Organizational conflict management of conflict in the organization. Conflict management in organizations. Stages of Social Conflict Management: Briefly

Conflict is one of the most common forms of organizational interaction and other relationships between people. It is estimated that conflicts and worries of staff occupy about 15% of his working time. Leaders spend even more time resolving and managing conflicts—in some organizations, up to half their working time.

Conflicts occupy one of the central places in personnel management, not only because of the significant time costs associated with them, but also because of the high organizational significance of their innovative, creative, and especially destructive consequences. At the same time, a constructive conflict is the only way to find ways out of the crisis of a particular enterprise. Only its staff has information about the internal interaction and the real possibilities of the team. Realization of this potential, its materialization in business restructuring, development of innovations is unthinkable without conflicts.

The mastery of conflict management is based on the leader's deep knowledge of the nature, technology and features of the relevant tools. First stage dealing with conflict - revealing its nature.

The structure of the regulated conflict process

An analysis of the literature on the problems of conflictology makes it possible to single out the following, largely interrelated features of social conflicts.

1. The existence of at least two parties having contact with each other.

2. The interdependence of the parties, which encourages them to participate in conflict interaction, without which the parties cannot leave the conflict field.

3. Incompatibility (full or partial) of the goals and values of the conflicting parties. It usually occurs when two subjects cannot occupy the same position, or when there is a shortage of resources, certain goods, the universal equivalent of which is usually money.

4. Zero sum conflict interaction. This means that in a conflict, the gain of one side is equivalent to the loss of the other, and each of the participants seeks to gain something for himself at the expense of the opponent. From this point of view, the conflict differs, for example, from the discussion of experts with different and even incompatible views and assessments.

5. Actions directed against each other. This is the leading sign in the diagnosis of conflict. It distinguishes a real conflict both from psychological opposition that does not manifest itself outwardly in behavior and actions (hostility, awareness of the incompatibility of goals and values, etc.), and from competition.

6. The concepts of conflict and competition are closely interrelated and sometimes are identified. However, the conflict is distinguished from competition by the awareness of contradictions and the direction of the actions of its participants against each other. Competition (for example, rivalry in the market for goods of different firms or a competition for an occupation leadership position) can take place without the competitors getting to know each other and realizing the incompatibility of their goals. In addition, during competition, parallel actions of the parties are possible, their unconscious rivalry mediated by other people (in the examples mentioned above, this is mediation by the consumer or the competition commission). Therefore, not all competition is a conflict. However, if the actions of competitors are conscious and directly directed against each other, then their interaction is a conflict.

7. Using pressure or force as an extreme pressure option. The pressure may be different types: psychological, economic, physical, etc.; it can be in the form of threats or practical actions. The use of pressure, especially force, gives the conflict a pronounced negative emotional coloring, which usually increases as the pressure increases and its more severe forms are used.

The conflict is based on contradictions: objective, existing before people realize them, and subjective, connected either with the awareness of objective contradictions, or with the consciousness, psychology of people.

Taking into account the noted signs of conflicts, they can be defined as interaction based on real or imaginary contradictions, pursuing incompatible, mutually exclusive goals of the parties, whose actions are directed against each other and exclude mutual benefit.

Stages of conflict

Conflicts are procedural in nature, i.e. are a process that begins and ends. Depending on the characteristics of the course of the conflict, the following stages are distinguished.

1. Origin, or occurrence. At this stage, the conflict has a character hidden from outside observation and manifests itself as discontent expressed in verbal form, isolationist or unfriendly behavior (isolation, distrust, spreading rumors, etc.).

2. Formation. At this stage, the parties to the conflict consolidate and put forward demands on the opponent.

3. Heyday. The parties proceed to active actions, blocking each other's ability to achieve goals and intentions.

4. Extinction, or transformation. This is the stage of full or partial resolution of the conflict, which occurs as a result of either the exhaustion of resources by one or both parties, or the achievement of an agreement between them, or the “elimination” of one of the parties.

Conflict Management Strategies

The activities of a leader or any other subject of conflict management directly depend on overall strategy to which it is oriented. There are three main conflict management strategies.

1. Regulatory or moral-legal strategy. Its goal is to resolve the conflict on an administrative-legal or ethical basis. Competing parties turn to the laws and accepted standards of behavior in this organization. The possibility of resolving the conflict directly depends on the acceptance and observance by all participants in the conflict of the relevant norms and the rules based on them. general rules games. If the rules of the game are not respected or even rejected by at least one of the parties, then the persuasion or forceful imposition of these rules of the game by means of the threat and application of sanctions, which are considered legitimate in society, is used. In general, this strategy is focused on peaceful rivalry according to certain rules. Moreover, respect for the rules and thereby maintaining a sphere of consensus is considered ultimately more important than winning the conflict.

2. Realistic strategy. This strategy is based on the inevitability of conflict due to the innate desire of a person to dominate and possess scarce values, and focuses mainly on the temporary resolution of the conflict using any means suitable in a given situation. Conflicts are considered inevitable, since in any organization there are objectively managers (subject of management) and managed (object of management). It is believed that universal equality is in principle unattainable. The obligatory presence in every organization of a ground for conflict does not allow us to hope for the achievement of "universal peace" and stable trustful cooperation. Therefore, it is most expedient to bet on a "truce" and a temporary settlement of conflicts. Within the framework of a realistic strategy, the conflict is considered as a game with zero payoff, i.e. one side's gain is equal to the other's loss. Such a strategy is widely used in enterprises with a high degree of exploitation and where management strives for maximum benefit, including personal, by intensively “squeezing the sweat” at the minimum wage, without thinking about the ethical and legal aspects of the policy being implemented.

3. Idealistic strategy. This strategy is focused on finding new common goals and values that devalue the old values that served as a source of conflict, as well as on the cooperation of the parties to achieve new goals. This strategy provides for the gain of all parties to the conflict as a result of its resolution. At the same time, the conflict is treated as a game, interaction with a positive amount of gain. It is believed that at the moment all parties to the conflict lose. By addressing the underlying problem, all parties will benefit. The implementation of this strategy transfers the relationship of the parties to a new, conflict-free plane. It either eliminates the source of the conflict or devalues its significance, creating a new scale of goals and values, according to which the source of the conflict loses its former significance for its participants. The variety of goals and means of resolving the conflict usually allows you to get a positive result. However, everything depends primarily on the hierarchy of needs of the participant in the conflict.

The success of an idealistic strategy is directly related to the culture of the subject, especially the level of development of his conflictological culture, and the subjective significance of humane, altruistic values for him. If all people proceeded from the humane biblical principle “love your neighbor as yourself”, then this would eliminate any ground for conflicts altogether. However, the actual behavior of people in organizations is far from the level where only an idealistic conflict resolution strategy can be considered acceptable. In general, the idealistic strategy is considered to be preferable. In the process of this conflict resolution, all parties benefit, and in addition, the participants develop a stable behavioral pattern that allows them to independently resolve problems in the future.

The biggest mistake that a leader can make in a crisis situation is to ignore the conflicts that arise in the team. In this situation, the following erroneous actions are possible: an overly critical assessment of events, constant non-observance of the interests of employees, and the presentation of a huge number of claims.

There is also such an opinion: the problem of current labor conflicts in most firms is that potential opponents or partners are mistaken about the motivation of others and are not inclined to agree with allies on the conditions for their participation in the conflict and the conditions for resolving the conflict with opponents. Conflicts, according to him, can arise for various reasons and also affect the state of affairs in the company in different ways. She warns leaders of organizations against ignoring the problems that arise in the firm, since the consequences of such inattention can be devastating.

In conditions of conflict, it is important to show interest in and care for employees, never put off resolving disagreements until later, and actively support cooperation within the enterprise. At the same time, it is recognized that simple conflict resolution schemes are not always effective, and often even exacerbate it, transferring it from the category of rapidly developing and short-term to the category of slow-moving, systematically escalating without visible outlines of a full resolution period.

In our time, conflicts in organizations are not only possible, but also desirable. The whole problem lies in the ability to manage them. The problem of conflict lies in what position the leader takes in it, whether he knows the strengths and weaknesses of the organization. The biggest mistake a leader makes is ignoring the problem. Conflicts can develop in different ways, therefore, it is possible various methods overcoming them.

To resolve the conflict, it is important to know all its hidden and obvious causes, analyze the positions and interests of the parties and focus on the interests, since they are the solution to the problem. There are no universal ways to overcome conflict. The only possibility is total involvement in the situation. Only by getting used to the current situation in the organization, it is possible to study the problem of conflict and give the manager recommendations on the optimal behavior strategy and methods for overcoming the conflict.

Structure of the conflict management process

Consider a strategy for effective intervention by a consultant or mediator.

1. Gaining prestige from the parties. The parties should seek a positive resolution of the conflict and act accordingly with the help of a consultant. It is very important for the consultant to establish a good relationship with both parties, without giving preference to any of them, otherwise his activity will not be effective.

The consultant must:

establish contact with both parties at an early stage of work;

explain their intentions regarding this conflict situation;

provide yourself with support. Representatives of both parties and managers can explain the intentions of the consultant to the persons whose interests they represent, and help them understand the important points of their activities.

If one of the parties does not see any point in resolving the conflict, then the expediency of the consultant's further activities is in doubt.

2. Determination of the structure of the relationship between the parties. The consultant must have a clear idea of the structure of the parties involved in the conflict. Unclear leadership, internal power struggles, intense rivalry between factions and other factors can become a significant obstacle to conflict resolution. It is very important to get acquainted with formal and informal leaders, to know their opinion, as well as the degree of their readiness for active participation in the conflict resolution process. This means that the consultant must not only establish the structure of the parties, but sometimes help them develop a more defined internal structure. In addition, he should coordinate the "central authority" of the enterprise. The cooperation of the consultant with representatives of the “central authority” of the enterprise increases the likelihood of success.

It is common for a consultant to interview representatives of both parties as a way of gathering the necessary information.

These interviews determine:

demarcation and internal structure of the parties;

possible composition of the team that will support the consultant.

The interviews provide the consultant with information about the following crucial characteristics:

the intensity of the conflict;

symmetry level and power balance;

nature, nature of the conflict (certain problems, complaints and grievances).

The main direction of research is the creation of preconditions for reducing tension and the intensity of the conflict.

3. Maintaining the balance of the parties. Without a certain symmetry in the relationship between the parties, the consultant will not be able to fulfill his duties. Actually, the invitation of a consultant may be evidence of a certain balance between the parties and a desire to resolve contradictions. A significant power difference indicates a high probability that more forte intends to resolve the conflict by imposing its will and forcing the other side to recognize it.

The consultant should be active, first of all, in hopeless situations. In fact, a hopeless situation (or the threat of its occurrence due to the fact that the parties are in the same “weight category”) turns out to be a driving factor for studying the nature, nature of the conflict, its consequences and alternative solutions. The most important feature of the interaction of the parties in these conditions is the desire to maintain a balance of interests. In addition, the consultant should devote approximately equal time to each side and conduct separate discussions on neutral territory.

4. Maintaining an "optimal" level of conflict intensity. The high intensity of the conflict greatly complicates its management and even in some cases makes this management impossible. This situation is due to the fact that neither side is ready to communicate with the other side. There are frequent cases when both parties to the conflict do not see much point in the activities of the consultant, especially if it is limited by certain conditions of one of the parties.

There is another danger as well. A conflict that is in a state of rapid escalation may, as practice shows, be outside the consultant's sphere of influence. In addition, there may come a time when the parties are unwilling to make changes, because the state of conflict has become habitual for them despite its destructiveness and they do not want to make another attempt to reach a compromise. One's own positive image is combined with a negative image of the other participant. The parties to the conflict are no longer willing to listen to other points of view, as this only creates doubts about their rightness, and adhere to their own understanding of the situation.

Such protracted conflicts can represent much big problem for a consultant than sudden acute crises.

5. Detailing of the conflict, confrontation, synthesis. Practice shows that the activity of a consultant is successful only in cases where the consideration of the subject of the dispute and the confrontation of the parties take place in stages. This is an iterative process, each time providing for the analysis of a certain part of the conflict. The best results are obtained when this method is supported by both conflicting parties.

The immediate purpose of the discussions is not to make decisions, but to clarify the perspectives for both parties. What are the prospects depends on which form of relations dominates: when solving business issues, it will be mainly discussion and polemics, while solving socio-emotional issues - presenting oneself in the place of another.

The result of opposing perspectives can be a synthesis: developing a solution, understanding and reaching a compromise.

The confrontation of the parties may also end in a hopeless situation. Desperate situations encourage the parties to further detail the subject of the dispute, which is again followed by confrontation.

7. Determination of procedures for reaching a compromise for each side, focusing on continuous progress. An important task of the consultant is to clearly define, explain, justify and indicate the procedures that the parties must follow. Clarity in the definition of the roles and algorithms of the work of the parties creates a calm environment necessary for the continuation of work, while uncertainty, indecision and ambiguity cause confusion and mistrust. Often the parties feel they are disoriented and under pressure. If the consultant is not able to regulate the interaction of the parties, then a hostile atmosphere easily arises, which makes it impossible to constructively discuss something, calls into question the expediency of negotiations.

8. Control over the procedure for moving towards conflict resolution. Among other things, the success of the consultant's activity is influenced by the structure of the conflict management process, i.e. the degree of change in the nature of the confrontation of the parties. The process, as experience shows, can easily take the form of cyclically repeated discussions of the same issues. In these cases, the quality of the consultant's performance of such management functions as control plays a special role. In other words, the consultant, in fact, acts as a regulator of the mental activity of the conflicting groups in the direction of the final resolution of the conflict. In this role, the consultant, as a manager, within his powers, must create conditions for constant progress in the negotiations. We are talking about such a possession of conflict resolution technology that will allow the consultant to manage the change in the positions of the parties to the dispute, which will lead to conflict resolution in a certain time. In a crisis, minimizing the time to resolve conflicts is one of the most important requirements for its successful overcoming.

Table. Methodology for successful intervention in a conflict by stages of its analysis

Relationship aspect	expert method
	Manifestation and demonstration of independence, clarification of one's intentions
Determining the structure of the relationship between the parties	Understanding the internal structure, structuring the relationship between the "central authority" of the enterprise and the participants in the conflict
Maintaining a rational level of conflict intensity	Determination of the consequences of protracted conflicts, study of the willingness of the parties to implement changes
Differentiation of intervention by types of conflict	Choice of the form of intervention corresponding to this classification
Detailing controversial issues, confrontation, synthesis	Step-by-step consideration of the conflict, confrontation and the study of hopeless situations for further detailing of contentious issues
Determination of procedures for reaching a compromise for each party	Establish clear procedures, stop cyclical discussions

Vladimir Alexandrovich Barinov- doctor economic sciences, professor of the department government controlled and management of the Russian Academy of Economics. G.V. Plekhanov

In this article, we will talk about the four main methods of conflict management and share tools that will help to extinguish the confrontation. Bonus: examples of typical conflict situations and their practical solutions.

From the article you will learn:

These tools will help resolve conflictin a collective

What conflict management methods do HR use in their work?

Conflicts are of different types. For example, they are classified according to the number of participants, the status of conflicting parties, the intensity of emotions, the form of confrontation, or the coloring of claims.

There are even more recipes for managing conflicts than classifications of disagreements. Understanding the variety of techniques, methods and techniques is not easy. But managing conflicts in the team is a priority for HR.

Conflict management methods are:

intrapersonal;
structural;
interpersonal;
negotiation.

Intrapersonal methods of conflict management

You influence the consciousness and emotions of an employee who has entered into a conflict. In other words, try to "talk" first. An example of an intrapersonal method - technique "Verbalization of Feelings". Ask each employee to formulate what emotions the conflict arouses in him. Ask ' Why do you feel this way?". Employees will speak out, throw out what they tried to keep in themselves and then calm down.

Structural methods of conflict management

You influence the participants in the organizational conflict. The reason for this confrontation is the wrong setting of tasks, the wrong distribution of functions, and the unfair system of motivation and incentives. Great example of struct method - SMART technology.

SMART is a method of precise task setting. Each letter of this abbreviation denotes the name of the goal quality criterion. S (specific) - specific, M (measurable) - measurable, A (assignable) - non-random, required by the company Currently,. R (realistic) - achievable, T (time-related) - defined in time, with specific deadlines and control points.

Transform the conflict situation into tasks that you will formulate using the SMART technique:

Make sure that the actions that employees will take to resolve the opposition are feasible.
State the exact nature of the problem.
Indicate the timeframe within which the conflicting parties should take concrete steps and eliminate differences in principle.
Formulate the criteria by which you will evaluate that there is no more confrontation.
Describe to opponents what benefits they will get if they stop the conflicts.

What wording to use when you set a task according to the SMART technique, experts from the HR Director magazine suggested

Interpersonal methods of conflict management

You help those in conflict choose a style of interaction that will help them minimize the cost of confrontation. The method is based. According to the model, a person in conflict chooses one of 5 strategies:

Evasion.
Adaptation.
Confrontation.
Compromise.
Cooperation.

To determine which strategy this or that employee will choose in a confrontation situation, the Thomas test will help.

Thomas' test "Assessment of methods of responding to a conflict" in the "Personnel System"

Negotiations as a method of conflict management

You use a set of techniques to find a solution that suits all parties to the conflict.

An example of a negotiation method

Daniel Dan's 4 Step Conflict Resolution Method

Step 1 . Set a time for negotiations. Thus, you confirm your intention not to avoid the conflict, but to end it.

Step 2 . Get ready. Limit the time - no more than two hours. Choose a location: quiet environment, neutral territory, privacy.

Step 3 . Discuss the issue. Express gratitude to the opponent: “I am glad that you agreed to discuss the situation. I'm sure we'll find a solution that suits both of us." Formulate your vision of the problem and invite the opponent to the discussion.

Step 4 . Sign an agreement. Find a compromise solution that will reconcile the conflicting parties. The task of HR at this step is to set up opponents to find a compromise, to change the relationship that has developed between them. Most often, at this stage, the parties will already find a solution to the problem. If not, then psychologically and emotionally they will be ready for this.

When should HR handle conflict?

Disputes and disagreements between employees are often based on personal hostility, low culture of one of the participants in the confrontation, envy. It is better for HR not to interfere in such conflicts. Let colleagues sort out the problem themselves. But if the conflict has become the property of the entire team, the HR specialist needs to resolve it.

The participation of HR is most often required in conflicts:

between structural divisions companies;
employees;
subordinates and leader;
leader and department.

To resolve the confrontation that broke out between colleagues, a leader and a subordinate, or between two leaders will help interactive "Conflict Buster".

Interactive "Conflict Buster" It was developed by the experts of the magazine "Director of Human Resources".

Three typical conflicts at work and ways to solve them

Consider three typical conflict situations that may arise in the workplace. This is a conflict between employees, a confrontation between a leader and subordinates, disagreements between two leaders.

Situation 1. Conflict between employees or groups of employees

A tearful employee flew into the HR service. She was holding a letter of resignation in her hands. It was hard to calm the girl down and find out what was the matter. It turned out that a sharp-tongued colleague pissed her off with a caustic remark: “What kind of dress are you wearing? From the market? And again without makeup! Therefore, you still won’t get married, but it’s time for a long time. ”

Solution

Use the technique of V.A. Smekhov. To resolve the conflict between employees, involve a leader - a “significant third”. It is important that both participants in the confrontation trust him. Let the manager in turn ask each subordinate the following questions:

How did you behave in this situation?
How would you like to behave?
How did your opponent behave?
How should he behave in such a situation?

By answering questions, employees will understand exactly where the misunderstanding occurred. This means that they will be able to eliminate him and eliminate the confrontation.

A useful memo from the experts of the magazine "Director of Human Resources", which will help you communicate with your boorish colleagues

Situation 2. Conflict between a leader and a subordinate

The head of the sales department is rude to a subordinate. An employee regularly complains to HR managers about their boss.

Solution

Apply the personality and role dissociation technique. Explain to the manager and subordinate that in a conflict situation their roles are different from their roles at work.

Tell the employee: “The manager has complaints about you as an employee, but not as a person.” If the conflict is personal, formulate the thought in a different way: “The manager has personal claims against you, but as an employee you suit him.” Your job is to separate the personal from the professional.

Ask each party to say the phrase out loud. A significant part of the negative will go away. Each participant in the conflict will understand where to look for the cause of the problem and how to fix it.

Cases that will help determine the conflict potential of a future employee

Situation 3. Conflict between two leaders

The company constantly clashes with the heads of two departments. This makes it difficult for their employees to work.

Solution

Use the listening tactic. Ask those in conflict: Why do you think the conflict arose?". Let one participant in the confrontation speak first, then the other. Demand that they answer in turn, do not interrupt each other. Each participant in the confrontation will see how his opponent looks at the situation, and will understand what the misunderstanding is.

An organization is a grouping of people to work together. Organizations differ from each other in terms of the type of activity of their members, the level of cohesion, and the quantitative composition. The first to attempt to classify organizations was the sociologist Zdravomyslov A.G. and divided them into five types: economic; educational and medical; government agencies And legal structures; informational; public associations different type.

Internal relations in organizations depend on the specifics of their activities.

The conflict in the organization is an open form of the existence of conflicts of interests that arise in the process of interaction between people in solving issues of production and personal order.

The main types of conflicts in organizations: organizational, industrial, labor, innovative.

Organizational conflict is a clash of oppositely directed actions of the participants in the conflict, caused by a divergence of interests, norms of behavior and value orientations. They arise as a result of the discrepancy between the formal organizational principles and the real behavior of the team members.

Production conflicts are a specific form of expression of contradictions in the production relations of the labor collective.

Labor conflicts are a clash of interests and opinions, assessments between representatives different groups about labor relations(conditions, content, organization of labor and its payment).

Innovative conflicts are contradictions between supporters and opponents of innovation. Innovation is a targeted change aimed at improving and creating a new product, technology, organizational form management, etc.

Objective - a conflict that arises due to circumstances outside the will and desire of its participants.

Subjective - when a specific material or spiritual value (salary, vacancy) becomes the object of a collision, which the conflicting parties (employees of the organization) strive to possess.

For immediate causes of conflict, there are:

Organizational - occurring within a particular organization in connection with a change in external circumstances or a violation of the regulated order;

Emotional - associated with personal perception of what is happening around, with a reaction to the behavior of other people, etc.;

Social and labor - caused by mismatch, confrontation of private and common interests, incompatibility of goals individuals and social groups.

According to the forms and degree of collision, conflicts are: open (dispute, quarrel), hidden (on the sly), spontaneous, that is, spontaneously arisen, deliberate or simply provoked. Such conflicts can be either inevitable or forced, and sometimes unjustified, that is, devoid of any expediency.

According to the communicative orientation, conflicts are distinguished:

Horizontal, that is, in which people who are not subordinate to each other participate;

Vertical, when participants are connected by certain types of subordination;

Mixed, that is, representing the relationship of subordination and disobedience.

By scale and duration, conflicts are distinguished:

Local, when part of the enterprise's personnel is involved;

General, that is, everyone (or most) is drawn into the confrontation.

Usually such conflicts are protracted, as they arise due to shortcomings in the organization (payment, working conditions, etc.).

According to the composition of the conflicting parties, conflicts are distinguished:

Intrapersonal, i.e. internal struggle with oneself;

Interpersonal, i.e. divergence of personal goals of employees;

Intra-group - between competing employees within a group or between group leaders on the question "Who is more important in a department or enterprise?"

Intergroup - conflict between co-owners of enterprises.

According to the methods of settlement (resolution), conflicts are divided into:

Antagonistic, i.e. accompanied by the intransigence of the parties;

Compromise - allowing for the diversity of overcoming differences, the convergence of views and goals.

Conflicts are also distinguished by functional significance, i.e. on the perception of the results.

All organizations in their development go through a series of internal conflicts. they cannot exist without internal tension and clashes.

And, according to Zdravomyslov A.G. There are at least three conflicts in every organization:

a) between managers and governed;

b) adaptive, when the newcomer is not aware of the rules that exist in this organization;

c) associated with the development of various strategies for the organization's behavior for the effectiveness of its activities.

There are different reasons for conflict:

Management failing to fulfill their promises;

A confluence of circumstances unfavorable for the activities of the enterprise;

Dissatisfaction of workers with wages, content and prestige of work;

Emotional outbursts;

Instigation of informal leaders, etc.

When classifying conflicts, we found out that for the immediate reasons for the occurrence of conflicts, they are distinguished: organizational, emotional and social and labor, i.e. three possible sources of conflict: objective situation, personality and communication.

The organizational reason includes the weakening of the functional interdependence of the members of the organization, which occurs where the tasks and functions of employees are not taken into account, where there are no growth prospects, where labor assessments are not well thought out, where information important for work does not arrive in time.

Emotional conflicts arise most often as a result of personal perception of what is happening in the team. Personal causes of conflicts are often rooted in a person's predisposition to conflicts, which has either situational or characterological prerequisites.

Situational prerequisites are the psychological states of a person in which he is most prone to conflict response (increased excitability, a sense of insecurity, etc.).

Characterological prerequisites - character traits that predispose to a collision with others, cause a feeling of antipathy, opposition (intolerance to the shortcomings of others, impulsiveness, a tendency to aggression, selfishness, selfishness, etc.).

At first glance, it may seem that emotional conflicts are not directly related to work, performance official duties, but it's not. In life, any psychological disturbances affect the staff, affect business relationships, lead to misunderstandings, mutual insults, stress, conflicts and, as a result, the efficiency of the enterprise decreases.

Social and labor conflicts arise as a result of a discrepancy between the interests of individuals or social groups regarding labor relations (conditions, content of labor and its payment).

Today, the main causes of labor conflicts are:

Payment delay wages;

Lack of wage indexation due to rising inflation;

Dissatisfaction with the amount of wages;

Mutual non-payments between producers and consumers;

Violations related to the implementation of labor legislation;

Systematic delays in budget allocations;

Deterioration of labor protection and growth of industrial injuries;

Disadvantages of informatization communication between employees and heads of individual structural units.

Conflict management is the ability of a leader to see a conflict situation, comprehend it and take guiding actions to resolve it.

Conflict management contains the following steps:

Perception of the conflict and initial assessment of the situation;

Study of the conflict and search for its causes;

Finding ways to resolve the conflict;

Implementation of organizational measures.

Prevention of conflicts - the implementation by the management of the organization of preventive measures to prevent the destructive, dysfunctional development of conflict clashes.

Conflict prevention methods in an organization include:

Setting integrating goals between management and staff, i.e. the conductors of the goals that the management apparatus sets for the organization should be the heads of departments, but at the same time, these goals should contribute to the goals of the staff;

A clear definition of the types of communication in the organizational structure of management, i.e. establishing the composition of links and subordination between them, the formation of all necessary structural links between departments and positions (organizational structure with a clear distribution of responsibilities);

The balance of rights and responsibilities in the performance of official duties, i.e. control over the development of regulatory documents that define the responsibilities and rights of employees for the performance of their official duties;

Implementation of the rules for the formation and functioning of temporary units, i.e. formation based on the personal characteristics of the participants (the group must necessarily include people who perform such professional and psychological roles as: "generator of ideas", organizer of work, performer, experienced employee), reaching agreement between the group members on the organization of labor;

Implementation of the rules for delegation of authority (transfer of part of official duties) and responsibility between hierarchical levels of management, i.e. determination of the degree of participation and responsibility of the employee in the decision-making process;

Usage various forms incentives (bonuses, special benefits, sale of shares to employees).

If the conflict could not be prevented or resolved at an early stage of development, then you need to be able to manage it.

Conflict management - targeted impact on people's behavior in conflict situations; activities for the prevention, settlement and resolution of conflict clashes, disagreements between individuals and social groups.

There are two main types of conflict resolution in organizations: authoritarian and partnership.

This type uses the following methods:

1) persuasion and suggestion;

2) an attempt to reconcile irreconcilable interests;

3) the "game" method, i.e. for example, when one of the parties tries to win over the leadership of the organization, and the other - the trade union.

Advantage this method, according to the head, - saving time. But the conflict is not resolved, but only crushed, so its return is possible.

Partner type - conflict resolution through the use of constructive methods. This type is considered more successful, because. allows you to find unifying factors, i.e. satisfy the interests of the parties. Here a compromise is possible, a mutual search for solutions, the perception of the arguments of the opposite side, the interaction of the leader with the conflicting parties.

There are also such methods of conflict resolution in organizations:

The method of "avoiding" the conflict is ignoring or denying the existence of a conflict;

- "adaptation" to the interests of the opposite side;

Compromise, i.e. the parties to the conflict make mutual concessions;

Cooperation, i.e. convergence of points of view and interests for mutual benefits.

An important condition for successful conflict resolution is legal support, which is based on various legal (legislative) acts (from the Constitution of the Russian Federation to individual orders and orders of the organization's management).

When resolving a conflict, it is also important to avoid extreme situations.

It is very important for the organization to strive for a quick and complete resolution of conflicts, because excessive aggravation of conflict differences and prolonged confrontation between the parties can lead the organization to a general crisis and disintegration.

Saint Petersburg

Institute of Business and Law

Nizhnevartovsk branch

CONFLICT MANAGEMENT

V O R G A N I Z A T I A X

Fulfilled

4th year student

Ignatenko

Yuri Alexandrovich

Checked:

S.I. Belyaev

Nizhnevartovsk

CONTENT

1. THE NATURE OF CONFLICT IN ORGANIZATIONS.................................................2

1.1. What is conflict............................. .................. ...............................2

1.2. Types of Conflict .......................................................... .................................3

1.3. Causes of the conflict .......................................................... ...........................4

1.4. Model of the conflict process .............................................................. ................6

2. MANAGEMENT OF THE CONFLICT SITUATION .............................................. 8

2.1. Structural Methods of Conflict Resolution...............................................9

2.2. Interpersonal Styles of Conflict Resolution...............................................10

CONCLUSIONS............................................ ................................................. .fourteen

LIST OF USED LITERATURE.................................................................15

1. THE NATURE OF CONFLICT IN ORGANIZATIONS

1.1. What is conflict

Like many fundamental concepts, conflict has many definitions and interpretations. From the standpoint of managing an organization, conflict is defined as a lack of agreement between two or more parties, which may be specific individuals, formal or informal groups. Each side does everything to get its point of view or goal accepted and prevents the other side from doing the same.

The concept of conflict is often associated with aggression, threats, quarrels, war, and so on. As a result, there is an opinion that conflict is always an undesirable phenomenon, that it, if possible, should be avoided. Such an attitude towards conflict can be traced within the framework of the school of scientific management, in the classical school and among adherents of the concept of bureaucracy according to M. Weber. Within the framework of these schools, it was believed that the presence of a clear hierarchical system, the rational distribution of tasks between departments and employees in the organization, the development of procedures and rules would eliminate the conditions for the emergence of conflicts.

Within the human relations school, conflict was also considered undesirable. It was seen as the result of poor management of the organization. It was believed that good relationships in the organization can eliminate the occurrence of conflicts.

The modern point of view is that conflict in an organization is not only possible, but often desirable. Conflicts, of course, are not always positive. For example, a person can argue at a meeting only because he cannot help but argue. Group members may take the argumentative point of view just to avoid conflict, which can reduce the satisfaction of their needs for power and belonging, as well as the effectiveness of the organization as a whole. But in many situations, conflict helps bring out different points of view, provides additional information, helps bring out more alternatives, and so on. This makes the decision-making process more efficient and also gives people the opportunity to satisfy their needs for respect and power.

Thus, conflict can be functional and lead to an increase in the effectiveness of the organization, or it can be destructive and lead to a decrease in personal satisfaction, group cooperation and efficiency. The role of conflict depends on how effectively it is managed.

1.2. Types of conflict

There are four types of conflict: intrapersonal, interpersonal, between an individual and a group, and intergroup conflict.

intrapersonal conflict. This type of conflict does not meet the definition given above. However, its potential dysfunctional consequences are similar to those for other types of conflict. It can take various forms. One of the most common forms is role conflict. Most often, it occurs when contradictory or mutually exclusive requirements are presented to the employee. For example, the head of a department in a store requires the salesperson to be in the department at all times. Later, he makes claims to him that the seller spends all his time on customers and does not care about replenishing the department with goods. Similarly, from the foreman of the site, his immediate supervisor requires an increase in output, and the head of the company for quality at the same time requires an increase in the quality of products.

Intrapersonal conflict can also arise due to the fact that personal needs are not consistent with production requirements (the need to work on weekends when a family event is planned, the need to move to another city when other family members lose their jobs, etc.).

Interpersonal conflict. This type of conflict is perhaps the most common. It manifests itself in organizations in different ways. Most often, this is the struggle of managers for limited resources: capital, premises, labor, etc. Each of them believes that since resources are limited, he must convince the higher authorities to allocate these resources to him, and not to another leader.

Interpersonal conflict can also arise, for example, between two candidates for promotion in the presence of one vacant position. In this case, the conflict can be subtle and long-lasting. Interpersonal conflict can also manifest itself as a clash of personalities. People with different personality traits, attitudes and values are sometimes just not able to get along with each other. As a rule, the views and goals of such people differ radically.

Conflict between the individual and the group. As E. Mayo's experiments at Hawthorne showed, production teams set standards for behavior and performance. Everyone must comply with them in order to be accepted by an informal group and, thereby, satisfy their social needs. However, if the expectations of the group are in conflict with the expectations of the individual, conflict may arise. For example, someone wants to earn more by exceeding the norms, and the group considers such behavior as a negative phenomenon.

Conflict can arise between an individual and a group if that individual takes a position that differs from that of the group. For example, at a meeting when discussing the possibility

increase in sales, when the majority believes that the problem can be solved by lowering the price, one of the participants in the meeting will be firmly convinced that such a policy will lead to a decrease in profits and will create the opinion that the company's product is worse than that of competitors. Although this person may sincerely support the interests of the organization, he will still be seen as a source of conflict because he goes against the opinion of the group.

A similar conflict may arise on the basis of the performance of official duties. For example, when a leader takes unpopular disciplinary action. The Group may respond to these measures with lower productivity.

Intergroup conflict. The organization is made up of many groups, both formal and informal. Even in the best organizations, conflicts can arise between such groups. A typical example of an intergroup conflict is the confrontation between the administration of an organization, on the one hand, and the trade union, on the other.

Another example of intergroup conflict may be the confrontation between line managers and functional service workers. Staff workers are usually younger and better educated than line managers. Line managers (heads of shops, heads of sections, foremen) may reject the recommendations of staff specialists and express dissatisfaction with their dependence on them in everything related to information. In extreme situations, line managers may deliberately choose to implement the suggestions of staff specialists in such a way that the whole undertaking will end in failure. And all this in order to "put in place" specialists. Staff personnel, in turn, may be indignant that their representatives are not given the opportunity to implement their decisions themselves, and try to maintain the informational dependence of line personnel on them. These are prime examples of dysfunctional conflict.

Often, due to the difference in goals, functional groups within the organization begin to conflict with each other. For example, the sales department is focused on the customer, while the production departments care more about the profit-cost ratio.

1.3. Causes of the conflict

All conflicts have multiple causes. The main causes of conflict are the limited resources to be shared, the interdependence of tasks, differences in goals, differences in perceptions and values, differences in behavior, differences in education, and poor communication.

Resource allocation. Even in the largest organizations, resources are limited. Management must decide how to allocate materials, people, finances and other resources among different

groups in order to effectively achieve the goals of the organization. To allocate a larger share of resources to one leader or group is to allocate a smaller share to others. People always want more resources, not less. Thus, the need to share resources leads to the possibility of conflict.

Interdependence of tasks. The possibility of conflict exists wherever a person or group is dependent on another person or group for a task. Since organizations are systems consisting of interdependent elements, the failure of any specialist or group of their tasks can cause conflict.

Some types of organizational structures and relationships seem to encourage conflict arising from the interdependence of tasks. The intergroup conflict between line managers and staff personnel is considered above. The cause of this conflict is often the interdependence of industrial relations. On the one hand, line personnel depend on the staff, as they must use the knowledge and skills of specialists. On the other hand, the staff staff depends on the line staff, as they need their support at the moment when they find out problems in manufacturing process or act as a consultant. Moreover, the staff at the implementation of their recommendations usually depends on the line.

Certain types of organizational structures increase the potential for conflict. This possibility increases with matrix structure organizations where the principle of unity of command is deliberately violated. The potential for conflict is also great in purely functional structures, since each major function focuses primarily on its own area of specialization. In organizations where departments are the basis of the organizational chart (whatever criteria they are created for: product, consumer or territorial), the heads of interdependent departments report to one common head of a higher level, thereby reducing the possibility of conflict for purely organizational reasons.

Differences in purpose. The potential for conflict increases as organizations become more specialized and broken down into divisions. This is because specialized units formulate their own goals and may pay more attention to them than to achieving the goals of the entire organization. For example, the sales department may insist on expanding the product range to better meet customer needs and increase sales. For the production department, such a policy leads to an increase in the cost of production, which contradicts its main goal - high production efficiency. For production department from

In terms of cost-benefit ratio, it is advantageous to produce large batches of homogeneous products.

Differences in perceptions and values. The idea of a situation depends on the desire to achieve a certain goal. Instead of assessing a situation objectively, people may consider only those views, alternatives, and aspects of the situation that they believe are favorable to their group and personal needs.

Conflicts in organizations…………………..6 Reasons conflicts in organizations……………………………………… 10 Chapter 2. Activities for management conflicts in organizations………...14 2.1. Stages management conflicts ...

Control conflicts in organizations (7)

Coursework >> Management

Work By discipline: "Management" Theme: " Control conflicts in organizations" Completed by: M., student gr. T-201. Checked...

Federal Agency for Education

Sochi State University tourism and resort business

Institute of Economics and Management

Department of Management

ESSAY:

in the discipline "Organization Theory"

on the topic: "Conflict in the organization and conflict management"

Performed:

Kovalenko A.N.

Organizational conflict and conflict management

organizational conflicts.

Causes of conflict and its course.

Managing conflict in an organization.

organizational conflicts. Probably, each of you had to deal with conflict situations. Everyday life literally filled with them. The practice of organizations' activities shows that modern leaders need deep knowledge and skills in managing conflicts and predicting them. A manager, as a person who constantly works with people, must be able to prevent the emergence of a conflict, bring people out of a state of hostility, and resolve disputes.

Modern management science recognizes that conflict is an integral part of the life of an organization. What is conflict?

Like many concepts in theory, sociology and psychology of management, conflict has many different definitions and interpretations. Many experts give it the following definition: “Conflict - (from lat. conflictus - clash) - a clash of parties, opinions, forces, the development of a conflict situation into an open clash; struggle for values and claims to a certain status, power, resources, in which the goals are neutralization, damage and destruction of the opponent.

But here the conflict is associated with enmity and confrontation. Meanwhile, conflict is not necessarily a negative phenomenon. Many sociologists and political scientists believe that society cannot exist without conflicts. This approach is most clearly presented in the works of G. Simmel, R. Dahrendorf, L. Koser. Domestic sociologist I.D. Ladanov believes that conflict helps participants in the labor process, when they find themselves in conflict situations, to better understand the goals of the organization, turn to their untapped reserves and do a lot for what seems impossible under normal conditions. According to K.A. Radugin, conflict is not an anomaly or dysfunction in the activities of organizations, but the norm of relations between people, a necessary element of life that gives an outlet for socio-psychological tension and generates changes in the activities of an organization. Therefore, there are two theoretical approaches to the concept of conflict.

1. Conflict is a clash, contradiction, struggle, opposition (of personalities, forces, interests, positions, views). Accordingly, a social conflict is an attempt to achieve a reward by subjugating, imposing one's will, removing or even destroying an adversary seeking to achieve the same reward. Conflict differs from competition in its clear direction, the presence of incidents, and the tough conduct of the struggle. Thus, supporters of this approach describe conflict as a negative phenomenon. Most of the works on the technology of working in conflict within the framework of this approach give recommendations on manipulation, which is called "conflict management", "conflict management". The main goal of such management is to eliminate the conflict with the maximum benefit for themselves.

2. Conflict is a system of relations, a process of development and interaction, given by the differences of the subjects participating in it (according to interests, values, activities). Proponents of this approach consider conflict to be a natural condition for the existence of interacting people, a tool for the development of an organization, any community, although it has destructive consequences, but in general and over a long period is not as destructive as the consequences of the elimination of conflicts, their informational and social blockade.

The second approach assumes the impossibility of managing the conflict and optimizing the interaction, theoretically substantiating the development of the conflict as a self-regulating mechanism. Instead of “solution”, “resolution” and other similar terms, the term “overcoming” is used, implying that the conflict is not eliminated, but ensures development, strengthening differentiation in the organization, primarily professional, and in society - social stratification which underlies social and organizational stability. It transforms into other conflicts, less destructive, in other spheres, other social dimensions. This approach does not deny the possibility and even the constructiveness of political and administrative manipulation (not any) in the initial phases of the conflict, but is based, first of all, on ensuring the information completeness of the interaction of subjects and the necessary risk, providing the possibility of transition to its last phase.

Conflictology has developed two models for describing conflicts: procedural and structural. In the procedural model, the emphasis is on the dynamics of the conflict, the emergence of a conflict situation, the transition of the conflict from one phase to another, the forms conflict behavior, the outcome of conflict interaction. The structural model describes the conditions underlying the conflict, defines its parameters and main features.

Most sociologists agree that conflict is the lack of agreement between two or more parties. The subjects of conflict interaction in the organization are both separate individuals and social groups. They are usually referred to as "opponents". At the same time, each of the parties strives to ensure that its point of view or its goal is accepted, preventing the other side from doing the same. A conflict is a special type of interaction between the subjects of an organization (opponents), a clash of opposing positions, opinions, assessments and ideas that people try to resolve with the help of persuasion or actions against the background of the manifestation of emotions. The basis of any conflict is the accumulated contradictions, objective and subjective, real and apparent.

The most conflictogenic in social interactions is the sphere of management and managerial relations. In the process of exercising managerial functions in various areas of social reality, conditions are manifested in which conflicts are formed objectively and subjectively. Management as one of the most complex types social relations is associated with a large number of problems and contradictions that create a system of prerequisites for conflict in this area. The objective prerequisites for the emergence of conflicts in the field of management are rooted in subjective differences in perception social norms people, in their individual uniqueness of attitudes towards the processes of purposeful, coordinated work and joint work. In the process of such relations, the motivation and interests of the subjects of management do not always coincide, they are often opposite and are perceived in different ways. This leads to the formation of conflict.

So, under the conflicts in the field of management, it is necessary to understand the conflicts that arise in the systems of social interaction between subjects and objects of management. The sources of any conflicts in the field of management are contradictions that turn into conflict as soon as certain conditions and opportunities are formed for this. Each type and type of conflicts have their own specific contradictions. These contradictions, ultimately, are due to the structure and content of social interaction - the specifics of management.

The essence of conflict in the modern organization. An organization is a complex whole that includes not only individuals with different statuses, social attitudes and interests, but also various social education those who seek to take a higher place in the structure of the organization, change the existing norms of activity or the system of relations within the organizational structure. In addition, different departments of the organization may be subject to managerial influence to varying degrees. Thus, there are inequalities in the distribution of resources, as well as differences in the ability of top management to exercise power functions.

As the most important cell of society, the organization connects and coordinates the behavior of people who specialize in different types activities, includes them in a single labor process, solves not only production problems, but also creates conditions for the development of its members. Here, in the environment of direct communication, the initial ideas of people are laid, opinions are formed, habits are fixed, inclinations are manifested, and the public reputation of workers is affirmed.

Mutual ties and relationships are formed not only on the basis of production activities, but also under the influence of real life conditions: political, psychological, moral, etc. People are united by common interests, ideas, goals, moral norms and principles. However, along with solidarity in the labor collective, conflict situations also arise.

A conflict in an organization is an open form of the existence of conflicts of interests that arise in the process of interaction between people in solving issues of production and personal order; this is a clash of oppositely directed actions of the participants in the conflict, caused by a divergence of interests, norms of behavior and value orientations. They arise as a result of the discrepancy between the formal organizational principles and the real behavior of the team members. This mismatch occurs:

1) when the employee does not fulfill, ignores the requirements imposed on him by the organization. For example, absenteeism, violations of labor and performance discipline, poor-quality performance of their duties, etc.;

It might be useful to read: