Ways to resolve conflict: how to find the optimal one

How to get out of a conflict and what absolutely cannot be done in a conflict situation? People of all ages face this unpleasant phenomenon. Small children quarrel among themselves over toys and parents' attention. Adults do not agree on their views on life, work issues, or issues of recreation and entertainment.

Some conflicts are resolved through serious conversation. Others drag on for weeks, months, years. What to do in such cases?

Causes

Conflicts and controversial situations arise for many reasons:

1. Lack of some type of resource. An example is a family that has been saving money for a long time. When the required amount was collected, the wife decided to buy a dishwasher. My husband dreams of purchasing a new computer. Such a discrepancy in views and desires provokes the development of conflict.
2. Dependence on others. Often you have to solve work problems together with other people. In any team, someone will be dissatisfied with the way a colleague works.
3. The difference is in the methods of achieving goals. A situation similar to the previous one. Sometimes several methods of work are discussed at once. However, in reality one or at most two is used. Another example is friends who decide to relax together. One wants to go to a nightclub, while the other prefers to spend time at home watching a new movie.
4. Different goals. On this basis, conflicts develop both between individuals and between groups.
5. Incomplete or inaccurate information provided. Here psychologists often give an example about two sisters who could not divide an orange. They turned to the sage for help. It turned out that there was no problem. One girl needs the juice, the other the zest.

No matter how trivial it may sound, often the cause of conflicts is character traits and emotional state. In most cases, such situations arise between people who live or work together.

Types of conflict situations

Most often in psychology the following types of conflict situations appear:

• intrapersonal,
• intergroup,
• interpersonal.

In the first group, psychologist F. Lutens identifies conflicts of role, frustration and goals. In the second, there are clashes of group production interests.

Interpersonal conflicts are the largest group. These conflicts are of a communication type; they manifest themselves in the clash of opposing opinions, interests in the material sphere, and opposing characters.

In this group, there are also conflicts of the “boss-subordinate” type, when one does not want to put up with the management style, and the other, seeing this, increases the demands on the employee.

By nature, conflict situations can be objective and subjective. According to the expected consequences - constructive or destructive.

Kinds

There are three types of conflicts. Each has its own characteristics and distinctive features.

Clear conflict

Has a clearly defined reason. All parties know what they want. Here you can recall an example of a quarrel between spouses over accumulated money.

Hidden conflict

The participants in the conflict do not understand the reasons for its occurrence. For example, the class teacher often scolds a student for what she thinks is an unkempt appearance. However, the cause of discontent is personal hostility.

False conflict

Develops against the background of misunderstandings or receipt of inaccurate information. For example, a mother scolds a child for wanting to pet a stray dog. However, the child did not even think about doing this. He simply approached her while walking.

Types of conflict

There are different types of conflicts. Psychologists define many of their classifications - from interpersonal to intergroup with biases in areas of interests and opinions. Let's give some examples.

1. The classification of conflicts according to R. Dahrendorf notes the occurrence of conflicts for the following reasons:

• source – interests, identification and values;
• consequences at the social level - success-failure, destructiveness-creativity, constructiveness-destructiveness;
• coverage – local, regional, interstate;
• form of permission - peaceful or non-peaceful;
• conditions of origin;
• tactics of behavior in conflict.

1. Psychologist A. Dmitrov divides conflicts according to areas of development: economics, politics, labor, educational activities, social orientation. His teaching also highlights internal and external conflicts that can occur between groups of people and individuals.
2. Many psychologists build their theories on motivational, role, and cognitive types of conflicts. For example, K. Levin believes that conflicts of motivational types should be classified as intrapersonal. In his opinion, such conflicts arise when people are dissatisfied with their jobs, experience stressful situations, and have low self-esteem.

D. Myers, L. Berkowitz, M. Deutsch classify motivational conflicts as group conflicts.

Conflict resolution methods

There are many ways to resolve conflict situations. They help solve the problem immediately after it occurs or stop its development.

Rivalry

Implemented more often than other methods. Involves defending one's interests to the bitter end. The parties to the conflict are ready to do anything not to give in to each other. Various types of pressure can be used in the process.

The method is used when people’s lives and the success of an enterprise depend on the decision made. An example could be a situation where one of the family members wants to go on vacation to a country with a difficult political situation, the threat of a military coup. Here the opponent can and must be proven right.

This method is also applicable in cases where it is necessary to resolve a conflict between a manager and a subordinate. The first can force the second to accept his point of view.

Device

Otherwise called flexibility. This is a decision to sacrifice one's interests for the sake of maintaining normal relationships. The method will be effective in several cases:

• good relationships are better than the cause of conflict;
• the result is more important to the opponent;
• the situation does not deserve such close attention;
• the chances of winning are critically low.

You can also make concessions if a person admits he was wrong.

Compromise

This is a situation when the parties to the conflict make concessions, satisfying only part of their own interests. There are cases when you need to use this particular exit path:

• the parties have an equal chance of winning;
• a temporary solution works for both;
• the initial goal or task can be modified.

You can compromise when it is the only way to maintain a good relationship.

Cooperation

Allows you to satisfy the interests of all parties to the conflict. However, it will take more time to resolve the problem.

This method will be most effective if:

• opponents want to avoid a quarrel and at the same time remain in their interests;
• the relationships between the parties to the conflict require preservation;
• there is plenty of time to solve the problem;
• the participants in the quarrel are ready to calmly explain their position.

Cooperation is appropriate if the parties to the conflict speak as equals. Otherwise there will be no result.

Care

Detachment from conflict or the so-called ostrich method. The person simply steps aside, leaving the problem unresolved. Such actions will be especially effective in the case when the counterpart is not well-mannered, deliberately provokes a quarrel, or is a complete stranger. This also includes situations where the result is not so important.

Avoiding conflict is considered an inappropriate method for resolving serious issues. Over time, discontent will accumulate, which will ultimately lead to a scandal.

What is conflict?

In simple words, this is the opposition of the participants, and a conflict situation is a way of resolving contradictions, which is not expressed in a peaceful way. Conflicts are usually accompanied by a surge of negative emotions.

Without conflicts, communication is impossible. Even the best relationships are tested. And in general, wherever at least two people act, conflicts are inevitable, because each of them has different interests, goals, and values. Even if everything is decent on the outside—no one hits each other’s faces or says hurtful words—people can have passions boiling inside. How to extinguish this volcano in the bud and get out of a conflict situation with dignity? And is it necessary to extinguish it - perhaps this is not a dead end, but a path to development?

Conflict and emotional control

Managing feelings in a conflict situation is difficult, but it is worth learning. Negative emotions will not solve the problem. They will worsen your relationship with your opponent, your mood, and your health.

You need to react as calmly as possible to the attacks and emotional impact of your interlocutor. This is the main advice. You cannot give in to the “enemy” and act in the same way. It’s better to stop and ask yourself three questions: “Why does a person behave this way?”, “What does he want to achieve?”, “What is the main reason for the manifestation of negative emotions?” This tactic has many advantages:

1. The work of consciousness is activated. Thanks to this, protection against emotional overstrain is activated.
2. The opponent can let off steam.
3. It turns out to be distracted at least for a few moments from unnecessary, offensive information.
4. Reflection and search for answers allows you to assess the situation from the outside and find out the cause of the conflict.

The second piece of advice concerns constructive dialogue, during which you can share your experiences and express your emotions. Often negativity is a kind of defensive reaction of a person to rude behavior or shouting. Therefore, you need to talk calmly, trying to avoid incorrect statements and derogatory phrases.

And finally, the third tip. It affects self-esteem. Under no circumstances should you underestimate either your self-esteem or your opponent. The conversation should take place as equals.

Conflict in a team: how to reduce losses, benefit and stay alive. Part 1

Hello, Habr!

My name is Tatyana, I am Team Coach R&D at Plesk, and we resolve most of the conflict situations in teams together with team leads.

Conflicts arise from time to time even in the most cohesive teams. And if they are not resolved naturally and constructively, they create costs, reduce the productivity of the entire team, demotivate and destroy trust.

Over the past few years, our approach to conflict management has changed significantly. We have learned to solve them faster, more efficiently, and with fewer losses. But even now our team is only halfway there.

At TeamLead Conf 2022, I shared the obstacles we overcame, the mistakes we made, the approach we developed, and the recipes that worked. Unexpectedly, the report made it to the TOP-3. You can combine reading and listening to a video of the speech.

There was a lot of content, so colleagues from Ontiko suggested breaking it into parts and writing two articles based on the report. Therefore, I am glad to share today the first story about our approach to conflict resolution (more theory), and an article with specific cases (practice) will be published in a week.

The story turned out to be voluminous, so here is a summary.

• Introduction
• What is conflict?
• Where can conflict arise in a team?
• Structure of the conflict

  Finding participants, their points of view and context

• We identify positions, interests and formulate the problem
• How to find interests hidden behind a position?

Introduction

The topic of conflicts is raised from time to time at conferences and in articles on Habré. But, in my opinion, most often we are talking about specific communication techniques and ways of working with manipulation. That is, reactive actions are considered “in the moment,” in the midst of a conflict confrontation.

But think about it, how often do we, at the time of a conflict that occurs on emotions, remember those 33 techniques that we read about in a book and act according to the instructions? Most likely rare. And our first reaction to a conflicting stimulus is not always thought out, often emotional. We are usually unhappy with the result of such a reaction.

At the same time, when faced with a more familiar technical problem, the first thing we usually do is evaluate it, decompose it, examine it from different angles, validate the data, reduce the degree of uncertainty, and only then begin to solve it. You can work with conflicts in the same way.

I propose to focus on diagnosing the conflict. My hypothesis: if we learn to quickly and accurately diagnose a conflict, we will be able to quickly, accurately and cheaply choose the right way to manage it.

I suggest that you first get under the hood of the conflict and see what it consists of. Next, look at what laws the conflict develops dynamically. As a result, we will put the steps to manage conflict into a small algorithm.

Logic of working with conflict / Contents of the report and two articles

Let's check the cards for the main characters: who is the team lead?

Historically, our team leader is, first of all, an experienced engineer with a balance of hard and soft skills, who had the authority of a cool engineer, but became interested in strategy, people and became a manager. Perhaps you recognize yourself in this portrait.

Portrait of a Plesk team leader

What is conflict?

Before reading the next block, try to take a moment’s pause and answer the question: what is conflict for me? What associations does this word evoke in me? What does it sound like, what does it look like?

And to remember whether we are ready to openly discuss conflicts to which we were directly related, let’s look at a situation in which everyone probably found themselves.

Interview. For the position of team lead. Let's imagine, for example, that an HR manager tests your conflict management skills and asks how you resolved conflicts in your team. You answer: “Well, what conflicts! I am a completely non-conflict person!”

Dialogue about conflicts in interviews

Question: why did you choose the tactic of not talking about conflicts in the team that you probably had?

Perhaps because when you heard the word “conflict” your imagination pictured failures, and you didn’t want to associate your reputation with them in an interview? Or maybe you didn’t want to talk about the fact that in difficult situations you made decisions almost randomly?

One way or another, in this example, the interlocutors look at the fact of the presence of conflicts in experience differently. The team lead, who decided not to talk about ambiguous cases, did not expect that for HR a person without experience in solving problems is a pig in a poke, and a candidate with experience of failures from which the right conclusions were drawn is a godsend.

Today we’ll talk about different attitudes to conflict. In our team, the attitude towards him has changed evolutionarily. When we started to sort out complex conflict situations with our team leads, we noticed that most of them were associated with losses, burnout, stress, loss of trust, powerlessness and putting out fires.

In general, the conflict was inevitably associated with negative things, which are sometimes easier to sweep under the rug, because... What to do with them is completely unclear. It was also possible to pretend that nothing was happening, or to nip the conflict in the bud - especially since the team lead had administrative leverage. I will not hide that we had similar stories, but gradually we began to admit that such an attitude towards the conflict costs us dearly.

Let's get a little synchronized in terms of concepts. You've probably already thought about your associations and terms that are familiar to you. I propose today that by conflict we understand any situation based on a contradiction (and often more than one) born at the intersection of the interests of several parties.

Where can conflict arise in a team?

In fact, a conflict can arise at any stage of the management cycle: when you plan tasks, set them, control their implementation, motivate people, give them feedback.

Conflicts at any stage of the management cycle

There are many reasons for their typology, let’s take a simple one - based on the composition of the participants: interpersonal, inter-team, conflicts between roles and systems.

Types of conflicts by composition of participants

Surely, you have come across all the named types. But most often we are disturbed and drained of strength by interpersonal conflicts in which something personal and important is affected. What we are doing right now. Therefore, we will mainly analyze them further.

Structure of the conflict

Now let's figure out what the conflict consists of.

Finding participants, their points of view and context

The first step is to understand who is actually involved in the conflict. If there are few participants, they are in an open constructive dialogue, we can quickly understand the problem and offer a solution.

But in interpersonal conflicts, the interests of even two participants are often not obvious; hurt feelings prevent an open dialogue. And if the team has not yet developed a clear culture of conflict resolution, the team leader will have to try hard to understand which problem is really worth solving and which is false or secondary.

The situation is complicated by the fact that team conflicts often involve not two participants, but several, and not all of them are obvious. The composition can be varied - support groups, coalitions, other “onlookers” participants. Everyone is vocal about their point of view, but the “thought leaders” of a conflict are usually not those who speak loudest, but those in the shadows. Identifying them is not always easy, but it is important - they are the ones you need to talk to first.

What is worth talking about?

When analyzing conflicts in a team, we often noticed that both employees and ourselves often talk about the same fact, but put completely different meanings into the words. This is a trap that is important to reflect on in time.

Everything becomes easier if you learn to align the context : understand what fact a person is talking about, what really stands behind it, what goals and interests he pursues, what emotions he experiences. It is important to learn to separate one from the other, recognize and discuss what is necessary. When such a skill is developed, arguing becomes much easier.

We separate the fact -> its interpretation -> emotions -> compare the cards

To help separate the flies from the cutlets, there is a tool called the Triangle Criminal Procedure Code - a method for diagnosing the structure of a conflict, proposed by conflictologist Christopher Mitchell. The method helps to look at the situation from the point of view of each side.

If each participant in the conflict can formulate his own view of himself and his partner and tries to formulate the same for the second participant in the conflict, this can become an important stage in the dialogue.

It is assumed that each party will formulate a view on specific actions (their own and the opponent’s), reflect on existing attitudes towards themselves and their partner, and describe their perception of the context - the objective circumstances in which they and the opponent find themselves.

The point of view can be “read” from another, it can be asked about directly, it can be clarified and recorded in writing on the “conflict map”. Validated data about each other is a reason for synchronization, increasing transparency, understanding the essence of the conflict and the problems that require solutions.

Points of view of the parties according to the “Triangle of Criminal Procedure Code” method

It is also extremely important for the team to be able to synchronize on values. This is a guarantee that even if we initially argue at the level of different meanings, we will be able to solve the problem on its merits and, which is very important in team conflicts, maintain (or even strengthen) relationships.

A simple example of my own mistake and misunderstanding in online dialogue. The department had a case of non-standard internal rotation for a key position, and something went wrong.

In my opinion, the team leads did not talk quite correctly with the person they wanted to offer to radically change their role and team. And, cutting corners during a call in Google Meet, I allowed myself to give a rather careless assessment of the actions of one of the guys: “Vasya, why did you shift responsibility for communication?” And the always very diplomatic Vasya very quickly reacted and retorted: “What kind of nonsense are you talking about? I didn’t shift any responsibility!”

Another interested participant took part in the conversation, which heightened the perception. There could have been a curtain right away, but we quickly realized that the conversation had gone in the wrong direction, returned to the facts, found out common interests and agreed to resolve the issue on the merits.

But immediately after the call, we contacted the team lead, apologized to each other for the wording, and once again explained the nature of the trigger. And this is a very cool feeling of shoulder, like-mindedness, when in disagreements you can immediately align the context and speak frankly about perception.

values ​​help us a lot in this : openness, safety, timeliness, non-toxicity and trust. Attunement to basic values ​​helps to remove misunderstandings on the spot and not leave a residue.

We identify positions, interests and formulate the problem

Often in conflict we argue at the level of positions , and often they are mutually exclusive:

But behind these declarations there are most often specific interests that we do not talk about.

There are substantive interests, and there are psychological ones, which often even come to the fore.

the problem that needs to be solved most often lies

Thus, in conflict analysis, it is extremely important to learn to separate what people say from what really stands behind that statement.

Correlation of positions and interests in the conflict

It is important to consider that there is usually more than one interest behind each position.

For example, in the case of internal rotation, behind the position of transferring a specific employee to a new role, each party had a number of its own interests. The goals of all teams were constructive, but some interests overlapped.

Each team assessed its balance of resources and tasks, risks and benefits due to rotation. Therefore, a competent scenario required that all the interests and all the doubts of the teams and individual participants be clarified and brought to the negotiating table.

Important: as soon as we learn to find out what interests, needs, and values ​​lie behind each position of the parties, we will understand that we can replace positional bargaining with substantive negotiations.

A simple everyday example. Let's imagine that two children are fighting over one orange. This is a scarce resource, both sides want to have it. What to do? You can throw away the orange, place the children in the corners. Or you can ask: “Tell me, why do you need the fruit?”

Let's hear that one child decided to bake a pie; he needed a crust and zest. And the other wanted to squeeze out fresh juice. We see that if you look _behind_ the declaration, you can invent a previously invisible, mutually beneficial option for satisfying initially mutually exclusive positions.

When the situation becomes more complicated, the same approach works.

In negotiation strategies it is also called “increasing the pie.”

Harvard scientists R. Fisher and W. Urey were the first to talk about this approach; there is an article on Habr with a synopsis of one of their famous books on this topic.

Or a real example from the life of one of our teams. Engineer Petya came to the team lead with an offer and asked to increase the salary by one and a half times, noting that otherwise he would be forced to accept the invitation of another company.

The team leader is upset, but throws up his hands, since it is not possible to resolve the issue in this way. I find out about the situation after the fact, conduct an exit interview and hear from the engineer:

– To be honest... I didn’t want to leave at all, money was just an excuse...

– ?…

– I got tired of being a developer and wanted to try myself as a devops engineer...

- Okay, why didn’t you say so directly?

- Yes, it was somehow awkward. But I was hinting! Apparently I’m not suitable...

Having found out all the details, I suggest calling the team lead and going back a step, discussing the options and finding a solution. The engineer would be happy, but by the time of the exit interview he had already given his word to the new company and became involved in new prospects.

What happened? The conversation between the team lead and Petya initially took place at the level of positions: “give me money, I won’t give you money.” At the same time, they had common interests - working in the same team, cutting their favorite product. Initially, both did not want to lose each other, but these interests were not revealed.

Both of them either did not hear each other’s silence or hints, or interpreted them incorrectly. Hidden interests remained at the level of a private position and did not turn into a neutrally formulated list of problems that could be discussed and solved:

– the possibility of changing the role in the current team – the possibility of changing the team – conditions for a salary increase – and so on.

If we evaluate the consequences, then such a mistake is expensive for the team - investing in effective communications with an existing employee is much cheaper than recruiting and immersing a new one in the project.

We had similar problems not only in situations with engineers, but also at the level of team leads. Sometimes, when inviting us to discuss contradictions in the team, we could hear the following words from the guys:

-What's the problem? I do not have problems.

– I don’t have any conflicts in my team at all. You have misunderstood it!

- Everything is calm for me. There is a problem, but I am not a psychologist for them, not their father or mother - let them resolve it themselves.

- Listen, have you even seen my schedule?

- I don’t understand, am I to blame?

Perhaps you said something similar to your leader or HR, who decided to open up a sore spot and help. Think about it, what really stands behind these formulations?

Remember, maybe in similar situations you felt the same? If so, then a great help in the conflict will be the ability to move from provocation and defense at the position level to the level of frank dialogue about your needs, concerns and resources, and by your example teach constructive dialogue to the team.

How to find interests hidden behind a position?

Of course, you can simply ask: “Petya, why do you want to leave?” And he can answer: “Yes, that’s why.” But more often than not, people do not speak directly about their own motives, especially if we are talking about difficult and significant situations for them. There are different reasons, each of which can be dealt with in its own way.

I will share the ones that I encountered most often in conflicts:

• People had different understandings of the terms/essence of the problem.
• They understood/knew the facts differently.
• Leverages and consequences were understood differently.
• They felt the distance, the lack of contact, and did not understand the goals of the interlocutor.
• They had certain role expectations (“I was waiting for you to ask in more detail”, “I was waiting for the team lead to ask”).
• They considered themselves/their interests “insignificant”, “outside the system”.
• They tried to “save face.”
• They were afraid of condemnation.
• They were afraid of disclosure.
• We were at the moment under the influence of a traumatic situation for ourselves.
• They felt meaningless, did not trust the sincere interest of the leader, and projected past experience.
• They understood etiquette and confidentiality in their own way (“it is indecent to reveal details in which management is involved”).

Above, we examined the “triangle of the Code of Criminal Procedure,” which, among other things, will help bring to the surface the hidden interests of the parties. In his book “Jedi Techniques for Constructive Communication,” Alexander Orlov also offers simple formulations in the form of questions.

If a person does not answer the direct question “Why?”, you can offer him your own solution and ask him to criticize him. It is sometimes easier for people to criticize someone else's decision than to offer your own. But the interests in such “cases on the contrary” also become clearer.

What to ask:

- Why don’t you like my version? -Which decision do you see as correct? - How do you see it? Why do you want it? - Why not"? -What exactly do you want? - How do we solve this?

Sometimes it works.

So, what we have already sorted out:

– what do we mean by conflict; – how to identify participants in the structure, their positions, interests, needs and view of the context; – why and how to agree on terms and expectations from each other; – how to formulate a non-judgmental problem for solution.

Structure of a conflict situation

Dynamics of conflict

Let's now look at how the conflict develops. This is important because the conflict, like any thriller, has its own dramaturgy. It grabs us emotionally, and when this happens, we instinctively want to fight back, attack back, defend ourselves, or hide.

If we learn to recognize conflict by “weak” signals at a stage when it has not yet entered the stage of open emotional declarations, it will be easier, more effective and cheaper to manage.

Dynamics of a conflict situation

Stages of conflict

Conflictologists identify a large number of stages of conflict. For example, the Austrian conflictologist Friedrich Glazzle in his work “Conflict Management” describes as many as 9 stages, but we will look at four main ones.

1. Pre-conflict . The first disagreements have arisen, and the parties are still trying to resolve them in a non-conflict manner. But time passes, an agreement cannot be reached, tensions grow.

2. Stage of open conflict. Escalation. With increased tension, something happens that becomes a “point of no return.” Such an incident can be a careless word or action - accidental or deliberate, provoked by one of the parties. After that everything goes to hell. It is usually extremely difficult to reach an agreement at this stage.

3 . Stage of open conflict. De-escalation. The situation reaches a certain peak, after which the tension subsides. But this does not always mean that the conflict is moving towards resolution - perhaps the parties have taken a break, are hoarding resources, looking for information, and have even lost the motive to fight. But with proper management of the situation, this may well mean that the parties have heard each other, recognized the legitimacy of demands, fears and emotions, cooled down and are looking for a solution.

4. Post-conflict . An important stage that will show how correctly everything was decided at the previous stage. It’s too early to relax, it’s important to observe. If the parties “swept the conflict under the rug” or settled it by force, but did not solve the problem in essence, then with a high degree of probability it will flare up again.

When you notice signs of conflict in your team and analyze what is happening, you can ask yourself the following questions:

- Where are we now? — What was hidden and becomes clear? — What became the incident? — How did the interaction change? — What is the forecast for the aggravation of the situation on a 10-point scale? — Is a new revolution possible?

How to recognize escalation

A little about how you can find out that the matter smells of kerosene, although no one on the team raises their voice, slams the door or defiantly leaves the chat, while the conflict is already at the escalation stage and requires active action.

You may notice that communication and relationships have changed within the team. The guys who yesterday were playing board games together and drinking beer in a bar, celebrating the release, today turned from partners into enemies. Arguments in disputes have become irrational. Trust was replaced by the expectation of a catch. The section of responsibility for the failure at the iteration turned into a sharp debriefing with shifting the blame.

Everything has become so escalated that nuances have disappeared, thinking and arguments have become black and white, and any action of the “other side” has begun to be interpreted as intentional harm and damage to oneself.

What happens at the stage of conflict escalation (open conflict)

And vice versa, if jokes and open clashes during work disputes in your team were commonplace, everyone was OK, and no one was shy about swearing when they were solving problems on the merits, but “suddenly” everyone became extremely polite and acted according to instructions, then this is more like an “Italian strike” than a sharp change in cultural code. This, however, is rather about how to identify a hidden, “cold conflict” in the active phase; this can be discussed separately.

Once you know that you are now in the escalation phase, you need to take immediate action. How can development be stopped at the escalation stage?

There are a number of techniques for direct and preventive amortization (you can read about them in the books of Mikhail Litvak, for example, in “Psychological Aikido”) and active listening techniques that will help to amortize emotions in a conflict due to the fact that they will be revealed, named, heard and recognized .

You can also use a series of questions that will help bring a person back to reality and conscious perception. If you are embroiled in conflict, it is worth asking these questions to yourself. And if you are a mediator in a conflict - to a colleague.

– What do you really want now? – What will happen if you continue to do A? – Are you ready to bear the consequences of B’s actions? – What do you think will happen if you continue to publicly discuss Vasya in the kitchen and say that his code is g*o?

Questions with a reality test and validation of consequences are often sobering and allow you to return the conversation to the subject.

Choosing a solution

When you have analyzed the conflict from different sides, you can choose a management .

• I propose that in a narrow sense, conflict management is understood as the resolution of a conflict or its episode,
• and in a broad sense, we understand conflict management as any conscious action in response to a conflict.

There are many approaches to conflict management. But since we consider conflicts in a team, we by default consider partner integrative negotiations and the win-win approach to be more effective than the win-lose approach.

Interaction styles in conflict

Positional bargaining, based on rivalry and suppression of information, may suit you once with a one-time sale of a gadget on Avito, but it will definitely come back to haunt you in a conflict with a “difficult” employee. Even after resigning, he will be a leader of opinion in circles, the reputation of which may subsequently be critically important for you.

According to famous American conflictologists Kenneth Thomas and Ralph Kilmann, 5 main styles of interaction in conflict can be distinguished. And each of them has its own advantages and limitations.

Approaches to interaction in conflict

1. Suppression . You act from a position of strength, the administrative leverage that you have, without taking into account the interests of the other side.

It happens that such tactics are appropriate - for example, in the event of a “fire”, when decisive urgent action is required and there is no time to negotiate. But after that, you definitely need to explain what happened.

2. Evasion. Sometimes you can simply walk away from a conflict, ignore it, or limit contact with the conflicting party. This may be an appropriate tactic if the gain is not comparable to the damage or the current development of the situation does not promise a gain at all. Perhaps the clash is with an equal participant, and complications in the relationship are undesirable. Perhaps you need to gain time or this conflict is not relevant to you at all now.

3. Device. This tactic can be chosen if you are ready to sacrifice your interests for the sake of the interests of another. For example, when your relationship with a person is more important than the subject of your disagreement, or the problem as a whole is not very significant for you.

4. Compromise. It implies only partial satisfaction of interests, therefore in many cases it is considered a rather unstable technique. Compromise is loved because it allows you to save relationships and not lose everything; it can be a temporary solution when suppression or cooperation is impossible or does not bring the desired effect. And they criticize the fact that if a party infringes on important points for it, the visually stable agreement will fall apart and the conflict will flare up again.

5. Collaboration. It involves a joint search for a solution that will suit everyone. Therefore, many consider it a “magic hike” that should be applied everywhere. But this is not entirely true; cooperation is a very “expensive” strategy that is not always possible. For example, you want to cooperate, but your colleague does not. It is unknown what to do about it, and there is no time to decide. There are techniques for bringing a party into integrative negotiations, but this is a separate complex topic. Therefore, an important condition for the implementation of a partnership approach will be approximately equal and voluntary desire, as well as the ability of each party to invest all resources in developing agreements.

Let's get back to practice. Many approaches from books on raising children are very similar to approaches in books for managers. Therefore, let's look at another everyday example that will seem familiar to many who work remotely.

So, you are on remote mode, there is a quarantine around you, everything is closed, you are working from home, and children are running around in the background.

Let's imagine that two children are making noise while trying to share a ball.

And you have an important ZOOM call.

Gluing children to the wall with duct tape is only possible in an Internet meme.

There are three sides here: you and the children, and each has its own interests. For children - to play, for you - to have a normal meeting, and also - to teach children to respect your work space and agree with each other. Common interests are to maintain respectful relationships and atmosphere in the home.

If your call starts any minute, you only have time to put on your top, pick up the ball and close the door, offering to discuss everything later. You may decide that suppression is appropriate here.

But if there is still time before the call, you can choose a partnership approach and ask: “Tell me, what is the problem? What can we come up with so that you can agree and I can work in silence?” In this way, you demonstrate interest in what is behind the behavior of children, in a sense, you even respect this fight as a construct and teach a different approach, to talk by example.

And you don't need to be a certified coach to do this. The good news: by and large, everyone who knows how to listen, hear and ask questions is already working in the coaching approach. From this perspective, each team leader can easily be a coach and mediator in a team conflict.

Our current approach

I began the story by describing the approach to conflict as an unwanted problem that is easier to avoid and suppress. But today conflict is a normal occurrence for Plesk team leads. We accepted this not at the level of a beautiful declaration, but at the level of lived experience and conclusions drawn. Where there are people, there will always be conflicts; there is no change without clashes.

– At the heart of a conflict are usually contradictions that require resolution. Solving problems is our job.

– Conflict can be useful. So much so that it is worth learning to intervene in a conflict, sometimes it is even worth provoking it.

– Inability to negotiate, lack of time – these are bad habits or lack of skills. This can and should be changed.

How exactly did we get to this point:

– in case of disagreements, we agreed on terms, – we revised roles and expectations for each other, – we aligned contexts, – we clearly formulated positions, explained to each other what we wanted and why, – we looked for common interests and relied on them, – we gave each other feedback, if something went wrong, we stopped comparing ourselves with carrots, admitted that experiences can be different, and we are stronger together, we began to admit mistakes.

Gradually, we also built a system of internal LeadTalks, where team leads meet, exchange experiences, sort out difficult situations and look for new solutions. This happens almost every two weeks.

Long-term training of all Plesk team leads at the management school, where the guys became acquainted with the principles of the famous American psychotherapist Milton Erickson, some of which they took into their work, also helped us develop a new approach to solving difficult situations.

1. Changes are inevitable . We are growing, everything will change, those who are flexible will survive.
2. Everything is OK with everyone . Each author of his own decisions. This means that, a priori, all participants in the conflict are normal. And there is no need to get into a person’s head if he does not have a request for it.
3. Everyone has all the resources. By default, a person has everything they want and need in order to change. If you make it clear to a person that he is not currently operating within the rules of your team, he is free to change. If he doesn’t understand how, he’ll ask you.
4. The basis of everything is positive intention . This is a very important approach. It lies in the fact that every action of a person on our team is based on a positive intention. Nobody wants to write bad code and intentionally damage the release. If, for example, a mistake was sent to production, it means it was made by accident.
5. And at that (and at every) moment it was the best choice a person could make.

We based our approach on 4 more principles.

1. The solution is based on diagnostics.

2. Gently towards the person, firmly towards the problem.

3. Focus on cooperation.

4. Form first, then essence.

Let me expand a little on the second principle: it means that we share our attitude towards a person and our attitude towards a problem.

A person’s behavior in a conflict at some point can be negative and even harmful in its impact on the project, result, or team. But this is an assessment of specific actions and consequences. This does not affect our attitude towards the personality of the team member himself. He remains our colleague, friend, partner and just a good person.

An example from the life of our team. Complex in emotions, delicate in ethics. We had a colleague, a very talented experienced engineer, who had been working on the team for many years. But something happened in his life, and he began to drink. This happens, this is life.

What did we do? For some time they carefully but firmly said that any manifestations of drunkenness during working hours were unacceptable and harmful, and asked to change the situation. She didn't change. And it became obvious to a large part of the team.

Some would probably break up right away. But we asked a question and heard that the employee would be glad to get all kinds of help. Then we enlisted his desire to change the situation and for almost a year we supported him in various ways: we recommended doctors, psychologists, supported him personally, and built a system of sick leave and recovery leave. They considered it important and correct.

In our opinion, without such a partnership approach to people, conflicts in a team cannot be effectively resolved. And often this choice is tactically quite expensive. Moreover, he is not even talking about some deferred strategic benefit. This is not written about in the “benefits” section on the company’s career website.

But this is a cultural code that is formed from specific decisions in difficult situations. And gradually becomes part of the team's DNA. These are the values ​​that allow you to feel safe not only at the peak of success, but also in situations of vulnerability that are characteristic of any conflict.

And the fourth principle: “first form, then essence.” I won’t say that we follow it perfectly, but we understand the importance of wording. And if we are not satisfied with the form of communication, we first try to make it work, and only then move on to the essence of the issue.

For example, if a holiwar starts in Slack chats and gets personal, the leaders try to move the conversation in a constructive direction. Guys-engineers also learn from concrete examples, and one day they themselves take on the role of a peacemaker, facilitator and mediator, even in a “neighboring” conflict. And it’s all about common values, goals, approach and team.

In the next article, we will analyze several large cases of conflict resolution from our experience, talk about what a conflict map is, and consider a conflict management algorithm.

PS Kirill Anastasin’s memes from his https://komikaki.ru/ were used as some illustrations, many thanks to him.

The nearest Ontiko conference - Saint TeamLead Conf 2022 - will be held on September 16 and 17, 2022 at the DESIGN DISTRICT DAA in SPB. You can purchase tickets for it today.

We look forward to seeing you at the 2022 conferences!

Rules of conduct in conflict situations

To resolve a conflict and maintain good relationships, you need to adhere to a certain algorithm of actions.

Find a common denominator

One of the effective ways out of conflict. You won’t be able to tolerate an unpleasant situation or avoid your opponent for a long time, so you still have to talk. Several effective recommendations will help you do without “victims”:

1. Screaming and indignation will achieve nothing. There are, of course, exceptions. However, they usually have the opposite effect. Therefore, you need to remain calm. This behavior will somewhat calm down the “rival” and will arouse respect in him.
2. It is important to understand the other person. You need to think about why your opponent behaves this way. Knowing the motive will help resolve the conflict so as not to return to it again.
3. Get outside opinions. Often, others provide a more adequate assessment of what is happening. Therefore, you need to describe the situation to a close relative or friend. Perhaps he will show a direct way out of their conflict or at least give practical advice.
4. Assess your attitude towards your opponent. We need to think about whether the cause of the conflict is a biased attitude towards a person? If this is the case, it’s worth reminding yourself that no two people on the planet are the same. Discrepancies in character and outlook on life do not make an opponent bad.
5. Think about what the participants in the quarrel have in common. It could be anything: hobbies, music, movies, family. It happens that identical interests nullify differences and radically change the nature of relationships.

In order to find a common denominator and understand all participants in a conflict situation, you need to devote more time to live communication. In the age of technological development, it has become catastrophically scarce. Regular conversations have given way to correspondence via email or social networks. But this will not solve the problem.

Not only constructive dialogues will help to establish communication, but also joint shopping trips, trips to nature, playing sports, etc.

Conflict without aggression

In the wild, aggression is easily fought through a show of force. This is how males defend their territory, females, and food. In human society everything is much more complicated.

A number of principles will help to ensure that in a conflict situation it does not lead to aggression:

1. A smile shows that the opponent, despite disagreements and misunderstandings, evokes sincere sympathy and respect. A good mood quickly spreads to other people.
2. Speaking in a raised voice is a manifestation of aggression. In view of this, the conversation must be conducted calmly, smoothly, and unhurriedly.
3. The opponent needs to speak out. Let him tell you what he doesn't like. At this stage, you should show interest, ask leading questions and insert remarks.

It is also important to show a willingness to cooperate. It is not necessary to make concessions and sacrifice your interests. The main thing is to show sincere interest in solving the problem.

Conflict and Dignity

Remaining calm when your opponent is openly hostile is not easy. Especially if the conflict has dragged on. However, it is still possible to restrain yourself, not start shouting, and maintain your dignity. It is enough to use one of the effective tips:

1. Don't forget about the goal and your position. There is no need to succumb to provocations, attempts to offend or confuse. The interlocutor can resort to any tricks: accusations, memories from the past, persuasion, threats. You should not react to them, make excuses, argue or explain anything. It is better to let the person speak out, and then firmly voice his position.
2. Don't get personal. We need to talk about the problem, not about each other. If necessary, the conversation should be brought back on track.
3. Control behavior. There is no need to tease your opponent. In order to reduce the ardor, it is better to try to adapt to his mood. If he screams, you can also raise your tone. But do this without anger and aggression. Perhaps, seeing himself from the outside, a person will change his behavior.

Another tip: you should always remain yourself. You should not be sarcastic or rude in response to barbs and threats. It is necessary to be above all this, showing the level of education and good manners.

It’s easy to ask for forgiveness and smooth over conflict

Quite an effective way to resolve conflict situations. Helps to avoid grievances, mutual reproaches, and showdowns.

To apologize properly, you need to follow a few tips:

1. Don't waste time. The situation will not resolve on its own. Delaying will intensify the conflict and lead to loss of respect and trust. Therefore, you need to call your opponent for a conversation as quickly as possible.
2. Discuss the situation exclusively in person. As stated above, communication on social networks or instant messengers does not solve the problem. If a person does not want to see each other, you should wait a while and try again.
3. Be as sincere as possible. The desire to resolve the conflict and change the situation must be sincere. It is unlikely that anything will work out if there is falsehood in every word.
4. Choose the right words. The conversation should resolve the conflict, not spark a new one. Therefore, there is no need to make excuses, start discussing a controversial issue again, or remember past grievances.

An apology does not guarantee that the relationship will be the same as it was before. You will have to make a lot of effort to earn trust again.

We are looking for a way out of the situation together with our opponent

Everything is simple here. It is enough to ask your opponents to tell you how they see the result and what prevents its achievement. They also need to suggest ways to resolve the conflict. There is no need to find out who is right and who is wrong. It’s better to discuss together what to do next.

Mirror of claims

Even if the essence of the conflict and the views of the parties to the conflict are clear, you need to clarify details and ask questions from time to time. This way you can show yourself as an attentive interlocutor, a person interested in resolving the issue as quickly as possible.

Mirroring complaints is a great way to reduce aggression.

To be silent or not

It all depends on the situation. If a person is drawn into a quarrel against his will, it is better to be the first to shut up. Such a way out of the conflict will negate the opponent’s efforts to provoke aggression or offend.

If your opponent has stopped talking, you should not remain silent. He may take this as surrender and his own victory. However, the subsequent conversation should be calm, without complaints or reproaches.

Another classification

Conflicts are also divided into other types.

Conflict of concepts

It would seem that a completely understandable task is working with a client. But one employee understands this concept as a full range of work - from the first contact to a personal meeting, while for another, all the work consists of cold calling clients. And everyone is absolutely sure that they are right.

How to solve? Give employees clear directives and call a spade a spade. Please clarify and ask again. It is better to clarify concepts immediately so as not to encounter conflicts later.

Conflict of perception of reality

Different people perceive the same situation differently. For example, a low-quality product was brought to the store at a bargain price. All your employees are calm about the situation. “Well, it happens,” they say, “and he has a corresponding price.” But if an idealist appears in the team, he will take it as a personal insult and start a holy war.

How to solve? Rely on facts, not on the personal attitude of each employee. And not even on your own. Understand that all people are different, that everyone has their own principles, and listen to everyone. And then calmly explain - better using facts and figures.

Role conflict

Most often it happens at work when one participant plays one role, another another. And when a person doesn’t like a certain role, dissatisfaction begins. For example: “I will not do this, this is not part of my job responsibilities.”

How to solve? Such a conflict can be resolved quite easily: a person must clearly understand his role in the team . And one more thing: this role must be acceptable to him. If job responsibilities include things that are not very pleasant for a particular employee (for example, calling clients is very difficult for an introvert), it is better to change his role.

Style conflict

We have already written about leadership styles - every employee has approximately the same ones. Only he doesn’t lead anyone - he’s just used to being a leader, dictator or democrat in life. And if your styles do not match, there will be conflict. A hard-willed person in the position of manager will never understand a soft, liberal boss. Discontent and sabotage can grow from this misunderstanding. Thus, interpersonal conflict will lead to intergroup conflict.

How to solve? Of course, you don’t owe anything to anyone - and yet try to adapt to everyone . Be soft and firm depending on the situation. But never show weakness and confusion - otherwise your authority will be lost.

Conflict of interest

Perhaps the simplest type. Your employee wants a salary increase - it’s beneficial for him. If you don't want it, it's not beneficial for you. Some workers want to work on weekends and holidays (they’ll get double pay, why not work hard?), while others have families and don’t want to sacrifice their personal lives in the name of work.

How to solve? You can’t adapt to everyone - everyone has their own interests. In this situation, it is better to come up with a constructive solution that everyone will appreciate . For example, offer weekend work only to those who agree to it. And pay decently for this work. So the sheep will be safe and the wolves will be fed.

Conflict of internal attitudes

This is an intrapersonal conflict that occurs in a person’s soul, but at any moment can break free and drag other people into a conflict situation. For example, from the series “in words you are Leo Tolstoy, but in reality you are a simple horseradish.” This often happens with employees who imagine themselves to be the navel of the earth, the leader of the team, but in reality they work as a simple secretary or junior salesman. Sooner or later, discontent will spill out, and others will not like it (and sometimes quite deservedly so).

How to solve? In this case, a confidential conversation and personal effectiveness training will help . If you value this employee, try to understand his true aspirations and improve his efficiency so that his dreams become a reality.

As you can see, almost any conflict situation can be resolved. But the highest aerobatics is to put it on a peaceful footing and offer a constructive solution. We believe you will succeed!

What is strictly forbidden to do during a conflict?

There are several prohibitions:

• criticize an opponent;
• attribute bad intentions;
• demonstrate your superiority;
• Blame the incident solely on the interlocutor;
• ignore the interests and position of your counterpart;
• take into account only your own opinion;
• deliberately belittle the merits of the opponent;
• provoke;
• raise the tone, shout;
• put pressure on the sore spot.

Don't think in stereotypes. A person may have a different opinion. Don't try to squeeze a solution to a problem into a generally accepted framework.

Stages of dealing with conflict

The manager must resolve employee conflicts from a neutral position. Its main function is the role of an arbitrator, managing the emotions of all participants in the process, including his own. Methods of solution can be pedagogical (persuasion, explanation, request, conversation) and administrative (dismissal, reprimand, punishment).

HR specialists from the UK conducted a study in which the following percentages of respondents said that improper conflict resolution led to the following consequences:

• 27%: personal attacks and insults;
• 25%: absence from work and sick leave;
• 18%: conflict between departments;
• 18%: bullying;
• 18%: dismissal of employees;
• 16%: dismiss colleagues;
• 13%: Team members move between departments;
• 9%: projects failure.

To understand how to resolve a conflict, find out the reasons for its occurrence. This is best done during a conversation with the parties to the conflict.

Stage 1 – Clarification of the situation

It is better to start the conversation with an introduction in which you can express the hope that the conflict will be resolved for the common benefit. It is necessary to listen to all employees related to the conflict situation. This is the only way to look at the problem from all sides. Most likely, these will be mutual claims and emotional statements. This is necessary so that opponents can let off steam. The boss should not take sides or demonstrate support for a certain point of view. His task is to remain as objective as possible, find out the goals and motives of the employees’ actions, and study the relationships of the participants before the conflict.

Stage 2 – Modeling an “ideal” future

At this stage of the negotiations, find out what vision of the result each side of the conflict has. There is a possibility that this will be something impossible, but this is the only way to understand what each participant wants. It is important to continue communication, even if there is a feeling that negotiations have reached a dead end. The main thing is not to deviate from the essence of the problem and encourage movement towards reconciliation.

Stage 3 – Transition to constructive

To reduce emotional stress, it is important to demonstrate a desire to listen to your partner, show sincere interest in your opponent’s position, and focus on common interests and goals. You need to prove your position with facts, speak calmly, without unnecessary emotions. Using the information obtained earlier, you should briefly outline the essence of the conflict, determine the intentions of the parties to the dispute regarding the means of reconciliation, and move on to the next stage. It is important not to push with authority using threats and ultimatums.

Stage 4 – Finding a solution

At this stage, choose a solution that suits all participants. Often, looking at a situation from the outside, you can see a simple solution that did not occur to you due to raging emotions. If the manager understands that employees are able to negotiate on their own, he can provide them with this opportunity. Otherwise, it is worth drawing the attention of the participants to the fact that without mutual concessions the conflict will not be resolved, so it is necessary to choose an option that will suit everyone.

Stage 5 – Fixation of reconciliation

The solution found needs to be discussed in order to draw additional attention to it. Subordinates must understand that their opinions were heard and their interests were respected. Employee conflict is a pain point that can signal that something is wrong in the organization. Having established relationships between employees, the manager must analyze the big picture to reduce conflicts between employees.

Mikhail Mikhailov , founder of the consulting bureau MIKHAILOV CONSULTING:

“The conflict arose because one employee was appointed head of a department over another. The subordinate considered the new boss incompetent and not suitable for this role. I suggested that the owner act as a regulator in this conflict, since it was important for him to preserve both. But, in the end, we came to a simpler solution - to separate the parties to the conflict into different departments, since the size of the company and functionality allowed this. The employee conflict was resolved by eliminating interaction. Such an easy solution, of course, is not always possible. For other cases, there is a rather extensive procedure for resolving the conflict using a special method.”

Not just a conflict between employees: bullying in a team

Separate from work conflicts is psychological terror, bullying of “inconvenient” employees. Its causes may be personal hostility, tense relationships in the team, the presence of a provocateur who takes pleasure in pushing employees together. If the source of bullying is one person, this phenomenon is called bullying, if a group of employees is called mobbing. Manifestations can be different: boycott, gossip, slander, withholding information, unfounded criticism and much more.

Anyone can become a victim of mobbing:

• a new boss who is not accepted by the team;
• a very gifted employee whose colleagues are against him sticking his neck out;
• a modest hard worker who simply cannot respond to offenders.

Bullying shows that there is an unhealthy atmosphere in the team, so it is important to prevent such phenomena. But this can be very difficult to do - provocateurs get away with it during a conflict analysis, shifting responsibility to other colleagues. Mobbing is difficult to recognize and stop - helping the victim can be perceived as an attempt to single him out, which will lead to an escalation of the conflict.

Bullying often has ulterior motives, and to overcome it, it is better to consult a specialist. He will help to find the instigators of the conflict, determine what caused it, and improve relationships in the team. If we are talking about a specific provocateur who, due to character traits, lack of tact, conflict, sets other employees against each other, it is worth considering how valuable this person is to the organization. A solution in this situation may be to fire such an employee, transfer the victim of bullying to another department, disband the department or take measures to improve relationships, encourage teamwork, or work with a psychologist.

Natalya Storozheva , General Director of the Perspective Business and Career Development Center:

“The workdays of the sales department were like a theater of war: people were in conflict over the distribution of client requests from the site, the provision of special conditions to customers, the reservation of goods, the sequence of document processing. It wasn’t just hostility; employees were openly harming each other. One manager kept losing documents, and he was forced to carry a thick folder of “primary documents” to lunch and coffee breaks. Another’s computer constantly froze and the email program did not work; the third could not be reached by phone due to constant communication problems. For some time, the manager turned a blind eye to this, considering it a manifestation of healthy competition. But one day, while one of the employees was absent from the office, her client was told that she was fired due to a loss of trust from management. This led to the loss of a large order, and the manager’s patience ran out. To overcome conflict and sabotage in the team, he revised the department’s motivation system and added a team bonus to personal bonuses, motivating people to cooperate, share experiences, help each other in obtaining orders and developing work with clients. He also coordinated several team building trainings for the department to reduce aggression and help people move from confrontation to mutual assistance. This helped develop team communication skills and reduce tension. It took about three months to stabilize the situation, the sabotage gradually stopped, and the department’s efficiency indicators went up. After 6-7 months, sales growth was 10-12%"

Conflict Prevention

Conflict prevention is mainly about predicting them, for example, the severity of the consequences or the time of onset. Carrying out conflict prevention activities is only possible using methods such as expert surveys, experimental and mathematical modeling, extrapolation, etc. In addition, prevention should be carried out at all levels: personal level, micro level, average level and macro level.

Conflict prevention measures should be related to the elimination of conditions conducive to the emergence of conflicts. The basis here is such measures as eliminating the deformation of social relations, dividing society into social strata, social psychohygiene and social protection of the population, psychotherapy (individual, group, mass), psychoprophylaxis, as well as training in social interaction, education, education, etc.

All these nuances must be taken into account, because It is much easier to eliminate a problem in its bud than to deal with it later, resorting to all sorts of methods, techniques and tricks. But, of course, there are no methods that 100% guarantee that conflict will not arise, and conflicts should be perceived as an integral part of human life. And if problems arise, then you need to be fully armed, i.e. be prepared for them and be able to resolve them. So what does conflict resolution mean? How does this happen and how to learn it?