Ways to resolve conflicts in various situations: strategies, tools

In the previous lessons of our training on conflict management, we covered an extensive theoretical part concerning this issue, namely: we talked about what the causes of conflicts are and what are the stages of their development. We also looked at the practical aspect and presented to your attention methods for preventing and managing conflicts.

However, if due attention has been paid to theory and the knowledge gained is quite enough to understand the basics of conflict management, then practice is far from being limited to one lesson. Moreover, even a dozen lessons will not exhaust it, because the relevance of the problem is great and a huge amount of research and work is devoted to it. But we, nevertheless, still strive to provide you with the most useful and effective recommendations, which is why we continue to talk about practice.

Now we will talk about what to do in situations when the situation gets out of control and grows from potentially dangerous to posing a real threat - about what methods exist for resolving and resolving conflicts. But first, let's figure out what it is all about?

What is conflict

Translated from Latin, the word “conflict” means “collision, blow.” A conflict is an acute discrepancy between the interests of two or more parties, leading to confrontation. This is a radical way to eliminate contradictions between goals and views that arise in the process of interaction.

Conflict situations are always associated with negative emotions and often lead to antisocial behavior. To avoid bad consequences, you need to be able to get out of them correctly.

More than 100 cool lessons, tests and exercises for brain development

Start developing

Despite their negative emotional connotation, conflicts have not only destructive effects. There is an opinion in society that any confrontations should be avoided or tried to be resolved as soon as possible. But there is also a positive side. The collision of contradictions always leads to the birth of alternative ideas and meanings. This is an integral part of development and movement forward.

Analysis of a conflict situation

Analysis of a conflict situation in the process of conflict resolution is based on the following points:

1	Analysis of the sources of the conflict, namely: its historical, economic, social, national and other prerequisites; subjective or objective experiences of subjects; moral and humane aspects; as well as the depth of the conflict: contradictory views and opinions of the parties, their positions or complete confrontation.
2	Analysis of the so-called “biography” of the conflict: its history and the background against which it developed; growth; priority methods of struggle of subjects; moments of crisis and turning points; victims and other consequences.
3	Analysis of the subjects of the conflict, i.e. people, groups, organizations. The indicator of the social complexity of the conflict is determined by calculating the number of participants and their real strengths.
4	Analysis of positions and relationships of subjects: formal and informal, private and general; the scale of relationships, the roles of individuals and groups in the conflict; features of personal relationships between the parties - leaders and ordinary participants.
5	Analysis of attitudes towards the conflict, in other words, analysis of the question of whether the parties to the conflict have the desire to resolve it, whether they plan to do this independently or rely on external influences and factors; what the parties to the conflict expect, what they hope for, what conditions they put forward, etc.

Only after sufficiently analyzing the conflict situation does it make sense to conceive negotiations and try to exert some influence on the opponent/opponents.

Strategies for exiting conflict

Any unstable situation ultimately tends to reach equilibrium. Conflict is no exception. The outcome of the confrontation depends on the actions of each side. There are several basic strategies for dealing with confrontation.

Rivalry

The essence of this strategy is the uncompromising defense of one’s own interests, regardless of the interests of the opponent. Competition does not imply any compromise or cooperation. By choosing this style of behavior, a person actually starts a war, which should end in the victory of one side and the defeat of the other side.

Rivalry applies in the following cases:

one of the parties is extremely interested in satisfying its own interests;
there is no time to negotiate and discuss the possibility of compromise;
the conflict occurs in an emergency situation;
there is a high probability of developing dangerous consequences.

Withdrawal, avoidance

The avoidance strategy involves avoiding direct confrontation. A person does not try to defend his interests and avoids confrontation. In this way, he strives to avoid increasing tension and passions, and maintain peaceful relations with his opponent.

This strategy is most often used in the following cases:

one of the parties realized that they were wrong;
relations with an opponent are more important than one’s own interests in a given situation;
it is beneficial for one of the parties to “suspend” contradictions, leaving them unresolved;
lack of leverage and power;
too much passion, preventing a constructive solution to the problem;
one of the sides wants to gain time to prepare for open confrontation.

Device

Accommodation is essentially voluntary surrender. One of the parties agrees to accept the opponent’s terms, renouncing its interests. In this way, the conflict is resolved and the relationship returns to normal.

This strategy is useful when:

for one side the outcome is not significant, but for the other it is extremely important;
one side does not have enough resources to win, it soberly assesses its chances;
It is very important to maintain a good relationship with your opponent.

Cooperation

Neither side avoids the conflict or enters into confrontation, but neither does it renounce its interests. The needs of each party are determined - explicit and hidden - and a joint search for a solution occurs.

Suitable situations for use:

the outcome is very important for both sides, no one wants to sacrifice their interests;
the parties have a long-term close relationship and do not want to destroy it;
both parties show a willingness to cooperate;
power and leverage are distributed evenly between the parties;
the problem does not require an immediate solution; there is time for discussion and search for optimal options.

Collaboration is considered the most productive and constructive strategy, but at the same time the most difficult.

Compromise

Both sides make mutual concessions to reach a consensus. Compromise is a more superficial strategy than cooperation. The final decision suits both participants; no one really loses in positions, but no one wins either.

Appropriate in the following cases:

the parties have approximately equal power;
the decision must be made quickly;
each side has interests that they are willing to sacrifice;
The parties are interested in maintaining good relationships.

As you can see, there are quite a lot of solution methods. It is impossible to say unambiguously which one is optimal. Different strategies are appropriate in different situations. Whereas people most often resort to one favorite method.

The main thing that is needed for effective conflict resolution is the ability to adequately assess the situation and not give in to emotions. Having developed these two skills, you can not be afraid of open confrontation and confidently defend your interests.

Negotiations as the main method of resolving conflicts

To begin with, it is worth noting that agreement between the parties to the conflict is achieved without intermediaries only in very rare cases. Mediators serve in a conflict as arbitrators, peacemakers, equalizers of the balance of interests of subjects and parties conducting negotiations. The gradual improvement of the practice of resolving conflict situations in the world in general (let alone small-level conflicts) has become the beginning of the creation of innovative methods that are based on sudden changes in the qualitative state of problem situations. And in most cases, these methods involve the use of third parties or other methods of external influence. Here are a few examples to prove this :

EXAMPLE: In world practice, quite effective ways of containing conflicting parties have already been developed. If these are micro-level conflicts (in families, at work, in a work team, etc.), then the role of mediators can be played by friends, colleagues, bosses, lawyers, etc. If these are mid- or macro-level conflicts (wars, uprisings, strikes, pickets, etc.), then army forces, police, riot police, special forces, the UN, etc. can act as mediators.

EXAMPLE: Since the UN was created in 1945, there have been over a hundred large-scale conflicts around the world, with a total death toll of approximately 20 million people. In most of these conflicts, the Security Council has resorted to the use of the veto, a power that allows an individual or group of individuals to unilaterally block any decision. But over time, the number of appeals to the UN has increased, and this mechanism for ensuring security with its help has become part of the arsenal of the main methods of conflict resolution, as well as their prevention.

The UN armed forces, whose activities are aimed at maintaining peace, are represented by various troops provided by UN member countries. The purpose of these armed forces is to contribute in every way to the prevention of hostilities, as well as to restore and maintain law and order, and ensure a favorable environment. Initially, they were assigned the powers to conduct negotiations, persuade opposing parties, conduct observations and all kinds of investigations.

Any activity aimed at resolving conflicts must proceed, first of all, from the premises of humanistic psychology. The position of the parties occupies a particularly important place here. Conflict resolution must be approached not from the position of “victory-defeat”, but from the position of such a mentality, the basis of which is a non-violent picture of the world, a “win-win” scheme, the desire to achieve agreement and personal growth. After all, the main task of conflict resolution is to achieve peace, stop aggressive confrontation, and find a compromise.

EXAMPLE: After the collapse of the USSR, violent conflicts arose on ethnic grounds in Tajikistan, Transnistria and South Ossetia, between Abkhazia and Georgia. To resolve conflicts, special models (Transnistrian, Georgian-Abkhaz, South Ossetian) of peacekeeping processes were developed. And their peculiarity was that Russia assumed the functions of a neutral force.

EXAMPLE: Resolving conflicts that resulted in strikes is also important. Russia has extensive experience in this regard. More specifically, the Russian government often resorts to the practice of social partnership, the purpose of which is to find and conclude acceptable solutions. The most important role in the process of resolving industrial conflicts is played by the organization of negotiations.

In addition, a special mechanism for the consideration of collective labor disputes has been developed and operates in developing and developed countries. It is provided by the ILO (International Labor Organization). For example, ILO Convention No. 154 of 1981, entitled “Collective Bargaining”, applies to all sectors of economic activity. It proclaims the main provisions for conducting negotiations within the arbitration or conciliation mechanism.

Resolving conflict relations involves carrying out certain preparatory work to ensure that the conflict is resolved not by aggressive, but by peaceful means. And the first thing you need to pay attention to here is the extinguishing of emotional intensity.

EXAMPLE: If a national conflict flared up and then turned into open armed confrontation, attempts to arrange negotiations between the conflicting parties will be useless. First of all, it is necessary to reach an agreement (for which a mediator must be used) on a cessation of hostilities, even if only temporarily.

Direct exchange of points of view will be effective only if the conflict has not yet reached the peak of its intensity, and also if the subjects have common ground.

For this reason, if there is an escalation of the conflict, the main task will be to try to prevent its parties from making direct contact, and also to, using an intermediary, begin to establish communication between the parties and exchange information between them.

But here it is very important to keep in mind that the “cold period” between the parties to the conflict should not be very long. If this condition is not met, the parties to the conflict (or at least one of them) may regard this as an unwillingness to solve the problem, as a result of which the situation may worsen and the parties will come into direct contact.

By and large, all researchers who study the problem of analysis and organization of negotiations have one common point of contact - these are the stages of the negotiation process.

The negotiation process should consist of the following stages:

Preparing for negotiations
Conduct of negotiations
Analysis of negotiation results
Implementation of agreements

And the process of finding solutions to resolve the conflict should include the following stages:

Mutual clarification of the positions, points of view and interests of the subjects of the conflict;
Discussion of the positions, points of view and interests of the subjects of the conflict;
Coordination of subjects' positions and development of agreements.

The negotiations themselves will look something like this:

Preparatory stage

Before actors begin to develop agreements, they must find out and discuss each other's points of view. Experts consider negotiations as a special process during which information uncertainty is removed through the understanding of opposing positions by the subjects. This process is most intense at its beginning. For this reason, it is conventionally called research.

First stage

At the first stage, the search and finding of common ground by subjects is of particular importance. But here we need a clear understanding that under the same definitions, formulations and terms, subjects mean the same things. Otherwise, the agreements and agreements reached by the subjects may be disrupted, and the conflict situation may worsen, as a result of which the confrontation will intensify. Negotiations should begin with introductory words and explanations, which are voiced by the mediator. He is also obliged to voice the purpose of the negotiations and outline their rules.

Main stage

After the mediator has brought the parties to the conflict up to date, the main stage of negotiations begins. The subjects of the conflict are given the opportunity to express their point of view in order of priority. Next, there is a step-by-step discussion of the problem, the adoption of specific decisions and agreements, first on specific issues, and then on the general topic.

Results of negotiations

The successful completion of negotiations depends on whether the following rules are observed:

You should not discuss those aspects of the problem that do not bring concrete results.
The main problem must be broken down into smaller issues and discussed step by step.
During the negotiation process, you need to follow the established order of discussion of issues
During the discussion, it is necessary to move from small agreements to more serious ones, as well as draw conclusions, sum up, summarize
It is necessary to respond to any positive aspects and constructive actions and proposals of the parties
It is necessary to attract the attention of the parties to those points that can unite them
It is necessary to make references to agreements already reached
It is necessary to establish agreements regarding general principles of interaction

At the main stage, when the problem is discussed, the attention of the participants is directed mainly to expressing their own position, and this stage will be of greatest importance if the subjects of the conflict (or at least one of them) are focused on resolving the issue, which will ensure realization of their own interests. In this case, a heated discussion may flare up, which may be replaced by the so-called “deaf time”, during which the natural course of negotiations is suspended.

EXAMPLE: During the negotiation process, the parties may begin to demonstrate their disinterest in meetings, contacts and any other interaction. As a result, there may be talk that the negotiations will be stopped altogether.

In such a situation, it can be effective to take a break so that each party can assess the situation, consider alternative courses of action and solutions to the problem, hold meetings with “their” people, or generally just take a break from the conflict resolution process. In addition, informal consultations and meetings may be helpful.

If the “deaf time” is successfully overcome, then the negotiation process will return to its natural rhythm. It is here that subjects most often begin to coordinate their positions. It is important to note that depending on what issues are being discussed, agreement on positions can be understood as either compromise concepts or issues that were previously discussed, but could become part of the final solution.

However, the coordination of positions is not yet an agreement, but serves only as a general “outline”. Moreover, the approval process has two phases: searching and defining a general scheme, and further discussion of details. Finding a general outline most often means establishing the framework of the agreement, and discussing the details means editing the agreement in order to formulate its final version.

This approach is very effective when applied to many negotiations, especially when the negotiations are planned to be complex and multifaceted. It can reduce the time it takes to come to a compromise, reach agreements, and also makes the discussion more productive. By developing a general scheme of negotiations and resorting to its detailing, the participants take turns going through the main stages: clarifying each other’s positions, discussing them and agreeing on them.

Of course, the marked stages do not have to strictly correspond to the presented order. When clarifying positions, participants can immediately come to agreement on some issues or discuss their points of view, or they can move on to clarifying individual nuances at the end of the negotiations. Although, speaking in general, the sequence that we talked about above must be followed, because otherwise, negotiations may be delayed or even broken down. It all depends on the specifics of each individual situation: sometimes one stage can take only a secondary place, while another can occupy a central place, and vice versa.

Along with the negotiation method, there are a number of methods for resolving and resolving conflicts that can be used if negotiations are not possible.

Tools for Conflict Resolution

In addition to the strategies themselves, it is necessary to consider special tools that help implement these strategies. Otherwise, you will want, for example, to reach a compromise with your opponent, but you have no idea how to do this. And instead of mutual concessions, you will only receive mutual claims.

Negotiation

If you and your opponent have decided to avoid open confrontation and are ready to cooperate, then negotiation is the best tool, which involves equal interaction between the participants to find the best solution. During negotiations, the parties adhere to certain rules.

Negotiation functions:

Informational. Exchange of information that is necessary to solve the problem.
Communicative. Establishing normal interaction between participants.
Regulatory. Control over the actions of both parties.

The negotiation process includes several stages. Let's look at them in detail.

Preparation

At the initial stage, the parties establish contact, negotiate the terms of interaction, and exchange important information. After studying the data received, each party determines a strategy for further behavior.

Positioning

Then there is an exchange of views on the controversial issue. Each side voices its point of view and expresses awareness of the opponent's disagreement.

Finding a solution

Opponents “probe” each other, try to find the enemy’s weaknesses and gain an advantage. The outcome of the stage depends on the chosen tactics and diplomatic qualities of each participant.

End of negotiations

At the end, the results are summed up and the decision made is declared. If the parties fail to reach a consensus, mutual tension increases between them and the situation remains unresolved. They have a choice: either continue to try to find a solution together, or move on to open confrontation.

Mediation

If the parties cannot agree among themselves on their own, they can resort to the help of a third party. The mediator organizes the interaction of opponents, offers options for solving the problem, monitors compliance with all rules and formalities, and monitors the implementation of agreements.

Involving an intermediary is advisable in the following cases:

the parties agree to make concessions, but cannot reach an agreement;
there is no way to organize their direct interaction;
monitoring of compliance with decisions made is required;
the confidentiality of one or both parties must be maintained.

The choice of intermediary must be approached very carefully. He must be competent, impartial and authoritative. You should be prepared for the fact that the conflict may not be resolved even with the participation of a third party.

Subordination

This conflict resolution tool, unlike the previous two, is not constructive. It can lead to the end of normal relationships and open hostility. It is usually used by the side that has enough power to suppress the enemy. But even in this case, the outcome and long-term consequences can be unpredictable.

Conflict resolution

When starting a conversation about conflict resolution, it should first of all be emphasized that the very concept of “conflict resolution” has two meanings:

1	Resolution of conflicts by their subjects themselves.
2	Conflict resolution based on identifying their causes and neutralizing them, as well as taking measures to prevent open conflict between subjects.

Conflict resolution, as a serious practical tool, cannot be carried out without knowledge of its features. And even this does not always guarantee that the problem situation will be resolved successfully. And this depends not so much on how specific each individual situation is and what this specificity is, but on what measures should be taken to resolve the conflict. And here we should strive to ensure that measures aimed at dealing with the fact of conflict correspond to the scheme below:

Analysis and determination of the causes of conflicts and the reasons for the conflict behavior of their subjects (conflict cartography).
Making a decision to enter into a conflict, taking into account its outcome.
Implementation of a decision to enter into conflict.

In practice, in resolving a conflict, everything depends on the position of the subjects resolving it. This position can be expectant, authoritative, negatively competent, leading to escalation, rational, or based on a deep understanding of the causes of the conflict. The point of conflict resolution is to influence both its causes and its participants.

Methods for resolving conflicts can be completely different, from eliminating their causes and containing the situation to reorienting the attitudes of the participants, the purpose of which is to form in them the conviction that it is necessary to abandon destructive conflict interaction. Methods can also be socio-psychological, administrative or complex. If we consider the issue of resolution, we can distinguish between seemingly resolved conflicts, partially resolved conflicts and completely resolved conflicts.

And given the fact that conflict in the abstract cannot exist in nature, there are no universal methods of settlement and resolution suitable for any type of conflict. To resolve an interpersonal conflict, some methods are used; to resolve a family conflict, others are used; to resolve a military conflict, others are used. Approaches to conflict resolution are selected depending on their theoretical understanding.

The problem of conflict resolution and resolution today is very relevant in many countries around the world, and therefore it receives great attention. Particularly acute is the question of the role and functions of civil services, situations related to terrorist attacks, strikes and other movements that are potentially dangerous to humans, as well as the question of law and order in the army. In this regard, state governments are even developing special technologies for conducting operations to resolve conflicts and systems of behavior in conflict situations. For example, in the USA there is even a position of conflict manager.

It should also be said that the terms “resolution” and “settlement” of conflicts should not be identified with each other.

Conflict resolution is a set of measures aimed at eliminating the source of conflict interaction and ultimately satisfying the needs and interests of the subjects of the conflict. In the social aspect, this process can last for many years.

Conflict resolution is work aimed at stopping aggressive actions and achieving compromises that suit them, which will be more beneficial for them than continuing conflict interaction. Moreover, conflict resolution through negotiations, arbitration and mediation is used in practice much more often than resolution, and is achieved many times faster than it.

EXAMPLE: The most unproductive and primitive method of resolving a conflict is considered to be the use of force (for example, the start of hostilities), because in this case, there is a high probability of significant losses by all subjects of the problem situation and even escalation of the conflict. For this reason, in addition to this method, the truce method is used.

The conclusion of a truce is largely a tactical technique or an element of strategy. A form of truce can be a renunciation of aggressive actions through intermediaries (for example, the media), a withdrawal from the line of interaction between the parties to the conflict, a temporary renunciation of aggressive actions (for example, a temporary cessation of shelling), etc.

But the truce method is not very effective, because it is only temporary, the parties do not give each other any obligations, and no sanctions are established for violating the truce.

The most suitable method for eliminating a conflict is the conclusion of an agreement to end hostility (for example, a peace treaty). But reaching agreement is quite problematic, because... may be required to be competent in certain issues: political, cultural, economic, etc.

However, along with less effective or more radical methods, there is a better way to resolve conflicts in many aspects - negotiations, to which we will pay special attention. But before we move on to talking about negotiations, we should say a few words about how a conflict situation should be analyzed, because without knowing its features, hoping for success is, at a minimum, naive and ridiculous, and at a maximum, impractical and dangerous.

How to resolve family conflicts

Conflicts in the family are a common phenomenon. How long their marriage will last depends on the behavior of the spouses in critical moments. The specificity of family conflicts is that it is extremely important for both parties to maintain good relationships. Sometimes even at the cost of their own interests. The more the parties understand this, the better the prognosis.

When using a strategy of competition, the spouse must keep in mind that this may cause divorce. It is worth taking such measures only in extreme cases, if it is absolutely impossible to sacrifice interests and if the other side itself is not interested in maintaining peace.

Avoidance is also not the best strategy in family conflicts. If you constantly avoid solving a problem, it will grow like a snowball. You can postpone the decision for a while to reduce the intensity of emotions, but be sure to return to it and bring the matter to the end.

The adaptation strategy can be used, but with some reservations. For example, if only one spouse uses it all the time, and the other does not want to make concessions, imbalance grows in the family. Sooner or later, the compliant spouse will get tired of his role and will rebel. So the confrontation can go into an uncontrollable phase.

The most productive strategies for resolving family conflicts, like any other, are cooperation and compromise. It is important that each spouse is ready to make concessions and seek a joint solution.

Main mistakes in conflict resolution

When resolving conflicts, people usually make the following mistakes:

✔	Failure to implement appropriate conflict resolution measures in a timely manner.
✔	Attempts to resolve conflicts without finding out their actual causes.
✔	The use of exclusively aggressive methods and punitive measures or, on the contrary, purely diplomatic methods in resolving conflicts.
✔	Using template schemes to resolve conflicts without studying their types and features.

Another, and quite significant, omission is that proper attention is not paid to the prevention of conflict situations, because how can one talk about influencing them without having information about their occurrence, without knowing what they can develop into, etc. . We have already touched on this topic in more detail in the last lesson, but given that all aspects of conflictology are closely intertwined, we should still return for a moment to the issue of conflict prevention and recall what their prevention is.

How to resolve conflicts in a team

Conflict can arise in almost any group: at school, at work, in various social organizations. Such conflicts can be divided into three types: interpersonal, between an individual and a group, and between several groups.

To resolve them, the following methods are used:

creating healthy competition;
choosing an evasion strategy if the subject of confrontation is insignificant for the team;
forced compromise when the common goal is more important than personal differences;
accommodation of both parties and smoothing out the situation.

The choice of strategy depends on the possibility of achieving a common goal in the current conditions and the need for further interaction. Time also plays an important role. If time resources are limited, you will have to use rigid, non-constructive solution methods.

Conflicts in the organization and possible ways to resolve them

Methods for resolving conflicts in an organization can be divided into 3 general groups:

Structural methods based on 4 mechanisms:

a description of the specific job requirements;
establishment of hierarchical powers at all levels of the structure;
uniting the team for one common goal;
introduction of an employee incentive system.

Regulatory methods involving normative control and regulation of the activities of representatives of the organization.
Constructive methods aimed at resolving functional conflicts. For example, disputes that ultimately help make the only right decision.

From the general typology presented above, the following options can be used to resolve conflicts in an organization:

Competitive methods are used only in cases where a quick solution to the problem is required.
Avoidance or evasion is reasonable in situations where time is required to gather information or when it takes too much time to resolve the consequences of conflict resolution.
Compromise – opponents mutually strive for a solution that suits them.
Adaptation - used in situations where maintaining harmonious relationships in a team is important.
Cooperation – allows opposing parties to develop a joint solution.

To prevent the occurrence of conflicts in an organization, it is necessary to create an effective management structure, correct allocation of resources, improve working conditions, and monitor compliance with accepted norms and rules.

How to resolve intrapersonal conflicts

Intrapersonal conflict is not like all others. There is only one opposing side, all processes take place inside and are hidden from prying eyes. Intrapersonal conflicts always precede important changes. Psychological development is a nonlinear process. It happens in spurts, and conflict plays a primary role along the way.

Contradictions can arise between motives, goals, feelings, ideas, aspirations, fears, etc. They cause discomfort, mental pain and negative emotions. The conflict can be considered successfully resolved when a person was able to return to balance and harmony, having completed certain internal work and acquired new meanings.

Strategies for resolving internal conflicts are partially different from traditional ones. The following can be distinguished:

Compromise. Smoothing out contradictions by renouncing some of the claims.
Avoidance. Avoiding a problem in the hope that it will resolve itself.
Sublimation. Converting destructive energy into constructive energy. For example, in creative.
Repression. Repression of traumatic experiences.
Correction. Changing attitudes towards the factors that caused the contradictions.

The choice of strategy most often occurs unconsciously. Psychological defenses are triggered, protecting the psyche from strong negative emotions. And the conflict itself can remain unresolved for a long time, provoking feelings of anxiety and inhibiting personal development.

A person must strive for a conscious, proactive solution to intrapersonal conflict. This is the only way to become stronger, strengthen your internal supports and enter a new stage of evolution.

Causes of conflicts between employees

Imperfect work organization

Work processes must be transparent and understandable to employees. If business processes are clearly defined, there is no room for confusion - the organization works smoothly. 44% of respondents in the HeadHunter study admitted that improperly structured work and communication systems become causes of conflicts.

Unclear terms of reference

Each employee must understand what tasks he is responsible for and what is beyond his competence. If the manager cannot distribute responsibilities between employees, determine the area of responsibility, or formulates the task vaguely, this gives rise to conflicts.

Employee Relations

Employees are expected, first of all, to perform their functions, but it is impossible to prevent them from communicating on personal topics or forming opinions about each other. It happens that people do not agree on certain events, hobbies, or lifestyle. This leads to tension.

You cannot demand from subordinates that they communicate exclusively warmly and in a friendly manner, but the manager’s task is to make sure that these differences do not interfere with work. There needs to be an emphasis on team building in a variety of ways. For example, the Buffett National Wellness Survey found that in companies that implemented corporate sports, employees took fewer sick days, revenues were on average 11% higher, and shareholder returns increased by 28%.

Peculiarities of employee behavior

Insults, personalization, scandals - all this is unacceptable in a work environment. Even if a person is right in assessing the situation, presenting it too emotionally can provoke an even greater conflict.

Limited resources

Conflicts arise at the point of convergence of interests. The lack of material and financial resources leads to clashes and struggles for them.

Lack of information

By hiding important information from employees, management can encourage rumors to arise. In crisis conditions, when the situation in the team is tense, a careless word can lead to a series of gossip and speculation, provoking conflicts.

According to statistics, 86% of managers and employees cite ineffective communication and lack of cooperation as the cause of work failure.

Excessive pressure

It is impossible to work in a state of constant emergency. Stress affects the emotional state of employees and can lead to scandals and showdowns.

These are the main causes of work conflicts, but there are many more reasons for them. It is more effective to prevent conflicts between employees than to constantly put out emerging fires. The main directions of the manager’s work in this matter:

optimization of the organization’s work – building logical vertical and horizontal connections, sharing responsibilities;
creating comfortable working conditions;
eliminating the psychological causes of conflicts - improving relationships in the team, reducing stress, neutralizing irritating factors;
a fair and transparent system of rewards and punishments.

Conflict Prevention

Most conflicts are easier to prevent than to resolve. In order not to bring the situation to the boiling point, you should follow simple rules:

Treat any person with respect, regardless of their social status, level of education, ideas and views. Even if you have a disagreement with someone, this is not a reason to humiliate the person and demonstrate your superiority.
Be polite. This way you will save yourself from small useless skirmishes out of nowhere.
State your thoughts clearly and unambiguously to avoid misunderstandings. Be loyal to your interlocutor’s clarifying questions and be prepared to clarify controversial points.
If you yourself are not sure that you understood your interlocutor correctly, do not hesitate to ask again.
Refrain from expressing negative opinions about things that do not concern you unless asked.
Express disagreement and dissatisfaction only in a correct, tactful form.

Of course, these tips will not save you from all conflicts. Conflicts of interest will still occur from time to time. But they will help you not to get involved in meaningless squabbles and showdowns, which only take away energy and spoil your nerves.

Types of conflicts

There are several classifications of conflicts (psychologists love to sort everything into categories). We will present two main ones and consider how to act in the realities of an online store.

Interpersonal conflict

The most common type of conflict in which a person and... a person collide . These could be two of your employees who do not share the client or simply have different worldviews. Or you yourself with some employee - it doesn’t matter. In this battle, two characters, two personality types, two souls with their own beliefs and habits come together.

Examples of conflicts. You hired a new manager and were surprised to notice that he had already made an enemy - another manager, more experienced. It's simple: two strong salespeople cannot divide the territory. An experienced person is afraid that a newcomer will take away his clients and, in general, he is right to be afraid. The newcomer eagerly got to work and shows every chance of becoming a leader. So what should we do?

A less dramatic example. Two employees are sitting in the same office. One is accustomed to cleanliness and carefully cleans his workplace. The other is a cheerful goof who is always in a mess. It is clear that these two will not find a common language and will constantly quarrel over cleanliness.

And now about you. Imagine that you hired an employee and set him a fixed salary. He worked for some time and was dissatisfied: it’s time to raise the boss! You are categorically against it: let it work better, then we’ll talk. But he has his own truth: it is impossible to live on such a salary, and he still has to feed his family. And who is right?

How to resolve the conflict? Obviously, you need to choose the third way - namely, to lead the person to constructive behavior . For example, in the first case, clearly divide the base between managers so that no one is offended. Hold a corporate event or training to bring the team together. The second example is even simpler - set a duty schedule in the offices and monitor compliance with the rules. Motivate those who have especially distinguished themselves: give pleasant trinkets and sweet gifts. Well, if it comes to you, offer the employee a real task: let him show himself in full force, and then you will consider the option of raising his salary.

Conflict between individual and group

This is a confrontation between one person and the rest of the team. Who is this person - a black sheep, a rebel-saboteur, or maybe a cruel tyrant boss? There can be many options - and there are also several culprits in the conflict.

Examples of conflicts. Let's take an employee first - you have a dude unlike any other in your quiet lamp department. Maybe he's a nerd, or maybe he's a punk rocker - it doesn't matter. The main thing is that everyone else sensed a stranger and is eager to deal with him - morally, of course. They organized a boycott of him or sophisticatedly mock him, weave intrigues - well, you know how employees survive those they don’t like. Or maybe the white crow is you? Have you joined an online store as a partner or manager and are faced with a lack of understanding from the team?

How to resolve the conflict? In the first case, it is very subtle and soft. If you openly take the side of an offended employee, the rest of the team may not like it. If you, along with everyone else, happily bully a newbie, we won’t even write how unprofessional it is. What to do? You will be surprised, but the same proven methods of team building help a lot . It’s also good to unite people with one goal - for example, start developing the company’s mission together. During the development process, unobtrusively indicate that no intrigues or office wars are now allowed in your team. Well, nothing prevents you from talking to the outcast - who knows, maybe this weirdo himself is behaving incorrectly. You are a leader, you better know the peculiarities of the psychological climate in the team. Explain what he is doing wrong and how to find the key to each colleague.

If you play the role of an outcast, oh, long and painstaking work awaits you. You will have to inspire confidence in the new team and show your business and personal qualities. Under no circumstances should you flirt with your subordinates, don’t play at being your boyfriend—just do your job well and open up as a person—again, in moderation.

Intergroup conflict

It occurs in relatively large organizations - entire departments can quarrel . For example, the advertising department and content specialists, couriers and dispatchers - all those whose professional interests may intersect. But even several groups of 2-3 people, united by personal interests, can greatly ruin the life of the boss.

Examples of conflicts. The advertising department demands money to carry out advertising campaigns - but the accounting department is against it. The first ones are sure: contextual advertising and targeting in social networks can bring more profit to the business. But financiers can also understand: it’s scary to invest money in a risky enterprise, what if it doesn’t work out? And it begins: sidelong glances, gossip, jokes and reproaches...

’s even worse when a team has a saboteur-provocateur who skillfully manipulates people and creates warring factions. These can be either two warring groups of people of equal strength, or several groups fighting against their superiors. In any case, conflicts like acid corrode the team from the inside.

How to resolve the conflict? Decisively intervene and stop the outrage. Offer a constructive solution or at least a compromise that will suit everyone. In the latter case, it is also necessary to neutralize the provocateur, take the sting out of him, so that he does not continue his subversive activities in the future.

When the turtle wins

There are several conditions under which the avoidance strategy is truly effective and can be used:

when you find yourself drawn into a conflict, the cause of which is of little importance to you, so there is no point in trying to emerge victorious from the dispute;

when you understand that an argument with an opponent will not have an objective result, since he does not want to find a compromise or the truth, but is guided only by the need to win and put the opponent in his place;
if you have found an opportunity to achieve what you want in a different way, avoiding participation in the conflict;
when the opponent is too biased, subjective, or behaves aggressively;
when conflict threatens your safety;
when you need to gain time to find resources and methods, to collect additional information that will help you win;
when your opponent is higher in rank than you and a conflict with him can threaten your financial well-being, career and social status.

How to conflict correctly?