No one in the world can live without communication. Even being uncommunicative and closed by nature, a person sometimes cannot do without it. The reason for this is that some pressing problems affecting our daily lives can only be solved through interaction with other people. But communication between individuals does not always go smoothly; there may be some kind of misunderstanding, divergence of views on the issue under discussion, mutual dissatisfaction of opponents with each other, and even pronounced hatred.

And the result of this is the emergence of a conflict, which, from a psychological point of view, is a collision of two or more strong motives that cannot be satisfied at the same time. The emergence of such a situation is a consequence of the weakening of one motivating stimulus and the strengthening of another, which requires a new assessment of the current situation.

The topic of this article will be conflicts and ways to resolve them. We will talk about what confrontations between people can be, what causes them to appear and, of course, how to extinguish quarrels that have already arisen.

What are the types of conflicts?

The average person hardly thinks about the fact that not all disagreements between individuals are the same. It would seem, how do they differ from each other? To some extent, all confrontations between people are indeed very similar. However, professional psychologists identify certain types of conflicts. Although, by and large, everything happens according to the same scenario: the two sides have contradictions, and this becomes the reason for the emergence and development of mutual hostility towards each other and the desire to defend their position.

Intrapersonal conflict

It is an intractable internal contradiction, perceived and emotionally experienced by a person as a very significant psychological problem for him. Resolving conflicts of this kind causes an internal work of consciousness in the individual, which is aimed at overcoming them. The basis for the emergence is a clash between hobbies, needs, and interests that are approximately equal in strength, but directed in opposite directions.

Indicators of personality conflict

Reduced self-esteem, awareness of a state of psychological impasse, delays in decision-making, deep doubts about the truth of the principles on which a person once relied.
Strong psycho-emotional stress, significant, frequently recurring negative experiences.
Reduced intensity and quality of any activity, lack of complete satisfaction with it, negative emotional background during communication.
Increased stress and deterioration in the process of adaptation to any new conditions.

Types of intrapersonal contradictions

Hysterical - inflated claims of the individual along with an underestimation of the demands of other people or objective environmental conditions.
Obsessive-psychasthenic - contradictory personal needs, the struggle between duty and desire, personal behavior of the individual and his moral principles.
Neurosthenic is a contradiction between a person’s capabilities and his inflated demands on himself.

When considering a situation of conflict within an individual, it should be understood that none of the above types ever occurs in its pure form and is the result of the influence of the social environment on a person. Any such internal confrontation is based on the individual’s personal experiences and can be either constructive or destructive. In other words, such an experience can either make a person stronger or completely break him.

Personal conflicts and ways to resolve them lie in restoring harmony in the inner world of the individual, eliminating splits in consciousness and establishing unity, reducing the severity of contradictions in life relationships and achieving a new, better quality of life. A person’s painful conditions associated with his internal confrontation disappear: the manifestations of negative socio-psychological factors decrease, the quality and efficiency of professional activity increases.

Interpersonal conflict

This type of confrontation is the most common and is considered as a clash between two or more people, both well acquainted with each other, and individuals meeting for the first time in the process of their communication, relating to a variety of spheres and areas of life. Clarification of relationships between subjects occurs face to face, without any intermediaries. They can represent both their own interests and the interests of the social groups in which they belong.

The essence of the conflict in this case lies in the contradictions that arise between opponents, which are presented in the form of some goals that are opposite to each other and absolutely incompatible in a particular situation. A very important factor in this case is the opponents’ personal perception of each other, and a significant obstacle to reconciliation becomes a negative attitude that has formed the corresponding attitude of one individual to another, which represents the readiness of one side for certain actions of the other: expected behavior, perception of future events . The reason for this is rumors, opinions, judgments about the opposite side of the conflict.

Types and methods of settlement

Interpersonal conflicts are divided into several types. They can be either fundamental confrontations, in which the goals and interests of one individual are achieved only by infringing on the interests of another, or they can only affect the relationship between them, without infringing on any interests and needs.

They are also built on imaginary contradictions provoked by both false or distorted information and incorrect interpretation of any facts and events. Conflicts can have the status of rivalry - a desire for dominance, dispute - disagreements regarding finding the optimal solution to joint problems, or discussion - discussion of controversial issues.

Resolving conflicts between individuals and preventing them are aimed at preserving the existing system of interaction between participants. But in some cases, the sources of confrontation become the reasons leading to its destruction. Therefore, such conflicts, like intrapersonal ones, can be both constructive and destructive. Their results include both strengthening and complete destruction of relationships between people.

Intragroup conflict

This type of confrontation occurs, as a rule, in three main cases:

the moment of collision of interests of various microgroups that are part of one team;
when the interests of a particular person and one group do not coincide;
in case of differences in the goals of the individual and the entire team.

The conflict of interest in this case is due to several factors. This:

The complete opposite of the goals pursued by opponents, which is explained by their belonging to multidirectional small social groups within the same team.
The desire to preserve and strengthen one’s social and legal status, which the current conflict situation calls into question.
Uncertainty in the intragroup normalization of the process of interaction between individuals, which creates the need to involve the opinions of other participants in the process, which should result in the resolution of conflicts within the group.

Intergroup conflict

This type of confrontation occurs between two or more social groups within one team. It can be based on both a professional and production basis, as well as a social and economic basis. Various kinds of conflicts in an organization between its divisions are clear examples of such confrontation.

The reason for its occurrence is the different goals and divergence of interests existing in social groups. As a rule, the interests of the group are dominant, while personal hostility fades into the background, and sometimes it may not exist at all. As is the case with the above types of conflicts, this type of conflict can be either constructive or destructive. In other words, the result is an improvement in the quality of activities in the team or its complete collapse.

Why do contradictions arise between people?

The causes of conflicts that occur between people are a key link in the process of finding ways to prevent them and constructively resolve them. Conventionally, they can be divided into two large groups:

Objective ones are the real basis for creating the situation preceding a clash between opponents.
Subjective – individual psychological characteristics of the participants, leading to the resolution of the dispute through conflict.

Behavior strategy

Particular attention in this article should be paid to such a concept as conflict management - the ability to maintain them below a level that threatens a peaceful situation in interpersonal relationships, social groups and teams. Competent behavior of at least one party is the key to successfully resolving the contradiction and problems that gave rise to the conflict, restoring relationships between the parties to the extent necessary to ensure joint activities.

The conflict develops according to the following strategies:

Competitive struggle: defending one's positions, open struggle for one's interests, suppression, rivalry.
Avoidance: the process of avoiding conflict situations without resolving them.
Compromise: resolving all disagreements between opponents through mutual concessions.
Collaboration: one of the most common scenarios. It is an effective tool used to resolve conflicts. And the ways to resolve them consist in this case in a joint search for a solution that satisfies the interests of both parties.

Modern psychologists offer some recommendations that will help direct difficult relationships between opponents in the right direction:

Constantly showing attention to your interlocutors, giving them the opportunity to speak.
Friendly and respectful relations between opponents.
A natural demeanor that reflects the feelings of both parties towards each other.
Showing sympathy, participation and tolerance for the weaknesses of the interlocutor.
The ability to admit that your opponent is right, if it actually occurs.
Calm tone, self-control and restraint. These are probably the most important tools that guarantee successful conflict management in any difficult situation.
Operating with facts.
Expression of key ideas by interlocutors, laconicism and conciseness.
Openly expressing the problem and explaining it to fully understand the situation. Questions to your opponent to help clarify the reasons for the quarrel.
Consideration of alternative solutions and interest in finding them, willingness to share responsibility for the results, increasing in the eyes of the partner his importance in the discussion.
Maintaining contact using verbal and non-verbal means throughout the entire communication process.
The ability to switch off and put up emotional barriers if people’s conflicts are of an openly aggressive nature.

How to resolve the contradictions that have arisen?

To do this you need:

Admit there is a problem.
Describe it through behavior, consequences, feelings.
Try not to change yourself, and not allow your opponent to change the topic of the conversation.
Offer a reasonable solution based on the values common to both parties.
Think over your speech before meeting with the interlocutor in order to briefly and clearly express your request.

We solve the problem through its solution

This method, although effective, is not often used when conflicts are brewing. And the ways to resolve them in a similar way lie in observing the following points:

Defining the problem in terms of solutions rather than in terms of goals.
Identifying conflict resolution strategies that are suitable for both parties.
Focusing on the subject of the conflict, and not on the personal qualities of the opponent.
Creating an atmosphere of trust, increasing mutual influence and exchange of information, as well as a positive attitude towards each other.
Show sympathy and listen to the other side's views, minimizing threats and anger.

As you can see, any contradiction, even the most seemingly one with no chance of resolution, can be dealt with in a civilized way. The only thing that is needed for this is the desire of all parties to the conflict for reconciliation, because in this case success is practically guaranteed. However, it is best, of course, to avoid quarrels and try to maintain good relations at all costs. Then you won’t have to rack your brains about what to do in such situations.

Every person has their own goals in life related to different application areas. Everyone strives to achieve something different or in their own way. But often people connected by joint business activities collide in their own interests, and then a conflict occurs, which is one of the most important enemies of the manager, because it disorganizes people, transforms them into emotions rather than reason. Therefore, one of the functions of a manager, as a person working with people, is to prevent the occurrence, smooth out the consequences of conflict, resolve disputes, and the ability to lead people from hostility of interests to cooperation and mutual understanding.

But often managers who cannot concentrate in a conflict situation or take an objective position instinctively try to either prevent the conflict or postpone it, which does not provide a complete solution to problems in the business team.

Concept of conflict

The concept of “conflict” is characterized by an exceptional breadth of content and is used in a variety of meanings. In the most general way, conflict can be defined as “the extreme aggravation of contradictions.” Psychologists also emphasize that such a difficult-to-resolve contradiction is associated with acute emotional experiences.

In the specialized literature, conflicts are considered at the social, socio-psychological or psychological levels, which are dialectically related to each other. Below we will talk about conflicts in socio-psychological terms. Based on an analysis of a large number of domestic and foreign works, N.V. Grishina proposes to define a socio-psychological conflict as a clash that arises and occurs in the sphere of communication, caused by conflicting goals, modes of behavior, and attitudes of people, in conditions of their desire to achieve certain goals. The determining factor in the origin of conflicts is the appropriate combination of objective and subjective factors. Factors that objectively determine the occurrence of conflicts are interpreted as a certain set of objective parameters that cause an objective conflict state in the system of interpersonal interaction. At the same time, the significant dependence of the conflict on the external context in which the conflict arises and develops is also emphasized. An important component of this context is the socio-psychological environment (various social groups with their specific characteristics), understood quite broadly and not limited only to the immediate environment of the individual.

The determining role in a person’s perception of the conflict nature of a situation is played by the subjective significance of the contradiction underlying the conflict, or the “personal meaning” that this contradiction has for a given individual. This personal meaning is determined by the entire individual life experience of a person, or more precisely, by such characteristics of his personality as value orientation and motivation.

The moment of awareness of a situation as a conflict is also associated with exceeding the individual threshold of tolerance. This universal psychological mechanism for the emergence of conflicts does not exclude the possibility of subsequent multivariance in the development of a conflict situation.

The role of the socio-economic formation in the formation of the socio-psychological climate of the production team is very important. In accordance with this, the most significant factors that ultimately determine the nature of interpersonal relationships in a team are the totality of social relations of a given society, its socio-economic structure, and, as a consequence, the content of social consciousness. This factor determines interpersonal relationships, both at the level of the main production team and at the level of all its structural divisions, up to the primary team. However, this determination at the level of individual production teams cannot be rigid. Thus, the possibility of a discrepancy between the features of a specific structure of relations at individual enterprises and the relations of mutual understanding characteristic of society as a whole is noted.

Each person repeatedly faces various kinds of conflicts throughout his life. Generally, conflict is a signal for change and growth, improved understanding and communication, whether with oneself or with other people. Although managing conflict is not easy, it is important to do everything possible on your part to ensure that the discussion of the controversial issue goes more smoothly and you are able to overcome differences. Since conflicts are part of our daily lives, it is important to learn how to resolve them.

Steps

Part 1

Managing Interpersonal Conflicts

Define the problem. Analyze the conflict to find out the essence of the problem. Some conflicts seem so complex and confusing that it can be very difficult to find the true cause of the current situation. However, if you analyze the situation carefully, you can most likely find one or two main problems with this conflict. Thanks to this, you will be able to clearly formulate what the essence of the problem is and take the right position in the conflict.

EXPERT ADVICE

Gene Linetzky is a startup founder and software engineer from the San Francisco Bay Area. Worked in the technology industry for over 30 years. He is currently the Chief Engineer at Poynt, a technology company that produces smart payment terminals for businesses.

Startup founder and chief engineer

Focus on the problem, not the other person. Gene Linetzky, a startup founder and software engineer, says, “When my employees have conflict, I encourage them to stand in front of a whiteboard and list everything they agree and disagree with about the issue. This puts the issue into perspective and helps eliminate disagreements and arguments.”

Identify the main individuals who are involved in the conflict. It is also important to make sure that you know who the main people involved in the conflict are. Ask yourself, who are you angry at and/or frustrated with? Do you take your feelings out on the person who is causing the situation or on someone else? Identify the person with whom you should resolve the conflict. This is no less important than the essence of the problem itself.

State your concerns clearly. The other party to the conflict must know what emotions you are experiencing, what the essence of the problem is and how it affects you. This will keep your conversation focused on your needs and emotions, and will prevent you from blaming the person for their misbehavior.

Be an active listener. By learning to listen actively, you can master one of the most powerful tools you need for healthy communication. The ability to listen will be useful to you in everyday life, and will also contribute to positive, open and free communication with people. By actively listening to the other person, you show that you understand their point of view. Below you will find some tips to help you be an active listener:

Show the other party to the conflict that you understand him and reflect on his words. Often conflict arises when a person feels that he is not being heard or understood. This means that some conflicts can be managed simply by demonstrating understanding. During the conversation, show the person that you are analyzing his words. Thanks to this, you yourself will better understand the point of view of the interlocutor and show him that you understand and listen to him.

For example, if you have a conflict with a colleague, and you listened to this person’s point of view, summarize and say: “If I understand you correctly, you don’t like that you don’t take part in the creation of a new project, but you would really like to become member of the planning committee." Then wait for the person to agree with your words or make the necessary adjustments.

Work together to find a resolution to the conflict. Joint conflict resolution requires that each participant stop placing blame on the other and take responsibility for the conflict that has arisen. Make a commitment to do everything possible on your part to, by collaborating with the conflicting party, resolve the problem that has arisen. There are several tactics that can help both you and the person you are conflicting with come to a common denominator:

Stand by your opinion. Every person has a different point of view, and we don't always agree with everything others say. Don't try to figure out which one of you is "right." It doesn't matter and is unlikely to help resolve the conflict.

Be willing to concede if appropriate. It is not always possible to resolve the issue in such a way that both parties to the conflict are completely satisfied, especially if one of the parties refuses to negotiate and firmly stands its ground. If such a situation arises, think about how important the essence of the problem is to you, whether you can give in or whether it is better to continue the dialogue to resolve the conflict in a different way.
- Is the problem that has arisen important to you? Ask yourself this. Perhaps the solution to this issue affects your ego. If the other party to the conflict is not willing to compromise, and you understand that this issue is more important to this person, then perhaps it is time to reach out and end the conflict.
- When making concessions, avoid drama. You can say: “Kolya, I heard your point of view when we discussed the difference in the schedule. Although I still stand by my opinion, I see that you are unlikely to give in. I am ready to do everything possible to put an end to the misunderstanding that has arisen. I will support you according to the schedule we have created.” You can have your own opinion while supporting the person's point of view.
Take a break. If you see that the situation has reached a dead end, ask the other party to the conflict to give you some time to reflect on the arguments being presented. However, do not keep the other party to the conflict waiting. Indicate a day and time when you can continue the conversation. You can also ask the person to think about your point of view.
- During a break, put yourself in the other person's shoes and think about why their proposed solution is so important to them. Putting yourself in the shoes of another, ask yourself: “How would I negotiate with a person like me?”
- Be sure to reconsider your point of view. Can you give in on something less important and still stick to your position on an issue that matters a lot to you?
- If you have a conflict at work, write a summary of your last conversation in the correct form and send it to the other party to the conflict. Make sure your letter is objective and non-threatening. By taking this step, you will show your opponent that you understand the essence of the conflict. In addition, by doing this you will remind the person of your point of view. You will also show that you are ready to solve the problem through diplomacy. Moreover, summarizing the problem in writing places responsibility on both sides of the conflict.
Maintain confidentiality. Discuss the situation only with the other party to the conflict. Remember, you need to solve the problem only with the person with whom you have a conflict. If you turn a blind eye to the problem or tell other people about it, you can only hope for the conflict to escalate and rumors to spread.

Farewell . If you have offended each other, find the strength to sincerely forgive, even if it is impossible to forget about what happened. This approach will prove your maturity, and this is the shortest path to resolving the conflict and continuing the relationship.
- If you can't forgive the other person, you will still have to find ways to continue the relationship if you are forced to live under the same roof or work together.
- Forgiving someone requires strong character and compassion. By forgiving the person who hurt you, you can be proud of your ability to forgive and resolve conflicts.
- If rumors have already spread, ask the other party to the conflict to help you develop a joint plan, following which you can put an end to the gossip.
Ask a third party to mediate. If you see that the situation has reached a dead end, ask for help from a person who can help you in the current situation. Get help from a psychologist or close friend.
- As a rule, the third party assesses the situation more objectively, which cannot always be said about the direct participants in the conflict, who are overwhelmed by emotions.
Part 2
Managing intrapersonal conflicts
1. Understand the nature of intrapersonal conflict. Intrapersonal or internal conflicts are contradictions that occur within a person. In an intrapersonal conflict, there are no subjects of conflict interaction represented by individuals or groups of people.

Each conflict is unique in nature, and it is impossible to foresee the optimal way out of it. But still, knowing the recommendations of psychologists will greatly simplify this task.

At the first stage, it is necessary to recognize and analyze the conflict situation. To do this, it is necessary to determine the cause and goals of the conflict (paying attention to the discrepancy between true and stated goals) and assess the potential threat (what the conflict can lead to). When determining the cause of the conflict, you need to understand for yourself as precisely as possible what in your partner’s actions seems unacceptable to you and what is unacceptable for him. It should be borne in mind that not every dispute is dictated by the need to identify the “truth”; it can reflect either long-buried resentment, hostility and jealousy, or be used as a convenient moment to humiliate the opponent in someone’s eyes or play the role of the “last straw” if necessary, “free yourself” from accumulated irritation and anger.

To recognize a conflict in a timely manner and make the right decision, it is necessary to answer the following questions:

How is the problem perceived by the other party?

What is at the root of the problem? Its meaning for each of the parties.

How likely is this situation to escalate into a conflict?

What's behind the other person's reactions?

Is the behavior of each of the opponents consistent with the current situation (research shows that the strength of the reaction usually does not correspond to the significance of the conflict)?

What needs to be done to prevent conflict?

What should be done if the other party does not behave as expected?

What are the possible consequences of a favorable and unfavorable development of the situation?

What is your level of physical danger?

You need to clearly understand with whom you are arguing or trying to resolve the conflict. A self-confident opponent is usually verbose in communication and does not avoid a showdown. A person who is unsure of his abilities tries to avoid a showdown, does not reveal his goals, but at the same time he can stubbornly stand his ground, hiding his weakness under “principles.”

It is very difficult to negotiate with a stubborn, primitive person, also exposed to power, whose goal is not to prove the truth in favor of the cause, but to use the slightest opportunity to show “who is the boss here.” It is dangerous to conflict with intellectually narrow-minded or unbalanced people. Firstly, such a conflict does not lend itself to a logical conclusion; it is impossible to manage, since emotions are involved in it, not common sense. Secondly, the style of behavior is monotonous - hostile, aggressive, easily moving to a lower, primitive level - the level of insults, which increases hostility and makes it easier to move from a verbal altercation to a physical clash. When all the verbal “proofs” of such people are exhausted, they resort to the last argument - physical force.

After the analysis is completed, a conflict resolution strategy (behavior style) is chosen. Experts identify five typical strategies for behavior in conflict situations. Each of the strategies listed below should be used only in a situation in which that strategy is appropriate.

Strategy "rivalry, competition"– open struggle for one’s interests, persistent defense of one’s position. It is effective when the result is important for both parties, and their interests are opposite, or when the problem needs to be fundamentally solved. This is a tough style, in which the principle of “who wins” applies, and dangerous, since there is a risk of losing. This strategy should be chosen when:

you have greater capabilities (power, strength, etc.) than your opponent;

prompt and decisive measures are required in case of unforeseen and dangerous situations;

there is nothing to lose and no other choice;

the outcome is very important to you, and you place a big bet on your solution to the problem;

you have to “work” in front of other people whose opinions you care about.

Strategy "ignoring, avoiding conflict"– the desire to get out of a conflict situation without eliminating its causes. It is effective when it is necessary to postpone the solution to a problem to a later time in order to more seriously study the situation or find the necessary reasons and arguments. Recommended when resolving a conflict with management. This strategy should be chosen when:

defending your position is unprincipled for you or the subject of disagreement is more significant for your opponent than for you;

the most important task is to restore calm and stability, not to resolve the conflict;

the possibility of the emergence of more complex problem situations compared to the one being considered now opens up;

during the conflict you begin to realize that you are wrong;

the problem seems hopeless;

defending your point of view requires a lot of time and significant intellectual effort;

you don’t really care about what happened;

Trying to resolve the problem immediately is dangerous because openly discussing the conflict can only make the situation worse.

"Accommodation" strategy– changing one’s position, restructuring one’s behavior, smoothing out contradictions, sometimes sacrificing one’s interests. Outwardly, it may look like you accept and share your opponent’s position. Close to the “ignoring” strategy. This style of behavior is used in cases where:

the problem is not important to you;

need to gain time;

it is preferable to win a moral victory over an opponent by yielding to him.

Collaboration strategy– joint development of a solution that satisfies the interests of all parties, albeit lengthy and consisting of several stages, but beneficial to the cause. The most open and honest style involves active participation in resolving the conflict, taking into account one’s own interests and those of the opponent. Often used to resolve open and protracted conflicts. Applicable in cases where:

it is necessary to find a common solution if the problem is too important for both sides, no one wants to give in, and a compromise is therefore impossible;

you have a close, long-term and interdependent relationship with the other party, and you want to maintain it;

there is time to work on the problem that has arisen;

your capabilities are approximately equal to those of your opponent.

"Compromise" strategy– settlement of disagreements through mutual concessions. It is preferable in cases where it is impossible to simultaneously accomplish what both parties want. Compromise options - making a temporary solution, adjusting the original goals, getting a certain part in order to avoid losing everything. The strategy is applied when:

the parties have equally convincing arguments;

it takes time to resolve complex issues;

it is necessary to make an urgent decision when there is a shortage of time;

cooperation and directive assertion of one’s point of view do not lead to success;

both parties have equal power and have mutually exclusive interests;

you may be satisfied with a temporary solution;

satisfying your desire is not too important for you, and you can slightly change the goal set at the beginning;

At the second stage (conflict resolution), in accordance with the adopted strategy of behavior, it is necessary to accept the restrictions that the enemy imposes and impose your own restrictions. At the same time, it is necessary to quickly and easily change lanes and maneuver. When resolving a conflict situation, you need to take into account the following rules of behavior and response to a conflicting person:

You cannot immediately and completely deny someone’s opinion that does not coincide with yours, accept the tone, harshness and aggressiveness set by the provocateur of the conflict, and respond to an attack with an attack (as soon as communication goes to a higher tone, they no longer hear anyone except themselves).

You should show attention and kindness to your interlocutor, tolerance for his characteristics, and show your sincere sympathy. Listen carefully to such a person, without interrupting or showing that you already know what he is going to say, as this will irritate him even more. A good effect is achieved by the technique of direct repetition, interpretation or generalization of what was heard - thereby making it clear to the person that he has been heard and understood.

As soon as the opponent has exhausted himself, one should calmly express the opinion that “his position is very interesting and could be accepted” and similar approvals that influence the reduction of aggression, anger, indignation and initial fervor. Immediately gently add that “it is precisely this idea (plan, position, desire, etc.) that is being developed (considered, discussed, accepted, etc.), but there are some nuances that require clarification and interfere... “- this disarms even the most ardent, hostile enemy.

Personal confrontations must be avoided. You should not accept profanity and verbal insults addressed to you, realizing that this person should be perceived as he presents himself, without trying to reason with him or call for decency.

Try to be restrained, control your movements, speech, facial expressions. Among other things, restraint and calmness reduce the overall intensity of passions.

In an already developing conflict, one cannot rush to respond. It is best to pause, as if to “turn a deaf ear” to any remarks and demands. Instead of answering the stated questions, ask your own question, completely off-topic, in order to gain time to think about your tactics and strategy.

It is useful to distract your partner’s attention from a painful issue, at least for a short time, and any techniques can be used - from asking him to move to another seat, calling, writing something down - to expressing some ridiculous thought, joke, etc.

It is advisable to express to your interlocutor not ready-made assessments and opinions, but your feelings and states evoked by his words: this will force your partner to answer not in monosyllables, but in a detailed, motivated manner, explaining his position. Before responding to criticism, remarks, reproaches, you need to clearly understand what exactly is meant; you must be sure that you have understood everything correctly.

Closed postures, such as folding your arms across your chest, should be avoided. You cannot look your opponent straight in the eye - in this case, aggression may arise.

Very often, conflicting parties see struggle as the only possible way of being. They forget about other possibilities and lose sight of the fact that they can achieve more if they solve problems constructively. The end of a conflict is sometimes achieved simply because opponents get tired of fighting and adapt to coexistence. Having shown sufficient tolerance, if contacts are inevitable, they gradually learn to live in peace, without demanding from each other complete agreement of views and habits.

If we paraphrase the famous poems of Vadim Shefner, the following will come out: “You don’t choose work, you live and die in it.” In times of a society based on competition, you can move from one to another, but such swimming is still not endless.

Since the work team is selected spontaneously, people with personal taste preferences and value systems end up there. The latter come into conflict with each other, which gives rise to conflicts at work. Regardless of whether an individual person likes the state of war or not, it has a negative impact on labor productivity. The microclimate among employees is generally extremely important. Therefore, managers organize trainings to unite the group. But psychological techniques are meaningless if there are conflicts at work that have not been resolved.

Conflict is a contradiction between the interests, beliefs, values and needs of two parties.

Types of conflicts at work

Person-to-person is the most common type of conflict at work. It is difficult to find a monolithic team. Interpersonal clashes act as a filter for personnel selection. Two people may dislike each other because of conflicting worldviews or political preferences, but more often, people disagree in their ideas about how to work. If a dispute arises between a superior and a subordinate, then the positions are clear. The first one thinks: he’s not working hard enough, and the second one believes: If we are talking about a horizontal conflict (between colleagues), then the reason is competition or personal hostility. True, sometimes people argue because they have different ideas about the degree of cleanliness of the workplace if they share it.
Between the individual and the group. The role of the “person” is played by the newly arrived boss, and the role of the group is played by the enterprise staff. The reasons for each specific case are different, but more often the confrontation arises due to the fact that “a new broom sweeps in a new way.” It’s a different story when a newly arrived employee manages not to win over his colleagues. In this case, if it is not possible to establish contact, the newcomer quickly drops out of the game. No one can in hell. If a person is strong in spirit and needs a job, then he is able to turn the situation around and change the attitude of the team towards himself, however, this is a painstaking and intense process.
Between groups in a team. When the microclimate in a company is healthy, the team is relatively monolithic. There are no cracks in it. It is clear that there is a struggle, but this does not affect work, and no conflicts arise. An indicator of the painful state of the collective is fragmentation into separate warring (on professional or ideological grounds) groups.

These are the types of conflicts at work, and now let’s pay attention to those that occur more often than others.

If there is a conflict with a colleague at work, what should you do?

First, a brief classification of “colleague pests” and methods of combating them. So:

“A talker or a brawler” is a boring type who distracts other people from their professional duties. In every office, people “work” - “passengers”. They are serving the number. They are not interested in work. In their activities, such entities primarily love salary. Such colleagues feel tolerable at work only two days a month - during the payment of advance payments and salaries. The rest of the time they suffer from and talk a lot to ease their pain from. Only one flaw worries others about this type of worker: him.
- harmful type. At work, as in the world, there are people who are very annoying. And they try to knock the rider out of the saddle and plot. A person comes to a team, does not yet know the balance of power and asks such a person to help, and that person takes it and substitutes him.
“An oppositionist or a sycophant of the leadership” is a dangerous type (“spy” or “informer”). Two facets of one phenomenon. Such an employee either likes or does not like his superiors and informs every colleague about this.

Ways to deal with human distractions:

Those who like to talk and throw out their world culture opinions on a person should be fenced off and protected by an impenetrable screen. In everyday terms, this is expressed by the phrase: “Sorry, the topics are interesting, but I have urgent tasks, we’ll talk another time.” The colleague will go looking for another interlocutor.
With the second type, you need to keep your eyes open and avoid dependence on him in your work. Be polite and not quarrel, so as not to get into trouble in the future.
Not discussing your bosses at work is the main principle in the fight against spies and informers in the team.

So, the answer to the question, if there is a conflict at work with a colleague, what to do, stands on a simple but effective basis: “less words - more action.”

Hazing, personal relationships reduce labor productivity. At work you need to work, not make friends. If a person firmly believes in these simple rules, then he is not afraid of any conflict with a colleague.

If the soul still requires understanding even in the place where you need to work, then you can get on a first-name basis with a colleague only after lengthy reflection and weighing all the pros and cons.

Conflict at work with your boss, what should you do?

You should not argue with your leader, remembering one covenant:

The boss is always right.
If the boss is wrong, see point one.

But leaders are not so hopeless. Sensible people, even if they are superior, make contact in complex and significant disputes. First of all, you should find out what is the reason for the misunderstanding? Is the fault due to professional unsuitability, or did the conflict at work with your boss happen because of the employee’s personal qualities?

Personal hostility is a phenomenon that cannot be eradicated. The mass boils down to the fact that ineffective personnel become successful and beloved by management. In life, the boss is consistent in his decisions and fires anyone he doesn’t like.

The employee's behavior strategy boils down to the fight for the right to work where he likes. This means:

It is dignified and polite to respond to your boss’s reproaches.
Keep your distance (do not lose your temper, do not show irritation).
If there is another official above the boss, and work has not erased everything human from him, turn to him, he will help. True, the employee must have ironclad evidence of the guilt of his immediate supervisor in his hands.

If there are specific professional complaints against an employee, the algorithm is as follows:

The man talks with the boss in detail about the problems.
A person identifies his weaknesses.
A person rushes into the abyss of labor.

Resolving conflicts at work. Ways to behave in a conflict situation

Rivalry. When one or both participants in a dispute perceive the dispute as a battle. Very tough demeanor. People prove that they are right, even with another person - “winners are not judged.” If a person easily and quickly goes into confrontation, then he will not stay in the team. The state of war does not last long; it takes too much effort.
Device. The behavior of an altruist who forgets about his interests and defended positions for the sake of the team. The strategy is suitable for resolving minor controversial issues. If a person gives in during important negotiations, then people lose respect for him. Moreover, the behavior of the one who gives in does not always come from the heart. In this case, the strategy is destructive for a person who deliberately smooths out corners.
Avoidance. A person goes into the shadows, allowing contradictions to exist, in the hope that the dispute will subside on its own. And again: minor disagreements can be resolved in this way, but serious problems need to be discussed.
Compromise. A person who professes this behavior sacrifices a pawn in order to get the king. He creates the illusion for the enemy that he has won, and bargains for himself bonuses and advantages.
Cooperation. The behavioral strategy involves winning for both parties. A wise and complex move, but not suitable for every person and situation.

As behavior strategies show, conflict resolution at work exists, but it is different for each specific situation.

The most constructive way to resolve conflict at work is to talk with your opponent (dissatisfied party)

Renegade anthropologists believe: in ancient, prehistoric times, before humans developed articulate speech, people communicated with each other telepathically. Then our ancestors switched to verbal communication. Since telepaths are rare these days, it is more productive to voice complaints out loud.

Methods of relieving emotions in a conflict are based on a substantive conversation, discussion of problems, when the disputing parties analyze what does not suit them in the interaction and eliminate the shortcomings together. If all disagreements are resolved, life is more fun and free, and labor productivity increases and the atmosphere in the team improves.

The main problem with people is that they do not know how to negotiate and discuss disagreements openly. Colleagues, subordinates and bosses, husbands and wives - in social and private life - people hush up pain points that worry them and in vain, this leads to increased pressure and emotional outbursts. To relieve the tension that arises, you need to enter into a dialogue with another person. Conversation is the most constructive thing at work and at home. A word spoken at the right time saves people's lives and careers. The opposite is also true: if a person is silent when he needs to speak, a disaster is inevitable.

Conflicts in work and personal life are exhausting and aging.

If the situation is tense, but it has not come to an open conflict, then ignoring and remaining silent (if possible) helps. When the confrontation turns from silent to screaming, then you need to talk and discuss everything down to the smallest detail. Analyze objective and subjective barriers to a peaceful agreement between the parties. Understand another person

How to avoid conflicts at work? Carefully select the area of activity and analyze the team

Conflicts are a part of life, and they accompany a person all the time. And thinking about work and professional interests will not hurt even at a tender age. When a person is faced with a choice whether to go or not to join a team, he needs to ask himself about three things:

Do you like the job?
Do your colleagues leave a good impression?
Is your boss harsh but fair?

The main thing is that the answer to the first question is positive. In the realities of modern society, it rarely happens that you can truly choose your job.

The cardinal answer to the question of how to avoid conflicts at work is this: don’t work, don’t merge with the team! But this is a utopia. A person needs to work to live. Otherwise, he will starve to death on the street.