Conflict is a form of relationship between potential or actual subjects of social action, the motivation of which is due to opposing values ​​and norms, interests and needs. The sociology of conflict proceeds from the fact that conflict is a normal phenomenon of social life; identification and development of the conflict as a whole is a useful and necessary thing. Society will achieve more effective results in its actions if it does not turn a blind eye to conflicts, but follows certain rules aimed at regulating conflicts. The meaning of these rules in the modern world is to:

1) avoid violence as a way to resolve conflicts;

2) to find ways out of impasses in cases where violent acts nevertheless took place and became a means of deepening conflicts;

3) seek mutual understanding between the parties opposing in 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.

There are five different ways in which the term "conflict" can be used:

1) the conflict as “happened”, in relation to which various technical formations are built up, bringing the actual clash of the parties to the full structure of the conflict (negotiating technique, mediation, observers in the conflict, etc.);

2) conflict as a means of a researcher (analyst). In this case, the conflict is seen as a kind of screen that allows you to identify and see what is invisible in the normal course of affairs (psychoanalysis, various forms of intelligence, etc.).

3) conflict as a mechanism artificially created by the organizer to intensify thinking and activity (a tool used in problematization and collective ways of solving problems).

4) conflict as an area of ​​specialization of scientific subjects (interpersonal conflicts in psychology, group interactions in sociology, etc.).

5) conflict as an object of study. Thus, conflict relations are considered in game theory as a special case of a game.

Conflicts can be hidden or overt, but they are always based on a lack of agreement. Therefore, we define a conflict as a process of interaction between subjects or groups regarding the difference in their interests.

2. Sociological theories of conflict

The English philosopher and sociologist H. Spencer (1820-1903) considered conflict "an inevitable phenomenon in the history of human society and a stimulus for social development."

Conflict is most often associated with aggression, threats, disputes, hostility. As a result, there is an opinion that conflict is always undesirable, that it should be avoided as far as possible, and that it should be resolved immediately as soon as it arises. K. Marx's concept of social class conflict examines the contradictions between the level of productive forces and the nature of production relations, which are the source of social conflict. Their discrepancy turns production relations at a certain stage into a brake on the development of productive forces, which leads to conflict. The solution to the conflict is contained in the social revolution, the classical formulation of which was given by K. Marx: “At a certain stage of its development, the productive material forces of society come into conflict with the existing production relations within which they have been developing until now. From the forms of development of the productive forces, these relations are transformed into their fetters. Then comes the era of social revolution. With a change in the economic basis, a revolution takes place more or less quickly in the entire vast superstructure. The dialectical concept of the conflict of Ralf Dahrendorf follows, it would seem, in line with the Marxist concept, but differs significantly from the latter. The basis for dividing people into classes, according to Dahrendorf,

is their participation or non-participation in the exercise of power. It is not only the power of employers over workers that creates the basis for conflict. Conflict can arise in any organization (in a hospital, university, etc.) where there are managers and subordinates. To designate these organizations, Dahrendorf uses the Weberian concept of an imperatively coordinated association (ICA), which is a well-organized system of roles. The resolution of the conflict in IKA is aimed at the redistribution of authority and power in it. Conflicts are becoming more diverse. Instead of a society that has been sharply polarized, a pluralistic society with overlapping interests, and therefore with various conflicts, is emerging. In the Western post-capitalist society, there are great opportunities for regulating the class conflict, which is not eliminated, but localized within the enterprise. For successful conflict management, according to Dahrendorf, three circumstances are important:

1) recognition of different points of view;

2) high organization of the conflicting parties;

3) the presence of the rules of the game.

R. Park, one of the founders of the Chicago school, included conflict among the four main types of social interaction along with competition, adaptation, and assimilation. From his point of view, competition, which is a social form of the struggle for existence, being conscious, turns into a conflict, which, thanks to assimilation, is designed to lead to strong mutual contacts, to cooperation and to promote better adaptation.

Social conflict can also become a means of stabilizing intra-group relations and is fraught with a social explosion. It depends on the nature of the social structure, under the influence of which the conflict develops. The following conflict functions are distinguished:

1) the discharge of tension, i.e., conflict, serves as an "exhaust valve" for tension;

2) communicative-informational, that is, as a result of collisions, people check each other, receive new information about the environment and find out their balance of power;

3) creation, i.e., confrontation helps the group to unite, and not collapse in difficult times;

4) the integration of the social structure, i.e. the conflict does not destroy integrity, but maintains it;

5) rule-making, i.e., conflict contributes to the creation of new forms and social institutions.

3. Conflict as an indicator of contradictions

The sources of claims are contradictions that arise where there are:

1) mismatch of value orientations according to moral norms, views, beliefs. If there are differences in beliefs and moral incompatibility, the emergence of claims is inevitable;

2) mismatch of expectations and positions. Such misunderstanding usually occurs between people of different ages, professional affiliations, life experiences and interests. And the greater these differences, the deeper the misunderstanding between them can become and give rise to mutual hostility;

3) mismatch of knowledge, skills, abilities, personal qualities. Differences in the level of education lead to the fact that people become of little interest to each other. There are psychological barriers due to possible individual differences of an intellectual nature ("too smart"), which can generate dislike and lead to enmity. Such individual personality differences in the properties of temperament as impulsiveness, irascibility, and such character traits as the desire to dominate, arrogance in handling and others give rise to tension in human relations;

4) mismatches in understanding, interpretation of information. Not all people are naturally endowed with the same ability to understand what is happening to them and around them. What is obvious to one person may become an insoluble problem to another;

5) mismatch of assessments, self-assessments. In relation to themselves and the situation for each of the participants, they can be adequate, underestimated or overestimated and not the same;

6) mismatches of physical, emotional and other states (“a well-fed one is not a friend to the hungry”);

7) mismatch of goals, means, methods of activity. Potentially explosive is a situation in which two or more people have conflicting, incompatible motives for behavior. Each of them, pursuing their personal goals, consciously or unconsciously hinders the achievement of goals by other individuals;

8) mismatch of management functions;

9) mismatch of economic, technological and other processes.

Conflict is an indicator of existing contradictions. In the process of conflict interaction, its participants get the opportunity to express different opinions, to identify more alternatives when making decisions, and this is precisely the important positive meaning of the conflict.

4. Structure of social conflict

The structure of social conflict can be represented as follows:

1) the contradiction that is expressed in the problem and is an objective prerequisite for the conflict (the source of the conflict);

2) people as carriers of this contradiction, representing various social interests (subjects of the conflict);

3) the object of the conflict (hidden needs) - the benefits, resources, over which the conflict arises;

4) the subject of the conflict (open needs) - material formations associated with it (the conflict);

5) clash of the subjects of the conflict (process, active phase), in which, as it were, there is a “contradiction in action”. The collision is also characterized by emotional coloring and psychological attitudes of the subjects. Since the conflict is the highest (active) stage in the development of a contradiction, in the absence of the last component (collision) we are dealing with a latent, i.e. hidden conflict, the identification of which is most difficult. Such a conflict can also be called “underdeveloped” due to the stoppage of its development at the stage of contradiction.

5. Typology of conflicts

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

intrapersonal conflict. This type of conflict does not fully correspond to our definition. Here, the participants are not people, but various psychological factors of the inner world of the individual, often seeming or being incompatible: needs, motives, values, feelings, etc. Intrapersonal conflicts associated with work in an organization can take various forms. One of the most common is role conflict, when different roles of a person make conflicting demands on him. For example, being a good family man (the role of father, mother, husband and wife, etc.), a person must spend the evenings at home, and the position of a leader may oblige him to stay late at work. The reason for this conflict is the mismatch of personal needs and production requirements. Internal conflicts can arise in the workplace due to work overload or, conversely, the lack of work if you need to be at the workplace.

Interpersonal conflict. This is one of the most common types of conflict. It manifests itself in organizations in different ways. According to the subjective sign, the following types of interpersonal conflicts can be distinguished in the internal life of each organization:

1) conflicts between managers and managed within a given organization, and conflicts between a leader and an ordinary performer will differ significantly from conflicts between a leader of the first hand and managers of lower levels;

2) conflicts between ordinary employees;

3) conflicts at the managerial level, i.e. conflicts between leaders of the same rank. These conflicts, as a rule, are closely intertwined with personal and personnel conflicts, with the practice of promoting personnel within a given organization, with the struggle for the distribution of the most important positions in its own structure. They may also be associated with the development of various strategies for the behavior of the relevant organizations, with the development of criteria for the effectiveness of its overall activities.

Conflict between the individual and the group. Informal groups establish their own norms of behavior and communication. Deviation from the accepted norms is considered by the group as a negative phenomenon, a conflict arises between the individual and the group.

Another common conflict of this type is the conflict between the group and the leader. Here one should distinguish between conflicts between the head and the subdivision subordinate to him, the subdivision and the head of another group, between the heads of different subdivisions, if members of the group (s) are involved in the conflict. Conflicts can develop into intergroup ones. The most difficult such conflicts occur with an authoritarian leadership style.

Intergroup conflict. The organization consists of many formal and informal groups between which conflicts can arise, for example, between management and performers, between employees of various departments, between informal groups within departments, between administration and the trade union.

6. Components of a conflict situation

The most important components of a conflict situation are the aspirations of the parties, their strategies and tactics of behavior, as well as the perception of the conflict situation.

Parties' motives. Motives in a conflict are incentives to enter into a conflict associated with meeting the needs of an opponent, a set of external and internal conditions that cause the subject's conflict activity. The basic motivator of the opponent's activity is his needs, which are states of need for objects (resources, power, spiritual values) necessary for his existence and development. Opponents' motives are concretized in goals. The goal in the conflict is to represent its participant about the final, anticipated useful (from the point of view of this person) result of the conflict. The general (final) and private goals of the opponents are singled out.

Conflict behavior consists of oppositely directed actions of the participants in the conflict. Conflict behavior can be divided into strategy and tactics. The strategy is considered as the orientation of the individual in relation to the conflict, its installation on certain forms of behavior in a conflict situation (avoidance, adaptation, compromise, rivalry, cooperation).

7. Classification of conflict strategies

The classification of conflict strategies is based on the following grounds:

1) the nature of the actions (offensive, defensive and neutral);

2) the degree of activity in their implementation (active - passive, initiating - response);

The chosen strategy (general line) is implemented through specific tactics. Tactics of behavior - a set of methods of influencing the opponent, a means of implementing the strategy. The following types of tactics of influencing the opponent are distinguished (according to A. Ya. Antsupov, A. I. Shipilov):

1) hard:

a) tactics of capturing and holding the object of the conflict (used in conflicts where the object is material);

b) tactics of physical violence (destruction of material values);

c) causing bodily harm, blocking someone else's activity, etc.;

d) tactics of psychological violence (insults, rudeness, negative personal assessment, slander, deceit, misinformation, humiliation, etc.);

e) tactics of pressure (presentation of demands, orders, threats, blackmail, presentation of compromising evidence);

2) neutral:

a) tactics of demonstrative actions (drawing attention to one's person by publicly stating complaints about the state of health, absenteeism from work, demonstrating suicidal actions, etc.);

b) sanctioning (influencing the opponent with the help of a penalty, increasing the burden, refusing to comply with the requirements, etc.);

c) coalition tactics (forming alliances, increasing groups in order to increase one's rank in the conflict);

3) soft:

a) the tactics of fixing one's position (the use of logic, facts to confirm one's position in the form of expressed judgments, suggestions, criticism, etc.);

b) tactics of friendliness (emphasizing the common, expressing readiness to solve the problem, presenting the necessary information, offering help, etc.);

c) tactics of transactions (mutual exchange of benefits, promises, concessions, apologies).

A kind of mediating link between the characteristics of the participants in the conflict and the conditions of its course, on the one hand, and conflict behavior, on the other, are images of a conflict situation - a kind of ideal maps that include the following elements:

1) representations of the participants of the contradiction about themselves (about their needs, capabilities, goals, values, etc.);

2) representations of the participants in the conflict about the opposite side (about its needs, capabilities, goals, values, etc.);

3) representations of each of the participants regarding how the opponent perceives him;

4) representations of the conflicting parties about the environment and conditions in which the conflict proceeds.

Why is analysis of images of a conflict situation necessary? This is determined by two factors:

1) it is the subjective picture of the conflict, and not the reality of the contradiction, in itself, that directly determines the conflict behavior;

2) there is a real and effective means of resolving the conflict by changing these images, which is carried out through external influence on the participants in the conflict.

The degree of discrepancy between the image and the real picture is different. For example, a conflict situation may exist, but not be recognized by the parties as such, or vice versa.

Distortion of a conflict situation can be as follows:

1) the whole situation is distorted as a whole - the situation is simplified, perceived in black and white (polar) assessments, information is filtered, it is misinterpreted, etc.;

2) distortion of the perception of the motives of behavior in a conflict - for example, attributing socially approved motives to oneself, and base, mean motives to the opponent;

3) distortion of the perception of actions, statements, deeds - is fixed in the following statements in relation to oneself: “I am forced to do this”, “everyone does this”; and in relation to the opponent: “he does everything to my detriment”, etc.

4) distortion of the perception of personal qualities: here the effect of searching for a mote in the eye of another works, downplaying negative qualities in oneself and exaggerating in an opponent. In 1972, K. Thomas and R. Kilmenn identified five main styles of behavior in a conflict situation:

1) cooperation - an attempt to jointly develop a solution that takes into account the interests of all parties. Collaboration is effective when:

a) there is an opportunity (time, desire) to deeply understand the reasons forcing the parties to adhere to their positions;

b) compensatory elements can be found in disagreements;

c) it is necessary to develop various solutions;

d) it is possible to constructively resolve emerging contradictions;

e) the parties are ready to discuss ways out of the conflict;

2) competition, rivalry - an uncompromising struggle for victory by any means, stubbornly defending one's position. The most acute form of conflict resolution. Its use is justified when:

a) there is confidence in the correctness and legitimacy of one's position, and there are means of protecting it;

b) the conflict affects the area of ​​principles and beliefs;

c) the opponent is a subordinate who prefers an authoritarian style of management;

d) refusal of the taken position is fraught with irreparable serious losses;

This strategy requires the selection of weighty arguments for discussion and an adequate assessment of the positions of opponents, as well as the availability of resources to defend their positions;

3) evasion, ignoring - an attempt to get out of the conflict, avoiding it. Dangerous strategy. You can use it if:

a) the source of the conflict is so trivial, and the consequences are so insignificant that they can be neglected;

b) the conflicting parties can sort it out without your intervention;

c) there is confidence that time will ease the tension of the situation and everything will resolve itself;

d) the conflict does not affect production problems in any way;

e) involvement in the conflict will not allow solving more important tasks.

Ignoring the conflict can lead to its uncontrolled growth;

4) adaptation - the desire to smooth out contradictions, often by changing one's position. This is effective in cases where:

a) there is a desire to resolve the conflict at any cost;

b) the conflict and its results have little effect on personal interests;

c) there is a willingness to make unilateral concessions;

d) defending one's position can take a lot of time and take a lot of energy (when "the game is not worth the candle").

5) compromise - conflict resolution through mutual concessions. Compromise is effective when:

a) the arguments of the conflicting parties are sufficiently convincing, objective and legitimate;

b) it is necessary to resolve the conflict by making a decision acceptable to the parties in the conditions of lack of time;

c) the parties are ready to resolve the conflict on the basis of a partial solution of the problem;

Any conflict action can have four main outcomes:

1) complete or partial subordination of another;

2) compromise;

3) interruption of conflict actions;

Society as a whole, which is characterized by a clash of opposing interests, goals, positions of the subjects of interaction. Conflicts may be covert or overt, but they are always based on a lack of agreement between two or more parties. In the field of scientific knowledge, there is a separate science [ ], dedicated to conflicts - conflictology.

Conflict is a clash of opposite goals, positions, subjects of interaction. At the same time, the conflict is the most important side of the interaction of people in society, a kind of cell of social life. This is a form of relationship between potential or actual subjects of social action, the motivation of which is due to opposing values ​​and norms, interests and needs. The essential side of social conflict is that these subjects operate within the framework of some wider system of connections, which is modified (strengthened or destroyed) under the influence of the conflict. If interests are multidirectional and opposite, then their opposition will be found in a mass of very different assessments; they themselves will find a “field of collision” for themselves, while the degree of rationality of the claims put forward will be very conditional and limited.

Encyclopedic YouTube

1 / 3

✪ Sociology of conflict. Lecture 1. The concept of conflict

✪ 31 Social conflict and ways to solve it

✪ 46 Social Conflict

Subtitles

Causes of social conflicts

The reason for social conflicts lies in the definition itself - it is a confrontation between individuals or groups pursuing socially significant goals.

Types of social conflicts

Ralf Dahrendorf offers the following classification of social conflicts:

1. By the number of participants in the conflict interaction:

• intrapersonal - the state of dissatisfaction of a person with any circumstances of his life, which are associated with the presence of contradictory needs, interests, aspirations and can cause affects;
• interpersonal - disagreement between two or more members of one group or several groups;
• intergroup - occur between social groups that pursue incompatible goals and interfere with each other with their practical actions;

2. According to the direction of conflict interaction: horizontal - between people who are not subordinate to each other; vertical - between people who are subordinate to each other; mixed - in which both those and others are presented. The most common are vertical and mixed conflicts, averaging 70-80% of all conflicts;

3. According to the source of occurrence:

• objectively determined - caused by objective reasons, which can be eliminated only by changing the objective situation;
• subjectively conditioned - associated with the personal characteristics of conflicting people, as well as with situations that create barriers to satisfying their desires, aspirations, interests;

4. According to its functions:

• creative (integrative) - contributing to renewal, the introduction of new structures, policies, leadership;
• destructive (disintegrative) - destabilizing social systems;

5. According to the duration of the course:

• short-term - caused by mutual misunderstanding or mistakes of the parties, which are quickly realized;
• protracted - associated with deep moral and psychological trauma or with objective difficulties. The duration of the conflict depends both on the subject of the contradiction and on the character traits of the people involved;

6. According to its internal content:

• rational - covering the sphere of reasonable, business rivalry, redistribution of resources;
• emotional - in which participants act on the basis of personal hostility;

7. According to the ways and means of resolving conflicts, they are peaceful and armed:

8. By taking into account the content of the problems that caused conflict actions, economic, political, domestic, industrial, spiritual, moral, legal, environmental, ideological and other conflicts are distinguished.

9. By shape: internal and external;

10. By the nature of development: deliberate and spontaneous;

11. By volume: global, local, regional, group and personal;

12. According to the means used: violent and non-violent;

13. By influence on the course of development of society: progressive and regressive;

14. By spheres of public life: economic (or industrial), political, ethnic, family and household.

According to the classification of typology by D. Katz, there are:

• conflict between indirectly competing subgroups;
• conflict between directly competing subgroups;
• conflict within the hierarchy over rewards.

social conflict

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

social conflict- conflict caused by differences social groups or personalities with a difference in opinions and views, the desire to take a leading position; manifestation of social connections of people.

In the field of scientific knowledge, there is a separate science dedicated to conflicts - conflictology. Conflict is a clash of opposing goals, positions, views of the subjects of interaction. At the same time, the conflict is the most important side of the interaction of people in society, a kind of cell of social life. This is a form of relationship between potential or actual subjects of social action, the motivation of which is due to opposing values ​​and norms, interests and needs. The essential side of social conflict is that these subjects operate within the framework of some wider system of connections, which is modified (strengthened or destroyed) under the influence of the conflict. If interests are multidirectional and opposite, then their opposition will be found in a mass of very different assessments; they themselves will find a “field of collision” for themselves, while the degree of rationality of the claims put forward will be very conditional and limited. It is likely that at each of the stages of the development of the conflict, it will be concentrated at a certain point of intersection of interests.

Causes of social conflicts

The reason for social conflicts lies in the definition itself - it is a confrontation between individuals or groups pursuing socially significant goals. It occurs when one side of the conflict seeks to implement its interests to the detriment of the other.

Types of social conflicts

Political conflicts- these are conflicts, the cause of which is the struggle for the distribution of power, dominance, influence and authority. They arise from various interests, rivalry and struggle in the process of acquiring, distributing and exercising political and state power. Political conflicts are directly related to winning leading positions in the institutions and structures of political power.

Main types of political conflicts:

conflict between branches of government;

conflict within parliament;

conflict between political parties and movements;

conflict between various parts of the administrative apparatus, etc.

Socio-economic conflicts- these are conflicts caused by means of subsistence, the use and redistribution of natural and other material resources, the level of wages, the use of professional and intellectual potential, the level of prices for goods and services, access and distribution of spiritual goods.

National-ethnic conflicts- these are conflicts that arise in the course of the struggle for the rights and interests of ethnic and national groups.

According to the classification of typology by D. Katz, there are:

conflict between indirectly competing subgroups;

conflict between directly competing subgroups;

conflict within the hierarchy over rewards.

The main aspects of social conflicts.

Social heterogeneity of society, difference in income levels, power, prestige, etc. often lead to conflict. Conflicts are an integral part of social life. This causes close attention of sociologists to the study of conflicts.

A conflict is a clash of opposing goals, positions, opinions and views of opponents or subjects of interaction. Radugin A.A., Radugin K.A. Sociology. - M.: Center, 1996., p. 117. The English sociologist E. Gidens gave the following definition of conflict: “By conflict, I mean a real struggle between active people or groups, regardless of what the origins of this struggle are, its methods and means mobilized by each of the parties.” Conflict is a ubiquitous phenomenon. Every society, every social group, social community is subject to conflicts to one degree or another. The wide distribution of this phenomenon and the heightened attention to it by society and scientists contributed to the emergence of a special branch of sociological knowledge - conflictology. Conflicts are classified according to their structure and research areas.

Social conflict is a special type of interaction of social forces, in which the action of one side, faced with the opposition of the other, makes it impossible to realize its goals and interests.

The main subjects of the conflict are large social groups. The prominent conflictologist R. Dorendorf refers to the subjects of the conflict three types of social groups. one). Primary groups are direct participants in the conflict. Which are in a state of interaction regarding the achievement of objectively or subjectively incompatible goals. 2). Secondary groups - tend to be uninvolved directly in the conflict. But they contribute to fueling the conflict. At the stage of exacerbation, they can become the primary side. 3). Third forces are interested in resolving the conflict.

The subject of the conflict is the main contradiction because of which and for the sake of resolving which the subjects enter into confrontation.

Conflictology has developed two models for describing the conflict: procedural and structural. The procedural model focuses on the dynamics of the conflict, the emergence of a conflict situation, the transition of the conflict from one stage to another, the forms of conflict behavior, and the final outcome of the conflict. In the structural model, the emphasis shifts to an analysis of the conditions that underlie the conflict and determine its dynamics. The main purpose of this model is to establish the parameters that influence the conflict behavior and the specification of the forms of this behavior.

Much attention is paid to the concept of “strength” of the participants in conflicts. Strength is the ability of the opponent to realize his goal against the will of the interaction partner. It includes a number of heterogeneous components:

Physical force, including technical means used as an instrument of violence;

An informationally civilized form of the use of force, requiring the collection of facts, statistical data, analysis of documents, the study of expert examination materials in order to ensure complete knowledge about the essence of the conflict, about one's opponent in order to develop a strategy and tactics of behavior, use materials that discredit the opponent, etc.;

Social status, expressed in socially recognized indicators (income, level of power, prestige, etc.);

Other resources - money, territory, time limit, number of supporters, etc.

The stage of conflict behavior is characterized by the maximum use of the strength of the participants in conflicts, the use of all the resources at their disposal.

An important influence on the development of conflict relations is exerted by the surrounding social environment, which determines the conditions in which conflict processes take place. The environment can act either as a source of external support for the participants in the conflict, or as a deterrent, or as a neutral factor.

1.1. Classification of conflicts.

All conflicts can be classified depending on the areas of disagreement as follows.

1. Personal conflict. This zone includes conflicts occurring within the personality, at the level of individual consciousness. Such conflicts may be associated, for example, with excessive dependence or role tension. This is a purely psychological conflict, but it can be a catalyst for the emergence of group tension if the individual seeks the cause of his internal conflict among the members of the group.

2. Interpersonal conflict. This zone includes disagreements between two or more members of the same group or groups.

3. Intergroup conflict. A certain number of individuals forming a group (that is, a social community capable of joint coordinated action) come into conflict with another group that does not include individuals from the first group. This is the most common type of conflict, because individuals, starting to influence others, usually try to attract supporters to themselves, form a group that facilitates actions in the conflict.

4. Conflict of ownership. Occurs due to the dual membership of individuals, for example, when they form a group within another, larger group, or when an individual is simultaneously in two competitive groups pursuing the same goal.

5. Conflict with the external environment. The individuals who make up the group are under pressure from outside (primarily from cultural, administrative and economic norms and regulations). Often they come into conflict with the institutions that support these norms and regulations.

According to their internal content, social conflicts are divided into rational and emotional. Rational conflicts include such conflicts that cover the sphere of reasonable, businesslike cooperation, redistribution of resources and improvement of the managerial or social structure. Rational conflicts are also encountered in the field of culture, when people are trying to free themselves from obsolete, unnecessary forms, customs and beliefs. As a rule, those participating in rational conflicts do not go to the personal level and do not form in their minds the image of the enemy. Respect for the opponent, recognition of his right to a certain amount of truth - these are the characteristic features of a rational conflict. Such conflicts are not sharp, protracted, since both sides strive, in principle, for the same goal - to improve relationships, norms, patterns of behavior, and a fair distribution of values. The parties come to an agreement, and as soon as the frustrating obstacle is removed, the conflict is resolved.

However, in the course of conflict interactions, clashes, the aggression of its participants is often transferred from the cause of the conflict to the individual. In this case, the initial cause of the conflict is simply forgotten and the participants act on the basis of personal hostility. Such a conflict is called emotional. Since the appearance of an emotional conflict, negative stereotypes appear in the minds of people participating in it.

The development of emotional conflict is unpredictable, and in the vast majority of cases they are uncontrollable. Most often, such a conflict stops after the appearance of new people or even new generations in the situation. But some conflicts (for example, national, religious) can transmit an emotional mood to other generations. In this case, the conflict continues for quite a long time.

1.2.Characteristics of conflicts.

Despite the numerous manifestations of conflict interactions in social life, they all have a number of common characteristics, the study of which makes it possible to classify the main parameters of conflicts, as well as to identify factors that affect their intensity. All conflicts are characterized by four main parameters: the causes of the conflict, the severity of the conflict, its duration and consequences. Considering these characteristics, it is possible to determine the similarities and differences in conflicts and the features of their course.

Causes of conflicts.

The definition of the concept of the nature of the conflict and the subsequent analysis of its causes is important in the study of conflict interactions, since the cause is the point around which the conflict situation unfolds. Early diagnostics of a conflict is primarily aimed at finding its real cause, which makes it possible to exercise social control over the behavior of social groups at the pre-conflict stage.

Consequences of social conflict.

Conflicts, on the one hand, destroy social structures, lead to significant unreasonable expenditure of resources, and on the other hand, they are the mechanism that contributes to the solution of many problems, unites groups and, ultimately, serves as one of the ways to achieve social justice. The ambivalence in people's assessment of the consequences of conflict has led to the fact that sociologists involved in the theory of conflicts have not come to a common point of view about whether conflicts are beneficial or harmful to society.

Thus, many believe that society and its individual elements develop as a result of evolutionary changes, i.e. in the course of continuous improvement and the emergence of more viable social structures based on the accumulation of experience, knowledge, cultural patterns and the development of production, and therefore suggest that social conflict can only be negative, destructive and destructive.

Another group of scientists recognizes the constructive, useful content of any conflict, since as a result of conflicts new qualitative certainties appear. According to the supporters of this point of view, any finite object of the social world from the moment of its inception carries its own negation, or its own death. Upon reaching a certain limit or measure, as a result of quantitative growth, the contradiction that carries negation comes into conflict with the essential characteristics of this object, in connection with which a new qualitative certainty is formed.

Constructive and destructive ways of conflict depend on the characteristics of its subject: size, rigidity, centralization, relationship with other problems, level of awareness. The conflict escalates if:

competing groups increase;

it is a conflict over principles, rights, or personalities;

conflict resolution sets a meaningful precedent;

conflict is perceived as win-lose;

the views and interests of the parties are not connected;

the conflict is poorly defined, non-specific, vague. 11 Social conflict: modern research. Ed. N.L. Polyakova // Abstract collection. - M, 1991, p. 70.

A particular consequence of the conflict may be the strengthening of group interaction. Since interests and points of view within the group change from time to time, new leaders, new policies, new intra-group norms are needed. As a result of the conflict, new leadership, new policies and new norms can be quickly introduced. Conflict may be the only way out of a tense situation.

Conflict resolution.

An external sign of conflict resolution may be the end of the incident. It is a completion, not a temporary cessation. This means that conflict interaction between the conflicting parties is terminated. Elimination, termination of the incident is a necessary but not sufficient condition for resolving the conflict. Often, having stopped active conflict interaction, people continue to experience a frustrating state, to look for its causes. In this case, the conflict flares up again.

The resolution of social conflict is possible only when the conflict situation changes. This change can take many forms. But the most effective change in the conflict situation, which allows to extinguish the conflict, is considered to be the elimination of the cause of the conflict. With a rational conflict, the elimination of the cause inevitably leads to its resolution, but for an emotional conflict, the most important moment in changing the conflict situation should be considered a change in the attitudes of rivals relative to each other.

It is also possible to resolve a social conflict by changing the requirements of one of the parties: the opponent makes concessions and changes the goals of his behavior in the conflict.

A social conflict can also be resolved as a result of the depletion of the resources of the parties or the intervention of a third force that creates an overwhelming preponderance of one of the parties, and, finally, as a result of the complete elimination of the rival. In all these cases, a change in the conflict situation will certainly occur.

Modern conflictology has formulated the conditions under which a successful resolution of social conflicts is possible. One of the important conditions is the timely and accurate analysis of its causes. And this involves the identification of objectively existing contradictions, interests, goals. An analysis carried out from this point of view makes it possible to outline the “business zone” of the conflict situation. Another, no less important condition is the mutual interest in overcoming contradictions on the basis of mutual recognition of the interests of each of the parties. To do this, the parties to the conflict must seek to free themselves from hostility and mistrust towards each other. To achieve such a state is possible on the basis of a goal that is meaningful to each group on a broader basis. The third, indispensable condition is the joint search for ways to overcome the conflict. Here it is possible to use a whole arsenal of means and methods: direct dialogue of the parties, negotiations with the participation of a third party, etc.

Conflictology has developed a number of recommendations, following which accelerates the process of conflict resolution: 1) during negotiations, priority should be given to discussion of substantive issues; 2) the parties must strive to relieve psychological and social tension; 3) the parties must demonstrate mutual respect for each other; 4) negotiators should strive to turn a significant and hidden part of the conflict situation into an open one, publicly and convincingly revealing each other's positions and deliberately creating an atmosphere of public equal exchange of views; 5) all negotiators should show a tendency to

2. Social conflicts in modern society.

In modern conditions, in essence, each sphere of public life gives rise to its own specific types of social conflicts. Therefore, we can talk about political, national-ethnic, economic, cultural and other types of conflicts.

Political conflict - it is a conflict over the distribution of power, dominance, influence, authority. This conflict can be covert or open. One of the brightest forms of its manifestation in modern Russia is the conflict between the executive and legislative authorities in the country, which lasted throughout the entire time after the collapse of the USSR. The objective causes of the conflict have not been eliminated, and it has entered a new stage of its development. From now on, it is being implemented in new forms of confrontation between the President and the Federal Assembly, as well as the executive and legislative authorities in the regions.

occupy a prominent place in modern life national-ethnic conflicts- conflicts based on the struggle for the rights and interests of ethnic and national groups. Most often, these are conflicts related to status or territorial claims. The problem of cultural self-determination of certain national communities also plays a significant role.

play an important role in modern life in Russia. socio-economic conflicts, that is, conflicts over the means of subsistence, the level of wages, the use of professional and intellectual potential, the level of prices for various benefits, over real access to these benefits and other resources.

Social conflicts in various spheres of public life can take the form of intra-institutional and organizational norms and procedures: discussions, requests, adoption of declarations, laws, etc. The most striking form of expression of the conflict are various kinds of mass actions. These mass actions are realized in the form of presentation of demands to the authorities by dissatisfied social groups, in the mobilization of public opinion in support of their demands or alternative programs, in direct actions of social protest. Mass protest is an active form of conflict behavior. It can be expressed in various forms: organized and spontaneous, direct or indirect, taking on the character of violence or a system of non-violent actions. Mass protests are organized by political organizations and so-called “pressure groups” that unite people for economic purposes, professional, religious and cultural interests. Forms of expressing mass protests can be such as: rallies, demonstrations, picketing, civil disobedience campaigns, strikes. Each of these forms is used for specific purposes, is an effective means of solving very specific problems. Therefore, when choosing a form of social protest, its organizers must be clearly aware of what specific goals are set for this action and what is the public support for certain demands.

Sociology as a science. Tutorial

X. SOCIAL CONFLICTS

1. The concept, causes and types of social conflicts. 2. Bulk actions. social movements.

Basic concepts Anomie, conflict society, antagonisms, crisis of the system, counteractions, violation of the system stabilization mechanism, consensus, neutralization of the opponent, bifurcation, compromise, latency, business zone, post-conflict syndrome, maximalism of the parties, frustration, public mood. The purpose of the information: to give students an idea of ​​the nature, dynamics, subjects and ways of resolving social conflicts in society.

Recommendations The first question. When studying the nature, essence and participants of social conflicts, find their definitions in the literature, and try to find out the motives and prerequisites for the ripening of social tension in society using specific examples of conflict systems existing in the world (societies, groups, social institutions). Carefully study the foundations of the theory of modern Western conflictology and try to carry out a comparative analysis of the most common conflict paradigms in sociology. When studying the patterns of functioning of social systems, focus on the concept of a crisis society and consider the processes of integration and disintegration, differentiation of interests, stratification, functional and dysfunctional systems, spontaneous and purposeful conflicts. Particular attention should be paid to the concepts of the conflict society of K. Marx, R. Dahrendorf, L. Koser and others. forces of modern formal and informal mass movements. It is useful to analyze the hierarchy of mass movements and the current state of mass consciousness on the basis of a study of the political life of Russian society.

The concept, causes and types of social conflicts Conflicts have always been an integral part of society. Conflict is a clash between people or large social groups, which acts as a ubiquitous phenomenon, i.e. Every society is subject to conflict. They can lead to the destruction not only of economic or political systems, but of society itself as a whole. Therefore, a special branch has been formed within sociology - conflictology, which faces a number of scientific and practical problems. Is it possible to have a society without conflicts? The question is about 1) the causes of conflicts; 2) about the role of conflicts in the life of society; 3) about the possibilities of regulating social conflicts. The term "conflict" comes from the Latin word conflictus - clash. The concept of "social conflict" is a complex phenomenon. This is a certain form of social interaction between people in the form of a collision of opposing goals, values, views, needs, interests. Conflict is the simultaneous deployment of action and counter-action. This is an extremely complex action of two or more parties united by opposition. The term "social conflict" was coined by the German sociologist Georg Simmel, who called it a "dispute". M. Weber called the conflict "struggle". The English sociologist Anthony Giddens defines conflict as "a real struggle between acting people or groups." The Americans T. Parsons and R. Merton considered conflict as a dysfunction of individual structures in the social system. L. Koser considers conflict to be the most important element of social interaction, which contributes to the strengthening or destruction of social ties. In general, in sociology conflict is defined as a form of interaction between different social communities. The nature of conflicts is due to the presence in society of objective and subjective contradictions that permeate the economy, politics and culture. Simultaneous aggravation of all contradictions creates a crisis of society, a violation of the system's stabilization mechanism. A manifestation of the crisis of society is the growth of social tension, the clash of classes, nations, the masses with the state. But objective contradictions should not be identified with conflict. Contradictions give rise to open and closed conflicts only when they are recognized by people as incompatible interests and needs. Social conflict is a way of interaction between individuals, communities, social institutions, due to their material and spiritual interests, certain social status, power. The dynamics of social systems is a process that is realized in various types of social interaction: competition, adaptation, assimilation, conflict. Note that the conflict here acts as a kind of connecting transitional form, say, to competition (competition), consensus. Consensus is one of the methods for making economic, socio-political and other decisions, which consists in developing an agreed position that does not cause fundamental objections from the parties. One way or another, the conflict has been and remains a constant companion of social life, corresponding to the nature of society and man as much as consensus. The legalization of conflictology in our country was prompted by the situation when the country was literally overwhelmed by conflicts, when we were not ready for the fact that "democracy is a conflict." A special role belongs to the sociological aspect of the study (conflict and society), political science (conflict and politics). But the socio-psychological aspect is becoming increasingly important in terms of studying the dynamics of the conflict. We single out two main concepts of social conflict. The "concept of a positive-functional conflict" (G. Simmel, L. Koser, R. Dahrendorf, K. Boulding, J. Galtung, and others) is sociological in its own right. It considers conflict as a problem of communication and interaction. Its social role is stabilization. But the stability of a society depends on the number of conflicting relations existing in it and the types of connections between them. The more different conflicts intersect, the more complex the group differentiation of society, the more difficult it is to divide all people into two opposing camps that do not have any common values ​​and norms. This means that the more conflicts that are independent of each other, the better for the unity of society. In this concept, "competition" is singled out as a key concept, and the interests of the parties are considered the motivating force of the conflict. His process is made up of a set of reactions to the outside world. All collisions are reactive processes. Consequently, the essence of the conflict lies in the stereotyped reactions of social actors. But conflict resolution is thought of as "manipulating" behavior without radically changing the social order. This is mainly the difference between Marxist conflictology (the theory of class struggle and social revolution) and the principle of "scarsity" (i.e., limited benefits, scarcity), which is characteristic of Western interpretations of the causes of conflict. The positive-functional concept considers conflict as "a struggle for values ​​and claims for a certain social status, power. and insufficient for all material and spiritual benefits, a struggle in which the goals of the parties to the conflict are to neutralize, damage or destroy the "rival". in the concept of conflict. "social disease" T. Parsons was the first to speak loudly about the conflict as a pathology, he defined the following foundations of stability: satisfaction of needs, social control, the coincidence of social motivations with social attitudes. E. Mayo put forward the idea of ​​"peace in industry", describing the conflict as a "dangerous social disease" that is the antithesis of cooperation and balance. Supporters of this concept (among them primarily the Swedish ecologist Hans Brodal and the German sociologist Friedrich Glasl) proceed from the fact that two opposite tendencies manifest themselves in the historical process. The first is emancipation, the desire to free oneself (man - woman, younger and older generation, employees - entrepreneurs, developed and developing countries, East - West). The disease begins when emancipation leads to selfishness, and this is the negative side of individualism. The second is an increasing mutual dependence, containing a tendency towards collectivism. The disease begins when interdependence turns into collectivism, i.e. when a certain system wins, allowing you to neglect a person as an individual. The disease has a wide spectrum, capturing the individual, social organisms, groups, organizations, communities, nations, entire peoples. What are the aspects of the sociological diagnosis of the conflict? First of all, these are the origins of the conflict (not the causes, but what it starts with); then the biography of the conflict (its history, roots, background against which it progresses, crises, turning points); parties (subjects) of the conflict, depending on which the level of social complexity of any conflict is determined; position and relations of the parties, formal and informal dependencies, roles, personal relationships; initial attitude towards the conflict (hopes and expectations of the parties). X. Brodal and F. Glasl distinguish three main phases of the conflict. 1. From hope to fear (discussions, withdrawal, arguments taken to extremes, loss of communication, initiation of action). 2. From fear to loss of appearance (formation of false images of the enemy, strengthening of leadership and authoritarianism, pushing for self-disclosure, intimidation and panic). 3. Loss of will - the path to violence (limited destruction and violence, destruction of the nerve (management) center, finally, total destruction, including self-destruction). The escalation of the conflict is a kind of deadly process, but it can be overcome quickly, disappear altogether, if the main contradiction of the parties is eliminated. In any conflict, there is a struggle between the tendencies of egoism and "collectivism". Finding a balance between them means finding a way to resolve the conflict and grow in your human essence (it's always an effort!). ; Extremeness (its researchers - M. Weber, E. Durkheim, L. Sorokin, N. Kondratiev, I. Prigozhin, N. Moiseev, etc.) occurs when the very existence of the social system is threatened within the framework of this quality and is explained by the action of extreme factors. An extreme situation is associated with the emergence of a "bifurcation state" (lat. bifurcus - bifurcation), that is, a state of dynamic chaos and the emergence of opportunities for the innovative development of the system. Under these conditions, the parameters change, and boundary (marginal) states arise. As a result, the effect of "detection of the entity" occurs. Its function is to stabilize the system in response to extreme forces. When leaving the dynamic chaos, it is necessary to have a leader (at the group level) or a dominant motivation (at the individual level), which carry out the target function of the survival of the social system. Sociologists see two options for getting out of an extreme situation. The first is a catastrophe associated with the collapse of the core of the system and the destruction of subsystems. The second is adaptation (compromise, consensus), the object of which is group contradictions and interests. To analyze the dynamics of the social system, the concept of "extreme situation cycle" is introduced. The cycle is associated with a minimum of time for making decisions, with a maximum of information about events, with a maximum of efficiency (mobilization of forces, abilities, resources), with a minimum of errors.

General definition of conflict and how to interpret it

Conflict is a sharp way to resolve contradictions that arise in communication between people, which consists in countering the subjects of the conflict and is usually accompanied by negative emotions.

The concept of "conflict" is also ambiguously interpreted by modern Russian researchers. Let's look at some of his formulations.

The very word "conflict" comes from Latin and means a clash of parties, opinions, forces. Over time, researchers have sought to supplement the original characterization. For example:

L. Koser: conflict is one of the types of social interaction, "the struggle for values ​​and claims to status, power and resources, during which opponents neutralize, damage or eliminate their rivals."

A. Zdravomyslov: the most important side of the interaction of people in society, ... the form of relations between potential or actual subjects of social action, the motivation of which is due to opposing values ​​and norms, interests and needs.

D. Myers: conflict is a perceived incompatibility of actions or goals.

The conflict is:

"an intractable contradiction associated with confrontation and acute emotional experiences";

"a struggle for values ​​and claims, for a certain status, power, resources, where the goals are to neutralize, damage or destroy an opponent." (It should be noted that the given interpretation of the conflict almost literally repeats the definition given by L. Kozer);

“the form of relations between subjects regarding the resolution of acute contradictions that arise in the process of their interaction”;

“a conscious clash of social communities, it is a manifestation of social contradiction, a stage in its development and a means of resolution (full or partial);

"a form of relationship between potential and actual subjects of social action, the motivation of which is due to opposing values ​​and norms, interests and needs"

"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";

"an extreme case of exacerbation of social contradictions, expressed in various forms of struggle between individuals and various social communities, aimed at achieving economic, social, political, spiritual interests and goals, neutralizing or eliminating a real or imaginary rival and not allowing him to achieve the realization of his interests"

“an open struggle of social subjects, prompted by mismatched (different or opposing) interests because of some benefits”;

“based on real and imaginary contradictions, the interaction of parties pursuing incompatible, mutually exclusive goals, whose actions are directly directed against each other and exclude mutual benefit”;

“the manifestation of objective and subjective contradictions, expressed in the confrontation of the parties”;

"a way of interaction between people in which the action of one side encounters the opposition of the other, which makes it impossible to realize its goals."

The analysis of the above definitions allows us to identify the main signs of social conflict:

Collision of two or more subjects of social interaction;

The form of relations between the subjects of social action regarding the resolution of acute contradictions;

The limiting case of exacerbation of social contradictions, expressed in the variety of forms of struggle between subjects;

Different in intensity types of clashes between conflicting groups;

Open struggle of social actors;

Conscious clash of social communities;

A way of interaction in which the action of one side encounters the reaction of the other;

Struggle between subjects for resources;

The interaction of parties pursuing incompatible goals, whose actions are directed against each other;

A clash of subjects based on real or imaginary contradictions.

The conflict is based on subjective-objective contradictions. But not every contradiction develops into a conflict. The concept of "contradiction" is broader in content than the concept of "conflict". Social contradictions are the main determinants of social development. They permeate all spheres of social relations and for the most part do not escalate into conflict. In order for objectively existing (periodically occurring) contradictions to transform into a social conflict, the subjects (subject) of interaction need to realize that this contradiction is an obstacle to achieving their vital goals and interests. Therefore, conflict contradictions are subjective-objective in nature.

Objective contradictions are those that really exist in society, regardless of the will and desire of the subjects. For example, the contradictions between labor and capital, between the rulers and the ruled, the contradictions between fathers and children, etc.

In addition to objectively existing contradictions, imaginary contradictions may arise in the imagination of the subject (subjects), when there are no objective reasons for the conflict, but the subject recognizes (perceives) the situation as a conflict. This is a situation of an imaginary conflict, and in this case we can talk about subjective-subjective contradictions.

Contradictions can exist for a long time and not develop into a conflict. Therefore, it must be borne in mind that the conflict is based only on those contradictions caused by incompatible interests, needs and values. Such contradictions, as a rule, are transformed into an open struggle of the parties, into a real confrontation.

The causes of collisions can be a variety of problems in our lives. For example, conflicts over material resources, values ​​and the most important life attitudes, powers of authority (problems of dominance), status and role differences in the social structure, personal (including emotional and psychological) differences, etc. Thus, conflicts cover all spheres of human life, the totality of social relations, social interaction. The conflict is essentially one of the types of social interaction, the subjects and participants of which are individual individuals, large or small social groups and organizations. However, conflict interaction involves the confrontation of the parties, that is, actions directed against each other.

The confrontation can be more or less intense and more or less violent. "Intensity, - according to R. Dahrendorf, - means the energy invested by the participants, and at the same time the social importance of individual conflicts." The form of clashes - violent or non-violent - depends on many factors, including whether there are real conditions and opportunities (mechanisms) for non-violent conflict resolution and what goals the subjects of confrontation pursue.

So, a social conflict is an open confrontation, a clash of two or more subjects (sides) of social interaction, the causes of which are incompatible needs, interests and values.

The main stages of the conflict

There are four main stages of conflict.

- occurrence conflict situation. At this stage, a contradiction arises, which may not yet be recognized by the participants and witnesses. If the conflict is deliberate, then the contradiction, which was in a latent form, is aggravated at the initiative of one of the parties.

- conflict awareness. The conflicting parties begin to understand those who are in conflict, rivals in a relationship with the appropriate emotional coloring. An assessment of the situation as a conflict is formed - the following are determined: the cause, reason, composition of the participants, the options for action are sorted out and the optimal one is determined, the decision is made into action. The solution can be of two types: to prevent the development of the conflict in every possible way, to seek a compromise, to avoid conflict, or, conversely, to intensify the conflict, give it a more acute form and achieve victory.

- external manifestation of the conflict, its apogee. There is an open clash of opposing sides, each of which acts according to its intentions and decisions. Together, attempts are made to block the actions of the opponent. The parties may agree to a compromise, and then the clash will take the form of negotiations (directly or through a third party), and the most effective result of such negotiations is mutual concessions.

- solutions, conflict resolution. At this stage of the conflict, the participants evaluate the consequences of their actions, compare the achieved result with the previously set goal. Depending on the conclusions, the conflict stops (fades out) or develops further; in the latter case, he goes through the second, third and fourth stages again, but on a new level.

Of course, the allocation of these stages is very conditional, given the variety of situations in which a conflict arises and the forms of its course. In some cases, they are clearly manifested, in others they are combined, merge with each other, which is particularly characteristic of fleeting conflicts. Sometimes the cause of the conflict is not recognized or the cause of the conflict is poorly differentiated, the decision on the optimal behavior for resolving the conflict can be made spontaneously.

The exit of one of the parties to the conflict at the last stage of its development with the intention to temporarily stop the confrontation is characterized by feigned indifference, recognition of defeat, external manifestations of consent, behind which the true attitude towards the opponent is masked. On occasion, such a conflict flares up with renewed vigor.

Correct diagnosis of the above-mentioned stages of the conflict and factors that exacerbate or mitigate it, allows the interested party to decide on the choice of the most appropriate way to resolve the conflict, prevent possible destructive consequences, which significantly reduces the negative consequences of confrontation.

Forms of participation

Arbitrator - The most authoritarian role, as he has the greatest ability to determine options for solving the problem. Examines the issue, listens to both sides and delivers a verdict that is not contested. An example is the resolution of conflicts by the elders of the clans, as well as the decision of the jury

Arbiter - Also has significant powers. He studies the conflict, discusses it with the participants, and then makes the final decision, which is binding. However, the parties may not agree with the decision and appeal it to higher authorities.

Intermediary (mediator) - A more neutral role. Possessing special knowledge, provides a constructive discussion of the problem. The final decision rests with the opponents

Assistant (moderator) - Participates in the regulation of the conflict in order to improve the process of discussing the problem, organizing meetings and negotiations, without interfering in the controversy over the content of the problem and making the final decision

Observer - By its presence in the conflict zone, it deters the parties from violating previously reached agreements or from mutual aggression. The presence of an observer creates conditions for resolving disputed issues through negotiations.

Among them, it is still possible to single out three main forms of participation of a third party in the settlement and resolution of the conflict.

The court - it is distinguished by a clearly developed, as a rule, legislatively fixed procedure for the trial, as well as the obligation for the participants in the conflict to comply with decisions taken by a third party.

Arbitration - characterized by the absence of strict rules governing the process of discussing the problem; the right to choose a third party by the parties to the conflict themselves; the binding nature of decisions made by a third party, which, however, can be appealed to higher authorities.

Mediation is a special form of participation of a third party in the settlement and resolution of a conflict in order to facilitate the negotiation process between the parties to the conflict.

Functions of the mediator:

Firstly, the mediator performs an analytical function - it encourages the parties to carefully analyze the conflict situation. Acting in this role, he tries to get the parties to express the available information and all available points of view on the subject of the dispute, to determine the most significant points in this dispute for each party, the degree of detail of the information so that it is useful for the parties to make a decision.

Secondly, the mediator must be an active listener. He should learn both the content and the emotional component of the arguing speech, and then demonstrate to the arguing parties that he really heard them.

Thirdly, the mediator organizes the negotiation process. In this role, he helps the parties to agree on the procedure for negotiating, and further supports both the implementation of the procedural agreements reached and the correct relations between the parties in the negotiation process.

Fourth, the mediator acts as a generator of ideas. In this role, he tries to help the disputants find solutions other than those they have considered so far.

It should be noted that mediation is a method of resolving disputes, focused on the realization of the interests of the parties. Mediation is the settlement of a conflict not on the basis of law, but within the framework of law. The mediated agreement is based on mutually satisfactory agreements between the parties to the dispute, and not on the judgment made by the mediator. The mediator does not have the authority to make a decision on the dispute; moreover, he should not offer his own options for a possible resolution of the conflict situation. In the mediation procedure, the legal positions of the parties do not play a decisive role. The most significant is the identification and satisfaction of the true needs of the participants in the conflict. What does this mean? The settlement of a dispute through the mediation procedure implies the voluntary participation of the parties in it, as well as the voluntariness of making any decisions on the basis of the equality of the parties. In mediation, the law does not apply. The participants in the dispute remain within the legal field, relying on the law, but at the same time they consider the current problem in all its diversity (including the emotional component).

The resolution of the dispute on the basis of law with a verdict in favor of one of the parties, as a rule, does not resolve the conflict between the participants. The contradictions between the parties to the dispute will not disappear only on the basis of the decision made by the judge, in addition, the court decision is not always executed, and sometimes the party does not have a real opportunity to execute it due to many different circumstances. After all, the figure of 45%, which reflects the level of execution of court decisions throughout the country, is quite eloquent. Moreover, even if the parties do not dispute the specific decision of the judge, an essentially unresolved conflict can affect both the execution of the decision and the subsequent interaction of the parties. As a result, other conflicts or disputes may arise between them, which may again lead them to court. Mediation allows, when resolving a dispute, including a legal one, to simultaneously do everything possible to resolve the conflict, taking into account all aspects that are important for the parties. The best results in resolving disputes through mediation will be, first of all, in cases where the parties to the dispute have an interest in a peaceful, civilized settlement of the conflict

18. Mediation techniques: questions, active listening, verbalization of emotions

Questioning Techniques

Questioning techniques play an important role here. They play a big role in revealing the semantic field of information received from a partner. The algorithm of these techniques includes the formulation of open, closed and alternative questions.

Techniques for setting open questions involve a detailed response from a business partner and obtaining additional information from him. The formulation of these questions is recommended to begin with the words: “What?”, “How?”, “In what way?”, “Why?”, “Under what conditions?” (for example, “Under what conditions do you want to achieve a change in the current situation?”).

The question "Why?" in business communication can mobilize defensive reactions of a partner, cause his irritation. Therefore, it is recommended to resort to its setting as little as possible.

The open ones also include:

Information questions asked in order to obtain information about any objects included in the business situation;

Introductory questions that involve identifying the partner's opinion on a specific issue;

Mirror questions that repeat those words of the partner that emphasize the semantic connotation of the statement.

All of these types of questions expand the information framework of business communication and create favorable opportunities for maintaining a continuous dialogue with a partner.

When applying the techniques of setting open questions, it is necessary to use such formulations that are acceptable to the partner and do not cause him mental rejection. Therefore, questions containing hidden accusations, reproaches, conjectures should be excluded from business communication.

Closed-ended questioning techniques require an unambiguous response from the business partner. Essentially, closed-ended questions are associated with unambiguous yes or no answers. In addition, they may also include such short answers that report the date or name of an event, the quantitative parameters of an object included in the business situation. But since closed questions do not contribute to business communication, it is desirable to limit their use.

Psychologists consider such questions and proposals to be very effective, forcing negotiating partners to think:

Try to look at the issue from the other side.

Let's assume it is, but let's weigh all the pros and cons.

In your opinion, how realistic is the fulfillment of your requirements by a partner?

What do you think your partner can offer in this situation?

Why did your partner react so sharply to your words?

Try using the brainstorming method.

Try to adjust your solution to the wishes of the other party.

Active listening techniques

Active listening techniques also help to achieve mutual understanding with a partner in business communication. The main components of these techniques are three stages of rational verbalization of the partner's statements: A, B, C (the development of these stages and their practical application was first carried out by Carl Rogers, the founder of the humanistic direction in psychology.

Ego-state model (Ego-state model).

Parent ego state manifests itself in imitation of the actions, thoughts and feelings of one of the parents or other people perceived as parents. The Controlling (Critical) Parent indicates what needs to be done and what is unnecessary. The Positive Controlling Parent is genuinely interested in protecting and maintaining the health of the Child. The Negative Controlling Parent ignores the other person. The Nurturing (Caring) Parent protects and cares for his Child. The Positive Nurturing Parent cares and helps, respecting the person being helped. The Negative Nurturing Parent provides help from a position of superiority.

Ego-state of the Child- a return to the behavior, thinking and feelings of childhood. The ego state of the Adapted Child is to enact behaviors that meet the expectations of the parents. The ego state of the Free Child is rebellion, behavior contrary to parental requirements. The latter state can be either beneficial and classified as positive or negative. An adult can sometimes fall into these states.

Adult ego state It manifests itself when a person’s behavior, thoughts and feelings are built according to the “here and now” principle, which involves responding to what is happening around using the full potential of the individual. The adult is usually not subdivided into its component parts.

2. When one person offers some form of communication to another and the other responds, transactions occur. Transaction is the basic concept of transactional analysis, a unit of the communicative process, consisting of a communicative stimulus and a communicative reaction (for example, a question-answer). The beginning of communication is called a stimulus, the response is a reaction. Thus, a transaction can be defined as a transactional stimulus plus a transactional response. Berne considered transaction "the basic unit of social interaction". Communication between people always takes the form of such chains of transactions.

3. There are four types of transactions:

· parallel(for example, one addresses the other as a Parent to a Child, and the other answers as a Child to a Parent);

· intersecting(for example, one addresses the other as Adult to Adult, and the other responds as Parent to Child);

· hidden(two messages are simultaneously transmitted: one of them is open (for example, Adult and Adult), or a social level message, the other is hidden, or a psychological level message (for example, Child and Parent));

· corner(on a social level, the stimulus goes from Adult to Adult, but the hidden message comes from Adult to Child with the hope of the Child's reaction).

4. There are three rules of communication:

First, as long as transactions remain parallel, nothing in the communication process interrupts the alternation of stimuli and responses;

second: in case of an intersecting transaction, communication breaks down; in order to restore it, one or both people need to change their ego-states.

Third, the behavioral outcome of a covert transaction is determined on a psychological, not a social, level.

5. The unit of transaction is a stroke, which can be:

Verbal (verbal) or non-verbal (waving hand, nodding head, shaking hands, patting each other);

positive (giving pleasant feelings) or negative (perceived painfully);

conditional (related to our activities) or unconditional (related to what we are).

6. There are six different ways to spend time:

withdrawal - lack of interaction with other members of the group, which does not exclude the physical presence in the group;

Ritual - a common form of social interaction that proceeds according to a pre-planned program (greetings, religious strokes, etc.);

pastime - light and superficial communication, flowing along a familiar path, but its content is not so rigidly programmed compared to the ritual (most often what happened yesterday is discussed, and not what is happening "here and now");

activity - the direction of people's energy to achieve a specific result in accordance with the existing rules;

games - playing the strategies of a child that are no longer acceptable to an adult (games are always ignored on a psychological level, and on a social level, players perceive the game as an exchange of intense strokes);

Intimacy differs from play in that the social and psychological levels coincide with each other (in addition, in intimacy the expressed feelings are aimed at completing the situation).

7. In early childhood, each of us writes our life script, later we only add details to our script, by the age of seven it is mostly written, and in adolescence we can revise it. Scenario decisions are due to the following reasons:

· they represent the child's best strategy for survival in a hostile, as it seems to him, world;

· they are accepted in accordance with the child's emotions and his way of testing reality.

· scenario of the winner (the one who achieves his goal easily and freely);

The scenario of the loser (the one who does not achieve the goal or achieves it without the proper degree of accompanying comfort);

non-winner scenario (the one who is the “golden mean”, day by day he patiently carries his burden, never takes risks, does not become a boss, he is not fired from his job, calmly works to the end and quietly retires).

9. The most important thing is to understand that any scenario can be changed. By becoming aware of his script, a person can identify areas where he has made losing decisions and remake them into winning ones.

10. There are six basic patterns in the scripting process. Each of these patterns has its own theme, describing the particular way in which a person lives their scenario:

· The “Not yet” scenario is based on the idea that something good will not happen until something less good is over (“I can’t be happy until I finish the job”);

· the “After” scenario is the reverse side of the process in the “Not yet” scenario (“I can be happy today, but tomorrow I will have to pay for it”);

• scenario "Never" ("I never get the most cherished");

Script "Always" ("Why does this always happen to me?");

Script “Almost” (“This time I almost reached my goal”).

open-ended script (for a person with an open script, time after this point seems empty, as if part of the theatrical script had been lost).

11. The philosophy of transactional analysis is based on premises:

All people are OK;

Every person has the ability to think;

All people determine their own destiny;

their decisions are subject to change.

12. The two main practical principles of transactional analysis are: the contract method and open communication.

A contract is a clearly expressed two-way commitment to a strictly defined plan of action. Since "all people are OK", the therapist and the client are equal before each other, they bear the same responsibility for the changes that the client wants to have. Since every person is capable of thinking for himself and is ultimately responsible for his life, it is not the therapist but the client who decides what he wants to change in his life. The role of the therapist is to point out those aspects that contribute to the achievement of the goal. Both parties need to be clear about the nature of the desired change, as well as the specific contribution of each party to its implementation. A clear statement of the purpose of the contract has another advantage - both parties know when their joint work will end.

Open communication is based on the fact that both the client and the therapist have complete information about what is happening in their joint work. The therapist and client agree on the goals and objectives of the contract. How do they represent the end goal of the change process? How do they find out about the end of a collaboration? Eric Berne believed that the ideal lies in autonomy, which is "characterized by the release or restoration of three human qualities: awareness, spontaneity and intimacy":

awareness - the ability to see, hear, feel, taste and smell things as sensory impressions in the same way as a newly born baby does;

· spontaneity - the ability to choose from all the possible variety and range of feelings, thoughts and behavior;

Intimacy is the open expression of feelings and desires between me and another person.

Despite the fact that E. Berne did not write about it directly anywhere, by autonomy he understood the same thing as freedom from the script. An autonomous personality is not in a state of passivity; it consistently solves the problems that life presents to it.

The structure of personality in transactional analysis is characterized by the presence of three ego states: Parent, Child, and Adult. Each ego state represents a particular pattern of thinking, feeling, and behaving. The selection of ego states is based on three axiomatic principles:

1. Every adult was once a child. This child in each person is represented by the Child ego-state;

2. Every person with a normally developed brain is potentially capable of an adequate assessment of reality. The ability to systematize information coming from outside and make reasonable decisions belongs to the Adult ego state;

3. each individual had or has parents or persons who have replaced them. R

Stages.

1. Latent, characterized by social tension, marked by the appearance of a feeling of dissatisfaction with the existing state of affairs, symptoms of anxiety. This stage covers both individual social strata and groups, and power structures. Representatives of the ruling elites have doubts and uncertainty about the correctness of the chosen course.

2. Institutionalization: the subject of the conflict begins to be realized by the participants. At this stage, there is a gradual consolidation of opponents, their mobilization, and opinions become a real force. Subjects become aware of their own interests and the aspirations of the enemy.

3. The incident is the central and decisive link in the conflict. It personifies the onset of an open struggle for the possession of an object (value, good).

4. The phase of open confrontation - the subjects - movements, associations, political parties become a true driving force, the role of political leaders is more noticeable, exerting a directing influence on political processes. In turn, the organized opposition, starting open actions, encourages the ruling elite to enter into various kinds of contacts and conduct counter operations.

5. The stage of the end of the conflict, subject to the described development of events, nevertheless by no means always acquires the character of an armed struggle. A political conflict can be resolved by the resignation of the government or the dissolution of parliament, the abolition of an unpopular decision, the granting of the required status to one or another social or ethnic group, etc. Armed forms are characteristic only of the deepest and most large-scale political conflicts such as revolution, uprising, civil war, etc. .

Functions of conflictology and the place of conflictology science in the general system of fundamental and applied sciences

Conflictology is the science of the processes of origin, emergence, development and completion of conflicts of any kind.

Functions of conflictology:

1. Cognitive- a certain way of knowing (studying) the nature of social conflict in order to prevent and resolve it.

2. Diagnostic- analysis (monitoring) of social reality in order to identify potential conflicts and conflict situations in order to resolve them.

3. predictive- development of scientifically based forecasts about the trends (prospects) for the development of social contradictions and the prevention of possible negative phenomena.

4. Organizational and technological- creation of technologies and organizational structures for the prevention and resolution of conflict situations.

5. managerial- the use of conflict studies for the development and adoption of managerial decisions.

6. instrumental- improvement of existing and development of new methods for studying social conflicts.

7. pragmatic (applied) - the use of theoretical and applied methods of conflictology to resolve the contradictions that arise in society.

Modern conflictology does not meet the requirements for scientific theories. She is:

Divided into many unrelated private conflictologies;

It does not have its own laws, problems and methods for solving them;

Closed on the procedures for negotiation and mediation.

Unified Theory of Conflict (ETK). With the help of ETC, a working model of the conflict is built, structural, dynamic, game-theoretic characteristics of the emergence, development and resolution of the analyzed conflict are identified and evaluated.

Conflictology is rooted in philosophy and actively interacts with other disciplines.

To date, the largest share of research in line with conflictology belongs to sociology and psychology. Although the two sciences are interpenetrating, there are differences between sociological and psychological approaches to conflict. If sociology is focused primarily on the consideration of conflicts in society, in the system of social relations, then psychology studies intrapersonal and interpersonal contradictions, and also searches for means to help resolve conflicts.

The conflict is a specific subject of study for more than a dozen disciplines, in addition to sociology and psychology: philosophy, pedagogy, sociobiology, political sciences, jurisprudence, military and historical sciences, mathematics, art history.

Knowledge of conflictology is necessary today for every person, especially those who actively interact with other people by the nature of their activities - teachers and psychologists, doctors, lawyers, political scientists, etc. In order to assess the conflict potential of decisions made, prevent the occurrence and destructive development of conflicts, each person should have the necessary knowledge about the conflict and the ability to act in such situations.

As a phenomenon that constantly accompanies human life and often threatens it, conflict requires attention and understanding.

The question of the nature of the conflict causes a lot of controversy. Here are the opinions of several modern Russian scientists.
A. G. Zdravomyslov. "This is a form of relationship between potential or actual subjects of social action, the motivation of which is due to opposing values ​​and norms, interests and needs."
E. M. Babosov. “A social conflict is the ultimate case of social contradictions, expressed in various forms of struggle between individuals and various social communities, aimed at achieving economic, social, political, spiritual interests and goals, neutralizing or eliminating an imaginary rival and not allowing him to achieve the realization of his interests.”
Yu. G. Zaprudsky. "Social conflict is a clear or hidden state of confrontation between objectively divergent interests, goals and trends in the development of social subjects ... a special form of historical movement towards a new social unity."
What unites these opinions?
As a rule, one side has some tangible and intangible (primarily power, prestige, authority, information, etc.) values, while the other side is either completely devoid of them or does not have enough. At the same time, it is not excluded that the predominance may be imaginary, existing only in the imagination of one of the parties. But if one of the partners feels disadvantaged in the possession of something of the above, then a conflict state arises.
It can be said that social conflict is a special interaction of individuals, groups and associations in the clash of their incompatible views, positions and interests; confrontation of social groups over the diverse resources of life support.
Two points of view are expressed in the literature: one is about the dangers of social conflict, the other is about its benefits. In essence, we are talking about the positive and negative functions of conflicts. Social conflicts can lead to both disintegrative and integrative consequences. The first of these consequences increases bitterness, destroys normal partnerships, distracts people from solving pressing problems. The latter help to solve problems, find a way out of the current situation, strengthen the cohesion of people, allow them to more clearly understand their interests. It is almost impossible to avoid conflict situations, but it is quite possible to ensure that they are resolved in a civilized manner.
There are many different social conflicts in society. They differ in their scale, type, composition of participants, causes, goals and consequences. The problem of typology arises in all sciences that take place with a multitude of heterogeneous objects. The most simple and easily explainable typology is based on the identification of spheres of manifestation of the conflict. According to this criterion, economic, political, interethnic, domestic, cultural and social (in the narrow sense) conflicts are distinguished. Let us explain that the latter include conflicts arising from conflicts of interests in the sphere of labor, health care, social security, education; for all their independence, they are closely related to such types of conflicts as economic and political.
Changes in social relations in modern Russia are accompanied by an expansion of the sphere of manifestation of conflicts, since they involve not only large social groups, but also territories, both nationally homogeneous and inhabited by various ethnic groups. In turn, interethnic conflicts (you will learn about them later) give rise to territorial, confessional, migration and other problems. Most modern researchers believe that in the social relations of modern Russian society there are two types of hidden conflicts that have not yet been clearly manifested. The first is the conflict between hired workers and the owners of the means of production. This is largely due to the fact that after half a century of social security and all the rights in the field of social policy and labor relations that they were endowed in Soviet society, it is difficult for workers to understand and accept their new status as a wage worker forced to work in market conditions. The other is the conflict between the poor majority of the country and the wealthy minority, accompanying the accelerated process of social stratification.
Many conditions influence the development of social conflict. These include the intentions of the parties to the conflict (to reach a compromise or completely eliminate the opponent); attitude to the means of physical (including armed) violence; the level of trust between the parties (as far as they are ready to follow certain rules of interaction); the adequacy of assessments by the conflicting parties of the true state of affairs.
All social conflicts go through three stages: pre-conflict, directly conflict and post-conflict.
Let's consider a specific example. At one enterprise, because of the real threat of bankruptcy, it was necessary to reduce the staff by a quarter. This prospect worried almost everyone: employees were afraid of layoffs, and management had to decide who to fire. When it was no longer possible to postpone the decision, the administration announced a list of those who were to be fired in the first place. On the part of the candidates for dismissal, legitimate demands to explain why they were being fired followed, applications began to be received by the commission on labor disputes, and some decided to go to court. The settlement of the conflict took several months, the company continued to work with a smaller number of employees. The pre-conflict stage is the period during which contradictions accumulate (in this case, caused by the need to reduce the staff). The direct conflict stage is a set of certain actions. It is characterized by a clash of opposing sides (administration - candidates for dismissal).
The most open form of expression of social conflicts can be various kinds of mass actions: presentation of demands to the authorities by discontented social groups; use of public opinion in support of their demands or alternative programs; direct social protests.
Protest forms can be rallies, demonstrations, picketing, civil disobedience campaigns, strikes, hunger strikes, etc. Organizers of social protest actions must be clearly aware of what specific tasks can be solved with the help of a particular action and what kind of public support they can rely on. -read. Thus, a slogan that is sufficient to organize a picket can hardly be used to organize a campaign of civil disobedience. (What historical examples of such actions do you know?)
To successfully resolve a social conflict, it is necessary to determine its true causes in a timely manner. The opposing sides should be interested in a joint search for ways to eliminate the causes that gave rise to their rivalry. At the post-conflict stage, measures are taken to finally eliminate contradictions (in the example under consideration, the dismissal of employees, if possible, the removal of socio-psychological tension in the relationship between the administration and the remaining employees, the search for optimal ways to avoid such a situation in the future).
Conflict resolution can be partial or complete. Complete resolution means the end of the conflict, a radical change in the entire conflict situation. At the same time, a kind of psychological restructuring takes place: the “image of the enemy” is transformed into the “image of a partner”, the attitude to fight is replaced by the attitude to cooperation. The main disadvantage of a partial resolution of the conflict is that only its external form changes, but the reasons that gave rise to the confrontation remain.
Let's look at some of the most common methods of conflict resolution.

The method of avoiding conflict means leaving or threatening to leave, it consists in avoiding meetings with the enemy. But the avoidance of conflict does not mean its elimination, because its cause remains. The negotiation method assumes that the parties exchange views. This will help reduce the severity of the conflict, understand the arguments of the opponent, objectively assess both the true balance of power and the very possibility of reconciliation. Negotiations allow you to consider alternative situations, achieve mutual understanding, reach agreement, consensus, open the way to cooperation. The method of using mediation is expressed as follows: the warring parties resort to the service of intermediaries (public organizations, individuals, etc.). What conditions are necessary for successful conflict resolution? First of all, it is necessary to determine its causes in a timely and accurate manner; identify objectively existing contradictions, interests, goals. The parties to the conflict must free themselves from distrust of each other and thereby become participants in the negotiations in order to publicly and convincingly defend their positions and consciously create an atmosphere of public exchange of views. Without such a mutual interest of the parties in overcoming contradictions, mutual recognition of the interests of each of them, a joint search for ways to overcome the conflict is practically impossible. All participants in the negotiations should show a tendency towards consensus, i.e., to agree.