely, that the degree of conformity also depends on such factors as the nature of the experimental situation and the composition and structure of the group. However, the role of these characteristics has not been fully elucidated.

To the most important reasons This applies, first of all, to the laboratory nature of the group, which does not allow us to fully take into account such a factor as the significance for the individual of the opinion expressed. The problem of the significance of the situation in general is very acute for social psychology. In this context, the problem of significance has at least two sides. On the one hand, one can raise the question of whether the presented material is significant for individuals? In Asch's experiments, these are segments different lengths. It is easy to assume that comparing the lengths of these segments is an insignificant task. In a number of experiments, the material was varied, in particular, instead of the lengths of the segments, the areas of geometric figures were compared, etc. All these modifications can, of course, contribute to the selection of more meaningful material for comparison. But the problem of significance in its entirety is still not solved by this, because it has another side as well.

Significant in the full sense of the word is for the individual a situation associated with real activity, with real social connections this personality. Significance in this sense cannot be increased at all by sorting out items for comparison. The conformity revealed in solving such problems may have nothing to do with how the individual will behave in some much more difficult situations of his real life: you can easily yield to the group when comparing the length of lines, areas of geometric shapes, etc., but maintain independence of opinion in the event of, for example, a conflict with immediate supervisor. Most critics rightly point out that the results of Asch's experiments cannot be generalized to real situations because the "group" here is not real social group, but a simple set of people collected specifically for the experiment. Therefore, it is fair to say that what is being studied here is not the pressure of the group on the individual, but the situation of the presence of a set of persons temporarily united to fulfill the task set by the experimenter.

Another reason for criticism of the experiments in question is the equally abstract nature of the individuals involved. This feature of the experiments was pointed out, for example, by R. Bales, who sharply raised the question that very little is known about individuals in Asch's experiments. It is possible, of course, to conduct the subjects on various personality tests and find out the distribution among them of different personal characteristics.

But it is not this side of the matter that is meant, but the social characteristics of individuals - who they are, what their values, beliefs, etc. It is impossible to answer this question without answering the first question, what kind of group is meant. But even pure individual characteristics test subjects may have certain value; however, they were not sufficiently taken into account.

One of the researchers, for example, suggested that in Asch's experiments, different individuals showed different types of conformity: it could be both conformity to the group, and conformity to the experimenter. The effects discussed above, arising in the course of a laboratory socio-psychological experiment, manifest themselves in this case in in full: both "anticipatory evaluation" and "Rosenthal effect", etc. can appear.

He will not simple connection features of conformal and non-conformal behavior (such a result is also possible in a laboratory group), but will demonstrate a conscious recognition by the individual of the norms and standards of the group. Therefore, in reality, there are not two, but three types of behavior (Petrovsky, 1973): 1) intragroup suggestibility, i.e. non-conflict acceptance of the opinion of the group; 2) conformity - conscious external agreement with internal divergence; 3) collectivism, or collectivist self-determination, is the relative uniformity of behavior as a result of the conscious solidarity of the individual with the assessments and tasks of the team.

Although the problem of collectivism - special problem, in this context, it must be emphasized that the phenomenon of group pressure as one of the mechanisms for the formation of a small group (more precisely, the entry of an individual into a group) will inevitably remain a formal characteristic of group life until, when identifying it, the meaningful characteristics of group activity that determine special type relationships between group members. As for the traditional experiments to identify conformity, they retain their value as experiments that allow us to state the presence of the phenomenon itself.

Further research The phenomenon of conformity led to the conclusion that pressure on an individual can be exerted not only by the majority of the group, but also by the minority. Accordingly, M. Deutsch and G. Gerard identified two types group influence: normative (when pressure is exerted by the majority, and his opinion is perceived by a member of the group as a norm) and informational (when pressure is exerted by a minority, and a member of the group considers his opinion only as information, on the basis of which he must make his own choice) (Fig. 12) Thus, the problem of the influence of the majority and the minority, analyzed by S. Moscovici, is of great importance in the context of a small group.

Rice. 12 Types social influence(G. Gerard and M. Deutsch)

style behavior conformism conflict

3. Choosing the best style of behavior in a conflict situation for daily communication

The conflict resolution styles described in the previous chapter form a grid that allows you to quickly and easily select the most appropriate style. This chapter provides more detailed description individual choices and use of these styles to help you better navigate your options.

Power Ratio Estimation

When choosing effective style Conflict resolution is key to two aspects: putting the other person in relation to you and that person's perspective (or "where this person came from").

If you have more power than the other person, then you can use the competitive style and persevere to get what you want. You can force the other person into concession (that is, accommodation). However, if another person has more power, then you should already adapt. If you are trying to reach a compromise in a situation in which the positions of the parties are not equal, then you should keep in mind that the difference in power is of primary importance for the outcome of the conflict. If a person with great power does not agree to forget about this advantage in a conflict situation, then a compromise gives best result for someone with more power. In order to receive most what he wants, he has something to bargain.

Of course, your reaction to a conflict with a person with great power will depend on the specific situation. If you are dealing with such a person who takes a tough stance towards you, then going into a tough confrontation, apparently, is not the best option for you: you will simply lose. You should think about how important the goal is to you and whether you can achieve what you want in an open struggle. If it is important enough, then maybe you should enlist the support of other people or strengthen it in some way. own positions. However, if you feel that you are in a disadvantageous position or that the danger of defeat is too great, then you should adjust to the other person and give in to him. This is true especially in cases where the possible loss is too significant - work, friendship or respect for employees.

Even if there is no difference in power, but the other person is too hard on some issue, you can choose to retreat. If a friend you value has some ideas that you disagree with, then it's better to temporarily agree with them than to insist on your own. By doing so, you can avert an explosion and show respect for a friend, as well as show how much you value your relationship.

The other person's perspective can be extremely important when you're trying to cooperate or reach an honest compromise. To be successful in both cases, both of you must have approximately equal power or be willing to ignore the difference in position. However, this alone is not enough. It is essential that you deal with someone who is willing to kindly discuss and settle the issue. Otherwise, this person may try to take advantage of him, especially if he feels that you are ready to give in. Then you may find that your attempts to cooperate or compromise are rebuffed by the other person's more strong-willed competitiveness trying to sway you into accommodation. Thus, in order for cooperation or compromise to be effective, both of you must believe in it. If you feel that the style you have chosen is not liked by the other person, then this style may not bring you success.

An honest and friendly approach to conflict resolution is ideal. However, you will also want to identify those situations in which you will not be able to achieve this, since the difference in positions or perspectives makes you vulnerable to an assertive or self-serving person. In such cases, it is better to recognize this difference right away and adopt a more defensive style than to waste time trying to apply those approaches that can be effective with equality or with mutual honesty and goodwill.

Determining Your Priorities

When you are involved in a conflict, it is important to keep your interests in mind, but it is also important that your own interests do not overshadow everything else. For example, you want to provide some opportunity to another person. And you want to know your needs in perspective; want to prioritize. You should evaluate how important your goal is to you in relation to the difficulties that you will have to overcome in order to achieve it. If the goal is worth it, then maybe it's worth borrowing more strong-willed position to achieve it in this situation. Or perhaps you will discover a way to achieve this goal by avoiding the situation and therefore avoiding the conflict. On the other hand, you may have other priorities, such as keeping the peace in your relationship or keeping your job. Wherein best approaches may turn out to be a retreat or a compromise, at least for the first time.

One person at the seminar complained about a hateful situation at work. Jerry worked as a programmer. He tried to be a calm, reserved person; and he felt oppressed by the aggressiveness and power struggles he saw around him at work. He commented on it like this: "I'm tired of watching this competition every day. I see clashes between managers and employees. And I hate these pictures." In particular, he felt constantly humiliated when his manager constantly reminded him what to do and when to do it.

Jeri wanted to know how he should be in this situation. Should he defend himself and take a more competitive approach? Or give in and adapt? Maybe get rid of this situation altogether by finding another job? Or is some kind of compromise and cooperation possible? Because he had so little power, he doubted he had any other choice but to obey, which he did. However, this made him resentful.

In deciding what to do, Jerry had to start by identifying his priorities. He had to evaluate the possible results of applying different styles of conflict resolution. So in the workshop, I asked him to list and order his priorities: "What is most important to you? Keep your job? Find new job? Oppose the manager, defending their rights and dignity, regardless of possible losses?"

With the help of the other participants in the workshop, Jeri went over each possible choice and the likely outcome. Since he expressed a desire to confront his boss, the group considered the style of competition first. Jeri realized that it was not worth entering into an open fight with the boss, because the latter has more power, and he is the type of person who prefers to insist on his own. Therefore, the style of competition would probably be inefficient. This style would push Jerry into a direct confrontation with the boss, and since he takes more high position, Jerry would lose. He might even lose his job.

What about the style of accommodation he was now following? By at least, the device satisfied the boss and saved the job. But it made him unhappy. One way to deal with this problem was to use mental evasion techniques in conjunction with accommodation. This would allow Jeri to psychologically isolate himself and separate himself from the concessions he would be forced to make. And Jerry learned this way of self-defense against the negative emotions caused by the need to obey the boss:

Use visualization or mental exercises and say to yourself, "I won't worry about it."

Try to establish a protective wall of white energy substance around you with the help of visualization or with the help of appropriate words addressed to yourself. You can then use this wall to reflect any negative emotions coming from the person you are in conflict with. Can you imagine how these negative emotions bounce off your "shield", and you are behind it and protected from attack.

However, if the situation became too oppressive for Jeri, then this evasive style might not be effective enough. In this case, it would be better to get out of the conflict completely by finding another job or moving to another department.

Finally, Jeri appreciated the possibilities of collaborative and compromise styles. Both of them did not seem suitable for this situation, because his boss had much more power. It seemed unlikely that he would give up anything to satisfy Jeri's wishes. Because collaborative and compromise styles require relatively equal contributions to a problem—some gains, some lose—they are rarely productive in situations of such inequalities.

After looking at all the options, it seemed like the only possible styles for Jerry were accommodating and avoiding if he wanted to keep his job. Since this was his main priority, he discarded the latter option. The device, from his point of view, worked poorly, but objectively this choice seemed the best. In order to neutralize the feeling of resentment by following this style, Jerry decided that he should try to combine it with the technique of mental avoidance. If this does not lead to a positive result, then he will have nothing left but to quit his job. If successful, he will move to another department of the company with another manager. At the very least, avoiding conflict will give final decision Problems.

Identification of real problems and interests

Just as you must look behind your desires in a conflict situation to consider your priorities, so you must look beyond your superficial desires to identify the hidden needs and interests of both parties. Your superficial desires, demands, or attitudes may cause conflict because your desires, demands, or attitudes may not be compatible. However, these desires, demands, or positions may reflect hidden interests that are most important to you. If satisfying superficial desires may seem impossible, then ways to satisfy hidden interests may exist.

The key to solving the problem is to identify your true interests. If you're not sure what you want, then you won't know how to get what you want.

So key factor in choosing the nature of the action to achieve a solution is knowledge. (This kind of awareness will also help you identify those situations in which solving a problem is not worth fighting for.) Basically, you need to be aware of three things:

a) your own hidden desires and interests;

) hidden desires and interests of another person;

) what is required to satisfy these hidden desires and interests.

There are two ways to get this information. The first is their open discussion. The second involves using your intuition to look into the hidden essence of what is happening with the person with whom you are in conflict.

The preceding chapters have detailed both of these methods, as well as the need to appeal to latent interests to develop any long-term solution to a problem in situations where underlying needs really come into play. essential role. However, in many daily situations, you may not want to waste time on this. For example, you may not want to look into the hidden interests of a neighbor who parks his car under your house all the time. In this case, you may choose an approach to conflict resolution that focuses on a superficial issue - compromise, say, instead of cooperation, which involves a deeper exploration of the causes of the conflict. In order to come to this decision, you would have to know the hidden interests that exist, which, however, may not be relevant to solving the problem. Of course, you should not discard this path if your neighbor makes political arguments (for example, the right to park your car anywhere on the common streets). You can think about what you can offer him in order to implement some compromise option (for example, no longer do what he does not like: do not honk under his windows, rushing the children to school in the morning).

On the other hand, you'll want to identify those situations in which you should dig deeper and choose the appropriate style. Let's say if another person seems very unhappy in a situation that seems trivial to you; in this case, look at the problem from the point of view of hidden interests. Being aware of them can lead you to recognize the need to give up your own needs as less important than the other person's hidden needs, and thus choose a style of accommodation. If your needs are equally important, then you can look for ways to cooperate. By cooperating or compromising consciously (rather than yielding in weakness), you will try to get the other person to share their needs. To this end, active listening should be used. You will also want to open up and directly discuss your own hidden needs and interests in the course of the collaboration. In this case, visualization techniques and self-knowledge will help you. It is important to identify the different levels of wants and needs that may exist; what matters is your ability to choose the level at which to act; it is important to remember that specific interests can be served through different approaches to conflict resolution.

Definition of reaction options

Achieve complete awareness of different strategies and choosing the best of them may take some time. However, if you keep thinking about them and contemplating how to use them, then this awareness will become a natural part of your life. You will want to develop your ability to respond appropriately when you are faced with a conflict situation or the potential for conflict. In fact, after a while you can develop this ability so that you act subconsciously, as if "on autopilot".

For example, imagine that you are involved in a prolonged conflict with a neighbor or with a co-worker. This conflict situation is repeated every day or every week, whenever you meet this person. At the beginning, you can approach the conflict consciously, thinking about what style to use to resolve it. Perhaps as you cycle through the various styles, you'll say something like this to yourself: "Okay, that approach didn't work. What style should I try now?" This way of consciously defining your own behavior in light of each individual style's description is a good place to start.

But soon, relying on own experience, you will be able to easily determine which style is most suitable and most convenient for you in each situation, whether it is the need to assert your rights or avoid and avoid conflict, accommodation, compromise or cooperation. You will create your own conflict analysis scheme and a catalog of effective (and ineffective) approaches to conflict resolution.

Using a style set

You may only need one approach to resolve a conflict. But in other cases, it may be necessary to use a combination of styles, especially if the conflict is complex or protracted. It may turn out that one approach is most effective for resolving one part of the conflict, and a completely different one for other parts of it. One style may be good for a temporary solution to the problem, but then, if it comes up again, a different style may be required to finally resolve the conflict.

Imagine, for example, that you had a conflict with your co-workers at a time when something was depressing you. And you don't want to try to fix the problem right away. Therefore, you can start with avoidance in order to delay the resolution of the conflict. But then you discover that one of the parties to the conflict is in a critical situation and needs your immediate help. It may turn out that this request for help without any concessions in return or without considering your own situation will cause you to feel resentful. It may even increase the conflict. However, you may find it appropriate to accommodate yourself to the other person until the crisis has been overcome. Then, when the pressure on you is gone, you can sit down and speak your mind. This may be the right time to work together to develop an acceptable solution to the problem through compromise or cooperation.

Because you pay a lot of attention to ways to resolve conflicts, over time you will find that you become much better at choosing the best approach. You will also find that you are more flexible and can easily change the style if the first attempt fails.

Likewise, in some situations you can use multiple styles for different aspects of the same conflict. For example, you can reach a compromise in order to remove some obstacle to solving the problem as a whole, accommodate the interests of another person that are too important for him in some area, persevere in achieving your true needs in some aspect, completely avoid discussion other matters if you decide that they are not very important to you, and use a collaborative style to serve the deepest interests of both parties. Long term business meeting or personal relationships are a good example of situations where, over time, different approaches.

The best teacher and adviser in choosing the optimal approach and in its efficient use- This life practice. However, the above will help you better prepare for real life situations. conflict situations so that you can meet them fully armed.

Bibliography

1.Artemov V.A. Introduction to social psychology. M., 1927.

.Becker G., Boskov A. Modern sociological theory in its continuity and development. Per. from English. M., 1961.

.Kovalev A.G. On the subject of social psychology. "Bulletin of Leningrad State University", 1959, No. 11.

.Moskoviy S. Society and theory in social psychology // Modern foreign social psychology. Texts. M., 1984.

.Myasishchev V.N. Personality and neuroses. M., 1949.

.Parygin B.D. Fundamentals of socio-psychological theory. M., 1971.

Tutoring

Need help learning a topic?

Our experts will advise or provide tutoring services on topics of interest to you.
Submit an application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

Portal for the student. Self-training

The style of resolving interpersonal conflict by force is. Conflict Resolution Styles (for Conflict Participants)

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

Similar Documents

Conflict Resolution Styles

Competition style

Collaboration Style

Compromise style

Avoidance (avoidance) style

Fixture style

Basic ways to resolve conflicts

Negative methods of conflict resolution

1. Restriction of the opponent's freedom

2. Disabling the governing bodies

3. The delay method

Positive methods of conflict resolution

1. Negotiations

2. Method of principled negotiations

Tutoring

Portal for the student. Self-training

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

Similar Documents

Conflict Resolution Styles

Competition style

Collaboration Style

Compromise style

Avoidance (avoidance) style

Fixture style

Basic ways to resolve conflicts

Negative methods of conflict resolution

1. Restriction of the opponent's freedom

2. Disabling the governing bodies

3. The delay method

Positive methods of conflict resolution

1. Negotiations

2. Method of principled negotiations

Tutoring

RELATED ARTICLES