Discipline "Banking"

Banks carry out cash transactions in accordance with the cash plan approved by the Central Bank based on their projects. Cash planning bank is based on cash

customer requests.

Cash planning aims to:

a) determine the cash flow through the enterprise’s cash desk;

b) establish the cash flow for current financial transactions, including the payment of salaries;

c) calculate the need for cash to pay wages, taking into account deductions and transfers, and order it from the bank in a timely manner;

d) determine the limit of remaining cash at the enterprise’s cash desk and the procedure for cash collection by the bank.

Cash flow forecast- a detailed estimate of the company’s monthly cash revenue and expenses. As a result, an indicator of cash flow for the month and its cumulative value for the past period can be obtained.

81 Classification of conflicts. Examples of Conflict Resolution Techniques.

Discipline "Management"

Conflict (lat. conflictus) is a collision of oppositely directed, mutually incompatible tendencies in the consciousness of an individual, in interpersonal interactions or interpersonal relationships of individuals or groups of people, associated with acute negative emotional experiences.

There are numerous conflict classifications.

By focus conflicts are divided into “horizontal” and “vertical”, as well as “mixed”. Horizontal conflicts include those conflicts in which persons subordinate to each other are not involved. Vertical conflicts include those in which persons subordinate to one another participate. Mixed conflicts have both vertical and horizontal components.

By meaning For groups and organizations, conflicts are divided into constructive (creative, positive) and destructive (destructive, negative). The former bring benefit to the cause, the latter - harm. You can’t leave the first, but you need to get away from the second.

By nature of the reasons conflicts can be divided into objective and subjective. The first are generated by objective reasons, the second by subjective, personal reasons. An objective conflict is often resolved constructively; a subjective conflict, on the contrary, is usually resolved destructively. O.

Classification of conflicts by type social formalization: formal and informal (formal and informal). These conflicts, as a rule, are associated with the organizational structure, its characteristics and can be both “horizontal” and “vertical”.

In my own way socio-psychological effect conflicts are divided into two groups:

developing, affirming, activating each of the conflicting individuals and the group as a whole;

promoting self-affirmation or development of one of the conflicting individuals or groups as a whole and suppression, limitation of another individual or group of persons.

By volume of social interaction Conflicts are classified into intergroup, intragroup, interpersonal and intrapersonal.

Intergroup conflicts assume that the parties to the conflict are social groups pursuing incompatible goals and interfering with each other through their practical actions. This may be a conflict between representatives of different social categories (for example, in an organization: workers and engineers, line and office staff, trade union and administration, etc.).

Intragroup conflict As a rule, it includes self-regulatory mechanisms. If group self-regulation does not work, and the conflict develops slowly, then conflict in the group becomes the norm of relations. If the conflict develops quickly and there is no self-regulation, then destruction occurs. If a conflict situation develops in a destructive manner, then a number of dysfunctional consequences are possible. These may be general dissatisfaction, poor morale, decreased cooperation, strong devotion to one's group with great unproductive competition with other groups.

Intrapersonal conflict- this is, as a rule, a conflict of motivation, feelings, needs, interests and behavior in the same person.

Interpersonal conflict- This is the most frequently occurring conflict. The occurrence of interpersonal conflicts is determined by the situation, the personal characteristics of people, the individual’s attitude to the situation and the psychological characteristics of interpersonal relationships. The emergence and development of interpersonal conflict is largely determined by demographic and individual psychological characteristics. For women, conflicts related to personal problems are more common, for men - with professional activities.

Evasion

This style implies that a person is trying to avoid conflict. His position is not to get into situations that provoke the emergence of contradictions, not to enter into a discussion of issues that are fraught with disagreement. Then you won’t have to get into an excited state, even if you are working on solving a problem.

Smoothing.

With this style, a person is convinced that there is no need to get angry, because “we are all one happy team, and we should not rock the boat.” Such a “smoother” tries not to let out the signs of conflict, appealing to the need for solidarity. But at the same time, you can forget about the problem underlying the conflict. The result may be peace and quiet, but the problem will remain, and eventually there will be an “explosion.”

Compulsion.

Within this style, attempts to force people to accept their point of view at any cost prevail. Anyone who tries to do this is not interested in the opinions of others, usually behaves aggressively, and uses power through coercion to influence others. This style can be effective where the leader has great power over subordinates, but it can suppress the initiative of subordinates and creates a greater likelihood that the wrong decision will be made, since only one point of view is presented. It can cause resentment, especially among younger and more educated staff.

Compromise.

This style is characterized by accepting the other party's point of view, but only to some extent. The ability to compromise is highly valued in management situations, as it minimizes ill will, which often makes it possible to quickly resolve a conflict to the satisfaction of both parties. However, using compromise at an early stage of a conflict that has arisen over an important issue can reduce the time it takes to find alternatives.

Solving the problem.

This style is an acknowledgment of differences of opinion and a willingness to engage with other points of view in order to understand the causes of the conflict and find a course of action acceptable to all parties. The one who uses this style does not try to achieve his goal at the expense of others, but rather looks for the best solution. This style is the most effective in solving organizational problems.

Knocking on Heaven's Door [A Scientific View of the Universe] Randall Lisa

WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF MEASUREMENTS?

Measurements may not be perfect. In scientific research - as in any decision making - we have to determine for ourselves an acceptable level of uncertainty. Only in this case can we move forward. For example, if you take a medicine and hope it will relieve a severe headache, then you might only need to know that the medicine helps the average person 75% of the time. On the other hand, if changing your eating habits does little to reduce your already low chances of developing cardiovascular disease (for example, from 5 to 4.9%), it may not be enough to convince you to give up your favorite cakes.

In politics, the decision point is even less certain. The public is generally unclear about how much research needs to be done before changing laws or imposing restrictions. The necessary calculations here are complicated by many factors. As discussed in the previous chapter, due to the ambiguity of goals and methods, it is very difficult, and sometimes even impossible, to conduct any reliable cost-benefit analysis.

Columnist The New York Times Nicholas Kristof, advocating caution in handling potentially hazardous chemicals such as bisphenol-A (BPA) in food or food packaging, wrote: “BPA research has been sounding the alarm for decades, and the data is still complex and ambiguous. That’s life: in the real world, legislative action usually has to be taken on the basis of ambiguous and controversial data.”

None of this is to say that we should not seek to quantify costs and benefits when setting policy. However, it is clear that we need to be clear about what each estimate means, how much it may vary depending on initial assumptions or goals, and what was and was not taken into account in the calculations. Cost-benefit analysis can be useful, but it can also provide a false sense of certainty, reliability and security, which often leads to rash decisions.

Fortunately for us, physicists tend to pose simpler questions than those faced by public policy makers. When dealing with pure knowledge that is not expected to be used in practice in the near future, you think about something completely different. Measurements in the world of elementary particles are also much simpler, at least in theory. All electrons are the same in nature. When making measurements, you have to think about statistical and systemic errors, but you can safely forget about the heterogeneity of the population. The behavior of one electron gives us reliable information about the behavior of all electrons. Nevertheless, the concepts of statistical and systemic error are also applicable here.

However, even in “simple” physical systems, it is necessary to decide in advance what accuracy we need, because there are no ideal measurements. In practice, the question comes down to how many times the experimenter should repeat the measurement and how precise a measuring device should be used. The decision is his. The acceptable level of uncertainty is determined by the questions asked. Different purposes require different levels of precision and accuracy.

For example, atomic clocks measure time with an accuracy of one part in ten trillion, but few people need such an accurate representation of time. The exception is experiments to test Einstein's theory of gravity: there cannot be excessive precision and accuracy in them. So far, all tests show that this theory works, but measurements are constantly being improved. With higher precision, previously unseen deviations may appear, representing new physical effects that could not be noticed during previous, less precise experiments. If this happens, the observed deviations will allow us to look into the realm of new physical phenomena. If not, you will have to conclude that Einstein's theory is even more accurate than previously established. We will know that it can be applied confidently over a wider range of energies and distances, and with greater accuracy.

If we “just” need to deliver a man to the Moon, then we, naturally, cannot do without knowledge of physical laws, sufficient to not miss, but it is not necessary to involve the general theory of relativity, and even more so it is not necessary to take into account even more minor potential effects representing possible deviations from it.