Methodology “Determining the level of personality conflict. Methods for diagnosing interpersonal conflicts

Using the technique of K.N. Thomas (1973), an American social psychologist, defines typical ways of responding to conflict situations. It is possible to identify how inclined a teacher is to competition and cooperation in a team, strives for compromise, avoids conflicts, or, conversely, tries to aggravate them, and also evaluates the adaptation of each team member to joint teaching activities.

1. a) Sometimes I give the opportunity to others to take responsibility for resolving a controversial issue.

6) Rather than discussing what we disagree on, I try to draw attention to what we agree with.

2. a) I am trying to find a compromise solution.

b) I try to settle it taking into account all the interests of the other person and my own.

3. a) I usually persistently strive to achieve my goal.

b) Sometimes I sacrifice mine own interests for the sake of the interests of another person.

4. a) I try to find a compromise solution.

b) I try not to hurt the other person's feelings.

5. a) When resolving a controversial situation, I always try to find support from someone else.

b) I try to do everything to avoid useless tension.

6. a) I try to avoid tension for myself.

6) I try to achieve my goal.

7. a) I try to postpone the resolution of a controversial issue in order to finally resolve it over time.

b) I consider it possible to give in to something in order to achieve something else.

8. a) I usually persistently strive to achieve my goal.

6) I first try to determine what all the interests involved are and controversial issues.

9. a) I think that you should not always worry about any disagreements that have arisen.

6) I make efforts to achieve my goal.

10. a) I firmly achieve my goal.

b) I'm trying to find a compromise solution.

11. a) First of all, I try to clearly define what all the interests involved and controversial issues are.

b) I try to reassure the other and mainly preserve our relationship.

12. a) I often avoid taking positions that might cause controversy.

6) I give the other person the opportunity to remain unconvinced in some way if he also agrees.

13. a) I propose a middle position.

b) I insist that everything be done my way.

14. a) I tell the other my point of view and ask about his views.

b) I am trying to show the other the logic and advantage of my views.

b) I try to do everything necessary to avoid tension.

16. a) I try not to hurt the feelings of another.

b) I usually try to convince others of the advantages of my position.

17. a) I usually persistently strive to achieve my goal.

b) I try to do everything to avoid useless tension.

18. a) If it makes the other strong, I will give him the opportunity to insist on his own.

b) I will give the other the opportunity to remain unconvinced if he meets me halfway.

19. a) First of all, I try to determine what all the difficulties and controversial issues are.

b) I try to put aside controversial issues in order to finally resolve them over time.

20. a) I am trying to immediately overcome our differences.

6) I'm trying to find best combination benefits and losses for both of us.

21. a) When negotiating, I try to be attentive to the other.

b) I always tend to discuss the problem directly.

22. a) I try to find a position that is in the middle between mine and the other person.

6) I defend my position,

23. As a rule, I am concerned with satisfying the desires of each of us.

b) Sometimes I let others take responsibility for resolving a controversial issue.

24. a) If the position of another seems very important to him, I try to meet him halfway.

6) I try to convince the other person to compromise.

25. a) I am trying to convince another that I am right.

6) When negotiating, I try to be attentive to the arguments of the other.

26. a) I usually offer a middle position.

6).I almost always strive to satisfy the interests of each of us.

27. a) I often try to avoid disputes.

6) If it makes the other person happy, I will give him the opportunity to have his way.

28. a) I usually persistently strive to achieve my goal.

6) When resolving a situation, I usually strive to find support from another.

29. a) I propose a middle position.

b) I think that you shouldn’t always worry about disagreements that arise.

30. a) I try not to hurt the feelings of another.

b) I always take a position in a dispute so that we can achieve success together.

QUESTIONNAIRE KEY

Rivalry: a) 3, 8, 10, 17, 25, 28; 6) 6, 9, 13, 14, 16, 22

Cooperation: a) 5, 11, 14, 19, 20, 23; 6) 2, 8, 21, 26, 28, 30

Compromises; a) 2, 4, 13, 22, 26, 29; 6) 7, 10, 12, 18, 20, 24

Avoidance: a) 1, 6, 7, 9, 12, 21, 27; 6) 5, 15, 17, 19, 23, 29

Device; a) 15, 16, 18, 24, 30; 6) 1, 3, 4, 11, 25, 27

For each of the five sections of the questionnaire (competition, cooperation, compromise, avoidance, adaptation), the number of answers that match the key is counted. Received quantitative estimates are compared with each other to identify the most preferred form social behavior the subject in a conflict situation, the trends of his relationships in difficult conditions.

Basic strategies for dealing with conflict:

— Counteraction – the partner’s goals are not taken into account;

— Cooperation – aimed at satisfying the participants’ needs;

— Compromise – conditional equality of partners;

— Avoidance – avoidance of contact, loss of one’s own goals;

— Compliance is sacrificing one’s own interests for the sake of others.

Models of behavior in a conflict situation for Sibirtelecom OJSC personnel were developed based on the K. Thomas test (Appendix 1).

The proposed test consists of 30 items, each of which has two judgments, designated by the letters a and b. When comparing the two judgments indicated in paragraph, each time you need to choose the one that is more typical for your behavior. In accordance with this test, 16 people were interviewed - employees of Sibirtelecom OJSC.

Of the 16 people interviewed, the answers were distributed as follows.

9 people are inclined to use the strategy of competition (suppression), 3 people are inclined to cooperate and adapt, 4 people are inclined to compromise and one person will avoid it if possible. Graphical results are presented in Figure 1.

Rice. 1. Results of testing of Sibirtelecom OJSC employees according to the K. Thomas test

According to the proposed methodology of K. Thomas, based on the results obtained, we can say that the majority of workers among those surveyed do not have a chance to win in the current conflict situation. The situation of cooperation in the team under consideration is not often observed, but conflicts are resolved by compromise concessions beneficial to both parties.

Let's consider several conflict situations and ways to resolve them at Sibirtelecom OJSC.

Conflict situation 1. Deputy. Directors, head of the sales department, who gives tasks to the sales manager. The sales manager receives an assignment and a list of debtor enterprises that need to be examined and served with notification letters to limit the supply of products. It is not possible to get to some enterprises the first time, this is due to the lack of personnel at the enterprise, lack of transport, and bad weather conditions. The head of the sales department does not conflict with the sales manager and considers the reasons objective. And the deputy The directors believe that they tried poorly, tried little, and did little. Dispute Deputy director and the head of the sales department arose on this basis. But the deputy The director asks for advice and listens to the opinion of the head of the sales department, he has extensive experience in this industry and a rare ability to clearly and simply express his thoughts, so it didn’t come to a quarrel, everything was limited to a clash of opinions. Their relationship is an example of cooperation.

Conflict situation 2 . A lot of ongoing work has accumulated in the network planning department, because... Several employees went on vacation and the time frame for completing this work is quite limited. The head of the department asks employees to go on a day off in exchange for a paid day off (time off). It should be noted that according to Labor Code Payment on weekends is made in double amount or a paid day off is provided at the discretion of the employee and only at his request. But the management of the enterprise does not allow going to work for double pay, citing fund savings. wages. Almost everyone refuses, because due to a lack of staff, time off will not be given, and without the employee’s consent, the head of the department cannot force him to go to work on a day off. The head of the department had to defend with the management of the enterprise double payment for the work of employees on a day off. For double pay, the workers agreed to leave, although they could not leave at all. This behavior can be seen as a compromise .

Conflict situation 3 . The call center employs female operators in two shifts from 8:00 to 20:00 and from 20:00 to 8:00 in accordance with the schedule. The conflict situation mainly arises between female operators and the head of the department. They live far from their place of work, on the outskirts of the city. The department is assigned a car, but the driver’s work schedule is from 8:00 to 17:00, and the Labor Code is not allowed to extend the working day until 21:00, even for additional wages, and the driver refuses. The management did not make concessions for a long time until the accident occurred. IN dark time 24 hours later, one of the employees was robbed on the way from the bus stop to her home. After this, the management compromised and entered into an agreement with a related company, which operates around the clock, to deliver the employees to their place of residence.

When analyzing conflict situations, it was revealed that two styles of resolving conflict situations predominate at the enterprise, the style of adaptation and compromise. The test conducted by K. Thomas showed that the style of competition and compromise predominates.

Conflict is almost always visible, as it has certain external manifestations: a high level of tension in the team, decreased efficiency, deterioration in production and financial performance, etc.

To identify the causes of conflicts, a survey was conducted among employees. The results of the survey are presented in Appendix 2.

Of the 18 respondents: 3 managers and 15 subordinates. As can be seen from the results of the survey, Sibirtelecom OJSC did not select very conflicting people. It can also be said that in an enterprise, conflicts occur quite rarely, but when they do occur, they relate mainly to work issues and any disagreements regarding them. Based on the results of the survey, it can be noted that the managers of Sibirtelecom OJSC mainly have horizontal conflicts, which means that in most cases they are satisfied with the work of their subordinates, but sometimes they have disagreements among themselves.

As can be seen from the results of the survey, subordinates have both horizontal conflicts (with their colleagues) and vertical conflicts (with their superiors). One of the manifestations of subordinates' distrust of the administration is their concealment of information from the manager. The manager, as a rule, is the last to learn about the intention of one of his subordinates to quit, as well as about other events in the life of the team.

According to the employees themselves, we can conclude that more than 60% of conflicts in an enterprise develop spontaneously. However, this figure is biased, since any conflict has its own pre-conflict stage, and most enterprise employees simply do not notice it. From the summary table of the survey results, it can be seen that in most cases conflicts arise on issues related to the direct performance of work, and not on personal issues.

Methods for diagnosing conflicts in an organization

Conflicts cover all spheres of people’s life, the entire set of social relations and social interaction. Conflict, in fact, is one of the types of social interaction, the subjects and participants of which are individuals, large and small social groups and organizations. Conflict interaction presupposes confrontation between the parties, i.e. actions directed against each other.

Conflict grows out of a conflict situation, which forms the basis of the conflict. A conflict situation is a situation in which the parties have demonstrated and realized the incompatibility of the actions of one party with the norms and expectations of the other.

2.1 Diagnosis of conflict

Conflict management should be preceded by the stage of its diagnosis, i.e. identification of the main components of the conflict, the reasons that gave rise to it. In most cases, diagnostics involves determining:

The origins of the conflict, subjective or objective experiences of the parties, methods of “struggle”, conflicting opinions, events, affected needs and interests;

Biographies of conflict, i.e. its history, the background against which it progressed, the escalation of the conflict, the crises and turning points in its development;

Participants in conflict interaction: individuals, groups, units;

Positions and relationships of the parties, their interdependence, roles, expectations, personal relationships;

Initial attitudes towards the conflict - whether the parties themselves want and can resolve the conflict, what are their hopes, expectations, attitudes, conditions, or whether the conflict is provoked specifically in the interests of one of the parties, which constantly maintains the level of tension.

Methods for diagnosing organizational conflicts.

Basic methods for diagnosing conflicts:

1. Descriptive and analytical methods: description and analysis of specific conflict situations according to the schemes proposed by the researcher (comparative historical, systematic approach, logical analysis, etc.)

The main parameters are closer to research than to diagnosis:

Gaining new knowledge;

Focus on a larger volume of new knowledge;

Part of the object is being examined

Interpretation is required: explanation is the result of the study.

Diagnostics of organizational conflicts according to the model of L. Greenhelg.

1. Subject of the dispute.

Is it a “matter of principle” or does it concern individual differences between the parties? Detachment from one's own principles is difficult, so to the extent that the conflict is related to individual differences between the parties, it is easier to resolve constructively.

2. bet size. -

what is the value of what can be lost by a participant in the conflict if the outcome is unsuccessful for him. Greenhelg believes that people may exaggerate the real value of a "stake" if they are involved in a gain-oriented confrontation or if the outcome of the conflict may set a precedent for subsequent situations.

3. The nature and degree of interdependence of the participants in this conflict.

Are the participants bound by “strict competition”, where one side’s gain means the other’s loss, resulting in a strong tendency to follow only their own interests, or can a solution be found in which the parties can mutually benefit from resolving the conflict. Zero-sum relationships (one side gains at the expense of the other) make conflict difficult to resolve.

4. The nature of the relationship between the parties.

Are they episodic (limited to a given situation - a single transaction) or are the participants in the conflict connected? long term relationship. The latter circumstance will contribute to a more successful search for a solution.

5. Structure of the parties.

For organizational conflicts, an important characteristic from the point of view of the ease or difficulty of resolving conflicts is the presence of strong leaders of the opposing parties. A strong leader is able to unite his followers to accept an agreement. Greenhelg refers to experience working with trade unions in decision-making situations on organizational innovations. Strong Leaders can take a tough position in negotiations and conduct tough bargaining, but ensure the implementation of accepted agreements. In the case of a weak leader, his position may be challenged by group members who disagree with him, as a result of which opposition to change and conflicts on this basis may become chronic.

6. Participation of a third neutral party

Even if the third party is not actively involved in the dialogue between the parties to the conflict, its very presence can restrain some destructive manifestations, primarily emotional nature, in conflict interaction between the parties. Positive influence will potentially be stronger the more prestigious it is. The third party is influential, credible and neutral.

7. Perceived progress of the conflict

Is there a possibility of equal “cost” of the conflict for both parties or does one of them feel more harmed? The latter circumstance makes it difficult to find a way out. Although this score is determined subjectively, the parties want to be convinced that the overall score is approximately equal and that everyone has already suffered enough.

2. Experimental studies of conflict

The largest number of methodological procedures for the experimental study of conflict was proposed by representatives of the behaviorist paradigm. Among the experimental game procedures they developed are matrix games (such as the “prisoner’s dilemma”, coalition games (involving the formation of coalitions within the group by participants), locomotion games (with the movement of the parties in the direction of the task or goal chosen by the participants) and social trap games (social tasks -dilemmas).

To study conflict interaction in laboratory conditions, we use business games-tasks related to the distribution of common resources or the need for joint care of them. We can talk, for example, about general finances.

However, all these tasks can be used to study people’s behavior in conflicts or to teach them certain methods of behavior, choice of strategies, etc. But they cannot be used to diagnose real conflicts, since when diagnosing you are dealing with integrity, and not with individual aspects of the conflict.

Another variant of the methodological procedure for the experimental study of conflicts is the creation of real conflict situations between experimental participants in laboratory conditions. Usually the subject needs to complete some task, and a figurehead - a participant in the experiment - interferes with him. In this way, the choice of behavior strategy and participants’ response to a conflict situation is studied.

Experiments with provoking conflicts in natural conditions.

Research of this kind most often models short-term interaction; in addition, this type of research is quite problematic from the point of view of ethical standards.

At the same time, practical conflictologists (L.N. Tsoi), engaged in management consulting, use this method to work with real conflicts. A methodological principle was formulated for using conflict in order to identify all existing contradictions in views, values, ideas, theoretical constructs, etc. Conflict modeling (this method Tsoi called the “conflict method”) is based on the regularity of the stages of development of the “natural” unfolding and escalation of a conflict situation.

The “conflict method” is a path of knowledge and a way of constructing rational activity, as well as mastering conflict reality in order to identify contradictions and minimize destructive elements in the conflict, transferring the conflict into a socially positive direction.

This method allows you to:

Identify the main contradictions between the conflicting parties;

• diagnose the situation at the micro level;
• in accordance with the obtained material, separate the “waste” rock from the valuable one;
• give necessary funds participants in the conflict working with this material;
• minimize destructive consequences, etc.

From the moment when conflict experts turned to practical issues conflict regulation, basically the task of diagnosis arose, and it was then that they turned to the diagnosis of real conflict situations. And they dominate here rather methods survey.

3. Survey methods.

Diagnostic techniques:

3.1 Diagnosis of conflicts at the personal level:

Most of the methods are built within the framework of subject-specific positive methodology (obviously, this is due to the fact that most of them are based on methods taken from social psychology - tests, sociometry).

Erina S.I. Diagnostic scale role conflict from the managers of the primary production team.

The presence of psychological conflict among managers, the degree of its severity, and the areas of activity of the manager that cause conflict experiences are revealed. The manager is offered a questionnaire with a set of judgments with which he must agree or disagree. Depending on his choice, a conclusion is made about the presence of intrapersonal conflicts.

The subject of study in this class of techniques is also the behavioral strategies of the participants in the conflict:

The T. Thomas test is aimed at identifying a repertoire of behavioral tendencies in contradictory situations. A person is offered 30 pairs of judgments, each of which reflects one of the possible behavioral strategies. The subject chooses from each pair the one that he considers more consistent with his typical behavior. As a result, it can be determined to what extent a person’s repertoire includes strategies of competition, cooperation, avoidance, concessions, or compromise. The formulations of judgments are “cleared” of the situational context and therefore make it possible to diagnose precisely personal tendencies towards the predominant use of certain strategies.

A similar questionnaire, aimed at studying the strategies chosen by the leader in conflict situations, was developed by A.A. Ershov. He singles out leaders primary organizations 4 main areas of value orientations that are updated in conflict situations:

Focus on work and its efficiency;

Focus on yourself, your views and experience;

Focus on official subordination, rights and responsibilities.

The methodology consists of 12 conflict situations, for each of which four possible solutions are proposed. corresponding to four possible orientations.

Projective tests to determine behavior strategies in conflict situations.

F. Rosenzweig test. It consists of pictures describing an incident between characters, and the subject is asked to identify himself with one of them. The partner’s words in the picture contain some kind of accusation (explicit or hidden) against the respondent or interfere with the satisfaction of his needs. The test subject's responses are categorized in accordance with a special scheme and this makes it possible to determine how a person usually reacts to a frustrating situation: by looking for someone to blame outside, by self-accusation, or in some other way.

Based on this test, the “Business Situations” test (20 pictures) was developed, depicting conflict situations in the organization.

Usage psychological tests to determine the level of personality conflict:

Questionnaire by A. Bass and A. Darkey. (1957) Designed to determine the individual level of aggressiveness of a person. Aggression is considered by the authors as a complex phenomenon that manifests itself in various forms aggressive and hostile reactions: physical, indirect, verbal aggression, irritability, resentment, etc. The questionnaire makes it possible to determine individual indices of aggressiveness and hostility.

Cattell Questionnaire.

Questionnaire by G. Eysenck.

Determination of anxiety level using the Spielberg questionnaire.

The common problem with using all these techniques to diagnose specific conflicts in organizations is that since they were created by psychologists and based on psychological techniques and tests, then the concept of a norm embedded in them (where it exists at all) is either related to a psychological norm - the boundaries of the manifestation of a particular characteristic in the general population, or it is a definition of a norm within the framework of a value-normative approach, when the concept of a norm is laid down by the author of the concept .

3.2 Diagnosis of conflicts at the interpersonal level.

Most often used for this traditional method sociometry (usually in the form of a survey):

Lebedev A.N. Methodology for predicting interpersonal conflicts in teams.

Parameters of mutual assessments that are most significant in terms of conflicts:

Level of professional training;

Attitude to work;

Level of development of moral qualities;

Level of ability to lead a team;

Level of development of innovative qualities.

In the proposed procedure, employees evaluate their colleagues according to these parameters, comparing them with each other (ranking).

Disadvantages of the technique:

1. value-normative approach;

2. halo effect.

Modular methodology for diagnosing interpersonal conflicts.

A.Ya.Antsupov. A.I. Shipilov.

Based on sociometric methodology.

Two basic modules that allow you to assess the attitude towards employees on the part of each of your work colleagues. Comparing the answers to the first two questions makes it possible:

Identify real and potential conflict dyadic relationships in the group;

Quantify the intensity and severity of the conflict.

Additional modules are used depending on the goals of studying the team and allow you to evaluate:

The quality of work of each group member;

Moral qualities of each group member;

Professional knowledge of group members;

The extent of his assistance to colleagues;

Efforts to achieve personal and group interests;

The nature of the fulfillment of these promises.

The survey procedure involves each member of the team filling out a special form (sociometric card), which lists all members of the group.

The rating is given on a ten-point scale from +5 to -5

Methodology for diagnosing relationships in a group

The questionnaire is a sociometric card on which all members of the team are recorded, and then the respondent makes positive or negative choices according to certain 14 criteria.

The disadvantage of this design of the sociometric card is that the respondent is forced to mark even those individuals about whom he does not have a definite opinion.

The information obtained during the research is processed through several channels.

Firstly, at the first stage, sociograms are constructed that clearly show the connections within the team. Sociograms make it possible to identify the presence of microgroups in the team of a unit, identify leaders, outsiders, i.e. socio-psychological structure, since the main emphasis is on the informal aspect of social connections.

Such an analysis also allows us to highlight tense moments in the relationships between team members that are fraught with the emergence of conflict situations in the present and future.

Secondly, the chosen form of the sociometric card, when in fact each member of the team in one way or another determines his negative or positive attitude towards all his colleagues, with certain shortcomings, still allows us to determine the “rating” of each member of the team,” since there are 14 selection criteria comes down to 4 parameters:

Leadership;

Compatibility (ability to establish favorable relationships with colleagues);

Reliability (the degree of trust in a team member);

Thirdly, sociometric indices are calculated based on the data obtained.

2.3. Diagnosis of intergroup conflicts in an organization.

1. Methods focused on subject methodology in the block of describing the real state of an object are usually based on survey methods. at the same time, the block of setting what should be done is value-normative.

A technique for identifying contradictions in the formal structure as causes of conflicts. The main zones have been identified possible occurrence contradictions in the organization

	Empirical indicators
Workplace organization	Forms for distributing tasks between employees
	Task implementation or goal orientation
	Forms of labor organization
	Balance of rights and responsibilities
	Level of formalization of procedures
Relationships between management and subordination	Compliance with the principle of unity of command
	Identifying forms of control
	Participation in decision making
	Determining the degree of formalization of relations
Information and communications	Assessing the efficiency and accuracy of information transfer
	Assessment of the main channels of information transmission
	Awareness of sources necessary information
	Assessing the correctness of interpretation of management orders
	Assessing the level of feedback
Staff	Assessment of the level of professional knowledge
	Level of employee awareness of goals and objectives
	Assessing the possibility of employees taking initiative
	Satisfaction with the remuneration system
	Individual assessment of career prospects
Culture	Compliance with labor discipline standards
	Identifying the frequency of communication with department management
	Attitude to change
	Presence of conflicts in the department
	Perceptions and ways of resolving conflicts
	Assessing the level of team cohesion

Each empirical indicator assumes four possible situations that reveal it, each of them is assigned a certain amount points. Employees answering the questionnaire select situations that are specific to their department. Then the average value for each indicator is calculated, and on this basis a profile of the department is built.

Formation of normative criteria:

the norm is set on the basis of an expert survey: the heads of the department act as experts (questionnaires and interviews). Based on the data obtained, a reference profile of the department is formed, which is then compared with the real profile obtained as a result of processing employee questionnaires.

However, the mismatch block is speculative.

2. The class of diagnostic techniques, as a rule, is focused on the problem-based methodology in the description of the object, but in the block of task assignment, the situational approach (problem-situational) is more common.

Methods of obtaining information: gaming methods

poorly structured interviews

sometimes - questionnaires.

Positional analysis (A.I.Prigozhin)

PA - diagnostic technique, which makes it possible to identify positionality, to determine the lines dividing the organization into groups of workers who are in positional conflict with each other.

The essence of PA is the definition of those lines that divide the organization into a set of social. groups that are in positional conflict with each other or have different interests that interact with each other.

Conflict management should be preceded by the stage of its diagnosis, i.e. identification of the main components of the conflict, the reasons that gave rise to it. In most cases, diagnostics involves determining:

• - the origins of the conflict, subjective or objective experiences of the parties, methods of “struggle”, conflicting opinions, events, affected needs and interests;
• - biographies of the conflict, i.e. its history, the background against which it progressed, the escalation of the conflict, the crises and turning points in its development;
• - participants in conflict interaction: individuals, groups, units;
• - positions and relationships of the parties, their interdependence, roles, expectations, personal relationships;
• - initial attitudes towards the conflict - whether the parties themselves want and can resolve the conflict, what are their hopes, expectations, attitudes, conditions, or whether the conflict is provoked specifically in the interests of one of the parties, which constantly maintains the level of tension.

In order to take into account all of the above, a conflict diagnostic scheme is drawn up in a generalized form.

Clarification of the essence of the conflict situation, its adequate understanding by each of the parties can serve as the basis for developing a further solution. For this purpose, the diagnostic results are entered into a table.

Conflict diagnostic scheme

Example. The private company "Levsha" is engaged in providing psychological and pedagogical services to the population or organizations and conducting training using the technology they have developed. This organization is owned and headed by Shomov - he is also the sole founder and at the same time the director of “Levsha”.

During its existence (about 5 years), the team at the company has become quite friendly and united. Employees value interesting and well-paid work and stable relationships within the team.

Not long ago, a new employee, Serov, was hired into the organization, a young, energetic, customer service manager who copes well with his duties.

The team greeted the new employee tensely. Serov found it quite difficult to fit into the team: he did not like some of his colleagues or the relationships that developed between employees. With his characteristic energy and enthusiasm, he decided to rebuild these relationships. Being an emotional person, he began to make statements about the work performed by some employees and their personal qualities, sometimes in an aggressive form.

Employees of the organization did not react very much to his statements and to open conflict didn't go.

After some time, Serov told the director of Levsha that he would like to be included in the list of trainees for the position of trainee coach (which is the goal of many employees). The director approved Serov as a candidate for the position of intern.

At the end of the working day, Serov joyfully announces the director’s decision to the company’s employees and offers to celebrate this event in a cafe.

The news came as a surprise to the company's employees; everyone was unpleasantly surprised and somewhat confused. After a prolonged silence, Serov was the first to congratulate Sablin, who then immediately left. Everyone else also left after brief congratulations, citing urgent matters.

Employees think this decision premature, because, in their opinion, there are more experienced specialists in the organization. Sablin was most dissatisfied with this decision of the director, because he himself sought to become a trainee. The atmosphere in the team is heating up.

After some time, when discussing the contract that Sablin had prepared, in the presence of other employees of the company, Serov pointed out the shortcomings of this contract, expressing his bewilderment at how such an experienced lawyer as Sablin could make such an obvious mistake, in his opinion. An emotional scene ensues with mutual insults.

Sablin immediately goes to the director with a statement about the impossibility of working in the organization with Serov. Serov also writes a statement to the director about the atmosphere of bullying and persecution in the team, which Sablin supports.

The next day, the director calls both employees to his office and says that their behavior calls into question his decision to nominate them as candidates for the position of trainee coach and offers to resolve the contradictions that have arisen in the near future, otherwise he will fire both.

Let's diagnose and resolve this conflict by filling out the table.

Diagnosis of conflict

Conflict diagnostic stage (according to with a picture)
1. Identification of visible participants in the conflict.	Serov is a new employee of the company, Sablin is an employee who has been working at the company for a long time.
2 - 3. Identification of other participants and bearers of affected interests.	After an initial analysis of the situation, the remaining participants in the conflict are identified, whose interests are affected to one degree or another as a result of its development. Other parties to the conflict: Shomov is the director of the company, and he is also its owner. Nikitin - deputy director of the company for organizational issues, other employees of the Levsha company
4. Drawing up a “biography” of the conflict	The team made no attempt to explain to Serov the existing norms and rules of behavior in the team, or the tactlessness of his behavior from the very beginning of his work at the company. Serov underestimated the difficulties of entering new team, decided to “impose” my own rules, my own understanding of teamwork. This event was preceded by similar situations in past years, when the work of new specialists began approximately the same and ended either with the dismissal of new specialists or their departure of their own free will.
5 - 6. Determining the positions of the parties to the conflict. Determining the causes of the conflict.	Analyzes what is the position of the parties on at the moment what are their needs, interests, concerns (the conflict mapping method is used). Objective and subjective reasons and the object of the conflict are identified. Objective reasons conflict: differences in methods of behavior, values; poor communications; limited number of trainee trainer positions. Object conflict - the position of a trainee trainer at a company. Subjective causes of the conflict (see “Conflict Map”).
7 - 8. Identification of the parties’ intentions and readiness to reach an agreement themselves	A solution to the problem is developed and it is determined whether the parties are ready to reach an agreement themselves, i.e. do they seek to resolve the conflict through negotiations among themselves; whether third party intervention is necessary or whether another solution is required. Sablin calmed down and regarded his behavior as an outburst of anger caused by Serov’s incorrect behavior and the need to fight for the position of coach, to which he had been working for a long time. Sablin agrees to negotiate with Serov, but in the presence of a third party. Serov feels unfairly offended, but for fear of losing an interesting job, he agrees to negotiate, but also in the presence of a neutral participant. Before the start of negotiations, the parties apologized to each other for their inappropriate behavior.
9. Negotiations	If the parties can agree on their own, then an appropriate solution is proposed with a forecast of the consequences for each of the parties, as well as with a calculation of the necessary costs. The deputy was chosen as the third party. Director of Organizational Affairs Nikitin. Negotiations were held, the conflict was settled.
10 - 11. Selecting a mediator and conducting negotiations with his participation	If the parties cannot come to an agreement themselves, then it is proposed to conduct negotiations with the participation of a third party (intermediary), forecast the consequences and calculate the necessary costs.
12. Solution by other methods.	If resolution of the conflict is impossible through negotiations, then a solution is developed (for example, changing the structure of the organization, dismissal of one of the participants), a forecast of consequences is made and the necessary costs are calculated.

When diagnosing a conflict, it is quite difficult to identify the subjects of the conflict, their affected needs, interests, fears, and causes of conflict interaction. To identify the causes of a conflict, it is possible to use the conflict cartography method, the essence of which is to graphically display the components of the conflict, to consistently analyze the behavior of the participants in the conflict interaction, to formulate the main problem, the needs and concerns of the participants, and ways to eliminate the causes that led to the conflict. This work consists of several stages.

On first stage the problem is described in general outline, the subject of the conflict is determined. If, for example, we are talking about inconsistency in work, about the fact that someone does not “pull the strap” along with everyone else, then the problem can be displayed as “load distribution.” If the conflict arises from a lack of trust between an individual and a group, then the problem can be expressed as “relationship.”

At this stage, it is important to determine the very nature of the conflict and for now it does not matter that this does not fully reflect the essence of the problem. The problem should not be defined in the form of a double choice of opposites “yes or no”; it is advisable to leave the possibility of finding new and original solutions.

On second stage, the main participants (subjects) of the conflict are identified. The list can include individuals or entire teams, departments, groups, or organizations. To the extent that the people involved in a conflict have common needs in relation to a given conflict, they can be grouped together. It is also possible to combine group and personal categories.

For example, if a conflict map is drawn up between two employees in an organization, then these employees can be included in the map, and the remaining specialists can be combined into one group or the head of this department can also be identified separately.

Third This stage involves listing the basic needs and concerns associated with this need of all the main participants in the conflict interaction. It is necessary to find out the motives of behavior behind the participants’ positions on this issue.

People's actions are determined by their desires, needs, and motives that need to be determined. Graphical representation of needs and concerns expands the possibilities and creates the conditions for a wider range of solutions possible after the entire mapping process is completed.

An example of a conflict map for the situation described earlier.

An example of a conflict map for the Levsha company

The use of the conflict mapping method made it possible to gradually identify the participants in the conflict, from among them identify the subjects of this conflict interaction, present the subject of the conflict (relationships in the department), the needs and concerns of all participants.

Participant No. 1. Serov Needs: respect; self-realization - take the position of a trainee trainer. Concerns: loss of interesting work in a given team; loss of growth opportunity in a given organization; failure to establish normal relationships with colleagues.	Participant No. 2. Sablin Needs: maintaining respect among colleagues; obtaining a position as a trainee trainer; conservation good climate in a team. loss of growth prospects; loss of work in this organization.
Relationships
Participant No. 4. Head of the company Shomov Needs: maintaining an efficient team; discipline in the company. Concerns: departure of highly qualified specialists from the department; loss of control in the team; deterioration in work quality.	Participant No. 3. Department staff Needs: normal work; maintaining the existing climate in the team. Concerns: expansion of the conflict; to be drawn into conflict; deterioration of the socio-psychological climate in the team; loss of work if the conflict escalates.

Domestic publications on the fundamentals of management describe a conflict as a collision of opposing views, positions, interests, and goals of two or more people. This understanding has also been consolidated in publications on personnel management. For example, in the personnel manual V.R. Vesnin “Practical Personnel Management” conflict is defined as “a collision of oppositely directed tendencies in the psyche of an individual, in the relationships of people and their formal and informal associations, caused by differences in views, positions and interests.”

If we summarize the above about conflict, then for management science and the applied significance of conflictology, the following definition will probably be most acceptable: Conflict is a normal manifestation of social connections and relationships between people, a way of interaction when incompatible views, positions and interests collide, a confrontation between two or more parties that are interconnected but pursuing their own goals. With all the variety of causes of occurrence, external forms of manifestation, ambiguity of their consequences, a large share of sensory perception, conflicts in real life act as a way of communication and interaction between people, an effective tool for the development of any social systems, including organizations. This approach can be illustrated by a number of examples, the analysis of which allows us to draw a line between different forms of social connections and, in particular, to clearly distinguish conflict from other contradictions - the absence of simple agreement, divergence of positions, opposing opinions on one or another vital issue.

Example one. Two colleagues - employees of an insurance company - during a lunch break entered into an argument with each other over whether the introduction of a “currency corridor” was good or evil. One argued that the establishment of such a corridor makes it possible to maintain a stable rate of domestic monetary unit and stability of the country's financial and credit system; the other pointed to the inevitable costs - restriction of freedom of market relations, artificial depreciation of the US dollar and other foreign currencies, which negatively affects the export of domestic goods and foreign investment receipts. Can this dispute be considered a conflict?

Also no, because in this case there is only a difference of opinion. None of the parties involved in the dispute insists on its opinion or imposes it on the other.

Example two.One of the main workshops is to be reconstructed at a large industrial enterprise. Regarding the workshop reconstruction project, two different ideas collided. One group of specialists advocates modernizing equipment and improving existing technology, while the other advocates complete replacement equipment and transition to new technology. Both parties appeal to the management of the enterprise, seeking acceptance of their proposal and proving the unacceptability of the other. Does the current clash meet the definition of a conflict?

Absolutely yes. Each side actively promotes its project and prevents the consideration of other proposals.

Diagnostics of conflict - knowledge of the main parameters of conflict interaction (composition of participants, object of disagreement, nature and degree of severity of contradictions, “scenario” for the development of interaction) with the aim of managerial influence on the opposing parties.

Ultimate Goal diagnostics of conflicts - obtaining new and reliable knowledge about conflict interaction, developing on their basis practical recommendations that would actually improve constructive conflict management.

When studying conflicts, it is necessary to consider them as complexly organized objects, consisting of hierarchically related subsystems and included, in turn, as subsystems |in systems of more high level. It is important to identify the variety of elements included in the structure of the conflict, the connections between them, as well as the relationship of the conflict being studied with phenomena external to it.

Modern conflictology does not develop its own tools, but widely uses methods and techniques developed in other branches of knowledge (Fig. 2.1).

Rice. 2.1. Methods for diagnosing conflicts

Observation- direct and immediate registration by a conflict specialist of events and the conditions in which they take place. Used to study conflicts various levels- from intrapersonal to interstate. As a method of collecting primary information about the object under study through targeted, organized, direct perception and recording of conflict events, observation has a number of advantages. Observation allows us to evaluate the effect of many factors in a conflict, their “weight” and effectiveness of influence. During observation, the naturalness of the conditions in which the conflict occurs is preserved. It is possible to study the conflict in dynamics.

Question 3However, observation as a method of studying conflict also has disadvantages: the private nature of the observed situation; mutual merging of observer and conflict. The observer becomes, to one degree or another, a participant in the conflict and his psyche undergoes changes that are inherent in the warring parties (distorted perception, negative emotions, search for a fair position, etc.). The facts obtained in this way bear the imprint of a personal, subjective assessment. It is also necessary to take into account the impact on the results of studying the conflict personal experience, knowledge, attitudes, emotional state observer. Disadvantages also include the laboriousness of documenting observation results.

Sociometry- socio-psychological test to assess interpersonal emotional connections in the group, developed by the American social psychologist and psychiatrist J. Moreno, in conflictology it is used to identify tense relationships in small group. Sociometry is based on each member of the group determining their attitude towards others according to the proposed criteria.

Various modifications of sociometry have been developed: the coordinate-sociogram method makes it possible to identify conflict couples, indifferent individuals, microgroups with positive and negative statuses in official and unofficial communication in the groups under study; spatial sociometry allows you to identify group members with whom the subject has closer relationships; color test relationships can be used in cases where respondents have an intention to hide their conflicting relationships in the group from the researcher, etc.

Studying documents- research of information for retrospective analysis of conflicts, recorded in handwritten or printed text, on a computer floppy disk, film, etc.

Survey- is currently the most common in the study of conflicts and includes various scales for diagnosing the presence of conflict and the degree of its severity, test procedures that identify chosen strategies of behavior in conflicts. For example, the F. Fiedler-Yu. Khanin questionnaire scale, consisting of pairs of words (antonyms) that are opposite in meaning, allows you to describe the atmosphere in the group and obtain information about the level of its conflict.

Test procedures make it possible to identify the behavioral strategies chosen by the subject in conflicts (for example, the K. Thomas questionnaire * shows to what extent a person’s behavior represents strategies of competition, cooperation, avoidance, concessions or compromise). Using the well-known F. Rosenzweig questionnaire (consists of pictures describing certain incidents between characters, in which the subject is asked to identify with one of them), it is possible to identify to what extent a person tends to react to situations characterized by the collapse of plans, hopes, and the search for someone to blame outside , self-blame and other known types of reactions. There is a modification of the test created on the basis of Rosenzweig’s methodological idea, adapted to the organizational conditions of our culture.

IN modern practice applies wide range survey methods to identify the interaction of conflicting parties.

Experiment. The experimental study of conflict is based on modeling conflict situations, mainly in laboratory conditions, and recording human reactions to these situations. Among the developed experimental game procedures are matrix games (such as the “prisoner’s dilemma”), negotiation games (in which participants communicate with each other, trying to achieve a one-sided or mutual win), coalition games (involving the formation of coalitions by participants within the group), locomotion games (with movement of the parties in the direction of the task or goal chosen by the participants) and social trap games (social task-dilemmas), as well as more complex conflict situations that simulate real collisions (for example, a series of studies by M. Sherif)*. However, such conflict research is fraught with difficulties. organizational nature, some of them are unacceptable from a moral point of view. Besides, complex shapes human behavior In reality, they turn out to be much richer than their “staged”; there is no certainty that the relationships identified in the game situation will manifest themselves in real conflicts. These difficulties have led to the fact that the experiment is now quite rarely used to study intragroup and interpersonal conflicts.

System-situational analysis- study of conflicts by units. As a unit of analysis, a conflict situation is used - the smallest integral, indivisible part of the conflict, possessing all its basic properties, having certain substantive and dynamic characteristics, temporal and spatial boundaries. During the study, all the main and minor participants in the conflict are identified. The spatial boundaries of conflict interaction are determined. Phases in the development of the conflict are identified, during which the nature of the interaction of its main participants does not qualitatively change. After determining the spatial, temporal and substantive boundaries of the conflict situation, its systemic analysis is carried out. Using a conflict situation as a unit of analysis makes it possible to standardize, store and accumulate information about real conflicts. A conflict situation allows us to study the characteristics of conflicts not “in general,” but on the basis of systematizing certain information about the behavior of specific people and social groups. Conflict situations can be analyzed retrospectively (studying documents, interviewing participants and witnesses of the conflict) and directly during the actual development of events. To conduct a situational analysis, a special form is developed, which reflects the main characteristics of the conflict that are of interest to the conflictologist*.

Question 4. Mathematical modeling. Mathematical modeling involving modern means Computer technology allows us to move from simple accumulation and analysis of facts to forecasting and assessing events in real time of their development. A mathematical model of conflict is a system of formalized relationships between the characteristics of the conflict, divided into parameters (reflecting external conditions and weakly changing characteristics of the conflict) and variable components. Among the mathematical models used in conflictology are probability distributions, Markov chains, models of goal-directed behavior, and simulation models. To date, the greatest progress has been achieved in the analysis and description of conflicts with the following properties: the number of participants in the conflict is two, the number of methods of action of each participant is finite, and their individual goals are diametrically opposed. These limitations, as well as the non-obviousness of the goals and strategies of the participants in conflicts, significantly reduce the range of situations of real interpersonal interaction to which the descriptions created by mathematicians are applicable.