Methods for resolving conflicts briefly. Conflict Resolution Techniques

In the previous lessons of our training on conflict management, we covered an extensive theoretical part concerning this issue, namely: we talked about what the causes of conflicts are and what are the stages of their development. We also looked at the practical aspect and presented to your attention methods for preventing and managing conflicts. However, if due attention has been paid to theory and the knowledge gained is quite enough to understand the basics of conflict management, then practice is far from being limited to one lesson. Moreover, even a dozen lessons will not exhaust it, because the relevance of the problem is great and a huge amount of research and work is devoted to it. But we, nevertheless, still strive to provide you with the most useful and effective recommendations, which is why we continue to talk about practice.

Now we will talk about what to do in situations when the situation gets out of control and grows from potentially dangerous to posing a real threat - about what methods exist for resolving and resolving conflicts. But first, let's figure out what it is all about?

What is conflict management and resolution?

The settlement and resolution of conflicts is usually understood as a system of measures aimed at preventing conflicts and finding optimal ways out of them. For many years, this problem has not received due attention either in theory or in practice. Only in recent years have communities of conflictologists and various organizations involved in applied conflictology begun to form, and thematic literature has also begun to be published. However, even now it is impossible to talk about the fact that there is any effective system in the field of conflict resolution. We can even speak with confidence about the opposite state of affairs, because when resolving conflicts, a number of mistakes are often made.

Main mistakes in conflict resolution

When resolving conflicts, people usually make the following mistakes:

Failure to timely implement appropriate conflict resolution measures
Attempts to resolve conflicts without finding out their actual causes
The use of exclusively aggressive methods and punitive measures or, on the contrary, purely diplomatic methods in resolving conflicts
Using template schemes to resolve conflicts without studying their types and features.

Another, and quite significant, omission is that proper attention is not paid to the prevention of conflict situations, because how can one talk about influencing them without having information about their occurrence, without knowing what they can develop into, etc. . We have already touched on this topic in more detail in the last lesson, but given that all aspects of conflictology are closely intertwined, we should still return for a moment to the issue of conflict prevention and recall what their prevention is.

Conflict Prevention

Conflict prevention is mainly about predicting them, for example, the severity of the consequences or the time of onset. Carrying out conflict prevention activities is only possible using methods such as expert surveys, experimental and mathematical modeling, extrapolation, etc. In addition, prevention should be carried out at all levels: personal level, micro level, average level and macro level.

Conflict prevention measures should be related to the elimination of conditions conducive to the emergence of conflicts. The basis here is such measures as eliminating the deformation of social relations, dividing society into social strata, social psychohygiene and social protection of the population, psychotherapy (individual, group, mass), psychoprophylaxis, as well as training in social interaction, education, education, etc.

All these nuances must be taken into account, because It is much easier to eliminate a problem in its bud than to deal with it later, resorting to all sorts of methods, techniques and tricks. But, of course, there are no methods that 100% guarantee that conflict will not arise, and conflicts should be perceived as an integral part of human life. And if problems arise, then you need to be fully armed, i.e. be prepared for them and be able to resolve them. So what does conflict resolution mean? How does this happen and how to learn it?

Conflict resolution

When starting a conversation about conflict resolution, it should first of all be emphasized that the very concept of “conflict resolution” has two meanings:

Resolving conflicts by their subjects themselves
Conflict resolution based on identifying their causes and neutralizing them, as well as taking measures to prevent open conflict between subjects

Conflict resolution, as a serious practical tool, cannot be carried out without knowledge of its features. And even this does not always guarantee that the problem situation will be resolved successfully. And this depends not so much on how specific each individual situation is and what this specificity is, but on what measures should be taken to resolve the conflict. And here we should strive to ensure that measures aimed at dealing with the fact of conflict correspond to the scheme below:

Analysis and determination of the causes of conflicts and the reasons for the conflict behavior of their subjects (conflict cartography);
Making a decision to enter into a conflict, taking into account its outcome;
Implementation of a decision to enter into conflict.

In practice, in resolving a conflict, everything depends on the position of the subjects resolving it. This position can be expectant, authoritative, negatively competent, leading to escalation, rational, or based on a deep understanding of the causes of the conflict. The point of conflict resolution is to influence both its causes and its participants.

Methods for resolving conflicts can be completely different, from eliminating their causes and containing the situation to reorienting the attitudes of the participants, the purpose of which is to form in them the conviction that it is necessary to abandon destructive conflict interaction. Methods can also be socio-psychological, administrative or complex. If we consider the issue of resolution, we can distinguish between seemingly resolved conflicts, partially resolved conflicts and completely resolved conflicts.

And given the fact that conflict in the abstract cannot exist in nature, there are no universal methods of settlement and resolution suitable for any type of conflict. To resolve an interpersonal conflict, some methods are used; to resolve a family conflict, second methods; to resolve a military conflict, third methods are used. Approaches to conflict resolution are selected depending on their theoretical understanding.

The problem of conflict resolution and resolution today is very relevant in many countries around the world, and therefore it receives great attention. Particularly acute is the question of the role and functions of civil services, situations related to terrorist attacks, strikes and other movements that are potentially dangerous to humans, as well as the question of law and order in the army. In this regard, state governments are even developing special technologies for conducting operations to resolve conflicts and systems of behavior in conflict situations. For example, in the USA there is even a position of conflict manager.

It should also be said that the terms “resolution” and “settlement” of conflicts should not be identified with each other.

Conflict resolution - This is a set of measures aimed at eliminating the source of conflict interaction and ultimately satisfying the needs and interests of the subjects of the conflict. In the social aspect, this process can last for many years.

Conflict resolution - This is work aimed at suppressing aggressive actions and achieving compromises that suit them, which will be more beneficial for them than continuing conflict interaction. Moreover, conflict resolution through negotiations, arbitration and mediation is used in practice much more often than resolution, and is achieved many times faster than it.

EXAMPLE: The most unproductive and primitive method of resolving a conflict is the use of force (for example, the start of hostilities), because in this case, there is a high probability of significant losses by all subjects of the problem situation and even escalation of the conflict. For this reason, in addition to this method, the truce method is used.

The conclusion of a truce is largely a tactical technique or an element of strategy. A form of truce can be a renunciation of aggressive actions through intermediaries (for example, the media), a withdrawal from the line of interaction between the parties to the conflict, a temporary renunciation of aggressive actions (for example, a temporary cessation of shelling), etc.

But the truce method is not very effective, because it is only temporary, the parties do not give each other any obligations, and no sanctions are established for violating the truce.

The most suitable method for eliminating a conflict is the conclusion of an agreement to end hostility (for example, a peace treaty). But reaching agreement is quite problematic, because... may be required to be competent in certain issues: political, cultural, economic, etc.

However, along with less effective or more radical methods, there is a better way to resolve conflicts in many aspects - negotiations, to which we will pay special attention. But before we move on to talking about negotiations, we should say a few words about how a conflict situation should be analyzed, because without knowing its features, hoping for success is, at a minimum, naive and ridiculous, and at a maximum, impractical and dangerous.

Analysis of a conflict situation

Analysis of a conflict situation in the process of conflict resolution is based on the following points:

Analysis of the sources of the conflict, namely: its historical, economic, social, national and other prerequisites; subjective or objective experiences of subjects; moral and humane aspects; as well as the depth of the conflict: contradictory views and opinions of the parties, their positions or complete confrontation;
Analysis of the so-called “biography” of the conflict: its history and the background against which it developed; growth; priority methods of struggle of subjects; moments of crisis and turning points; victims and other consequences;
Analysis of the subjects of the conflict, i.e. people, groups, organizations. The indicator of the social complexity of the conflict is determined by calculating the number of participants and their real strengths;
Analysis of the positions and relationships of subjects: formal and informal, private and general; the scale of relationships, the roles of individuals and groups in the conflict; features of personal relationships between the parties - leaders and ordinary participants;
Analysis of attitudes towards the conflict, in other words, analysis of the question of whether the parties to the conflict have the desire to resolve it, whether they plan to do this independently or rely on external influences and factors; what the parties to the conflict expect, what they hope for, what conditions they put forward, etc.

Only after sufficiently analyzing the conflict situation does it make sense to conceive negotiations and try to exert some influence on the opponent/opponents.

Negotiations as the main method of resolving conflicts

To begin with, it is worth noting that agreement between the parties to the conflict is achieved without intermediaries only in very rare cases. Mediators serve in a conflict as arbitrators, peacemakers, equalizers of the balance of interests of subjects and parties conducting negotiations. The gradual improvement of the practice of resolving conflict situations in the world in general (let alone small-level conflicts) has become the beginning of the creation of innovative methods that are based on sudden changes in the qualitative state of problem situations. And in most cases, these methods involve the use of third parties or other methods of external influence. Let us give several examples to prove this.

EXAMPLE: In world practice, quite effective ways of containing conflicting parties have already been developed. If these are micro-level conflicts (in families, at work, in a work team, etc.), then the role of mediators can be played by friends, colleagues, bosses, lawyers, etc. If these are mid- or macro-level conflicts (wars, uprisings, strikes, pickets, etc.), then army forces, police, riot police, special forces, the UN, etc. can act as mediators.

EXAMPLE: Since the UN was created in 1945, there have been over a hundred large-scale conflicts around the world, with a total death toll of approximately 20 million people. In most of these conflicts, the Security Council has resorted to the use of the veto, a power that allows an individual or group of individuals to unilaterally block any decision. But over time, the number of appeals to the UN increased, and this mechanism for ensuring security with its help became part of the arsenal of the main methods of conflict resolution, as well as their prevention.

The UN armed forces, whose activities are aimed at maintaining peace, are represented by various troops provided by UN member countries. The purpose of these armed forces is to contribute in every way to the prevention of hostilities, as well as to restore and maintain law and order, and ensure a favorable environment. Initially, they were assigned the powers to conduct negotiations, persuade opposing parties, conduct observations and all kinds of investigations.

Any activity aimed at resolving conflicts must proceed, first of all, from the premises of humanistic psychology. The position of the parties occupies a particularly important place here. Conflict resolution must be approached not from the position of “victory-defeat”, but from the position of such a mentality, the basis of which is a non-violent picture of the world, a “win-win” scheme, the desire to achieve agreement and personal growth. After all, the main task of conflict resolution is to achieve peace, stop aggressive confrontation, and find a compromise.

EXAMPLE: After the collapse of the USSR, violent conflicts arose on ethnic grounds in Tajikistan, Transnistria and South Ossetia, between Abkhazia and Georgia. To resolve conflicts, special models (Transnistrian, Georgian-Abkhaz, South Ossetian) of peacekeeping processes were developed. And their peculiarity was that Russia assumed the functions of a neutral force.

EXAMPLE: Resolving conflicts that resulted in strikes is also important. Russia has extensive experience in this regard. More specifically, the Russian government often resorts to the practice of social partnership, the purpose of which is to find and conclude acceptable solutions. The most important role in the process of resolving industrial conflicts is played by the organization of negotiations.

In addition, a special mechanism for the consideration of collective labor disputes has been developed and operates in developing and developed countries. It is provided by the ILO (International Labor Organization). For example, ILO Convention No. 154 of 1981, entitled “Collective Bargaining”, applies to all sectors of economic activity. It proclaims the main provisions for conducting negotiations within the arbitration or conciliation mechanism.

Resolving conflict relations involves carrying out certain preparatory work to ensure that the conflict is resolved not by aggressive, but by peaceful means. And the first thing you need to pay attention to here is the extinguishing of emotional intensity.

EXAMPLE: If a national conflict flared up and then turned into open armed confrontation, attempts to arrange negotiations between the conflicting parties will be useless. First of all, it is necessary to reach an agreement (for which a mediator must be used) on a cessation of hostilities, even if only temporarily.

Direct exchange of points of view will be effective only if the conflict has not yet reached the peak of its intensity, and also if the subjects have common ground.

For this reason, if there is an escalation of the conflict, the main task will be to try to prevent its parties from making direct contact, and also to, using an intermediary, begin to establish communication between the parties and exchange information between them.

But here it is very important to keep in mind that the “cold period” between the parties to the conflict should not be very long. If this condition is not met, the parties to the conflict (or at least one of them) may regard this as an unwillingness to solve the problem, as a result of which the situation may worsen and the parties will come into direct contact.

By and large, all researchers who study the problem of analysis and organization of negotiations have one common point of contact - these are the stages of the negotiation process.

The negotiation process should consist of the following stages:

Preparing for negotiations
Conduct of negotiations
Analysis of negotiation results
Fulfillment of agreements

And the process of finding solutions to resolve the conflict should include the following stages:

Mutual clarification of the positions, points of view and interests of the subjects of the conflict;
Discussion of the positions, points of view and interests of the subjects of the conflict;
Coordination of subjects' positions and development of agreements.

The negotiations themselves will look something like this:

Preparatory stage

Before actors begin to develop agreements, they must find out and discuss each other's points of view. Experts consider negotiations as a special process during which information uncertainty is removed through the understanding of opposing positions by subjects. This process is most intense at its beginning. For this reason, it is conventionally called research.

First stage

At the first stage, the search and finding of common ground by subjects is of particular importance. But here we need a clear understanding that under the same definitions, formulations and terms, subjects mean the same things. Otherwise, the agreements and agreements reached by the subjects may be disrupted, and the conflict situation may worsen, as a result of which the confrontation will intensify. Negotiations should begin with introductory words and explanations, which are voiced by the mediator. He is also obliged to voice the purpose of the negotiations and outline their rules.

Main stage

After the mediator has brought the parties to the conflict up to date, the main stage of negotiations begins. The subjects of the conflict are given the opportunity to express their point of view in order of priority. Next, there is a step-by-step discussion of the problem, the adoption of specific decisions and agreements, first on specific issues, and then on the general topic.

Results of negotiations

The successful completion of negotiations depends on whether the following rules are observed:

You should not discuss those aspects of the problem that do not bring concrete results.
The main problem must be broken down into smaller issues and discussed step by step.
During the negotiation process, you need to follow the established order of discussion of issues
During the discussion, it is necessary to move from small agreements to more serious ones, as well as draw conclusions, sum up, summarize
It is necessary to respond to any positive aspects and constructive actions and proposals of the parties
It is necessary to attract the attention of the parties to those points that can unite them
It is necessary to make references to agreements already reached
It is necessary to establish agreements regarding general principles of interaction

At the main stage, when the problem is discussed, the attention of the participants is directed mainly to expressing their own position, and this stage will be of greatest importance if the subjects of the conflict (or at least one of them) are focused on resolving the issue, which will ensure realization of their own interests. In this case, a heated discussion may flare up, which may be replaced by the so-called “dead period,” during which the natural course of negotiations is suspended.

EXAMPLE: During the negotiation process, the parties may begin to demonstrate their disinterest in meetings, contacts and any other interaction. As a result, there may be talk that the negotiations will be stopped altogether.

In such a situation, it can be effective to take a break so that each party can assess the situation, consider alternative courses of action and solutions to the problem, hold meetings with “their” people, or generally just take a break from the conflict resolution process. In addition, informal consultations and meetings may be helpful.

If the “deaf time” is successfully overcome, then the negotiation process will return to its natural rhythm. It is here that subjects most often begin to coordinate their positions. It is important to note that depending on what issues are being discussed, agreement on positions can be understood as either compromise concepts or issues that were previously discussed, but could become part of the final solution.

However, the coordination of positions is not yet an agreement, but serves only as a general “outline”. Moreover, the approval process has two phases: searching and defining a general scheme, and further discussion of details. Finding a general outline most often means establishing the framework of the agreement, and discussing the details means editing the agreement in order to formulate its final version.

This approach is very effective when applied to many negotiations, especially when the negotiations are planned to be complex and multifaceted. It can reduce the time it takes to come to a compromise, reach agreements, and also makes the discussion more productive. By developing a general scheme of negotiations and resorting to its detailing, the participants take turns going through the main stages: clarifying each other’s positions, discussing them and agreeing on them.

Of course, the marked stages do not have to strictly correspond to the presented order. When clarifying positions, participants can immediately come to agreement on some issues or discuss their points of view, or they can move on to clarifying individual nuances at the end of the negotiations. Although, speaking in general, the sequence that we talked about above must be followed, because otherwise, negotiations may be delayed or even broken down. It all depends on the specifics of each individual situation: sometimes one stage can take only a secondary place, while another can occupy a central place, and vice versa.

Along with the negotiation method, there are a number of methods for resolving and resolving conflicts that can be used if it is not possible to negotiate.

Other methods of conflict resolution and resolution

Other methods of conflict resolution and resolution depend on the characteristics of each problem situation and should be used based on this situation.

Intrapersonal methods. They have an impact on an individual and imply adequate organization of his behavior.

EXAMPLE: The ability to justify one’s position, express an opinion or point of view without provoking a negative or aggressive reaction from another person or group of people, etc.

Structural methods. They influence the subjects of conflicts that arise due to incorrect distribution of responsibilities, rights or functions, as well as improper organization of work or an unfair remuneration system.

EXAMPLE: A clear explanation to the parties to the conflict of their functions and tasks; a specific table of rights and responsibilities; principle of unity of command, etc.

Interpersonal methods. They are considered in two aspects: external and internal. External implies the competent activity of a third party to resolve the conflict. Internal - the use of effective techniques in the process of conflict interaction and everyday communication by the subjects themselves.

EXAMPLE: Coercion, compromise, cooperation, confrontation, evasion, compliance, accommodation, empathy, etc.

Retaliatory aggression. Responsive destructive actions of one subject of the conflict in relation to another when a conflict situation arises.

EXAMPLE: Counterattack, bickering, unwillingness to make concessions, argument, etc.

Avoiding conflict. It is used when the conflict is unnecessary for one of the subjects or the problematic situation is completely banal, as well as in cases where it is necessary to solve more important problems, gain time, or collect missing information.

EXAMPLE: Smoothing, adaptation, inaction, delaying time, concessions, taking the opposite position.

Conflict suppression. It is used in cases where circumstances do not allow entering into an open conflict, it is impossible to involve the opposite party in the situation, or there is a risk of losing authority, image, etc.

EXAMPLE: The “Divide and Conquer” method, quick conflict resolution, hidden actions, etc.

This should also include a very interesting tool for conflict resolution. As such, it does not represent a method of resolution, but it serves as an indispensable assistant for any person faced with unfavorable circumstances within the framework of the topic we are considering. This tool is called a conflict resolution matrix. You can remember the matrix, write it down on a piece of paper and always keep it nearby, or you can simply understand its features. In any case, this will be useful, because... can be useful anytime, anywhere.

So, the matrix:

To understand the essence of the presented matrix, you just need to refer to the description of conflict resolution methods that we talked about at the end of the lesson. Evaluate their advantages and disadvantages, remember how they differ from each other. And in order to more accurately understand the probability with which a particular conflict is most often resolved, in brackets for each of the matrix methods there is a scheme (“win-lose”, “win-win”, etc.), which means the prospect of resolving the conflict for the party applying the method (first indicator) and for the party to whom this method is directed (second indicator). The matrix is extremely easy to use, so mastering it will not pose any difficulties for you.

In conclusion, it remains only to note that the considered methods of resolving and resolving conflicts are not exhaustive or the only one of their kind. The most important thing is to come to the understanding that absolutely anything that helps ensure and maintain normal relations between people can serve as such methods; everything that strengthens their respect and trust in each other.

In our next lesson we will talk in detail about a topic that is one of the most relevant in conflictology and worries many people - intrapersonal conflict.

Test your knowledge

If you want to test your knowledge on the topic of this lesson, you can take a short test consisting of several questions. For each question, only 1 option can be correct. After you select one of the options, the system automatically moves on to the next question. The points you receive are affected by the correctness of your answers and the time spent on completion. Please note that the questions are different each time and the options are mixed.

Basic methods of conflict resolution.

People will inevitably conflict and disagree with each other. As, Carlson repeated, “this is an everyday matter,” but by no means a reason for quarrels. A passionate debater, Voltaire loved to tell his interlocutor that he fundamentally disagreed with his opinion, but was ready to give his life so that he could express it.

When a person finds himself in a conflict situation, in order to more effectively solve the problem, he needs to choose a certain strategy and style of behavior.

Psychologists identify five typical styles of behavior in conflict situations:

Competition;

Evasion;

Device;

Cooperation;

Compromise.

Rivalry style:If a person goes his own way in resolving a conflict, is capable of strong-willed decisions and is not inclined to cooperate, satisfies his own interests to the detriment of the interests of others, forces others to accept their own solution to the problem, then he chooses this style. This style is effective if the person has a certain amount of power and is confident in the correctness of the solution to the problem. He insists on his path of openly fighting for his interests, using coercion and other means of putting pressure on his opponents.

Weaknesses in using the style: alienates others, is not suitable in a subordinate position.

The outcome is important for a person,

The decision must be made quickly and he has the power to do so,

He has no other choice and nothing to lose,

He cannot make it clear to a group of people that they are at a dead end and someone needs to lead them,

He must make an unpopular decision and he must act immediately.

Evasion style : a person does not defend his rights, avoids resolving the conflict. This happens when the problem being addressed is not so important to him, he does not want to waste energy on solving it, or is in a hopeless situation. He senses that he is wrong or the other person is right, or the other person has great power. In this case, you can try to change the topic of conversation, leave the room, get away from the problem, ignoring it.

The style is effective if a person is forced to communicate with a difficult person, if there is no reason to continue contact with him, if there is no great need to make a decision, if the employee wants to avoid responsibility, if he does not have the necessary information to solve the problem.

Typical application situations:

The tension is too high and the tension needs to be released - the outcome is very important for the party,

Solving a problem can lead to trouble,

The party cannot resolve the conflict in its favor,

The party wants to gain time to obtain additional information,

The situation is too important for him

He has too little power to solve the problem in the way he wants,

Immediate resolution of the problem is dangerous and open discussion of the conflict can only worsen the situation.

Fixture Style:a person acts together with another person without trying to defend his own interests. The outcome of the case is extremely important for the other person and not very significant for the opponent. A side cannot gain the upper hand because the other person has more power. He sacrifices his interests in favor of another person, giving in to him and feeling sorry for him. If an employee feels that he is inferior in something important to him and feels dissatisfaction due to this, then the accommodation style is unacceptable. If the other does not want to give up anything or does not appreciate what the opponent has done, the style is also unacceptable.

The style is effective if, by giving in, the employee can mitigate the conflict situation and restore harmony. He does not shy away from solving the problem, participates in the situation, agrees to do what the other wants.

Typical application situations:

The party is not particularly concerned about what happened,

The result is more important for the other than for the enemy,

The truth is not on the enemy's side,

The enemy has little power and little chance of winning.

Collaboration style: The party resolves the conflict and defends its interests, but tries to cooperate with the other person. First, the needs and interests of the other party are identified and then discussed. The style is effective if the parties have different hidden needs. Determining the source of dissatisfaction in this case is difficult; there is a difference between external declarations and underlying interests and needs. It takes time to search for hidden interests and needs.

Typical application situations:

Solving the problem is very important for both sides and no one wants to get rid of it,

The person has a close, long-term and interdependent relationship with the other party,

The face has time to work with the other side,

The opponent and the other person are aware of the problem and the desires of both parties are known,

The person and his opponent want to put some ideas on the table and work on solving them,

Both sides are able to explain the essence of their interests and listen to each other,

Both parties involved in the conflict have equal power or want to ignore differences in power in order to seek a solution to the problem as equals.

Both parties must take time to solve the problem and explain their desires.

The collaborative style is the most effective style, but also the most difficult.

It involves the use of the method: “Principled negotiations”. It boils down to this:

It is necessary to separate people from the problem:

Separate the opponent and the problem;

Put yourself in the other party's shoes;

Don't be led by your emotions and fears;

Show your willingness to deal with the problem;

Be firm on the issue but soft on the people;

It is important to pay attention to interests, not positions:

Look for common interests;

ask “why?” and “why not?”;

Record common interests;

Explain the vitality and importance of your interests;

Recognize the vitality and importance of your opponent's interests.

Offer mutually beneficial options:

Don't look for a single answer to a problem;

Do not rate the answers found;

Expand the range of options for solving the problem;

Seek mutual benefit;

find out what the other side prefers.

needs, listen to each other and develop solutions to the problem.

Compromise style: mutual concessions of the two parties, bargaining and development of a compromise solution. Compromise is an agreement on a more superficial level compared to cooperation. Compromise is based on minor mutual concessions. When making decisions, no one really loses, but no one gains either.

Typical application situations:

Both parties have equal power and have mutually exclusive interests,

The enemy wants a solution quickly because he doesn't have time.

The enemy may arrange a temporary solution,

The opponent can enjoy short-term benefits,

Other approaches to solving the problem are not effective,

Satisfying the enemy's desire is not of great importance for him and he can change the goal set at the beginning,

The question arises: which behavior strategy is the most correct? And here's the answer: everything. All behavioral strategies are good, but each for its own situation. People, unfortunately, tend to use one strategy in all situations in life. It is not right. In this case, an employee who prefers confrontation to everything in the world rushes into battle where it is not at all required, and the result is “a storm in a teacup.” Those who give in all the time can pay severely for such a position.

We communicate with people of different levels of culture, with different habits and rules of behavior. These differences can be caused by both character traits and education, value orientations, life experiences, that is, factors associated with the process of socialization of the individual. But there are people who are simply difficult to communicate, whose behavior is inconvenient for others and who are sources of increased danger of conflicts.

Relevance of the topic

In all spheres of human activity, when solving various problems in everyday life, at work or in leisure, one has to observe conflicts that differ in their content and strength of manifestation. They occupy a significant place in the life of every person, since the consequences of some conflicts can be too noticeable over many years of life. They can consume the life energy of one person or a group of people for several days, weeks, months or even years.

When people think of conflict, they most often associate it with aggression, threats, disputes, hostility, war, etc. As a result, there is an opinion that conflict is always an undesirable phenomenon, that it must be avoided if possible and that it should be resolved immediately as soon as it arises.

Lack of agreement is due to the presence of diverse opinions, views, ideas, interests, points of view, etc. However, it is not always expressed in the form of an obvious clash or conflict. This happens only when existing contradictions and disagreements disrupt the normal interaction of people and prevent the achievement of their goals. In this case, people are simply forced to somehow overcome differences and enter into open conflict interaction. In the process of conflict interaction, its participants get the opportunity to express different opinions, identify more alternatives when making a decision, and this is where the important positive meaning of the conflict lies. This, of course, does not mean that the conflict is always positive.

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. Any organizational changes, contradictory situations, business and personal relationships between people often give rise to conflict situations, which are subjectively accompanied by serious psychological experiences.

From an ordinary point of view, conflict has a negative meaning and is associated with aggression, deep emotions, disputes, threats, hostility, etc. There is an opinion that conflict is always an undesirable phenomenon and should be avoided if possible and, if it arises, resolved immediately . Modern psychology views conflict not only in a negative, but also in a positive way: as a way of developing an organization, group and individual, highlighting in the inconsistency of conflict situations positive aspects associated with the development and subjective understanding of life situations.

K. Levin characterizes conflict as a situation in which an individual is simultaneously acted upon by opposing forces of approximately equal magnitude. Along with the “force” lines of the situation, the personality itself plays an active role in resolving conflicts, understanding and seeing them. Therefore, Lewin's works examine both intrapersonal and interpersonal conflicts.

In L. Coser'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 basic existence of groups, then it is positive. If the conflict is associated with the most important values of the group, then it is undesirable, since it undermines the foundations of the group and carries a tendency towards its destruction.

Ways to resolve conflict

Rivalry consists in imposing on the other side a solution that is beneficial for oneself. Rivalry is justified in the following cases: the proposed solution is clearly constructive; the benefit of the result for the entire group or organization, and not for an individual or microgroup; the importance of the outcome of the struggle for those who support this strategy; lack of time to reach an agreement with the opponent. Rivalry is advisable in extreme and fundamental situations, in case of lack of time and a high probability of dangerous consequences.

Escape or evasion from solving a problem or avoidance is an attempt to get out of the conflict with minimal losses. It differs from a similar strategy of behavior during a conflict in that the opponent switches to it after unsuccessful attempts to realize his interests using active strategies. Actually, we are not talking about a solution, but about the extinction of the conflict. Walking away can be a completely constructive response to a long-term conflict. Avoidance is used in the absence of energy and time to eliminate contradictions, the desire to gain time, the presence of difficulties in determining the line of one’s behavior, and the reluctance to solve the problem at all.

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. The one 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 manager has great power over subordinates, but cannot suppress the initiative of subordinates, creates a high probability 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, often allowing conflict to be resolved quickly to the satisfaction of both parties. However, using compromise early in a conflict over an important issue can reduce the time it takes to find alternatives.

Solution to 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. Someone who uses this style does not try to achieve their goal at the expense of others, but rather looks for the best solution. This style is the most effective in solving organizational problems.

Back in 1942, the American social psychologist M. Folet pointed out the need for resolution (settlement), and not suppression. Among the methods, she highlighted the victory of one of the parties, compromise and integration. Integration was understood as a new solution in which the conditions of both parties are met, and neither of them will suffer serious losses.

Negotiation represent a broad aspect of communication, covering many areas of an individual’s activity. As a method of resolving conflicts, negotiations are a set of tactics aimed at finding mutually acceptable solutions for conflicting parties.

Cooperation is considered the most effective strategy for dealing with conflict. It presupposes the desire of opponents to constructively discuss the problem, viewing the other side not as an adversary, but as an ally in the search for a solution. It is most effective in situations of strong interdependence between opponents; the tendency of both to ignore differences in power; the importance of the decision for both parties; impartiality of participants

Conflict resolution methods

Conflict management is a targeted impact on eliminating (minimizing) the causes that gave rise to a conflict, or on correcting the behavior of participants in the conflict.

There are quite a lot of conflict management methods. Enlarged, they can be represented in the form of several groups, each of which has its own area of application:

1) intrapersonal, i.e. methods of influencing an individual;

2) structural, i.e. methods for eliminating organizational conflicts;

3) interpersonal methods or styles of behavior in conflict;

4) negotiations;

5) retaliatory aggressive actions. This group of methods is used in extreme cases, when the capabilities of all previous groups have been exhausted.

Intrapersonal methods consist in the ability to correctly organize one’s own behavior, express one’s point of view without causing a defensive reaction on the part of the other person. Some authors suggest using the “I-statement” method, i.e. a way of conveying to another person your attitude towards a certain subject, without accusations or demands, but in such a way that the other person changes his attitude.

This method helps a person maintain his position without turning another into his enemy. The “I statement” can be useful in any situation, but it is especially effective when a person is angry, irritated, or dissatisfied. It should be noted right away that the use of this approach requires skills and practice, but this can be justified in the future. The “I-statement” is constructed in such a way as to allow the individual to express his opinion about the current situation, to express his positions. It is especially useful when a person wants to convey something to another, but does not want him to perceive it negatively and go on the attack.

Structural methods, i.e. methods of influencing primarily organizational conflicts arising due to improper distribution of powers, labor organization, adopted incentive system, etc. Such methods include: clarifying job requirements, coordination and integration mechanisms, organization-wide goals, and the use of reward systems.

Equally useful are integration tools such as cross-functional teams, task forces, and meetings. For example, when in one of the companies there was a conflict between interdependent departments - the sales department and the production department - an intermediate service was organized to coordinate the volume of orders and sales.

Organization-wide comprehensive goals. Effective implementation of these goals requires the joint efforts of two or more employees, departments, or groups. The idea behind this technique is to direct the efforts of all participants to achieve a common goal.

Thus, conflict can be functional and lead to increased organizational effectiveness. Or it may be dysfunctional and lead to decreased personal satisfaction, group cooperation, and organizational effectiveness. The role of conflict mainly depends on how effectively it is managed.

Conflict should not be understood as something exclusively negative. The fact is that in many cases it is he who helps resolve the current situation, remove barriers between people, and clarify relationships once and for all. Conflicts can be not only social, but also intrapersonal. They often happen between groups of people. The resolution methods are the most specific. This is due to the fact that a person has to negotiate not with someone, but with himself.

In general, we note that any conflict must be resolved. Do not be afraid of an open showdown. Postponing this is also highly discouraged.

Ways to resolve social conflicts

Let's start with evasion. This method is also called avoiding conflict. In this case, the participants in the conflict, due to their reluctance to spoil their relationship with someone, begin to convince themselves that the problem does not exist. Often they begin to infringe on themselves in some interests. Many are flattered by the hope that everything will end on its own. The methods vary, and evasion is perhaps the least effective of them.

Sometimes permission occurs due to coercion. In this case, one of the parties begins to put its interests above the interests of all others. If the other side, for some reason, is not interested in defending its positions, then the conflict will soon be settled.

Methods for resolving conflicts include compliance. In this case, everything is similar to coercion, the only difference is that one side agrees with the opinion of the other without much pressure, that is, for some internal reasons. Compliance can lead to a clear awareness of the infringement of one’s own, thus it can be resolved either completely or partially. Often from open it develops into disagreements that can be very dangerous. It is possible that they will ruin relationships between people.

More effective ways to resolve conflicts involve compromise. In this case, both sides make mutual concessions. As a rule, these concessions are deliberate, calculated, and mutually beneficial. The point is that each side gives up something important in favor of the opposing side. But the opposing side also gives up something.

In general, the compromise is effective, but there are still disadvantages. The main one is that there is a possibility of having to give up something important, meaningful, and necessary. Compromise must be approached extremely seriously, consciously, and deliberately.

Conflict resolution methods include cooperation. The specificity of cooperation is that the warring parties see a way out of the current situation in full satisfaction of each other’s interests.

Cooperation is effective because it makes it possible to get what you need without giving up something. It also makes it possible not only not to spoil, but also to strengthen relationships. Cooperation is specific and not always possible, but still, you should not miss the opportunity to end the conflict in this way.

Why you shouldn't be afraid of conflict

The fact is that problems rarely solve themselves. Due to conflict, a person can become depressed, oppressed, and squeezed. He will try to go into the shadows and not stand out too much. It’s much more rational to take it and find out everything. It doesn't matter whether you lose or win in the conflict. Much more important is that the difficult situation that prevented us from living, working, thinking and developing normally will be resolved.

It is also worth remembering that participation in conflicts provides good life experience, which can help in the future. Appreciate it.

Abstract on the academic discipline "Psychology"

on the topic: "Conflict. Types and methods of conflict resolution."

Plan

1. Introduction.

2. The concept of conflict. Types of conflicts.

3. Causes of conflict situations.

4. Methods for preventing and resolving conflicts.

5. Conflict as a way to manage people.

6. Conclusion.

7. List of references.

1. Introduction.

In each sphere of human activity, various types of problems are solved. If they are resolved at work, leisure or at home, conflicts of varying strength, manifestation and complexity often arise.

Conflicts are of great importance in human life, because their consequences are often very noticeable for many years to come. They eat the life energy of a person, or a group of people, for many days, weeks, months, even years.

Human thoughts about conflict tend to associate it with hostility, aggression, disputes, war, threats. As a result, there is an opinion that conflict is an invariably undesirable phenomenon, therefore, if possible, it is necessary to bypass it and resolve it immediately, at the slightest manifestation.

As long as people exist, there are conflicts. However, there is no generally accepted paradigm of conflicts that explains their nature, impact on the development of society, teams, although there are many studies on issues of their formation, functioning and management.

Without a doubt, there has been a moment in every person's life when he wished to bypass a confrontation and wondered how to resolve a conflict situation. However, there are circumstances when there is a desire to nobly get out of a difficult conflict, while at the same time preserving the relationship. Some people find it necessary to escalate a conflict situation in order to finally resolve it. One way or another, any person was faced with the question of how to avoid a conflict situation or how to resolve it.

2 . The concept of conflict. Types of conflicts.

Existing various explanations of conflict emphasize the fact of contradiction, which takes the form of disagreement; when it comes to human interaction, the conflict can be overt or hidden, but its basis is a lack of mutual understanding. Thus, conflict can be defined as a lack of mutual understanding between two or more parties - groups or individuals. Each side does everything to accept its goal or point of view, and creates all sorts of obstacles for the opposite side to achieve the same.

A conflict is a confrontation of parties, forces, opinions, the transition of a conflict situation into open confrontation.

Conflict is a struggle for values, claims to specific resources, power, status, deliberate damage to an opponent, neutralization or destruction.

Types of conflicts by reason:

A conflict of goals is a different vision by the parties of the desired state of an object in the future.
A conflict of views - a divergence of the parties in thoughts and ideas on the issue being resolved - to resolve this conflict requires more time than achieving mutual understanding in a conflict of goals.
A conflict of feelings is a difference in emotions and feelings that underlie the relationship between participants - people are irritants to each other with their own style of behavior.

Types of conflicts by participants:

Intrapsychic conflict is an internal contradiction in the mental world of the individual, often by nature it is a conflict of views or goals.
An interpsychic conflict involves two or more parties, if they perceive themselves as being in opposition to each other regarding the values, dispositions, behavior, and goals of each party. This type of conflict is more common.
Intragroup conflict - for the most part, it is a confrontation between members or parts of a group, affecting the group process of change and the results of the work of this group.
Intergroup conflict is opposition or confrontation between two or more groups in an organization. Possible emotional or professional-production basis. Intensity is characteristic.
Intra-organizational conflict is formed mostly as a result of planning specific work, in establishing an organization and, as a result, in the formal appointment of power - there is linear-functional, vertical, role and horizontal.

Types of conflicts by degree of openness:

Open conflicts mostly arise on a business basis. The disagreement of the parties relates to the production sphere, and expresses a variety of ways to resolve the problem. These conflicts are to some extent harmless.
The source of “smoldering” hidden conflicts is human relationships. A significant number of conflicts that appear to be business conflicts are actually based on feelings and human relationships. These conflicts are difficult to resolve - if the business part of the conflict is resolved, the tension is transferred to other problems with the same parties.

Types of conflicts by consequences:

1. Functional conflicts have some positive consequences:

solving the issues under consideration using methods that are more suitable for all parties, and the participants feel involved in their solution;
difficulties in implementing decisions are reduced to the smallest number - the need to act against the will, injustice, hostility;
in the future, the disposition of the parties will most likely be aimed at cooperation rather than opposition;
reducing the possibility of expressing resignation syndrome and groupthink;
improving the quality of decision-making, identifying different points of view; through conflict, group members have the opportunity to work through possible difficulties before they arise.

2. In the absence of conflict management, it becomes dysfunctional - the existence of negative consequences:

increased staff turnover, decreased productivity, poor morale, dissatisfaction;
the formation of strong loyalty of participants to their group, the idea of the other side as an “enemy”, in the long term, a decrease in cooperation, a curtailment of communication and interaction between the conflicting parties;
placing greater emphasis on defeating an opponent than on solving an existing problem.

3 . Causes of conflict situations.

Initially, it is necessary to understand that conflict is an absolutely natural state of personality. Tirelessly, throughout a person’s implementation of conscious life activity, he is in conflict with himself, groups of individuals, and other people. At the same time, if a person masters skills that help him understand how to resolve a conflict situation, he can significantly develop and strengthen professional and personal relationships. Resolving social conflicts is a fairly significant and very useful skill.

The basis of each conflict is a situation that involves either a discrepancy between the desires, interests, and inclinations of the parties, or opposing means, goals of achieving them in existing circumstances, or conflicting positions of the parties on some issue. At the same time, for a conflict to develop, an incident is needed, as a result of which one side takes action, limiting the interests of the opposite side.

There are quite a few reasons for the formation of conflicts. Without a doubt, I would like to resolve them through organizational forms. Having one idea about them, you can identify them and manage them.

Information - unreliability of witnesses, experts, distortions, insufficient trust in information, involuntary facts, misinformation.

Structural - a clash of traditional values, views, habits; clash as a result of status claims or differences; clashes over technology and the effectiveness of its use; clashes over price or quality of purchase; clashes over agreements, contracts, purchase agreements.

Value-based - infringement of someone’s rights, needs, violation of ethical standards, violation of accepted organizational or professional standards.

Relationship factors - a violation of compatibility in a relationship, a violation of the balance of power in a relationship.

Social and economic inequality - unfair distribution of power, recognition, rewards, prestige between individual groups, divisions, members of the organization.

A conflict arises from the time when one of the interacting parties realizes the difference between its own principles and interests from the principles and interests of the other party and begins unilateral actions to align these differences in its favor.

Tension can be considered the first sign of conflict. It manifests itself as a result of a lack of knowledge to overcome a difficulty, inconsistency or lack of information. A real conflict often manifests itself when there is an attempt to convince the opposite side or an indifferent mediator that one is right.

Phases of conflict.

The confrontational or military phase is the desire of the parties to achieve their own interests by eliminating the interests of others.

The compromise or political phase is the desire of the parties to ensure their interests through negotiations, during which the differing interests of each party are replaced by mutual agreement.

Communication or management phase - by creating a line of communication, the parties come to an agreement, which is based on the fact that both the parties to the conflict and their interests are endowed with sovereignty, and also strive for mutual complementation of interests, eliminating only illegal differences.

In a conflict, the driving force is a person’s desire or curiosity to win, preserve, improve one’s own security, stability, position in a team, or hope to achieve a goal. It is often not clear how to act in these situations.

The causes of conflicts lie in the abnormality of society and the shortcomings of the person himself. First of all, among the reasons that cause conflicts, there are moral, political and socio-economic ones. These reasons provide a breeding ground for the formation of various types of conflicts. The formation of conflicts is influenced by the biological and psychophysical characteristics of a person.

Every conflict has many causes. Significant causes of conflict are differences in values and ideas, interdependence of tasks, a limited amount of resources that need to be shared, differences in goals, in the level of education, in behavioral manner, and poor communication.

4 . Methods for preventing and resolving conflicts.

You can spend a significant amount of time in the current conflict situation and get used to it as something inevitable. However, we should not forget that an incident will certainly arise, some set of circumstances that will inevitably lead to open confrontation between the parties and the manifestation of incompatible positions.

A conflict situation is an essential condition for the formation of a conflict. For this situation to develop into dynamics, into conflict, an external incident, impact or impetus is required.

In one case, the resolution of the conflict is quite professionally competent and correct, but in the other it happens in an illiterate, unprofessional manner, often with a bad outcome for all parties to the conflict, where there are only losers and no winners.

To eliminate the causes that led to the conflict, work must be carried out in several stages.

At the first stage, a general description of the problem is carried out. If a conflict arises as a result of mistrust between a group and an individual, the problem is expressed as communication. It is important to determine, at this stage, the nature of the conflict, and at this time it does not matter that this is not a complete reflection of the essence of the problem.

At the second stage, the leading parties to the conflict are identified. You can add individual individuals or entire groups, teams, organizations, departments to the list. There is an opportunity to bring together parties involved in a conflict who have common needs in accordance with a given conflict. Liquidation of personal and group contingents is also allowed.

At the third stage, the main concerns and needs of the leading parties to the conflict are listed. It is necessary to determine the motives of behavior that lie behind the positions of the parties in a given situation. Human attitudes and actions are determined by motives, needs, desires that need to be established.

Five conflict resolution styles:

smoothing out - behavior as if there is no need to be irritated;
avoidance - the desire to avoid a conflict situation;
coercion - pressure or use of legitimate authority in order to impose one’s own view of the situation;
compromise - relaxation to some extent to a different view of the situation;
problem resolution - used in a situation requiring different data and opinions, characterized by open recognition of differences in views, confrontation of these views to identify a solution acceptable to both parties to the conflict.

In turn, the choice of a way to overcome difficulties is determined by the emotional stability of the individual, the available means of protecting one’s own interests, the amount of available power and many other circumstances.

Psychological protection of the individual is carried out unconsciously, as a procedure for regulating the individual to protect the sphere of human consciousness from negative psychological influences. As a result of the conflict, this order works involuntarily, bypassing human desires and will. The significance of such protection is formed by the manifestation of feelings and thoughts that embody a threat to the system of value orientations, self-respect, the formed self - the image of a person, self-respect, reducing the individual’s self-esteem.

A person’s perception of a situation is sometimes far from the existing state of affairs, but his reaction to the situation is formed based on what it seems to him, from his perception, and this circumstance significantly complicates the resolution of a conflict situation. Negative emotions arising from a conflict are quickly transferred from the problem to the personality of the opponent - this complements the conflict with personal opposition. As the conflict intensifies, the image of the opponent becomes more unsightly - this, in addition, makes it more difficult to resolve. A closed ring is formed that is very difficult to break. It makes the most sense to do this at the initial stage of the situation, before control over it is lost.

5. Conflict as a way to manage people.

In the practice of conflict management, there are three areas: conflict management, conflict suppression and conflict avoidance. These directions are implemented thanks to special methods.

Conflict management is a targeted, directed influence on eliminating the causes that contribute to the emergence of a conflict, maintaining a controlled level of conflict, and correcting the behavior of the parties to the conflict.

The existing variety of conflict management methods are divided into several groups, which have their own separate scope of application:

Intrapsychic methods. They influence a specific person, are embodied in the correct coordination of one’s own behavior, in the ability to express one’s own position, without contributing to the formation of a defensive reaction on the opposite side.
Structural methods. The parties are mainly affected by organizational conflicts arising due to incorrect distribution of responsibilities, rights and functions, the injustice of the employee incentive and motivation system, and poor coordination of work activities. These methods include:

explanation of job requirements;
application of management mechanisms;
clarifying or developing overall organizational goals;
building reasoned reward systems.

Interpsychic methods for modifying behavioral style in conflict. They assume the need to select the appropriate form of influence at the stages of the formation of a conflict situation or the development of a conflict in order to adjust the style of isolated behavior of its parties in order to prevent damage to individual interests.
Personal methods. Coercion is the attempt to force a person to accept his position by any means necessary. The party trying to do this is not interested in the opinion of the other party. The party using this approach in most cases behaves hostilely and uses power to influence. In difficult situations, in which a variety of approaches is a significant sign for making a rational decision, the formation of conflicting opinions must be stimulated and managed by the situation using a problem-solving style. Conflict management through problem solving is carried out in the following order:

identifying problems in terms of goals rather than solutions;
determining a solution suitable for both parties to the conflict;
focusing attention not on the individual characteristics of the parties to the conflict, but on the problem;
increasing mutual influence, spreading the exchange of information and ensuring an environment of trust.

Negotiation. Carry out the developed functions, including most aspects of the parties’ activities. As a method of conflict resolution, negotiations are a set of tactics aimed at finding acceptable solutions for the parties to the conflict. To organize the negotiation process, it is necessary to guarantee the fulfillment of these conditions:

the presence of mutual dependence of the parties to the conflict;
absence of significant differences in the capabilities of the conflicting parties;
similarity of the level of development of the conflict to the potential of negotiations;
participation of the parties in negotiations making decisions in a specific situation of the conflict that has arisen.

Methods of influencing personal behavior and normalizing the agreed roles of the parties, taking into account their functional responsibilities.
Methods for activating appropriate hostile actions, used in extreme cases - the potentiality of all previous methods is used. Proper hostile actions are extremely undesirable. The use of these methods contributes to the resolution of conflict by force using violence. Be that as it may, there are situations when the conflict can be resolved only by these methods.

The advantage of withdrawing from a conflict is, as a rule, prompt decision-making.

The waste is used in the following cases:

large losses from building a conflict;
the mediocrity of the problem that is the basis of the conflict;
the significance of other problems that need to be solved;
the importance of cooling passions;
the need to gain time to avoid making immediate decisions and collecting the necessary information;
joining other forces to resolve the conflict;
the presence of fear of an impending conflict or a dissimilar party.

Avoiding a conflict should not be used if the problem that is its basis is important, or if the prospect of this conflict lasting for quite a long time is realistic.

A variety of this method is the method of inactivity. In the case of using the method of inactivity, the development of events proceeds spontaneously, with the flow.

6 . Conclusion.

The causes of conflicts lie in the abnormality of society and the shortcomings of the person himself.

First of all, among the reasons that cause conflicts, there are moral, political and socio-economic ones. These reasons provide a breeding ground for the formation of various types of conflicts. The formation of conflicts is influenced by the biological and psychophysical characteristics of a person.

Every conflict has many causes. Significant causes of conflict are differences in values and perceptions, interdependence of tasks, limited resources that need to be shared, differences in goals, level of education, behavior and poor communication.

Thus, it is better to prevent conflicts by changing your own attitude to a problem situation, behavior in it, and accordingly influencing the behavior and psyche of your opponent.

When preventing interpsychic conflicts, first of all, you need to evaluate what you managed to do, then what you failed to do - the evaluator needs to know enough about the activity; give an assessment based on the essence of the matter, and not on the form; the evaluator must be responsible for the impartiality of the assessment; identify and inform evaluated employees about the causes of deficiencies; inspire employees to take on new jobs; specifically formulate new tasks and goals.

7 . Bibliography.

1. B.S. Volkov, N.V. Volkova, Conflictology: a textbook for university students / B.S. Volkov, N.V. Volkova. - M.: Academic Project; Trista, 2005. - 384 p.

2. AND I. Antsupov, A.I. Shipilov, Conflictology. Textbook. 3rd ed. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2008. - 496 p.

3. E.N. Bogdanov, V.G. Zazykin, Psychology of personality in conflict: A textbook. 2nd ed. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2004. - 224 p.

4. N.V. Grishina, Psychology of conflict. 2nd ed. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2008. - 544 p.

5. A.P. Egides, Labyrinths of Communication, or How to Get Along with People. - M.: AST-Press Book, 2002. - 368 p.

6. A.K. Zaitsev, Social conflict. 2nd ed. - M.: Academy, 2001. - 464 p.