1.Podavlenie — realization of their interests at the expense of others;
2.Podchinenie — one of the parties to sacrifice their own interests;
3.Izbeganie — avoiding conflict;
4.Kompromiss — style of concessions (alleviating the conflict);
5.Sotrudnichestvo — the solution is fully acceptable to both sides, requires the ability to contain the emotions, to listen to the other side, the right to express the essence of their interests.
Classification of conflicts:
1. Interpersonal (collision of interacting people, whose purpose or mutually exclusive and incompatible in this situation, oppose and hinder each other.)
2. Intergroup (opposing groups in the collective society).
3. Intrapersonal (collision of oppositely-directed motivations, needs, interests in the 1st person).
In a conflict situation, it is important as the subjects are. Conflicts can be false (do not have substantial grounds contradictions) and genuine. Conflicts are biased (double)-a clear conflict in which one can find a hidden underlying explicit. The most complex — latent (hidden) — either do not realize or hide (promotes cynicism and hypocrisy in the conflict). Conflicts can be: — Personal and (most Grieved) — a special type of pedagogical conflicts — all conflicts related to the process of training and education.
Methods of diagnosis: definite tendency to konfliktonomu povideniyu — K.Tomas technique.
The structure of the conflict:
The basic elements of conflict interaction are:
1) the object of the conflict,
2) The parties to the conflict,
3) the social environment, the conflict,
4) the subjective perception of the conflict and his personal items.
1 — The object of the conflict. Every conflict has its cause, arises from the need to meet any need. Is the value that will meet this need, and for the possession of which there is a conflict, and it is its object. The object of the conflict may make the material, social and spiritual values.
2 — The participants of the conflict may be separate individuals, social groups, organizations, states, coalitions of states. The main protagonists are the opposing party or the opponents. They form the core of the conflict. On exit from the confrontation at least one of the main parties conflict ceases. Depending on the nature of the Party to the conflict can be divided into three main types (see the classification of conflicts)
Besides the main parties to the conflict can be and the other participants, who play supporting roles in it. These roles can be as important and unimportant, until the role of so-called "people out of the crowd."
The role of the conflict vary. They differ as to the sociological, and psychological perspectives.
From a sociological point of view, they can differ in their social significance, power, influence, most clearly observed in the collision of the individual and the state. Of course, in this type of conflict is far unequal strength of the participants, as evidenced by the tragic fate of the "dissidents" were strongly against the Soviet state. In its social significance as the conflict in the following order: 1) separate individuals acting on their own behalf, 2) followed by groups, and 3) social classes, and 4) state. However, the significance, the impact of the conflict does not always correspond to the specified sequence. Historically, the role of individuals, not only in the lives of groups and organizations, but also in the lives of nations and states can be very large.
Different roles of individual participants in the conflict, and from a psychological point of view, in this respect, it can be raised, even heroic, and perhaps vulgar, ugly. Each participant can guide the development of confrontation with their motives, goals, interests, values and attitudes.
As the social significance of participants and their goals, attitudes are particularly well only when the conflict reaches a high degree of development. This is the time comes "moment of truth" in the disaster, to find out who's who of the participants.
3 — But in addition to the conflict, the totality of which is like his microenvironment important and sometimes decisive role in its development and macro-plays, those specific historical social and psychological context in which it is deployed. The concept of the social environment is defined the basis on which the conflict arises and develops. This concept includes not only the immediate, but also long-distance, the wider community of the conflicting parties, those large social groups to which they belong, or national, class, and society as a whole.
4 — The nature of the conflict depends not only on the objective conditions in the country, large or small group, but otsubektivnogo perception or image of the conflict, which creates a force in this conflict situation of individuals or groups. This image or perception does not necessarily correspond to the actual state of affairs, the real situation. These images, people's perceptions can be of three types:
1) The presentation of self,
2) the perception of other parties to the conflict,
3) The images of the environment, big and small, in which the conflict unfolds.
It is these images, picture perfect conflict, not the objective reality are the direct basis of behavior konfliktantov.
Of course, in general, these images and pictures are generated by objective reality. However, as already observed by Immanuel Kant, our knowledge reflects not only the objective nature, but includes as its integral part and our own human nature. Therefore, the relationship between the two images, perceptions and reality are very complex and not only had she not fully fit, but it can very seriously disagree, which is another source of conflict.
It should be borne in mind that no matter what our images, perceptions and ideas about conflict, conflict did not begin until they are realized in the corresponding reciprocal actions. Objective and subjective causes of the conflict arising as to its neighbors, and on the distant approaches, as well as determine the composition of the set of possible courses of action, the conduct of the parties. Because every action of one of the parties to the conflict causes a corresponding reaction, they affect each other and interact.
Definition of time, space and system boundaries of the conflict is an important prerequisite for successful control, preventing its destructive effect.
Aging causes the formation of the conflict, their interaction and a particular outcome of the conflict takes time. Therefore, any real conflict is not a single act but a process that is often very long. In this regard, the analysis of conflict involves not only consideration of its structure, statics, and the study of dynamics, stages and phases of development.
Five ways to resolve interpersonal conflicts:
Avoidance, evasion (low assertiveness combined with low cooperativity). With this strategy, the behavior of the manager are intended to get out of the situation without conceding, but not insisting on, refraining from entering into the controversy and debate, from the statements of position. In response to the claim or allegation of such a leader the conversation to another topic. He does not take responsibility for the problems, does not want to see controversial issues ignores the controversy, denies the existence of conflict or even considered it useless, try not to get into situations that provoke conflict.
Coercion (confrontation) — in this case a high drive combined with low cooperativity. Manager actions are intended to insist on his own in an open struggle for the interests of government coercion. Confrontation involves a perception as a victory or defeat, occupation assertive and uncompromising expression of antagonism in the case of resistance partner. Such a leader to make his point of view at all costs.
Smoothing (compliance) — weak assertiveness combined with high cooperativity. Action director in a conflict aimed at preserving or restoring good relations, to ensure the satisfaction of another person by smoothing out the differences. For this he is ready to give in, to compromise their interests, seek to support the other, not hurt his feelings, consider his arguments. His motto: "Do not quarrel, because all of us — one happy team, which is in the same boat, not to be rocking."
Compromise, cooperation — high drive combined with high cooperativity. This case is aimed at finding a manager solutions that meets his interests and wishes of the other person in an open and frank exchange of views on the issue. He is trying to resolve the differences, giving in something in exchange for concessions on the other hand, in the process of negotiations seeking interim "average" solutions, mutually convenient, in which nobody loses anything particularly, but not acquired.
There are other ways to resolve interpersonal conflicts:
coordination — coordination of tactical sub and behavior in the interests of the main goal or solving the general problem. Such alignment between business units can be produced at different levels of management pyramid (vertical coordination) on organizational levels of the same value (horizontal coordination) and as a mixed form of both. If negotiation fails, the conflicts are resolved with less cost and effort, an integrative solution. Conflict resolution is based on the assumption that there may be a solution that removes all elements of conflict and acceptable to both parties. It is believed that this is one of the most successful strategies for managerial behavior in conflict, as in this case, it comes closer to the resolution of the conditions originally gave rise to the conflict. However, the approach to the conflict on the basis of response was often very difficult to observe. This is due to the fact that much of it depends on the professionalism of the manager. Furthermore, in this case to resolve the conflict takes a long time. In such circumstances, the manager must have a good technology — a model for solving problems;
confrontation as a way of resolving the conflict — the imposition of problems in public. This gives an opportunity to discuss it with the greatest number of participants in the conflict (in fact, this is not a conflict, as the labor dispute), to confront the problem, not each other, to identify and remove all deficiencies. The purpose of confrontational meetings — bring people together in nonthreatening forum that facilitates communication. Public and frank communication — one of the means of conflict management.