Peculiarities of people's behavior in conflict
In any conflict, each participant evaluates and correlates his interests and the interests of his opponent, asking himself the questions: what will I gain, what will I lose, what significance does the subject of the dispute have for the opponent. Based on such an analysis, he consciously chooses one or another strategy of behavior (withdrawal, coercion, compromise, concession or cooperation). Often the reflection of these interests occurs unconsciously, and then behavior in conflict interaction is saturated with powerful emotional tension and is spontaneous.
A special place in assessing the models and strategies of a person’s behavior in a conflict is occupied by the value of interpersonal relationships with the opposing party. If for one of the rivals interpersonal relationships with another rival are of no value, his behavior in the conflict will be characterized by destructive content or extreme positions in strategy (coercion, struggle, rivalry). Conversely, the value of interpersonal relationships for the subject of conflict interaction, as a rule, is a significant reason for constructive behavior in a conflict or the direction of such behavior towards compromise, cooperation, withdrawal or concession.
Coercion (struggle, rivalry). Anyone who chooses this strategy of behavior primarily proceeds from assessing personal interests in the conflict as high, and the interests of his opponent as low. The choice of coercion strategy ultimately comes down to a choice: either the interest of struggle or the relationship.
The choice to fight is characterized by a style of behavior characteristic of a destructive model. With this strategy, power, the force of law, connections, authority, etc. are actively used. It is appropriate and effective in two cases. Firstly, when protecting the interests of the business from attacks on them by a conflicting individual.. Secondly, when there is a threat to the existence of an organization or team. In this case, a “who will win” situation develops. This occurs especially often in the context of reforming enterprises and institutions.
Care. The exit strategy is characterized by the desire to get away from the conflict. It is characterized by a low level of focus on personal interests and the interests of the opponent and is mutual. In essence, this is a mutual concession.
When analyzing this strategy, it is important to consider two options for its manifestation:
1. when the subject of the conflict is not significant for any of the subjects and is adequately reflected in the images of the conflict situation;
2. when the subject of the dispute is of significant importance for one or both parties, but is understated in the images of the conflict situation, i.e. subjects of conflict interaction perceive the subject of the conflict as insignificant.
In the first case, the conflict is exhausted by the exit strategy, and in the second case it may have a relapse.
Concession. A person who adheres to this strategy also seeks to escape the conflict. But the reasons for “leaving” in this case are different. The focus on personal interests is low here, and the assessment of the opponent’s interests is high, i.e. a person who adopts a concession strategy sacrifices personal interests in favor of the interests of a rival.
The concession strategy has some similarities with the coercion strategy, which consists in choosing between the value of the subject of the conflict and the value of interpersonal relationships. Unlike the fight strategy, the concession strategy gives priority to interpersonal relationships.
When analyzing this strategy, it should be taken into account that:
· sometimes such a strategy reflects the tactics of a decisive struggle for victory. A concession here may turn out to be only a tactical step towards achieving the main strategic goal;
· a concession may cause an inadequate assessment of the subject of the conflict (underestimation of its value for oneself). In this case, the adopted strategy is self-deception and does not lead to resolution of the conflict;
· this strategy can be dominant for a person due to his individual psychological characteristics. In particular, this is typical for a conformist personality, a conflict personality of a “conflict-free” type. Because of this, the concession strategy can give a constructive conflict a destructive direction.
Compromise. A compromise strategy of behavior is characterized by a balance of interests of the conflicting parties at the average level. Otherwise, it can be called a strategy of mutual concession.
The compromise strategy not only does not spoil interpersonal relationships, but also contributes to their positive development.
When analyzing this strategy, it is important to keep in mind the following significant points:
· Compromise cannot be considered as a way to resolve the conflict. Mutual concession is often a step towards finding an acceptable solution to a problem;
· sometimes a compromise can resolve a conflict situation. This is possible if the circumstances that caused the tension change.
· Compromise can take both active and passive forms. An active form of compromise can manifest itself in concluding clear agreements, accepting any obligations, etc. Passive compromise is nothing more than a refusal to take any active action to achieve certain mutual concessions under certain conditions.
· the conditions of compromise may be imaginary, when the subjects of conflict interaction have reached a compromise on the basis of inadequate images of the conflict situation.
Cooperation. The cooperation strategy is characterized by a high level of focus on both one’s own interests and the interests of the opponent. This strategy is built not only on the basis of a balance of interests, but also on recognition of the value of interpersonal relationships.
The subject of conflict occupies a special place in the choice of this strategy. If the subject of the conflict is of vital importance for one or both subjects of conflict interaction, then there can be no talk of cooperation. In this case, only the choice of struggle, competition is possible. Cooperation is possible only when the complex subject of the conflict allows the interests of the opposing parties to maneuver, ensuring their coexistence within the framework of the problem that has arisen and the development of events in a favorable direction.
The cooperation strategy includes all other strategies (withdrawal, concession, compromise, confrontation). At the same time, other strategies play a subordinate role in the complex process of cooperation; they act to a greater extent as psychological factors in the development of relationships between the subjects of the conflict.
Rules of behavior in a conflict situation
Rules of behavior in a conflict situation
- The rule of fair treatment of the conflict initiator.
The first rule of behavior in conflict is a fair, unbiased attitude towards the initiator of the conflict. Every interpersonal conflict begins with the appearance of a person in a couple or group who is dissatisfied with something—this is the initiator of the conflict. He makes demands, claims, grievances and expects his partner to listen to him and change his behavior. In order for the conflict not to go down the “crooked path” from the very first step, you need to treat the initiator of the conflict fairly and, most importantly, patiently: do not immediately condemn, do not dismiss, do not scold, but listen to him attentively and kindly. .
- Rule: do not expand the subject of the quarrel.
The second rule of behavior in conflict is to identify the subject of the conflict and not expand it. The subject of the conflict is understood as the cause of dissatisfaction: what exactly does not suit you, what do you dislike in the behavior of the other? This rule must be observed by the initiator of the conflict. He must clearly and clearly formulate, first of all, for himself, what does not suit him and irritates him in another.
- The rule of positive formulation of an acute situation
The third rule of behavior in conflict is the formulation of a positive solution to an acute situation. Firstly, it will force the initiator to mentally weigh the pros and cons of the accusation; secondly, calculate the possible consequences of the conflict for relationships; thirdly, to think for the accused himself about his preferred outcome of the conflict. All together, this can reduce the potential for negative tension of the initiator, expand his understanding of the subject of the conflict and its expediency, and feel himself in the role of the accused.
- Rule of emotional endurance
The fourth rule of behavior in conflict concerns the emotional type of behavior of the dispute. Often, conflicting partners are able to correctly identify the subject of the conflict, treat fairly the rights of the initiator, express their demands, and outline the outcome of the conflict, but the entire tone of the conversation nullifies these achievements. The most essential condition for a dispute or clash is the most calm and even tone of statements possible, precision and thoughtfulness of words. You need to speak in such a way that there is not even a hint of irritation, anger, or reproach in your voice and words.
- Rule of impersonal dispute
The fifth, and most important rule: avoid personal conflicts that affect the individual’s self-esteem.
List of rules of behavior in the event of conflicts
Home Favorites Random article Educational New additions Feedback FAQ⇐ PreviousPage 18 of 24Next ⇒
According to researchers, there are no miracle recipes for resolving any conflict. However, practice shows that thoughtful actions in this direction can greatly help resolve a conflict situation. Since conflicts often give rise to an emotional state in which it is difficult to think, draw conclusions, or approach creative solutions to problems, certain rules must be followed when resolving conflicts.
Let's list some of them.
I. General rules of behavior in a conflict situation .
1. Remember that in a person’s conflict it is not his mind that dominates, but his emotions, which leads to affect, when a person’s consciousness simply turns off and he is not responsible for his actions.
2. Adhere to a multi-alternative approach and, without insisting on your proposal, do not reject your partner’s proposal. Try to analyze both proposals and see what amount of benefits and losses they will bring in the near future and then.
3. Realize the importance of conflict resolution for yourself by asking the question: “What will happen if a solution is not found?” This will allow you to shift the center of gravity from the relationship to the problem.
4. If you and your interlocutor are irritated and aggressive, then it is necessary to reduce internal tension and “let off steam.” But venting on others is not a solution, but a trick. But if it so happens that you have lost control of yourself, try to do the only thing: shut up yourself, and don’t demand it from your partner.
Avoid stating your partner’s negative emotional states.
5. Focus on the positive traits of a person, then you will oblige him to be better.
6. Invite your interlocutor to take your place and ask: “If you were in my place, what would you do?” This removes the critical attitude and switches the interlocutor from emotions to understanding the situation.
7. Do not exaggerate your merits or show signs of superiority.
8. Do not blame or attribute responsibility for the situation to your partner alone.
9. Regardless of the results of resolving contradictions, try not to destroy the relationship.
II. General recommendations for resolving conflict situations , in particular:
– recognize the existence of a conflict, that is, the presence of opposing goals and methods among opponents, identify the participants;
– determine the possibility of contacts. It is advisable to agree on the possibility of holding negotiations and clarify which ones: with or without a mediator, who can be a mediator that suits both parties equally;
– identify the range of issues that constitute the subject of the conflict. When determining the subject of the conflict, already at this stage joint approaches to the problem are developed, the positions of the parties are identified, the points of greatest disagreement and possible convergence of positions are determined;
- develop solutions. The parties, when working together, offer several options for solutions with calculation of costs for each of them, taking into account the possible consequences;
– make an agreed decision. It is drawn up in writing: communiqué, resolution, cooperation agreement;
– implement the adopted decision in practice.
III. Polish psychologist E. Melibruda suggests the following rules when getting out of a conflict situation:
A. It is necessary to adequately perceive the conflict . This means that you do not need to distort, but truthfully perceive both your own position and the position and behavior of your partner. Sometimes it seems that truth and justice are exclusively on our side. We do not notice our own shortcomings, we are looking for “ straws”
in the eyes of another, believing that
“everything is clear”,
and thereby simplifying the situation of the conflict, we do not think about its origins. At such moments, you need to concentrate on yourself, think about whether there is a distortion in our perception, our actions and feelings.
B. One of the main ways to constructively resolve a conflict is open and effective communication between the conflicting parties. But in practice, communication during conflict deteriorates; opponents usually take defensive positions, hiding information about themselves.
B. Think about the essence of the conflict, and then think through the stages of overcoming it . They can be like this :
1. Determining the essence of the problem (to determine your actions and the actions of the enemy, to identify issues on which there are differences, and issues on which mutual understanding can be achieved).
2. Establishing the main cause of the conflict (to understand as fully and truthfully as possible what is completely unacceptable in the enemy’s actions; what action caused the conflict). Think about whether the conflict might recur in the future.
3. Search for possible ways to resolve the conflict (show flexibility and the ability to compromise; think about what I and my partner could do; what are our common goals, in the name of which it is necessary to find a way out of the conflict).
4. Making a joint decision to end the conflict.
5. Implementation of the jointly planned method of resolving the conflict.
6. Assessing the effectiveness of efforts made to resolve the conflict.
If the conflict could not be resolved, it is necessary to again take all possible steps to resolve it, not to “get hung up” on one’s positions, but, showing perseverance and good will, to look for new ways out of the conflict.
D. To find joint solutions, communication and discussion are necessary
. Frank discussions allow us to resolve many controversial issues that gave rise to the conflict.
IV. Werner Siegert and Lucia Lang provide a list of rules that provide guidelines for a person’s line of behavior in a conflict. This line prevents the emergence of serious conflicts. The main ones are:
1. Acknowledge each other.
2. Listen without interrupting.
3. Demonstrate understanding of the other person's role.
4. Find out how the other perceives the conflict, how he feels about it.
5. Clearly formulate the subject of discussion.
6. Establish common points of view.
7. Find out what separates you.
8. After this, describe the content of the conflict again.
9. Look for a general solution.
10. Adopt a general “communiqué” [5].
V. When resolving a conflict, it is useful to remember the following rules:
1. Let your partner let off steam
" If he is aggressive when irritated, then you need to help reduce internal tension. Until this happens, it is difficult or impossible to come to an agreement with him. During its “explosion” you should behave calmly, confidently, but not arrogantly. If a person is aggressive, it means he is filled with negative emotions. The best technique at these moments is to imagine that there is a shell (aura) around you through which the arrows of aggression do not pass.
2. Demand that he calmly justify his claims.
Say that you will only consider facts and objective evidence. People tend to confuse facts and emotions. Therefore, brush aside emotions with questions: “Does what you say relate to facts or opinion, guesswork?”
3. Discourage aggression with unexpected tactics
. For example, confidentially ask a conflicting partner for advice. Ask an unexpected question, about something completely different, but meaningful to him. Remind yourself of something that connected you in the past with this person and was very pleasant. Give a compliment, for example, like this: “You are even more beautiful in anger... Your anger is much less than I expected, you are so calm in an acute situation...” Express sympathy: for example, that he (she) has lost too much. The main thing is that your requests for memories and compliments switch the consciousness of the angry partner from negative emotions to positive emotions.
4. Don't give him negative assessments, but talk about your feelings
. There is no need to say: “You are deceiving me,” “I feel deceived” sounds better; “You are a rude person,” better say: “I am very upset by the way you talk to me.”
5. Ask them to formulate the desired end result and problem as a chain of obstacles.
Identify the problem with your communication partner and focus on it.
6. Invite your opponent to express his thoughts on resolving the problem and his options for solutions.
Don’t look for the guilty and don’t explain the current situation, look for a way out of it. Don’t stop at the first acceptable option, but create a range of options and then choose the best one from it. When looking for solutions, remember to look for mutually acceptable solutions. You and your partner should be mutually satisfied. And you both must become winners, not winner and loser. If you cannot agree on something, then look for an objective measure for agreement (standards, law, facts, existing regulations, instructions, etc.).
7. In any case, let your partner “save face.”
Don't respond to aggression with aggression. Don't insult his dignity. He will not forgive this, even if he gives in to pressure. Don't touch his personality. Let us evaluate only his actions and actions. You can say: “You have already failed to fulfill your promise twice,” but you cannot say: “You are an unnecessary person.”
8. Reflect like an echo the meaning of his statements and claims
. In a conversation with a partner, it is advisable to ask: “Did I understand you correctly?”, “Did you mean...?”, “Let me retell it to make sure whether I understood you correctly or not.” This tactic eliminates misunderstandings. In addition, it demonstrates attention to the person and reduces aggression.
9. Stay on a knife's edge in an equal position
" Most people, when they are shouted at or accused, also shout back or try to give in, remain silent, in order to extinguish the anger of the other partner. Both of these positions (top – “parent” or bottom – “child”) are ineffective. Hold yourself firmly in a position of calm confidence (the position of equals - “adult”). It also keeps the partner from aggression and helps both of them not to “lose their face.”
10. Don't be afraid to apologize if you feel guilty
. Firstly, it disarms the partner, and secondly, it earns him respect.
11. There's nothing to prove
. In any conflict situations, no one can ever prove anything to anyone. Even by force. Negative emotional influences block the ability to understand, consider and agree with the “enemy”. The work of thought stops. If a person doesn’t think, there is no need to try to prove anything. This is a useless, empty exercise.
12. Be the first to shut up.
If it so happens that you have lost control of yourself and did not notice how you were drawn into a conflict, then try to do the only thing - shut up. Your silence allows you to get out of the quarrel and stop it. If neither of the parties to the conflict is inclined to remain silent, then both are very quickly overwhelmed by negative emotional arousal. To extinguish this excitement, you need to remove what fuels it. Silence should not be offensive to your partner. In order for the scandal to stop, you need to silently ignore the very fact of the quarrel, the negative arousal of your partner, as if none of this happened.
13. Don't characterize your opponent's condition.
Avoid in every possible way verbally stating your partner’s negative emotional state: “Well, get excited again! ... Why are you nervous, why are you angry? ...Why are you mad?” Such “calming” words only strengthen and intensify the development of the conflict.
14. Don't slam the door when leaving
. A quarrel can be stopped if you calmly and without any words leave the room.
15. Speak up when your partner is cold
. If you fell silent and your partner regarded the refusal to quarrel as capitulation, it is better not to refute this. Pause until it cools down. The position of the partner who has abandoned the quarrel should completely exclude anything that should not be offensive and insulting to the other partner. It is not the one who has the last word who wins, but the one who manages to stop the conflict at the beginning and does not allow it to disperse.
16. Regardless of the outcome of resolving the contradiction, try not to destroy the relationship.
They must always remain at the level of goodwill and mutual respect. And if you save the relationship and let your partner “save face,” then you will not lose him as a future partner.
VI. In relation to constructive and stabilizing conflicts, it is possible to formulate some rules of behavior and business communication
.
1. It is necessary to remember that in conflicts there are no winners; both sides lose, if we keep in mind the moral aspects of conflicts, since it is impossible to do without moral costs. Ideally, all parties to the conflict experience feelings of awkwardness or even shame afterwards.
2. You must try to be as objective as possible. Here you will act as a participant in business communication who, in his monologue, essentially confesses to others, and the more you are able to explain to others what the essence of your interests is, the greater the chances of coming to agreement and compromise.
3. It must not be forgotten that unexpressed grievances often lead to frustration. It represents a mental state of a person caused by objectively insurmountable (or subjectively perceived) difficulties that arise on the way to achieving a goal or solving a problem; experiencing failure [6, 433-434]. Frustration is a kind of “discord” of a person when he is tormented by conflicting thoughts and feelings.
4. It is necessary to try to understand the opposite side. Although it is very difficult, one must perceive the statements of opponents as a necessary condition for resolving the conflict. Therefore, do not interrupt, do not object, do not argue, no matter how difficult it is for you. Show your interlocutor that you are really listening to him and that you are striving to reach agreement.
5. It is imperative to try to identify the “hidden thoughts” of your partner. Hidden thoughts - his guesses, fears, suspicions, etc. To make sure how justified they are, it is better to ask about them directly. If his guesses had a basis in reality, your answer can relieve tension.
6. It is necessary to refrain from offensive comments, drawing a line under the conflict that has arisen. Highlight only the points on which your thoughts and feelings coincide.
7. It is necessary to make concrete proposals in order to prevent new conflicts.
8. At the end of the meeting, it is necessary to express your opinion about what will change if the experience of exiting the conflict is taken into account by each side.
Thus, compliance with the above rules requires the utmost effort and tact from the individual. However, your efforts will pay off handsomely - your relationship will not deteriorate, but will become more respectful. In difficult situations, it is imperative to reflect.
10.3. Overcoming conflicts in the institution
Practice shows that when resolving conflicts in an organization, there can be different outcomes. For example, N.N. Obozov and G.V. Shchukin in [1] gives the following results:
- a way to resolve the contradiction that has arisen
when one side, for example, takes the conversation in a different direction, citing lack of time, the untimeliness of the conflict, and leaves the “battlefield”;
– smoothing
. This happens when one of the parties tries to get around the sharp corners in the conflict. However, internal contradiction may still remain. In the future, the manifestation of the conflict situation may be repeated;
– compromise
. It relieves tension in the relationship between the parties and helps find the optimal solution to the conflict.
Other scientists believe that the main ways to resolve conflict in an organization include:
– mutual reconciliation of the parties
– the conflict situation ends. The difficulty is finding the objective side of reconciliation;
– compromise
– the claims of both parties are partially satisfied, mutual concessions are made;
– resolving conflicts on a principled business basis
[2];
– confrontation
– as a result of the unproductive outcome of the negotiations between the parties to the conflict, it is not possible to drown it out; none of the parties to the conflict takes into account the positions of the other;
– compulsion
– straightforward imposition of one’s position on the other side, rejecting any arguments of the other side.
A major role in resolving a conflict situation is assigned to the head of the institution. In practice, there are the following methods for the prevention and prevention of conflict situations and conflicts in an organization:
1. The leading role of the head of the institution, directly to the business person, manager.
2. Compliance with the principles of fairness and uniform distribution of tasks (loads).
3. Application of conflict prevention tactics.
The effectiveness of the functioning of the institution depends on the professional training of the manager and his possession of an arsenal of algorithms for resolving conflicts in the team. Here is one of them: analysis of a conflict situation; identifying the personal characteristics of the participants in the conflict; collecting a variety of information about the conflict and its participants; choosing a conflict management strategy; interviews with parties to the conflict; specific steps to eliminate the causes of the conflict; creating public opinion aimed at resolving the conflict; use, if necessary, legal or administrative measures to eliminate the causes of the conflict (Fig. 22).
| Use, if necessary, legal or administrative measures to eliminate the causes of the conflict |
Rice. 22. Conflict resolution
The manager's actions to resolve the conflict are shown in Fig. 23.
Fig.23. Leader's actions and ways to resolve conflict
A manager has to resolve conflicts not only in the business sphere, but also in the personal and emotional sphere. When resolving them, various groups of methods are used to facilitate the search for a peaceful way out of the conflict. First year
The group is aimed at preventing the development of the violent stage of the conflict (taking into account the psychology of the interests of the conflicting participants, conversation, request, persuasion, principled negotiations, psychotraining, psychotherapy, etc.).
The second
is aimed at resolving contradictions (clear formulation of requirements, the principle of unity of command, establishment of common goals, an incentive system based on well-thought-out performance criteria, etc.).
The third
is aimed at reducing the confrontation between the parties, the refusal of each participant from unilateral actions and the transition to finding a joint solution to the problem (suppression of demands, transfer to another job, separation of conflicting parties by administrative measures, resolution of the conflict based on an order from the head of the organization or a court decision, etc.).
When resolving a conflict, it is necessary to take into account that different types of conflicting personalities may participate in it:
1) demonstrative - most often these are choleric people and those who are characterized by vigorous activity in a wide variety of directions. They love to be seen and have high self-esteem;
2) rigid - people of this type do not know how to adapt, take into account the opinions and points of view of others; ambitious, display morbid touchiness and suspicion;
3) a pedant - a person who is always punctual, picky, although efficient, boring, pushes people away from himself;
4) conflict-free - a person who consciously avoids conflict, shifting responsibility for decision-making to others (if this is a manager, then to his deputy). Meanwhile, the conflict grows like a snowball and falls on such a person;
5) practitioner – acting under the slogan “The best defense is attack.” For such a person, the most important thing is to transform the environment, the external environment. Changes in the position of other people, which can lead to various clashes and tension in relationships.
R. Bramson identifies the following types:
A) an aggressor – someone who speaks rudely and unceremoniously, bullies others and gets irritated if they don’t listen to him. As a rule, behind his aggressiveness lies the fear of revealing his incompetence;
B) complainer - a person who is obsessed with some idea and accuses others of all sins, but does nothing himself to solve the problem;
C) an angry child - a person belonging to this type is not angry by nature, but an explosion of emotions reflects his desire to take control of the situation;
D) maximalist - a person who wants something without delay, even if it is not necessary;
D) silent - keeps everything to himself, does not talk about his grievances, and then takes it out on someone;
H) secret avenger - a person who causes trouble with the help of some kind of fraud, believing that someone has done wrong, and he restores justice;
E) false altruist - a person who supposedly does good to you, but deep down regrets it, which can manifest itself in the form of sabotage, demands for compensation, etc.;
G) chronic accuser - a person who is always looking for the mistakes of others, believing that he is always right, and by blaming one can solve the problem [3].
When a manager comes into contact with a conflicting person, the following rules must be observed.
1. It must be borne in mind that such people have some hidden needs, which, as a rule, are associated with past losses and disappointments, and they satisfy them in this way.
2. You should take control of your emotions and give vent to the emotions of this person if you intend to continue communicating with him.
3. Do not take the words and behavior of this person personally, knowing that in order to satisfy his interests, a difficult person behaves this way with everyone.
4. When choosing an appropriate style of action in a conflict situation, you should take into account what type of person he is.
5. If you consider it necessary to continue communication with a conflicting person, you must insist that he tell the truth, no matter what. You must convince him that your attitude towards him will be determined by how truthful he is with you and how consistently he agrees with you on everything.
Implementation of the above recommendations will allow the manager to successfully resolve conflicts of various types that arise for various reasons. In addition, no matter how valuable experience in resolving conflict a manager may have, the most important area of his activity in the team should be prevention . Not bringing matters to the point of conflict, avoiding tension is the most important thing in prevention, more difficult than resolving an existing conflict.
⇐ Previous18Next ⇒
