Summary: Features of interpersonal conflicts. Conflicts in interpersonal relationships: stages and preventive measures

3. Interpersonal conflict

1. The concept of interpersonal conflict

2. Functions, structure and dynamics of interpersonal conflict

3. Basic styles of behavior in interpersonal conflict

1. The concept of interpersonal conflict

Interpersonal conflicts, along with group conflicts, are one of the most common types of conflicts. Interpersonal conflicts are closely related to other types of conflicts: intergroup, ethnic, organizational, since any conflict is always the interaction of specific individuals, and in order to start the mechanism of conflict confrontation, personal motivation of the participants, a feeling of hostility or hatred towards another is necessary.

Interpersonal conflict is a clash of two or more individuals caused by a mismatch of goals and interests, value orientations, the struggle for scarce resources, awareness of a security threat, psychological and behavioral characteristics. An interpersonal conflict is also understood as an open clash of interacting subjects based on the contradictions that have arisen, acting as opposite goals that are incompatible in a particular situation. Interpersonal conflict is manifested in the interaction between two or more persons. In interpersonal conflicts, subjects confront each other and sort out their relationship directly, face to face.

In an interpersonal conflict, each side seeks to defend its opinion, to prove the other wrong, people resort to the most various types aggression, from verbal to physical. Such behavior causes sharp negative emotional experiences in the subjects of the conflict, which aggravate the interaction of the participants and provoke them to extreme actions. In conditions of interpersonal conflict, rational perception of reality is often difficult, emotions begin to take precedence over reason. Many of its participants, after resolving an interpersonal conflict, experience negative emotions for a long time.

Interpersonal conflict reveals the lack of agreement in the existing system of interaction between people. They have opposing opinions, interests, points of view, views on the same problems, which at the appropriate stage of the relationship disrupt normal interaction, when one of the parties begins to purposefully act to the detriment of the other, and the latter, in turn, realizes that these actions infringe on its interests, and takes retaliatory actions.

This situation most often leads to conflict as a means of resolving it. The full resolution of the conflict will be carried out when the opposing sides together quite consciously eliminate the causes that gave rise to it. If the conflict is resolved by the victory of one of the parties, then such a state will be temporary and the conflict will necessarily declare itself in some form under favorable circumstances.

Interpersonal conflict involves direct contact between opponents, direct interaction. Such a kind of "immersion" in the conflict weakens the action of the mechanisms of reflection, leads to a distortion of the perception of the situation. The psychological features of the conflict include the following points.

1. Insufficient awareness of the motives of behavior, one's own and the opponent's. Probably, it would be more accurate to talk about a kind of mythologization of motives, their construction under the influence of various factors. Typical examples of mythologization are:

- the illusion of one's own nobility (I defend a just cause, truth, goodness and justice in the struggle);

- hypertrophy of other people's shortcomings (the principle of a straw in another's eye);

- a double standard of evaluation (what is possible for me is absolutely unacceptable on the part of the opponent);

- simplification of the conflict situation, its translation into one dimension of confrontation and struggle;

- conscious, or, more often, unconscious substitution of the object of the conflict, which increases the motivation for conflict behavior.

2. Substitution of the motives of conflict behavior, most often associated with the action of the projection mechanism - the transfer of the internal psychological state to the assessment of other objects or people (or attributing one's own motives to others). This may be based on:

- suppressed needs

- unresolved problems of the past (for example, children's complexes);

- an inferiority complex;

- own internally unacceptable qualities or personality traits, the existence of which a person does not want to admit and transfers to the outside.

The reasons interpersonal conflicts are very diverse and are determined by the action of a wide variety of variables: from the sociocultural characteristics of individuals to the mismatch of their psychological types.

identifies the following groups of main causes of conflicts:

Structural features include:

- diagnostic (the appearance of a conflict acts as an indicator of dysfunctional relations and manifestations of the contradictions that have arisen);

- development function (conflict is an important source of development of its participants and improvement of the interaction process);

- instrumental (the conflict acts as a tool for resolving contradictions);

- reconstruction (conflict removes factors that interfere with interpersonal interactions, brings interaction between participants to a new level).

The destructive functions of conflict are related to:

- with the collapse of existing joint activities;

- deterioration or complete collapse of relations;

– poor emotional state of the participants;

– low efficiency of further interaction, etc.

It is this side of the conflict that causes people the most negative attitude towards the participants, and they try to avoid them as much as possible.

The structure of interpersonal conflict is not something particularly specific. As in any other conflict, the main structural elements in an interpersonal conflict are: the subjects of the conflict, their personal characteristics, goals and motives, supporters, the cause of the conflict (the object of the conflict). The subjects of interpersonal conflict include those participants who defend their own interests, strive to achieve their goal. They always speak for themselves.

The object of interpersonal conflict is what its participants claim. This is the material, social, spiritual value, or the goal that each of the opposing subjects strives to achieve. For example, two children in kindergarten claim the same toy. In this case, the object of disagreement is the toy itself, provided that the opposite side considers its rights infringed.

The subject of the conflict in such a situation are contradictions in which the opposite interests of children are manifested. In the above case, the subject will be the desire of children to master the right to dispose of the toy, that is, the problem of mastering the object, the claims that the subjects present to each other. In this regard, two aspects can be distinguished in the structure of interpersonal conflict: the first is the objectively established antagonism of interests, goals, values, and opinions. But in itself, the confrontation of interests and goals is static, does not lead to the emergence and deployment of a conflict process without external behavioral expression. Therefore, the second aspect is behavioral antagonism associated with contradictions in interaction, with an emotionally intense confrontation between the parties.

In accordance with this, we can distinguish in interpersonal conflict two parallel systems, two "hypostases".

1. Analyzing the content characteristics of the object of the conflict, we construct some cognitive (semantic) structure based on knowledge, information, values ​​that we attach to these cognitive elements. In accordance with them, the purpose of the action is built.

2. But at the same time, conflict actions are associated with the motives of behavior, with the personal meaning that sets the relationship to opponents.

But any conflict should always be considered not only in statics, but also in dynamics. Conflict is a process that is always in development, so its elements and structure are constantly changing. There is a wide range of views on this issue in the literature. for example, in the textbook "Conflictology" they give a detailed table of the main periods and stages of the dynamics of the conflict. Depending on the degree of tension in relations, they distinguish differentiating and integrating parts of the conflict.

The conflict itself, they believe, consists of three periods:

1) pre-conflict (the emergence of an objective problem situation, awareness of an objective problem situation, attempts to solve the problem in non-conflict ways, pre-conflict situation);

2) conflict (incident, escalation, balanced counteraction, end of the conflict);

3) post-conflict situation (partial normalization of relations, full normalization of relations).

Daniel Dana, PhD, one of the pioneers in the field of conflict resolution, in his four-step method for improving relationships, identifies only three levels of conflict development:

1st level: skirmishes (minor troubles that do not pose a threat to the relationship);

2nd level: clashes (development of clashes into clashes - expansion of the circle of causes that cause quarrels, a decrease in the desire to interact with another and a decrease in faith in his good intentions for us);

3rd level: crisis (the escalation of clashes into a crisis is the final decision to break off relationships that are unhealthy, here the emotional instability of the participants reaches such an extent that there are fears of physical violence).

Each of these authors independently determines the tactics and strategy for resolving conflicts and preventing them. In any case, for the emergence of an interpersonal conflict, the presence of contradictions (objective or imaginary) is necessary. The contradictions that have arisen due to a discrepancy in the views and assessments of people on a variety of phenomena lead to a situation of dispute. If it poses a threat to one of the participants, then a conflict situation arises.

The conflict situation is characterized by the presence of opposite goals and aspirations of the parties to master one object. For example, the issue of leadership in a student group between students. For a conflict to arise, a kind of trigger is needed, that is, a reason that activates the action of one of the parties. Any circumstances can act as a trigger, even the actions of a third party. In the above example, the reason may be a negative opinion about one of the contenders for the leadership of any student.

3. Basic styles of behavior

in interpersonal conflict

Any conflict always has its resolution, someday ends. Interpersonal conflict is no exception, after all, it also has its resolution. Forms of resolving interpersonal conflicts depend on the behavior of subjects in the process of conflict development. This part of the conflict is called the emotional side, and many researchers consider it the most important.

Researchers identify the following styles of behavior in interpersonal conflict: rivalry, evasion, adaptation, compromise, suppression, assertive behavior. Let's take a closer look at these styles.

1. Rivalry- this style of behavior is characterized by persistent, uncompromising, cooperation-rejecting defense of one's interests, for which all available funds. This style is most often used by opponents of equal rank. Character traits of this style: the desire to satisfy their interests at the expense of the interests of others; the desire to avoid the pain caused by defeat; The main thing is not to win, the main thing is not to lose. This behavior is manifested in people who always strive to "save face", to be a winner in any situation and at any cost. If this style is used by both opponents, the conflict becomes an end in itself, the original cause fades into the background, and rational control over the situation is lost.

2. Evasion associated with an attempt to get away from the conflict, not attaching great value to it, perhaps due to the lack of conditions for its resolution. A group of opponents or one of them refuse to participate in the further development of events, evade solving the problem. The forms of manifestation of such behavior can be silence, defiant removal, ignoring the offender, breaking off relations. In some cases, this behavior can be productive (if the problem is not important to you, if you are aware that you are being deliberately drawn into the conflict, if you do not have this moment enough complete information about the situation). But this style also has negative aspects: dodging provokes excessive demands from the opponent, turning off the situation can lead to a loss.

3. fixture implies the willingness of the subject to give up their interests in order to maintain relationships that are placed above the subject and object of disagreement. The conflict is not released outside for the sake of solidarity (sometimes false), the preservation of unity even at the cost of significant sacrifices and concessions. So, the leader can adhere to this tactic in relation to subordinates (or one of them) in order to save the "face" of the organization, "not to wash dirty linen in public." Such behavior may be justified if you need to get a reprieve, analyze the situation. But if this style is used constantly, one of the parties inevitably becomes the object of manipulation and is forced to constantly make concessions, submit to the pressure of the opponent. This leads to the accumulation of negative emotions, the constant growth of a negative emotional background.

4. Compromise requires concessions from both sides to the extent that an acceptable solution is found through mutual concessions for the opposing sides. This style of conflict behavior is perhaps the most constructive (although it is not applicable in every situation). The bottom line is that the point of view of the opponent is accepted, but only if he makes reciprocal concessions. With this style, a rational strategy dominates: it is better to gain something than to lose everything. It is important that each participant in the conflict achieve something. But often the problem is that some finite value is being divided, and the needs of all participants cannot be fully satisfied, which can become the basis for a new conflict. For example, if two children quarrel over a chocolate bar, then a compromise is possible (half), but if the object of the conflict is a toy, then a compromise is impossible for objective reasons (an indivisible object). The fact is that a compromise presupposes, albeit partial, but simultaneous satisfaction of the needs of the subjects of conflict confrontation.

5. suppression- the essence of this style lies in the fact that one of the opponents forces the other to accept his point of view or position at any cost, using aggression, power and coercion. This happens very often when one of the opponents has higher ranked positions and seeks to realize his advantage using any available resources. Such behavior, for example, is often characteristic of authoritarian parents when resolving conflict situations with a child. Of course, this leads to the fact that the “weaker” opponent is forced to submit, but the conflict is driven inside and inevitably periodically resumes.

6. assertive behavior(from English assert - to assert, to defend). Such behavior implies the ability of a person to defend his interests and achieve his goals without prejudice to the interests of other people. It is aimed at ensuring that the realization of one's own interests is a condition for the realization of the interests of interacting subjects. Assertiveness is an attentive attitude both to oneself and to a partner. Assertive behavior prevents the emergence of conflicts, and in a conflict situation helps to find the right way out of it. At the same time, the greatest efficiency is achieved when one assertive person interacts with another such person.

It should be noted that there is no ideal style of behavior in interpersonal conflict. All of these styles of behavior can be both spontaneous and consciously used to achieve the desired results in resolving such conflicts.

Conflictology. Ed. . SPb. Publishing house "Lan", 1999. S. 132.

Shipilov. M. UNITI, 1999. S. 264.

Dana D. Overcoming disagreements. SPb. LENATO, 1994, pp. 30–35.

Andrienko psychology. M. ACADEMIA, 2000. S. 223–224.

Conflict (aka dispute or quarrel) is a natural component of the life of any person who lives, interacts with the environment and, in particular, with people. Conflicts are of different types, depending on the environment in which it manifests itself. For example, in interpersonal conflicts, a person often operates with the interests of the whole team, while in intrapersonal conflicts, he pays attention to his own desires and needs. Conflicts always become social because it is the person who creates the conflict.

It is unlikely that any reader of an online magazine site has not encountered conflict situations in his life. Psychologists recommend getting used to the fact that a person will periodically argue with someone and clarify controversial issues in a raised voice, without even coming to common decision. The fact is that conflict is a clash of your interests with others. Two or more people do not always want the same thing, they think the same way, which naturally leads them to conflicts.

The conflict is:

1. When you want to go to the sea and your partner wants to go to the mountains.
2. When you want to spend the company's money on development, and other participants on increasing the salaries of employees.
3. When you are fighting for justice, and a group of other people - for achieving their success.

When you think and want something different from other people, when others do not perceive your actions or you are outraged by someone's behavior, when someone's freedom is limited by the actions of another person, then a dispute arises that is natural in the world of people. Therefore, it remains only to decide how to get out of it so that the conflict does not become a constant companion.

What is the purpose of separating the types of conflicts?

Separately, experts distinguish types of conflicts. For what purpose is this being done? If you understand what kind of conflict has arisen between people, then it becomes easier to resolve it. However, experts begin their consideration of the topic with a huge variety of the concept of the term itself. What is conflict? And there are many possible answers here.

Among all the variety, we single out the most suitable for a modern person: a conflict is a confrontation of participants in the event of disagreements. When a person interacts with society, he periodically has disagreements in opinions, desires, needs, views with other people. This leads to a confrontation for the right to consider one's opinion the only correct one. However, a conflict is not just a confrontation, a struggle, but also a desire to resolve the situation that has arisen, that is, to find ways to reconcile, resolve and eliminate the conflict situation.

How can you communicate with a person who considers his opinion the only correct one? No way. Stated your opinion and the conversation ended, since all other words will be directed to proving why your opinion is correct, and with unsuccessful results. Therefore, such people are bad teachers and interlocutors. They are bad teachers because they require complete submission from students and their copying (any innovations in development are not welcome). They are bad conversationalists because you need to think exactly like them and have the same thoughts as theirs.

Probably, it is already becoming clear that a person who considers his opinion the only correct one cannot achieve success. Undoubtedly, he has some knowledge and skills that are useful. But if the question arises of learning something new or changing one's mind, then there is aggression, resistance or a retaliatory attack. A person believes that he already knows everything that he needs to know, therefore he perceives any innovations not on his initiative without willingness. Only when he believes that he needs to learn something new, he begins to do it. And at the same time, he quite often imposes his idea on other people, thinking that they should also learn this (otherwise they become “backward” and “stupid” in his eyes).

A person who considers his opinion the only correct one is a difficult person. You can’t say anything to such people and you can’t prove anything, because if your opinion does not coincide with their opinion, then you are wrong, no matter what you think and no matter how you argue. You are wrong - and that's it! What to do if a person considers himself omniscient, omnipotent and wise in experience? It is better to leave such a “master” alone, so as not to once again infringe on his big ego, which is ready to prove by hook or by crook that it is the most valuable and intelligent.

Types of social conflicts

Social conflicts are the most common types, since we are talking about the confrontation of a person with another person or even a whole group for the right to possess a valuable resource, because of which it flared up. Here, in addition to the disputing parties, they distinguish:

1. Witnesses are individuals who simply observe the conflict from the outside.
2. Instigators - individuals who commit actions that incite the parties to further conduct the dispute.
3. Accomplices - who in various ways (technical means or advice) intensify the conflict.
4. Intermediaries - individuals who are trying to eliminate the conflict, resolve.

Only the arguing parties are in direct confrontation. The rest of the participants may not be in a state of struggle or hatred towards anyone.

The subject of the dispute differs from the cause and reason for the development of the conflict:

• The reason arises from objective circumstances, which are always related to the needs of the disputing parties.
• Some reason becomes external factor, which may be insignificant. It can be accidental or socially created.

A conflict situation should be distinguished from a contradiction - when the parties do not converge at all and are not similar in anything (neither in opinion, nor in interests, nor in the direction of activity). The contradictions are:

1. Subjective and objective. Objective disagreements arise independently of the will and intellect of a person, which is the opposite in the situation with subjective disputes.
2. Minor and main.
3. Non-antagonistic and antagonistic. In a non-antagonistic conflict, the parties have a consistency of interests, so they can resolve the dispute by finding a compromise, concessions.
4. External and internal. Internal conflicts arise within the group due to differences of opinion or conflict with established orders. External disputes arise between groups of persons.

For the development of a conflict, a contradiction is always needed, because of which the parties experience internal tension and dissatisfaction with their interests, which makes them want to resist.

Types and functions of conflicts

Conflicts can be both positive and negative. In conflict, people notice that life is not as monotonous as a person sees it. If there is another opinion that may be correct, then it is not so simple. At the same time, conflicts can lead to the destruction of the individual and the disorganization of the team, so it is very important to single out the types and functions of conflict situations in order to quickly resolve them.

Types of conflicts within the team can be:

1. Means used: violent and non-violent.
2. Duration: one-time and recurring, long-term and short-term, protracted.
3. Form: internal and external.
4. Capacity (volume): regional and national, group and personal, local and global.
5. The nature of development: deliberate and spontaneous.
6. Type of relationship: individually and socio-psychological, international and intranational.
7. Source of education: false, subjective and objective.
8. Impact on the course of development: progressive and regressive.
9. The sphere of social life: political, economic, family and household, ethnic.

Depending on the number of participants in the conflict, group, interpersonal and intrapersonal disputes are distinguished. Often a person feels conflict within himself. It may arise due to the collision of two important ideas or desires that require implementation in a particular situation, while they cannot be implemented simultaneously. The conflict may arise because of the need to choose between two equally significant options, which themselves may be imperfect. Also, a person is in conflict when he sees that all the proposed options are unattractive to him, so he faces a dilemma.

A person performs various roles in society, so conflicts are distinguished here:

• Personal - when a person must fulfill one role, but he believes that he must fulfill another, since this is consistent with his interests.
• Interpersonal - when a person is already used to playing one role, so it is difficult for him to switch to another.
• Interrole.

In an organization (company) where a large number of different people work with their own needs, professional skills and views, directions in activities, conflicts also arise. They are often called group, because the conflict occurs between groups of people from different areas of production. Here, each group is in the position of "we - they".

Types of conflict in an organization are:

1. Vertical - when a dispute arises between different layers in the hierarchy of employees.
2. Horizontal - when people from different areas of the organization argue.
3. Mixed - when there is a mixture of vertical and horizontal positions.
4. Business - problems arose at the level of solving some work issue.
5. Personal - the conflict is informal.
6. Symmetric - when both sides win in the conflict.
7. Asymmetric - when only one side wins the dispute or it loses more than the other.
8. Destructive - when the conflict damages the company.
9. Constructive - when the conflict contributes to the development of the company.

Types of interpersonal conflicts

Interpersonal conflicts are the most frequent when, at the level of personal needs, a person is faced with misunderstanding, denial or indignation of others. Interpersonal conflicts arise at the level of a person with another person or even a group of people. Moreover, disputes always arise at the level of communication. Here are the types of interpersonal conflicts:

1. Value - when the values ​​of the participants are affected.
2. Conflict of interests.
3. Regulatory - violation by one of the participants of the rules of relations.

A conflict occurs if:

• There are differences of opinion and desires that are very significant.
• It is necessary to overcome disagreement in order to restore relationships.
• Participants are active or passive in order to eliminate or reduce the conflict.

To overcome interpersonal conflicts, participants must cooperate, when not only their wishes and needs are taken into account, but also the interests of the other side.

Types of intrapersonal conflicts

When contradictions arise within a person, they are called intrapersonal conflicts. Here are the types:

• Role - a collision of two or more roles that a person can play in one situation. Here you need to choose which role to play, which is sometimes difficult, since each of them gives its own benefit and brings its own harm.
• Motivational - a person fluctuates between his inner desires and responsibilities.
• Cognitive - a discrepancy between the subject's ideas about ongoing events and how it should have been.

Ways to resolve conflicts

Conflict resolution should be the main goal of the parties involved in the dispute. The result can be negative or positive ways. Negative means methods that will ultimately lead to the destruction of relations between the parties. Positive ways are those that allow you to resolve the conflict and keep the connection.

There are various ways to resolve conflicts. Which one people choose depends on their behavior and their desire to go to reconciliation. If in the end everyone is satisfied, then their way of reconciliation turns out to be the most successful.

Outcome

Conflicts are normal for people who cannot desire and think alike. However, another issue remains how to resolve conflicts. If people want to keep the relationship, then they must direct all their efforts to resolve the dispute, and not to increase or prolong it.

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION OF THE REPUBLIC OF BELARUS

BELARUSIAN STATE UNIVERSITY

FACULTY OF PHILOSOPHY AND SOCIAL SCIENCES

Department of Social Communication

Interpersonal conflicts

course work

2nd year student of the department of information and communication

Grishkevich I. A.

Scientific adviser:

Candidate of Sociological Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of Social Communication Mazanik M. N.

Minsk, 2013

INTRODUCTION

LITERATURE REVIEW

CHAPTER 1: MAIN PARAMETERS AND NATURE OF INTERPERSONAL CONFLICT

2 Causes and functions of interpersonal conflict

3 Structure and dynamics of interpersonal conflict

CHAPTER 2: INTERPERSONAL CONFLICTS IN COMMUNICATION AND METHODS OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION

3 Interpersonal Conflict Resolution

CONCLUSION

LIST OF SOURCES USED

INTRODUCTION

In the usual, everyday sense, a person interprets conflict as something negative, associated with irrationality with hostility, fear, threats. Some experiences are so intense that a defensive reaction is fixed in people, and they begin to believe that the conflict is an extremely undesirable phenomenon, it should be avoided, and if it occurs, it requires immediate resolution. They cannot be judged for this, because they are partly right: conflicts can be very destructive, take a lot of time and effort. However, no matter how hard we try, conflicts in one form or another always accompany our lives, from family to geopolitical, and everyone can see this from their own experience. Consequently, since we cannot avoid them, we must learn to reduce their number and intensity, learn to control them. However, all this requires time, which we do not have, since in our time communication is undergoing major changes, all social processes are accelerating and becoming more complex, and our life is filled with situations in which numerous contradictions need to be resolved.

Any conflict (interethnic, interstate, organizational, etc.) is reduced to interpersonal. Interpersonal conflicts cover almost all areas human relations. They have always been present in a person's life, from the very beginning of his social life and, apparently, to the end. The very problem of interpersonal conflicts was given much attention, since, as mentioned above, conflicts have always existed at all times, and the most basic type of conflict was interpersonal.

Today, psychology considers conflict in a positive way, as the development of an organization and personality, treats conflict as an engine of progress. It teaches us to look not at the negative, but at the positive sides of conflicts, which the vast majority of us have not done before. If we are not afraid of conflicts, but analyze them every time, then we will find that we could easily avoid many mistakes by simply noticing them in time and taking appropriate measures.

The problem of conflict resolution is now becoming more relevant not only in terms of improving the human condition, but also for practical purposes, mainly in the economy and politics, where business relationship.

Thus, mastering the skills of successful communication in conflict situations is not only of theoretical importance, but will also help in Everyday life and in a person's career.

Object of work: interpersonal conflict.

Subject of work: conflict interaction in the course of communication and ways to resolve it

Purpose: to study interpersonal conflict as a communication phenomenon.

Describe interpersonal conflict

Identify the causes and functions of interpersonal conflict

Consider the dynamics of interpersonal conflict

Consider communication models in relation to interpersonal conflict

Determine strategies for people's behavior

Identify methods for resolving interpersonal conflicts

LITERATURE REVIEW

Antsupov, A.Ya. Shipilov, A. Conflictology: Textbook for universities / A. Antsupov, A. Shipilov. - Unity: Moscow, 2000. - 507 p.

Contains a generalization and systematization of scientific knowledge about conflicts, which are obtained in various areas Russian science. The basics of conflictology are outlined, a conceptual scheme for describing conflicts is given. The principles, methods and methods of settlement, prevention and study of conflicts are considered.

Completely and systematized information about conflicts is presented in a language understandable to the student. Contains the necessary information, which serves as the basis for conducting research or self-study of the subject.

The anthology contains a large amount of useful systematized and structured information aimed at practical use. The ways of resolving conflicts are considered and a list of useful tips is given.

CHAPTER 1. THE NATURE OF INTERPERSONAL CONFLICT

1 The concept and characteristics of interpersonal conflict

The word "conflict" came into modern languages ​​from Latin (conflictus - clash), it is international and does not need to be translated.

In order to define interpersonal conflict, it is necessary to define what “conflict” is. The definition of this concept was given by many authoritative sociologists and psychologists, considering this phenomenon from many angles, and the variety of interpretations makes it problematic to single out any particular one. However, most authors agree that there is a contradiction in the conflict, which takes the form of a disagreement, in which two or more subjects most often take part.

After analyzing the definitions of many authoritative authors, you can try to give a general definition of the conflict. So, a conflict is a situation in which two subjects clash on the basis of contradictions, each of which seeks to master the object of disagreement or defend its own point of view, which is not only incompatible with the opponent’s point of view, but often opposite to it.

Due to its scope and diversity, conflict has many different types. Interpersonal conflict is the most common type of conflict. It can be defined as a situation of confrontation between specific participants face to face, perceived and experienced by them (or at least one of them) as a significant psychological problem that requires its resolution and causes activity of the parties aimed at overcoming the contradiction that has arisen and resolving the situation in the interests of both. or one of the parties.

A large number of Researchers agree on the following signs of interpersonal conflict:

Bipolarity - there are two opposite positions in the conflict.

Competition - the desire to fill the need or the destruction of the opponent.

The presence of the subjects of the conflict.

Activity aimed at overcoming the contradiction.

Just as personal conflicts differ in what problems are affected by the contradiction that has arisen, Krylov identifies the basic characters of interpersonal conflicts:

value conflicts. Situations in which there is a disagreement based on incompatible ideas that are of particular individual importance to the subjects. Each person has a value system that is of great importance to him and reflects what is the meaning for the subject.

Conflicts of interest. Situations in which the goals, motives and plans of the participants are incompatible or contradict each other.

Conflicts as a result of violation of norms or rules of interaction. Norms and rules regulate the order of interaction; without them, it turns out to be impossible.

A factor is also the cause of the conflict, that is, an event that brings hidden difficulties into an open environment, leading to confrontation.

The last factor he singles out is such a parameter as the severity of the conflict. In any conflict there is a problem, but the degree of its significance in different situations and for different subjects will also be different. The more significant the problems that are present in the conflict, the less a person is set up for concessions and compromises.

According to A.V. Dmitriev, there are the following types of interpersonal conflict:

Sensual-affective. The most common type of interpersonal conflict. It begins with a sharp and unpleasant question that was addressed by one of the parties to the other. The party that was asked the question has negative feelings for the other party and tries to ignore it and keep communication to a minimum. The first main feature is the gradual development of the conflict situation, the accumulation of irritation, which does not lead to the resolution of the conflict situation. The second feature is the divergent positions of the parties, i.e. the first party tries to get answers to questions, does not receive and gets annoyed, and the second tries to ignore and move away from the first, which leads to a shaken morale of the latter, followed by a conflict situation.

Uncompromising. It begins with mutual remarks, reproaches, which continue to be used as the main arguments until such time as one of the parties wins, while neither of them intends to make concessions. A very destructive type.

Emotionally unrestrained. It begins with the aggressiveness of one of the subjects, while the other subject interprets the behavior of the aggressor as wrong and maintains the conflict. The conflict itself is characterized by the participants' lack of desire to understand each other and understand the situation, each other's dissatisfaction, a sharp form of communication, and destructiveness. Such a conflict is of a protracted nature.

Politely touchy. Main characteristic this type of politeness. The most peaceful type. The conflict begins with a polite expression of disagreement of one of the partners with the opinion of the other, while both feel awkward and some guilt for participating in the conflict. Both are immediately ready for reconciliation.

Aggressive. Both participants are tuned to destructive behavior and exit from the situation without compromise due to the suppression of reason by emotions. The most dangerous type. The form of interaction is a verbal skirmish, the extreme form is a fight.

Each type of conflict has its own causes, which require a special approach. These types differ in the aspects of interpersonal relationships or interactions that have been affected. But the same reasons can give rise to different conflicts. Consequently, the nature of conflicts is determined by the nature of the problems between the participants, and the cause of the problems is determined by the external environment and circumstances.

2 Causes and functions of interpersonal conflicts

To resolve a conflict, first of all, you need to find out its causes. If this is not done, conflicts can neither be resolved nor, moreover, prevented.

Any specific causes of interpersonal conflicts are very different. It is difficult to single out any one classification, since each author offers his own.

The cause of conflicts are conflictogens - words or actions that can contribute to the emergence of conflict. The key word here is “may”, since not all conflictogens lead to conflict, because we get used to some of them (rudeness, impoliteness) and react differently.

A conflictogen has one pattern that makes it so dangerous, and this property is escalation. People tend to pay less attention to what they say and more to what they are told, which is a kind of catalyst for the development of the conflict. The subject receives the conflict generator x, which was sent to him by another participant, but he does not accept it as it was sent, but reacts more strongly, multiplying this conflict generator, getting, say, 1.5x. The subject tries to respond to the conflictogen with a large conflictogen, and it turns out that the one who sent the first conflictogen, in the next turn, receives a conflictogen, let's say 2x, and then a chain reaction starts. This can be explained by the fact that the subject, who has received a conflictogen in his address, wants to compensate for the psychological damage inflicted on him, and responds with aggression to aggression in order to get rid of psychological discomfort, while aggression, in order not to miscalculate, comes with a “margin”.

In modern conflictology, there are several groups of causes of conflicts:

Objective.

Divided according to social spheres economic, social, political, ideological. These factors cannot be drastically affected by the subject.

Socio-psychological.

Intersection of interests, values, distortion of information, inconsistency with role expectations, psychological incompatibility and natural aspirations for power and wealth.

Organizational and managerial.

Associated with structural features in organizations, functions within them, correspondence between personality and position, and situations in management.

Personal (subjective).

Subjective critical assessments, conflict resistance, attitude towards design resolution.

According to the American conflictologist W. Lincoln, there are five types of causative factors of conflicts:

informational factors.

For one of the parties, the information is not acceptable, it is rejected (incompleteness, rumors, relevance, veracity, interpretation, extraneous factors).

behavioral factors.

Characteristics of behavior that are rejected by one of the parties (the desire for dominance, aggression and selfishness, a threat to security, undermining self-esteem, unpredictability, discomfort).

relationship factors.

Dissatisfaction with the interaction between subjects (balance of power, importance of relationships, personal compatibility, difference in educational level, history and duration of relationships).

value factors.

The principles of behavior expected by the participants (own belief systems and behaviors, group traditions and values, modes of action and methods of institutions, political, religious, regional and cultural values, belief systems and their corresponding expectations).

Structural factors.

Circumstances that are characterized by stability, objectivity and immutability (governance system, political currents, power, social norms, property rights, standards of behavior, traditions, religions, geographical location, frequency of contacts with society).

This classification allows not only to identify the sources of conflicts, but also to help resolve them, especially when there is a lack of information.

A. Karmin has a classification that is good because it can identify the sources of conflict and the area in which they arise:

Limited resources.

The most frequently encountered objective reason conflicts. People are selfish by nature, therefore they believe that it is they who need and have the right to possess certain resources.

Differences in purpose.

Differences in ideas, values, worldview.

Differences in behavior and experience.

Personal characteristics of opponents.

Poor communications.

Various aspects of interdependence.

Among the functions of conflicts, it is customary to single out positive and negative ones.

Positive:

Eliminate contradiction.

Assessment of individual psychological characteristics of people.

Release of psychological stress.

Development of personality and interpersonal relationships.

Improving the quality of individual activities.

Self-assertion.

Negative:

Negative impact on the psyche.

Possible injuries to opponents.

Violation of interpersonal relationships.

Formation of a negative image of the opponent.

Negative reflection on the activities of the individual.

Consolidation in the experience of solving problems by violent means.

Also, in relation to the participants in the conflict, constructive and destructive functions are distinguished.

Structural:

Cognitive (conflict as a symptom of contradictions in relationships).

Function of development (improvement of the participants and the communication process).

Instrumental (conflict as a tool for resolving contradictions).

Perestroika (growth of mutual understanding and removal of factors that exacerbate interpersonal communication).

Destructive:

Destruction of joint activity.

Deterioration of relations between opponents.

Negative emotional state of opponents.

Decreased effectiveness of future interaction.

For the most part, people feel only the negative and destructive side of conflicts, since it does not require any knowledge in the field of conflictology or any other efforts on the part of the participants in the conflict, that is, this is an affective state. The positive aspects influence passively and most often imperceptibly for us, give experience in resolving and some stability. They also require participants to have a certain level of preparedness in order to act more effectively.

3 Structure and dynamics of interpersonal conflicts

Conflict is one of the types of the process of interaction between people, and, like every process, it has a certain structure.

The structure is a set of stable links of the conflict, which ensure its integrity, equality to itself, difference from other phenomena of social life, without which it cannot exist as a dynamically interconnected integral system and process.

Any interpersonal conflict situation has an objective content and subjective meaning, these are two sides of the same coin. Objective elements include participants (subjects), subject, object, conditions. The subjective elements include conflict behavior, the motives of the parties and information models of the conflict situation. More about each of them:

Participants (subjects) - direct parties, people participating in the confrontation. The contradiction of their interests lies at the heart of the conflict. They can act as both private and official or legal entities. Based on the degree of participation in the conflict, the main participants, others and support groups are distinguished.

The main participants in the conflict are subjects who take active actions against each other, whether it be defense or attack.

Support groups. Almost always behind the opponents there are forces that at any moment can influence the conflict by passive or active actions. These are individuals or groups.

Other participants are those who have an episodic impact on the conflict.

The subject is the contradiction that was the reason for which the subjects come into conflict. The contradiction reflects the clash of interests and goals of the parties, and the problem will remain the same until it is resolved. Each side seeks to resolve the contradiction in its favor.

An object is a kind of scarce resource that the parties to the conflict seek to obtain. The object is material, social and spiritual value. The object itself can be divisible and indivisible, and depending on how the subject regards it, the course of the conflict depends.

Conditions (micro- and macroenvironment) - factors, features environment that determine the emergence, course of development and characteristics of the conflict.

Microenvironment - the closest environment of the subject.

Macroenvironment - social groups.

Motives - what drives a person, determines the direction associated with the satisfaction of needs. The parties in most cases hide their motives, so it is rather problematic to reveal them during the conflict.

Conflict behavior is the activity of the subject, which is aimed at the subject of the conflict and saves the current contradiction. This behavior has its own tactics, strategies and principles. The main principles are the concentration and coordination of forces, saving resources and "strike" on the vulnerable parts of the enemy.

Information models are the subjective representation of each of the participants in the conflict of all the above elements.

As for the dynamics, the stages in interpersonal conflict can be distinguished:

pre-conflict situation.

This is the period that precedes the conflict, it can also be prosperous, but is more often characterized by tension in relations. Here an objective problematic situation arises and the participants realize that the situation is a conflict.

The event that influenced the creation of the conflict. It can also act as a minor incident, which was the "last straw".

Development.

A series of conflict actions of the parties after the start and before the climax of the conflict, or, if the participants are competent enough, before seeking a solution to the conflict.

There are 2 phases: constructive and destructive.

The constructive phase of the conflict is characterized by the fact that the opponent of the goal, the object of the conflict, the means to achieve the goal, the correct assessment of one’s state, “weight”, and capabilities are realized, and the ability to adequately assess oneself and the opponent is determined. The only thing that may not satisfy opponents is, firstly, the style of conducting a conversation (high tone, self-orientation, prevalence of personal interests, weak feedback, ignoring), and secondly, non-verbal characteristics of behavior (avoidance of conversations, stopping or deterioration of joint activities, etc.).

The destructive phase of the conflict (which refers only to the unrealistic, i.e. when the conflict is pointless) is characterized by the fact that it begins when the dissatisfaction of the opponents with each other, the way of solving problems is out of control and, therefore, the situation becomes unmanageable. In turn, this phase is divided into 2 stages:

Psychological. The desire to overestimate one's own capabilities and underestimate the opponent's capabilities.

Increasing activity. Mutual insults, lowering perception, etc.

Climax.

It is characterized by the fact that it occurs when the degree of tension of the conflict reaches its peak and causes significant harm to the participants. After that, the participants realize that they need to look for a way out.

Completion.

Transition from conflict to search for a solution to the problem. Here we can distinguish such concepts as the price of the conflict and the price of the exit from the conflict.

The price of conflict is the sum of three indicators:

Energy consumption - how much effort, time and resources were spent on the conflict.

Damage - the severity of the negative consequences that the opponent created.

Losses - deterioration of the situation as a result of conflict actions of both parties.

The price of getting out of the conflict is the difference between the minuses of getting out of the conflict and the pluses. If the value exceeds zero, then the prospect of getting out of the conflict and gaining benefits become obvious to the conflicting parties.

CHAPTER 2

1 Models of interpersonal communication

Interpersonal conflicts are part of communication in society, they are inseparable from each other, they are closely intertwined. It is impossible to resolve a conflict without knowing the principles of communication between people.

To date, there are many models of communication in society - Lasswell, Shannon-Weaver, Newcomb, Jacobson, Lotman, Eco and others. Each of them is unique in its own way, offers something new, and also complements the previous ones, but they are all similar.

To analyze communication in society, you can take the model of Umberto Eco, as it is well-known and one of the latest.

So, what does the Eco model include?

Source.

Sender.

Receiver.

Message.

Some corrections can be made to this model: the source and signal are combined in the sender (the brain is the source, the articulatory apparatus is the signal), the receiver (sense organs) and the addressee are combined in the same way. As a result, we get the following model:

Sender.

Message.

The message here is a form that the addressee has endowed with meaning based on some code.

A channel is a way of transmitting a message, but there is a risk that the message will distort its meaning under the influence of noise. This risk can be reduced by complicating the coding system or by duplicating information, making it redundant.

In this model, the subjects of the conflict situation are the sender and the addressee. As we can see, almost every element, with the exception of the code and, in part, the channel, can cause a conflict situation to develop.

The sender and the recipient may have some incompatible characteristics, which may lead to a conflict.

The way a message is conveyed can very often vary and take many forms, but it also affects the conflict situation.

Noise here is a destructive element that can destroy communication or change it so much that the meaning of the message can be accepted by the addressee exactly the opposite.

As for the code, the sender encodes the message in advance so that it is understandable to the addressee, or, conversely, not understandable. There is an element of manipulation that can be seen so often in interpersonal conflicts.

And finally, the message. The message is a means of information transfer, communication between subjects. It depends on its content whether the conflict will be resolved, created or preventively stopped.

After the communicative act, the sender and the addressee change places, and the process is repeated anew.

This model is good because it can be applied to any conflict situation and understand where the conflict began.

2 Behavior of people in interpersonal conflicts

Every interpersonal conflict has both a beginning and an end, both a beginning and a resolution. However, there are a lot of ways to achieve conflict resolution, and these ways depend on the parameters that people have, namely temperament, character and level of personal development.

A person receives temperament at birth, it is an inseparable part not only of our psyche, but also of the body, since it is conditioned by the central nervous system. Temperament was considered and classified by such personalities as Hippocrates and I.P. Pavlov, who made the greatest contribution.

There are 4 types of temperament:

Sanguine.

Strong, balanced, mobile.

The best type of temperament for solving a conflict problem.

Phlegmatic person.

Strong, balanced, inert.

The second best type, but he is not characterized by initiative.

Strong, unbalanced, mobile.

This type can be the most destructive in conflicts, as it relies not on calculation, but on the violent emotional reaction.

Melancholic.

Weak, unbalanced, inert.

In this case, the subject will be passive in the conflict, he can avoid it or adapt.

Temperament has a very strong influence on a person's behavior in interpersonal conflicts, and almost every type has its pros and cons that can be managed.

As for character traits, their typology was developed by Jung, and 4 pairs of opposite types are distinguished in it:

Introvert - Extrovert.

Intuitives - Sensory.

Feeling - Thinking.

Perceiving - Decisive.

Each character type has 4 preferences, one on each row. In accordance with this typology, there are 16 types of character in total. This dualism is due to the fact that the human brain consists of two hemispheres - left and right, which are formed by the age of seven and no longer change. The left hemisphere - rational and logical activity, the right - subconscious activity and emotions. It also explains why some of us are left-handed and others are right-handed.

The problem of conflicts is connected with the inconsistency of types of characters, with opposite sets of characteristics, which hinders the solution of a joint task.

You can try to identify five types of conflict personalities:

Demonstrative.

Good adaptability to situations, likes to be the center of attention, avoids effort, irrational. Feels comfortable in conflicts.

Rigid.

Critical to others, but not to himself, has an overestimated self-esteem, touchy, straightforward. In conflicts, it is characterized by low adaptability, which interferes with behavior in conflict.

Ungovernable.

Impulsive, aggressive, unpredictable, has high self-esteem, lack of self-control. Poorly controls the situation in the conflict and does not accompanies cooperation.

Ultra-precise.

Perfectionist, worries about failures, demanding of everyone, including himself, touchy, outwardly restrained and poor. Poorly oriented in a conflict situation.

Conflict-free.

Suggestible, weak-willed, dependent on the opinions of others, contradicts himself. In conflict, he most often compromises or tries to avoid it.

Purposefully conflict.

Manipulative, active, planned. In conflict, he behaves confidently, evaluates positions and achieves the goal with the help of conflict.

Styles (strategies) of behavior in conflict - the orientation of a person (group) in relation to the conflict, installation on certain forms of behavior.

There are 5 styles:

Cooperation.

Joint actions to solve a problem that involve a different view of the problem. Satisfaction with the decision by both parties.

Compromise.

Concessions on something important on each side to the extent that both are satisfied with the decision.

Rivalry.

Persistent and uncompromising imposition of a solution, dictation of one's own interests and use of all means to win.

Adaptation.

The readiness of the subject to give in in order to maintain relations, lowering aspirations and, as a result, making imposed decisions.

avoidance.

An attempt to get away from the conflict, being in the stage of conflict in the absence of active actions to resolve it.

These styles (strategies) are implemented through the following tactics:

Capturing and holding the object of the conflict. Condition: the object must be material.

Physical abuse. Destruction of property, blocking activities and causing bodily harm.

Psychological abuse. Insult, deceit, slander, discrimination, etc.

Pressure. Demands, threats, orders, blackmail.

demonstrative actions. Attracting attention to oneself, namely public statements, suicide attempts, etc.

Validation. Denial of execution, increase in workload, imposition of a ban.

Coalitions. The goal is to increase the rank in the conflict, i.e. creation of unions, groups, appeal to the media and authorities.

Fixing your position. The most used tactic. Application of logic, facts, criticism, requests and persuasion.

Friendliness. Correct handling, demonstration of readiness to solve a problem, encouragement, apology, etc.

These styles can be both spontaneous and purposefully used. As a rule, combinations of strategies are used in the conflict, sometimes one of them dominates, however, during the conflict, strategies can change.

3 Conflict resolution

Without establishing the causes and motives of the participants, it is impossible to resolve the conflict. Conflict resolution also requires conflict management. Conflict management is a targeted impact to eliminate the causes that caused the conflict, the impact on the behavior of the participants in the conflict in order to correct it and maintain a certain acceptable level of conflict.

The management process depends on a number of factors, the main of which are given below:

Adequacy of perception (an objective and accurate assessment of one's own actions and the actions of an opponent).

Willingness to discuss problems with an opponent openly.

Creating a friendly atmosphere for cooperation.

Determination of the basis of the conflict.

There are also other factors, but they are weakly influenced, such as stereotypes, motives and needs, prejudices, etc.

It is worth noting that conflict avoidance is not conflict resolution, but only a delay and respite, so the symptoms that correspond to conflict avoidance do not contribute to solving the problem.

It is also worth avoiding a prolonged escalation phase, as here the conflict can take on rampant proportions, and it becomes increasingly difficult to control such a situation.

However, before moving on to resolving a conflict situation, it is worth considering a number of conditions that are important in the interaction of the parties.

Voluntary actions on both sides.

You cannot force a person to perform the actions that we need, that is, the opponent must be convinced using constructive arguments.

"Mirror reflection".

Each action of the subject will affect the attitude towards him and the actions of the opponent.

Depends on which representative social group the subject communicates, and what personality the opponent has.

These 3 aspects are prerequisites for resolving a conflict situation.

There is a list of rules for conflict-free communication that can help resolve interpersonal conflict or at least reduce its intensity:

Do not use conflictogens.

Do not respond with a conflictogen to a conflictogen.

Showing empathy for the opponent.

The use of benevolent messages.

To resolve the conflict, the subject also needs to be aware of a number of certain rules that make the conflict resolution procedure easier. They are the following:

The conflict situation is all that needs to be eliminated.

The conflict situation arises before the conflict.

The wording helps to identify the causes.

Ask yourself the question "Why" until you know the real reason.

Formulate the conflict situation in your own words without using words that describe the conflict.

Keep the wording to a minimum.

Successful conflict resolution requires:

Adopt a mindset to resolve the conflict in a way that is beneficial to both parties.

Regulation of one's behavior towards the opponent in a rational way.

Try to find common ground between positions.

Preparation and conduct of negotiations, functionally - with an intermediary.

There are 2 negotiation models:

mutual benefits.

When solutions are found that satisfy both parties.

The meaning of this model is that at the outcome of the conflict it is not at all necessary that one side wins at the expense of the other, but that there is a possibility of mutual gain. The main thing here is interests, not positions.

Concessions and rapprochement or bargaining of the parties.

The essence of the model is that during a conflict with a conflict of interests, the participants make mutual concessions until they find a common ground.

In our time, the degree and role of such a person as a mediator (intermediary) has significantly increased. However, despite the obvious positive attributes of the presence of a mediator, there are also negative ones:

The intervention of the mediator violates the stability within the relations of the parties to the conflict.

The presence and actions of the mediator can lead to the end of the conflict, but this will only be an external influence, while the internal motivation may remain unaffected, which in the future may affect the relationship between the subjects.

The potential danger that the actions of the mediator may lead to the development and deterioration of the conflict.

To avoid such problems, the parties to the conflict need to trust the mediator, and the chances of success when both parties have chosen a mediator are much higher than when only one party has chosen him.

The mediator has the following tactics:

Intervention, which is aimed at establishing and maintaining contact with the subjects of the conflict, gaining their trust.

Contextual intervention, which is used to establish a favorable negotiating climate, prevent complications (also emotional), etc.

Interference related to the decision-making process or the consideration of options.

There are 3 mediation strategies:

Logical (analysis, discussion, etc.).

Aggressive (threats, coercion, etc.).

Paternalistic (gives advice individually to each participant in the conflict, discusses, approves and encourages).

The task of the mediator is difficult because he has to deal with two sides of the conflict, each of which is sure that it is she who has an objective vision of the situation.

The biggest problem in dealing constructively with conflict is the unwillingness of the parties to resolve the conflict. The parties will not seek to resolve the conflict, since each of them is comfortable on their own side, and the search for a way out requires leaving this side and starting to search for a joint solution with the opponent.

interpersonal conflict behavior communication

CONCLUSION

Interpersonal conflicts have always been and always will be. They will meet every day several times, some familiar, some new. We cannot prevent the emergence of conflicts, since they are an important and integral part of society and human essence. All that can be done is to facilitate the flow of conflicts, change your attitude towards them, learn how to manage them, and, if desired, use them to achieve your goal.

Interpersonal conflicts will not lose their relevance, just as the ways to resolve them will not lose their relevance, since throughout history, and especially in our time with the development of globalization and the advent of the Internet, communication has constantly evolved and changed, new forms of interaction have changed and added, new forms of interaction have been created. spheres and institutions, in each of which the conflict proceeded differently, changing with the person.

To get out of a conflict situation, it is not at all necessary that both parties to the conflict have certain conflict management skills, it is enough if at least one subject owns them, and then the chances that the situation will be resolved in a rational way with the least losses will increase many times over.

Most often, it is not conflicts that have a destructive effect on people, but how we emotionally experience them during them. These are threats, fear, hostility, in a word, any acute emotional experience. These effects, unfortunately, are neither limited nor short-lived. They can spread to other areas of human activity and haunt him for a long period of life, as well as transfer these fears and dangers to other people or raise their children in this atmosphere.

Interpersonal conflicts are closely related to other types of conflicts. Suppose they can arise as a result of an intrapersonal conflict, when a person who cannot find answers to his questions begins to involve other people in his problems, which can lead to conflict. Also, interpersonal conflicts are included in intra-group and inter-group conflicts, since the units of groups are subjects, and in case of interpersonal conflict within a group, the conflict passes into the status of a group conflict, because there are parties to the conflict, certain points of view that can be shared by several people. Thus, interpersonal, intrapersonal and group conflicts create some closed system, the elements of which determine each other.

In psychology, the dual nature of the conflict is recognized. It is recognized that it helps to prevent the ossification of the system of relations and is an incentive for change, for the progress of man and society as a whole. Conflicts will bring real benefits when we learn how to rationally manage them.

LIST OF USED SOURCES

1. Antsupov, A.Ya. Shipilov, A. Conflictology: Textbook for universities / A. Antsupov, A. Shipilov. - Unity: Moscow, 2000. - 507 p.

Babosov, E. M. Sociology of conflicts: textbook-method. allowance / E. M. Babosov. - Minsk: BSU Publishing House, 2011. - 399 p.

Grishina, N. V. Psychology of conflict / N. V. Grishina - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2004. - 464 p.

Dmitriev, A.V. Conflictology: Textbook / A. Dmitriev. - M.: Gardariki, 2000. - 320 p.

Karmin, A. Conflictology / A. Karmin - St. Petersburg: Lan Publishing House, 1999. - 448 p.

Krylov, A. Psychology / A. Krylov. - Prospect Publishing House; Moscow, 2005 - 744 p.

Lincoln, W.F. etc. Negotiations. / W. Lincoln. - St. Petersburg: Riga: Ped. Center "Experiment", 1998. - 159 p.

Pavlov, IP Twenty-year experience of objective study of higher nervous activity (behavior) of animals / IP Pavlov. - M.: Nauka, 1973. - 661 p.

Selchenok, K. Applied conflictology: Reader / K. Selchenok. - Harvest, AST, 2007. - 565 p.

Scott, G. J. Conflicts: ways to overcome / G. J. Scott. / Per. from English. - K. : Publishing House Verzilin and KLTD, 2000. - 246 p.

11. Jung, K.G. Psychological types / K.G. Jung. - St. Petersburg: Azbuka, 2001. - 370 p.

Tutoring

Need help learning a topic?

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

Definition of interpersonal conflict

Interpersonal conflict [from lat. conflictus - clash] - a clash of opposing goals, motives, points of view of the interests of the participants in the interaction [Myers, 12]. In essence, this is the interaction of people either pursuing goals that are mutually exclusive or unattainable at the same time by both conflicting parties, or seeking to realize incompatible values ​​and norms in their relationships. In socio-psychological science, as a rule, such structural components of interpersonal conflict as a conflict situation, conflict interaction, conflict resolution are considered. At the heart of any interpersonal conflict lies the conflict situation that has developed even before it began. Here we have the participants of a possible future interpersonal clash, and the subject of their disagreement. In many studies devoted to the problems of interpersonal conflict, it is shown that the conflict situation implies the orientation of its participants to achieve not common, but individual goals. This determines the possibility of an interpersonal conflict, but does not yet predetermine its obligatory nature. In order for an interpersonal conflict to become a reality, it is necessary for its future participants to realize, on the one hand, the current situation as generally meeting their individual goals, and on the other hand, these goals as incompatible and mutually exclusive. But until this happens, one of the potential opponents may change its position, and the object itself, about which differences of opinion have arisen, may lose its significance for one or even for both sides. If the acuteness of the situation disappears in this way, the interpersonal conflict, which, it would seem, inevitably had to unfold, having lost its objective foundations, simply will not arise. So, for example, at the heart of most conflict situations, the participants of which are a teacher and a student, most often there is a discrepancy, and sometimes even a direct opposite, of their positions and views on learning and the rules of behavior at school.

Interpersonal conflict is manifested in the interaction between two or more persons. In interpersonal conflicts, subjects confront each other and sort out their relationship directly, face to face. This is one of the most common types of conflicts. They can occur both between colleagues and between the closest people.

In an interpersonal conflict, each side seeks to defend its opinion, to prove the other wrong, people resort to mutual accusations, attacks on each other, verbal abuse and humiliation, etc. Such behavior causes sharp negative emotional experiences in the subjects of the conflict, which aggravate the interaction of the participants and provoke them to extreme actions. In conflict, it becomes difficult to manage your emotions. Many of its participants experience negative health for a long time after the resolution of the conflict.

Interpersonal conflict reveals the lack of agreement in the existing system of interaction between people. They have opposing opinions, interests, points of view, views on the same problems, which at the appropriate stage of the relationship disrupt normal interaction, when one of the parties begins to purposefully act to the detriment of the other, and the latter, in turn, realizes that these actions infringe on its interests, and takes retaliatory actions. This situation most often leads to conflict as a means of resolving it. The full resolution of the conflict will be carried out when the opposing sides together quite consciously eliminate the causes that gave rise to it. If the conflict is resolved by the victory of one of the parties, then such a state will be temporary and the conflict will necessarily declare itself in some form under favorable circumstances.

Any settlement of the conflict or its prevention is aimed at preserving existing system interpersonal interaction. However, the source of the conflict may be such reasons that lead to the destruction of the existing system of interaction. In this regard, there are various functions of the conflict: constructive and destructive.

Structural features include:

* cognitive (the appearance of a conflict acts as a symptom of dysfunctional relationships and manifestations of the contradictions that have arisen);

* development function (conflict is an important source of development of its participants and improvement of the interaction process);

* instrumental (the conflict acts as a tool for resolving contradictions);

* perestroika (conflict removes factors that undermine existing interpersonal interactions, promotes the development of mutual understanding between participants).

The destructive functions of conflict are associated with

* destruction of existing joint activities;

* deterioration or collapse of relations;

* negative well-being of the participants;

* low efficiency of further interaction, etc.

This side of the conflict causes people to have a negative attitude towards them and they try to avoid them.

The structure of the conflict.

In a systematic study of conflicts, the structure and elements are distinguished in them. The elements in an interpersonal conflict are: the subjects of the conflict, their personal characteristics, goals and motives, supporters, the cause of the conflict. The structure of the conflict is the relationship between its elements. The conflict is always in development, so its elements and structure are constantly changing.

It can be noted that the most significant of a number of unresolved problems should, in our opinion, include the difficulties associated with the definition of the concept of conflict and its correlation with other concepts and phenomena of the mental life of a person close to it. The analysis of the understanding of the conflict and the nature of this phenomenon in various areas of classical psychology enriched our understanding of psychological conflicts, but did not remove the problem of defining the concept, moreover, it even complicated it. The authors of the generalizing publication on the problems of constructive conflict management (Constructive Conflict Management ... 1994) are forced to start with the question of definition. They point out that existing definitions of conflict emphasize either the incompatibility of actions (which, as we have seen, is characteristic of the situational approach) or the perceived difference of interests or beliefs (which is characteristic of cognitivists). The definition of conflict, in their opinion, with which it is difficult to disagree, should include both behavioral, and cognitive, and affective components as present in any conflict and significant for it. A. Ya. Antsupov and A. I. Shipilov (Antsupov, Shipilov, 1999), in their review of works on conflictological issues, tried to compare various definitions of conflict in Russian psychology, solving the same problem that Western sociologists once set themselves in relation to to social conflicts. Like Mack and Snyder, they conclude that there is no established, generally accepted understanding of conflicts. The authors analyzed 52 definitions of conflicts belonging to domestic psychologists. The definitions of intrapersonal conflict are based on two key concepts: in some definitions, the conflict is interpreted as a contradiction between different sides of the personality, in others - as a clash, a struggle of personal tendencies. The generalization of the definitions of interpersonal conflict made it possible to identify the following main properties: the presence of a contradiction between interests, values, goals, motives as the basis of the conflict; opposition of the subjects of the conflict; the desire by any means to cause maximum damage to the opponent, his interests; negative emotions and feelings towards each other (Antsupov, Shipilov, 1992). An analysis of most specific definitions demonstrates either their vulnerability or narrowness, which does not satisfy the existing varieties of psychological conflicts (at least two of its main varieties - intrapersonal and interpersonal). And the first domestic "Psychotherapeutic Encyclopedia" (1998) does not include in the circle of defined concepts such as "conflict", "crisis" or, for example, "problem", which are so widely used in practical work. Let us turn to the preliminary selection of a number of features that we have undertaken in the introduction, which, on the basis of various sources were designated as invariant, i.e. necessarily encountered in various interpretations of the conflict.

Recall that they included bipolarity as a confrontation between two principles; activity aimed at overcoming contradictions; the presence of a subject or subjects as carriers of the conflict. Let us consider whether these signs satisfy the psychological understanding of conflicts, taking into account the ideas of different psychological trends. Bipolarity as the presence and opposition of two principles is necessarily present in any psychological conflict. Whether we are talking about an intrapersonal conflict, interpersonal or intergroup - in any case, there are two instances in the conflict, opposing each other. Activity aimed at overcoming a contradiction is also characteristic of any conflict and, in various designations, is apparently present in all definitions of a conflict (which is not surprising: remember that, by its very origin, the word "conflict" is a collision). This activity is called "collision", "incompatibility", "opposition", etc.

It is this characterization of conflicts that was at one time the subject of

disputes between conflictologists who could not decide whether this feature is mandatory or whether the presence of negative feelings can already be considered a conflict. L. Koser objected to identifying conflict with hostile attitudes: “The difference between conflict and hostile feelings is significant. Conflict, unlike hostile attitudes or feelings, always takes place in the interaction between two or more people. Hostile attitudes are predispositions to the emergence of conflict behavior; conflict in contrast, there is always an interaction" (Coser, 1986). At present, according to G. M. Andreeva, the debatable question of whether “the conflict is only a form of psychological antagonism (i.e., the representation of a contradiction in consciousness) or is it necessarily the presence of conflict actions” can be considered resolved in favor of that "both evoked components are obligatory signs of a conflict" (Andreeva, 1994).

Indeed, the contradictions between people, the disagreements that have arisen between them, no matter how significant they may be, will not necessarily take the form of a conflict. When does the situation begin to develop as a conflict? If a person, perceiving the current situation as unacceptable for him, begins to do something to change it - he explains his point of view to his partner, trying to convince him, goes to complain about him to someone, demonstrates his dissatisfaction, etc. All this is calculated to the partner's response and is aimed at changing the situation. Is this sign - activity aimed at overcoming contradictions - mandatory for conflicts that develop not in interpersonal situations, but in the inner world of a person, at an intrapersonal level? By itself, bipolarity does not yet mean a clash of sides. Many contradictions live in each of us - the desire for closeness with other people and the desire for autonomy, isolation of our individuality, high and low, good and evil coexist in us, etc. Nevertheless, this does not mean that we are constantly because of this, in conflict with himself. However, when for one reason or another these contradictions become aggravated, a “struggle” begins, a search, sometimes painful, for a solution, a way to overcome this contradiction, a way out of it. The carrier of the conflict is the subject or subjects. Another sign of conflict was originally designated by us as the presence of a subject or subjects as carriers of the conflict. Its selection was determined by the need to limit our understanding of the conflict from its metaphorical use. The simplest interpretation of this feature means that conflict is a "human" phenomenon. Psychologists do not need this clarification (the exception is the attribution of the properties of conflict to the phenomenon of struggle in the animal world, which, in our opinion, is deeply erroneous, because it deprives the phenomenon of conflict of its value-normative characteristics, its "sociality"). However, the subject is not just a human individual; this characteristic focuses on his endowment with consciousness and will (in the traditional philosophical and psychological understanding), on his ability to take active and conscious actions.

Activity was noted by us above as one of the attributive signs of the conflict. It develops as a consequence of the awareness of the existence of a contradiction and the need to overcome it. If a person does not perceive the existing contradiction (in his own aspirations, in relations with other people, etc.) as a problem that needs to be solved, then there is no psychological conflict. The foregoing, of course, does not mean the need for adequate awareness of the problem that has arisen, it can be experienced in the form of emotional discomfort, tension, anxiety, i.e., in one way or another, give rise to the need to overcome it. Equally, regardless of what might be called an "objective view", if a person perceives as a problem something in his relationships with other people or what is happening in his soul, he will experience it as a problem that requires his own solutions.

At first glance, the exception is the psychoanalytic interpretation of the conflict as an unconscious human phenomenon (pathogenic, according to Freud, and neurotic, according to Horney). However, we are talking about problems repressed from consciousness, therefore, it would be more accurate to talk about conflicts that have acquired an unconscious character as a result of a certain inner work aimed at their displacement and suppression, and their resolution presupposes their awareness.

We have considered those signs of conflict that were originally singled out to characterize this phenomenon and which, in our opinion, are in full agreement with both psychological phenomenology and the ideas that exist in theoretical psychology. Is there some unmarked sign left outside our consideration? Referring to the definitions of the conflict by other authors shows that the attributive features proposed by us match or largely coincide with the views of specialists or, in any case, do not contradict them. But there is one characteristic of conflict that deserves special discussion. These are negative actions or negative feelings, characteristics often included in conflict definitions. Consider, as an example, the two definitions already given. One of them is the classic and, perhaps, the most common definition of L. Coser, widely used in the literature. It refers to social conflict, but, as is known, in the Western tradition the concept of social conflict is used quite widely, including in relation to interpersonal situations. So, according to Coser, "social conflict can be defined as a struggle over values ​​or claims to status, power or limited resources, in which the goals of the conflicting parties are not only to achieve the desired, but also to neutralize, damage or eliminate the rival" ( Coser, 1968, p. 232). In this definition, the parties act as opponents seeking to neutralize each other. But this is at best, and at worst, aggressive components are directly included in the definition of a conflict (“damaging or eliminating an opponent”). The second definition belongs to domestic authors Antsupov and Shipilov, who have done a great deal of analytical work to clarify the conceptual scheme of the conflict: "Conflict is understood as the most acute way of resolving significant contradictions that arise in the process of interaction, which consists in the opposition of subjects and is usually accompanied by negative emotions" (Antsupov, Shipilov, 1999). In a recent edition, they clarify their definition: conflict is "the most destructive way of developing and completing significant contradictions that arise in the process of social interaction, as well as the struggle under personality structures" (Antsupov, Shipilov, 2006, p. 158), but do the following reservation. If in the course of the conflict there is a counteraction of the subjects, but they do not experience mutual negative emotions, or, on the contrary, experiencing such, they do not oppose each other, then the authors consider such situations to be pre-conflict. And intrapersonal conflict is understood as "a negative experience caused by a protracted struggle of structures inner peace personality" (Antsupov, Shipilov, 2006, p. 158). We are talking about a fundamental issue - the inclusion of negative actions (as in Coser) or negative feelings (as in Antsupov and Shipilov) into the concept of conflict as its obligatory sign. Definition of Coser was proposed by him 30 years ago during the formation of conflictology, the definition of Antsupov and Shipilov is one of the latest.Recall that the early philosophical and sociological tradition, as well as the psychological one (psychoanalysis), was characterized by an emphasis on the destructive, destructive aspects of the conflict, which led to its overall negative assessment.From a psychological point of view, adhering to any of these definitions, we would also be forced to consider the conflict as a negative phenomenon.

Undoubtedly, the conflict is accompanied by a variety of experiences: you can experience a feeling of annoyance, experience difficulties that have arisen, a feeling of incomprehension, injustice, etc. However, does it necessarily contain hostility towards a partner or a desire to harm him?

The authors of a publication devoted to constructive conflict management (Constructive Conflict Management ... 1994) believe that this concept is characterized by a wider scope than the concept of aggression, and that a conflict can proceed without aggression. The latter can be a way of influencing the participants in the conflict on each other, can lead to its destructive development, however, in the modern interpretation, the conflict can develop without mutual hostility of the participants or their destructive actions. This just gives reason to hope for the possibility of constructive conflict management.

Most of the above definitions dealt with interpersonal conflicts. If we hope to be able to create a universal definition of conflict, corresponding to at least two of its main psychological varieties - interpersonal and intrapersonal conflict, then it must contain features that are relevant for conflicts of both types. It is hardly legitimate, among the various feelings experienced by a person in a situation of existential or any other internal conflict, to focus on hostility or aggression towards oneself.

Thus, it seems to us that the inclusion of aggression (in the form of actions or hostile feelings) in the list of signs of a conflict leads to a narrowing of the scope of the concept and thereby reduces the general concept of conflict to one of the possible varieties.

Introduction

1. The concept of conflict and its essence

2. Features of interpersonal conflicts

3. Causes of interpersonal conflicts

4. Classification of interpersonal conflicts

Conclusion

Introduction

To the most common psychological conflicts include interpersonal conflicts. They cover almost all spheres of human relations. Any conflict ultimately, one way or another, comes down to interpersonal. Even in interstate conflicts, there is a clash between the leaders or representatives of states. Therefore, knowledge of the characteristics of interpersonal conflicts, the causes of their occurrence and ways to manage them is an important component in the professional training of any specialist.

Interpersonal conflicts are conflicts between individuals in the process of their social and psychological interaction. The causes of such conflicts are both socio-psychological and personal, in fact, psychological. The former include: loss and distortion of information in the process of interpersonal communication, unbalanced role interaction between two people, differences in the ways of assessing each other's activities and personality, etc., tense interpersonal relationships, the desire for power, psychological incompatibility.

The concept of conflict and its essence

Memories of conflicts, as a rule, evoke unpleasant associations: threats, hostility, misunderstanding, attempts, sometimes hopeless, to prove one's case, resentment. As a result, there was an opinion that conflict is always a negative phenomenon, undesirable for each of us, and especially for leaders and managers, since they have to deal with conflicts more often than others. Conflicts are seen as something that should be avoided whenever possible.

Representatives of the early schools of management, including supporters of the school of human relations, believed that conflict is a sign of ineffective organization and poor management. Nowadays, management theorists and practitioners are increasingly inclined to the point of view that some conflicts, even in the most effective organization with the best relationships, are not only possible, but also desirable. You just need to manage the conflict. The role of conflicts and their regulation in modern society is so great that in the second half of the 20th century. a special field of knowledge - conflictology - was singled out. A great contribution to its development was made by sociology, philosophy, political science and, of course, psychology.

Conflicts arise in almost all spheres of human life.

What is conflict?

There are various definitions of conflict, but they all emphasize the existence of a contradiction that takes the form of disagreement. When it comes to human interaction.

Conflict (lat. conflictus - collision) - a collision of oppositely directed goals, interests, positions, opinions or views of opponents or subjects of interaction.

Conflicts can be hidden or overt, but they are always based on a lack of agreement. Therefore, we define conflict as the lack of agreement between two or more parties - individuals or groups.

Observations show that 80 percent of conflicts arise without the desire of their participants. This happens because of the peculiarities of our psyche and the fact that most people either do not know about them or do not attach importance to them.

The main role in the emergence of conflicts is played by the so-called conflictogens - words, actions (or inactions) that contribute to the emergence and development of the conflict, that is, leading to conflict directly.

However, by itself, a "single" conflictogen is not capable, as a rule, of leading to a conflict. There should be a "chain of conflictogens" - their so-called escalation.

Escalation of conflictogens - we try to respond to the conflictogen in our address with a stronger conflictogen, often as strong as possible among all possible ones.

If conflicts contribute to the adoption of informed decisions and the development of relationships, then they are called functional (constructive) .

Conflicts that impede effective interaction and decision-making are called dysfunctional (destructive).

So you need to destroy all the conditions for the emergence of conflicts once and for all, and learn how to manage them correctly. To do this, one must be able to analyze conflicts, understand their causes and possible consequences.

Conflicts can be realistic (objective) or unrealistic (non-objective).

Realistic conflicts are caused by dissatisfaction with certain requirements of the participants or unfair, in the opinion of one or both parties, the distribution of any advantages between them and are aimed at achieving a specific result.

Unrealistic conflicts have as their goal the open expression of accumulated negative emotions, resentment, hostility, that is, acute conflict interaction becomes here not a means to achieve a specific result, but an end in itself.

Having started as a realistic conflict, it can turn into an unrealistic one, for example, if the subject of the conflict is extremely significant for the participants, but they cannot find an acceptable solution to cope with the situation. This increases emotional tension and requires release from accumulated negative emotions.

Unrealistic conflicts are always dysfunctional. They are much more difficult to regulate, direct constructive direction. For example, reliable way prevention of such conflicts in the organization - creating a favorable psychological atmosphere, increasing the psychological culture of managers and subordinates, mastering self-regulation techniques emotional states in communication.

2. Features of interpersonal conflicts

There are hardly any among us who have never had to participate in some kind of conflict in their lives. Sometimes a person himself becomes the initiator of a conflict with one or more of the people around him, sometimes he finds himself in conflict with someone unexpectedly for himself and even against his own will.

It often happens that circumstances force a person to be drawn into a conflict that has flared up between other people, and he willy-nilly has to act either as an arbitrator or conciliator of the disputing parties, or as a defender of one of them, although, perhaps, he I don't want either one or the other.

In all situations of this kind, two interrelated aspects can be seen. The first is the content side of the conflict, that is, the subject of the dispute, the matter, the issue that causes disagreement. The second is the psychological side of the conflict, associated with the personal characteristics of its participants, with their personal relationships, with their emotional reactions to the causes of the conflict, to its course and to each other. It is this second side that is a specific feature of interpersonal conflicts - in contrast to social, political, etc.

In such a conflict, people face each other directly, face to face. At the same time, tensions arise and are maintained. They are drawn into the conflict as individuals, showing in it the traits of their character, abilities, other individual properties and characteristics. In conflicts, the needs, goals and values ​​of people are manifested; their motives, attitudes and interests; emotions, will and intellect.

A strict definition of interpersonal conflict, apparently, cannot be given. But when we talk about such a conflict, we immediately see a picture of a confrontation between two people based on a clash of opposing motives.

Interpersonal conflicts have their own distinctive features, which are as follows.

1. In interpersonal conflicts, people confront each other directly, here and now, on the basis of a clash of their personal motives. Opponents face off.

2. In interpersonal conflicts, the whole range of known causes is manifested: general and particular, objective and subjective.

3. Interpersonal conflicts for the subjects of conflict interaction are a kind of “testing ground” for testing characters, temperaments, manifestations of abilities, intelligence, will and other individual psychological characteristics.

4. Interpersonal conflicts are characterized by high emotionality and coverage of almost all aspects of relations between conflicting subjects.

5. Interpersonal conflicts affect the interests of not only those in conflict, but also those with whom they are directly connected either by official or interpersonal relations.

Interpersonal conflicts, as noted above, cover all spheres of human relations.

Management of interpersonal conflicts can be considered in two aspects - internal and external. The internal aspect involves the use of technologies for effective communication and rational behavior in conflict. The external aspect reflects the managerial activity on the part of the leader (manager) or another subject of management in relation to a specific conflict.

In an interpersonal conflict, each side seeks to defend its opinion, to prove the other wrong, people resort to mutual accusations, attacks on each other, verbal abuse and humiliation, etc. Such behavior causes sharp negative emotional experiences in the subjects of the conflict, which aggravate the interaction of the participants and provoke them to extreme actions. In conflict, it becomes difficult to manage your emotions. Many of its participants experience negative health for a long time after the resolution of the conflict.

Interpersonal conflict reveals the lack of agreement in the existing system of interaction between people. They have opposing opinions, interests, points of view, views on the same problems, which at the appropriate stage of the relationship disrupt normal interaction, when one of the parties begins to purposefully act to the detriment of the other, and the latter, in turn, realizes that these actions infringe on its interests, and takes retaliatory actions.

This situation most often leads to conflict as a means of resolving it. The full resolution of the conflict will be carried out when the opposing sides together quite consciously eliminate the causes that gave rise to it. If the conflict is resolved by the victory of one of the parties, then such a state will be temporary and the conflict will necessarily declare itself in some form under favorable circumstances.

Any conflict resolution or prevention is aimed at preserving the existing system of interpersonal interaction. However, the source of the conflict may be such reasons that lead to the destruction of the existing system of interaction.

In real life, when interpersonal conflicts arise, and we live among them, there are very different attitudes towards this very complex phenomenon. Some believe that any conflict is evil, and it must be avoided in every possible way: warn, prevent, eliminate, etc. Others point out that conflicts surround us everywhere and, therefore, are simply inevitable, and therefore we must put up with them. Still others are of the opinion that there is some positive, constructive beginning in conflicts, and argue that, at a minimum, one should benefit from their results, and even specifically design conflicts in order to get useful results. Who is right here? Most likely, it depends on the specific circumstances and behavior of the participants in the conflict.

You can at least reduce the negative consequences of violent clashes, and in many cases even use the energy of human interaction inherent in them in a constructive way. This is achieved through the use of techniques and technologies developed in conflictology and other sciences, such as mediation.

Interpersonal conflicts are closely related to other types of conflicts. Very often, interpersonal conflicts stem from intrapersonal ones: conflicting personal tendencies within the person himself lead to clashes with other people.

Often a person, not finding an answer to the problems that concern him, begins to think that other people who have driven him into a difficult situation are to blame for this. As a result, he begins to behave (act, speak) inappropriately. He can put forward unfair, but seemingly fair claims to others, pester other people, make vague and unjustified demands on them. People in contact with him do not really understand the reasons for this, sometimes completely incomprehensible, behavior, and if it violates any of their interests, they come into conflict with him. Thus, intrapersonal conflict develops into interpersonal.

Along with this, interpersonal conflicts are included in clashes of another level - intergroup, interinstitutional and other group conflicts.

When disagreements and clashes arise between groups of people, members of each of the conflicting groups usually begin to perceive members of the other group as their opponents. The We-They dichotomy shifts from relationships between groups to personal relationships. In such cases, intergroup conflict becomes the basis for the emergence and development of interpersonal conflicts.

On the other hand, interpersonal conflicts can escalate and affect other people. The participants in the conflict are often joined by supporters who support them. And when a conflict flares up around an issue, the solution of which somehow affects outsiders or entire organizations, then they also begin to take part in it. As a result, the conflict, having begun as an interpersonal one, becomes a group one.

3. Causes of interpersonal conflicts

In any interpersonal conflict, there are at least two participants and a certain specific situation of their interaction, in which the initial incident occurs and its consequences develop.

To identify the causes of conflicts, a comprehensive and in-depth analysis of both the actions, positions and psychological characteristics of its participants, as well as the circumstances that arise in the situation of their interaction, is needed.

You can see the immediate causes and sources of interpersonal conflicts by referring to the basic needs of a person. Here we mean the needs for food, sex, affection, security, self-respect, justice, kindness, etc. When they are suppressed or their satisfaction is threatened, then tension is produced and conflicts arise between people. In this case, a person sees in the behavior of those who, in his opinion, harm him, a manifestation of aggressiveness, selfishness, categoricalness or superiority over himself.

Conflictologists, referring to driving forces and motivation of interpersonal conflicts, distinguish between resource and value conflicts.

Resource conflicts are associated with the distribution of livelihoods (material resources, territory, time, etc.). In organizations, for example, interpersonal conflicts often arise over the distribution of the bonus fund among employees.

Value conflicts unfold in the area of ​​mutually exclusive cultural stereotypes, beliefs and convictions, assessments and attitudes. An example is the conflicts that occur in modern conditions in families due to various value orientations in parents and children. Conflicts between spouses in families are often based on sexual dimorphism (differences in perception and response) of men and women.

An important role in interpersonal conflicts is played by irrational motivation, which is especially enhanced in the conditions of the modern crisis development of society. An illustration of the complexity of human relationships that give rise to conflicts, the causes of which are difficult to explain on the basis of ordinary logic, are the "games" described in the books of E. Berne. Berne calls games such forms of communication between people in which one of the participants is guided by a hidden and even unconscious motive to get some kind of psychological or social “win”.

The specific causes of interpersonal conflicts are extremely diverse. It is difficult to give an exhaustive classification of them - how many schools and authors, so many approaches to solving this problem. The causes of conflicts can be classified on various grounds. So, according to N. V. Grishina, the causes of conflicts can be reduced to three groups:

firstly, the very content of the interaction (joint activity);

secondly, features of interpersonal relations;

thirdly, the personal characteristics of the participants.

With other grounds for classifying conflict threaders, the values ​​of interaction, the interests of participants, the means of achieving goals, the potential of participants, the rules of interaction and management are distinguished.

It seems appropriate to classify the following groups of the main causes of conflicts:

1) limited resources - their qualitative and quantitative side;

2) various aspects of interdependence (authorities, power, tasks and other resources);

3) differences in goals;

4) differences in ideas and values;

5) differences in behavior and life experience;

6) poor communications;

7) personal characteristics of the participants in the collisions.

This classification is good because it allows you to understand the sources of conflicts and the area where they exist.

In practice, when analyzing conflicts, the approach proposed by W. Lincoln is very useful. He identifies the causal factors of conflicts, which are divided into five main types: informational, behavioral, relationship, value and structural.

1. Information factors - associated with the unacceptability of information for one of the parties.

Information factors can be:

Incomplete and inaccurate facts, including issues related to the accuracy of the presentation of the problem and the history of the conflict;

Rumors, unwitting misinformation;

Premature information and information transmitted late;

Unreliability of experts, witnesses, sources of information or data, inaccuracy of translations and reports of means mass media;

Unwanted disclosure of information that may offend the values ​​of one of the parties, violate confidentiality, and even leave unpleasant memories;

Interpretation of the language used, expressions such as "approximately", "substantially", "intentionally", "excessively", etc.;

Extraneous facts, controversial issues of legislation, rules, procedures, stereotypes, etc.

2. Behavioral factors - inappropriateness, rudeness, selfishness, unpredictability and other characteristics of behavior rejected by one of the parties.

In interpersonal relationships, the most typical behavioral factors that cause conflict situations are:

Striving for excellence;

The manifestation of aggressiveness;

manifestation of selfishness.

Behavioral factors can be cases where someone:

Threatens our safety (physical, financial, emotional or social);

Undermines our self-esteem;

Does not live up to positive expectations, breaks promises;

Constantly distracts us, causes stress, inconvenience, discomfort, embarrassment;

Behaves unpredictably, rudely, exaggeratedly and causes fear.

3. Relationship factors - dissatisfaction with the interaction between the parties. Often such dissatisfaction is generated not only by the already established interaction, but also by the unacceptability for one of the parties of proposals regarding its further development.

The most important relationship factors are:

The contribution of the parties to the relationship, the balance of power in the relationship;

The importance of the relationship for each of the parties;

Compatibility of the parties in terms of values, behavior, personal or professional goals and personal communication;

Differences in educational level, class differences;

History of relationships, their duration, negative sediment from past conflicts, level of trust and authority;

The values ​​of the groups to which the parties belong and their pressure on the relationship of the parties.

4. Value factors - include principles that are proclaimed or rejected, which we adhere to and which we neglect, which we forget or deliberately and even intentionally violate; principles that others expect us to follow and we expect others to follow.

Values ​​can vary in strength and importance. They are usually described as:

Personal belief systems and behaviors (prejudices, preferences, priorities);

Group (including professional) traditions, values, needs and norms;

Modes of action and methods peculiar to individual institutions, organizations and professions;

Religious, cultural, regional and political values;

Traditional belief systems and associated expectations: ideas of right and wrong, good and bad; methods and methods for assessing the relevance, effectiveness of "fairness", "practicality", "realism"; attitude to progress or change, to the preservation of the old, to the "status quo".

5. Structural factors - relatively stable circumstances that exist objectively, regardless of our desire, which are difficult or even impossible to change. They require large resources to overcome: material, physical, intellectual, etc. These are, for example, such factors as the law, age, lines of accountability, fixed dates, time, income, availability of technology and other means.

Any interpersonal conflict unfolds against the background of structural factors that are "external" in relation to it, but significantly affect its course. Such factors are:

Power, control system;

Political parties and currents;

Various social norms;

Ownership;

Religions, justice systems, status, roles, traditions, "rules of the game" and other standards of behavior, including ethical standards;

Geographic location, voluntary (forced) isolation or openness, as well as the frequency and intensity of community contacts with the outside world.

The above classification helps not only to understand the sources of conflicts, but also to outline ways of diluting clashing interests, that is, ways leading to conflict resolution.

Assigning specific conflicts to a particular type allows you to take primary measures to eliminate them. So, for example, in the event of conflicts based on lack of information, it is enough to ensure its flow, and the collision will be removed.

4. Classification of interpersonal conflicts

For practical work with conflicts, it is advisable not only to identify the causes, but also to classify conflicts on various grounds. This can be done, for example, a) by spheres of existence; b) by its effect and functional consequences; c) according to the criterion of reality or truth-falsity.

a) according to the spheres of existence, conflicts are divided into: business, family, property, domestic, etc.

Typical examples here may be conflicts between subordinates and superiors - managers, owners (vertical), between employees in an organization (horizontal).

In modern conditions in Russia, conflicts in the business sphere are frequent due to the fuzzy distribution of responsibilities, powers, and various expectations.

At the same time, we note that clashes of different positions and points of view of individuals or groups in the process of joint activity are almost inevitable. The following conflicts are typical for enterprises and organizations:

Conflicts between managerial staff and subordinates (vertical) about the ways of managing and performing functional duties;

Conflicts between staff (horizontal) in connection with the admission of new members, distribution of work, remuneration, etc.;

Conflicts between the managers themselves in determining the goals, methods and directions of joint activities.

This is closely related to personal characteristics, personnel reshuffles, the practice of moral and material incentives, the influence of the external environment. Of particular importance for understanding the nature of the conflict here is the analysis of the motives of people in this organization: what keeps them, are they satisfied with the methods of management, the resources received, their career prospects, how rank-and-file members participate in decision-making, etc.

b) according to their effect and functional consequences, conflicts are: constructive (functional) and destructive (dysfunctional). Usually in conflicts, the constructive and destructive sides coexist like two sides of a coin. These types of conflicts differ in which of these parties prevails.

The constructive side of interpersonal conflicts is that they can lead to a clarification of the relationship between the parties and finding ways to improve both behavior and personal qualities participants in the conflict.

The constructive consequences of interpersonal conflicts can manifest themselves, for example:

In creating a community of people involved in solving the problem;

In expanding the scope of cooperation to other areas;

The fact that rather there is a process of self-awareness, clarification of one's own interests and the interests of a partner.

The destructive side of interpersonal conflicts manifests itself when one of the opponents resorts to morally condemned methods of struggle, seeks to psychologically suppress partners, discrediting and humiliating him in the eyes of others.

Usually this causes violent resistance from the other side, the dialogue is accompanied by mutual insults, the solution of the problem becomes impossible, interpersonal relationships are destroyed, and health is harmed. Very often conflicts of this kind arise at work.

There is a special term - "mobbing", which literally means: harassment, persecution, rudeness, attacks and nit-picking, which are often hidden. According to some reports, only when hiring 3-4% of those hired are subjected to mobbing.

In a destructive conflict, there is:

polarization of value judgments of partners;

striving for a divergence of initial positions;

the desire to force a partner to a decision that is unfavorable for him;

aggravation of the conflict;

desire to get away from the original problem;

painful forms of conflict resolution.

Destructive conflict resolution usually has three negative consequences:

First, even if it seems that you have won and your partner has lost, in reality this is not always the case. Most of the time, both sides are affected.

Secondly, relationships become tense in the future, a feeling of indignation and resentment is experienced by at least one of the parties. At the same time, a participant who feels like a loser often blames himself for ineptly behaving in a conflict, and therefore lost. This reduces his self-esteem and self-esteem.

Thirdly, the inability to resolve interpersonal problems to mutual satisfaction is harmful for both participants because it not only makes it impossible to resolve substantive problems between the parties, but also negatively affects the health of the conflicting parties.

c) according to the criterion of reality or truth-falsity, according to M. Deutsch, the following types of conflicts are distinguished:

"genuine" conflict that exists objectively and is perceived adequately;

"accidental" or "conditional" conflict, depending on easily changeable circumstances, which is not always recognized by the parties;

“displaced” conflict - when we mean a clear conflict, behind which lies another, invisible conflict underlying the explicit one;

"misattributed" conflict - between parties who have misunderstood each other and misinterpreted issues;

“latent” (hidden) conflict that should have happened, but which does not exist, because for one reason or another it is not recognized by the parties;

"false" conflict - when there are no objective grounds for the conflict and the latter exists only due to errors in perception and understanding.

5. Methods for overcoming conflicts

Any conflict can be quickly resolved if the appropriate methods are known. But at the same time, the characteristics of the conflict must be considered: goals, motives, emotional states of opponents, features of the development of confrontation, etc. Here are the principles that should be followed in resolving the conflict.

1. Resolution of the conflict, taking into account the essence and content of the contradiction. In this case it is necessary:

Distinguish the reason from the true cause of the conflict, which is often masked by its participants;

Determine its business basis;

Understand the true, not declarative motives for people to enter into a conflict.

2. Resolution of the conflict, taking into account its goals. It is extremely important to quickly determine the goals of the conflicting parties, to draw a clear line between the features of interpersonal and business interaction. If personal goals are dominant, then it is advisable to first apply educational measures to the opponent, put forward certain stringent requirements. If one of the opponents has a higher rank in relation to the other, then he should be pointed out the need to adhere to certain standards of behavior.

3. Resolution of the conflict, taking into account emotional states. If the conflict has become emotional in nature and is accompanied by violent reactions, then it is advisable to show with specific examples how high tension affects the effectiveness of work, how opponents lose their objectivity, how their criticality decreases. In other words, an explanatory conversation is needed in a calm and trusting atmosphere.

4. Resolution of the conflict, taking into account the characteristics of its participants. In this case, before proceeding to resolve the conflict, it is necessary to understand the personality traits of each: do they differ in balance, are they prone to affective behavior, what are their dominant character traits, the severity of temperament, etc. This will help not only to correctly understand the motives behavior, but also to choose the right tone in communication when resolving the conflict.

Resolution of the conflict, taking into account its dynamics.

The conflict develops in certain stages. Naturally, for each of them there are certain forms of its permission. If conversations and persuasion are expedient at the first stages, then at the stage of uncompromising clashes it is necessary to apply all possible measures, up to administrative ones. Here it is also necessary to determine the choice of influence, taking into account the personal characteristics of the conflicting parties and the nature of their actions.

One of the effective methods of overcoming conflicts is the formation of a certain public opinion about the conflicting parties. Public opinion is a very powerful regulator of people's behavior. Many people are very dependent on the attitude of others, they need approval and support. Conflicting, they can find themselves in isolation, which they experience very painfully, and so painfully that they are even ready to stop the confrontation.

An interesting technique for resolving conflicts is an appeal to an "arbitrator". It can be very effective if the opponents agree, with mutual obligations, to fully submit to its decision. As an "arbitrator" it is advisable to choose the most authoritative person in the team, best of all, if such is the manager himself. It is very important for the "arbiter" to be able to separate the subject of the conflict from its object, therefore it is sometimes advisable to allow opponents to give emotional assessments to each other. If the conflict is based on business basis, opponents will not move on from it to other questions, in other cases, opponents, starting from the object, will very quickly move on to the subject, thereby giving out the true sources of the conflict.

Another method of overcoming conflicts is the objectification of the conflict. Its essence is again in addressing the "arbitrator", but the "judge" should behave somewhat unusually. First, the analysis of the conflict should take place in two stages. The first stage is called "frank conversation": opponents are allowed to give each other assessments, to speak almost as they like, the main thing is that they speak out, and the "judge" is able to separate the subject of the conflict from the object. The second stage is the actual objectification. When parsing, opponents are no longer allowed to give emotional assessments.

The conflict, as it were, is decomposed into its component parts, each of the opponents must state their versions and explanation of the reasons, without assessing the other opponent. It has been noted by science and confirmed by practice that if the conflict is "decomposed" into its components, if each action of the opponents is considered impartially, then it loses emotional tension and turns from emotional into business.

Opponents "remove" false images of the situation and each other, which are inevitable in a conflict due to partiality of positions, they begin to understand the fallacy of their assessments and attitudes, psychological barriers between opponents are eliminated.

Conclusion

Representatives of the early schools of management believed that conflict is a sign of ineffective organization and poor management. In our time, more and more often they are inclined to the point of view that some conflicts, even in the most effective organization with the best relationships, are not only possible, but also desirable. You just need to manage the conflict.

Conflicts arise in almost all spheres of human life. Conflicts can be hidden or overt, but they are always based on a lack of agreement.

The main role in the emergence of conflicts is played by conflictogens - words, actions (or inactions) that contribute to the emergence and development of the conflict, that is, leading to conflict directly.

In the process of conflict interaction, its participants get the opportunity to express different opinions, to identify more alternatives when making a decision, and this is precisely the important positive meaning of the conflict. This, of course, does not mean that the conflict is always positive.

Interpersonal conflict is an intractable contradiction that arises between people and is caused by the incompatibility of their views, interests, goals, needs.

In interpersonal conflicts, the whole range of known causes is manifested: general and particular, objective and subjective.

In the process of managing interpersonal conflicts, it is important to take into account their causes and factors, as well as the nature of interpersonal relations of conflictants before the conflict, their mutual likes and dislikes.

List of used literature

1. Antsupov A.Ya., Shipilov A.I. Conflictology. – M.: UNITI, 2009.

2. Grishina N.V. Psychology of conflict St. Petersburg, 2008

3. Emelyanov S.M. Workshop on conflictology. SPb., 2007

4. Zerkin D.P. Fundamentals of conflictology: a course of lectures. Rostov n / a., 2008

5. Kabushkin N.I. Fundamentals of management. – Minsk: Amalfeya, 2008.

6. Mastenbrook U. Management of conflict situations and development of the organization. – M.: Infr-M, 2006.

7. Sulimova M.S. Social work and constructive conflict resolution. - M., Institute of Practical Psychology, 2009.

8. Kozrev G.I. Introduction to conflictology: textbook.- M.: Vlados, 2009.