In 2017, a study was conducted, the results of which showed that about 15% of working time is spent on conflicts and worries about them. Managers spend up to half of their working time on conflict resolution. Read this article about the main methods for resolving conflicts in a team.

From the article you will learn:

The formation of a working team occurs spontaneously. Over time, different people join it, each of whom has their own tastes, preferences and attitudes. Conflicts at work most often arise due to the fact that different people look at life differently and have different attitudes towards work. A state of constant war, whether one likes it or not, has a negative impact on the overall work environment and productivity. The atmosphere in the workplace is an important indicator of staff cohesion.

Managers often spend huge amounts of money on various psychological trainings to create and improve team performance (team building). But any team building does not make sense; there are internal disagreements that are not detected and eliminated.

Conflict, in general terms, is an extreme way of resolving contradictions between the interests, goals, views and needs of two parties.

Types of conflicts in a team

The most common variety conflicts in the team– disagreements between man and man. There are no monolithic groups. Clashes between people are a sieve through which shots are sifted out. The cause of hostility can be anything - the manner of dressing, political leanings, views on life, but most often the war between employees flares up due to different attitudes to work. If the contradictions are vertical, i.e. arise between a boss and a subordinate, the former considers the latter to be an undisciplined and irresponsible lazy person, and the latter, in turn, believes that the boss is a tyrant and a madman. If the contradictions are horizontal, i.e. arise between colleagues, then one considers the other an upstart and a sycophant, and the latter, in turn, accuses the first of indifference and dishonesty, etc.

The second type of disagreement in a team is between an individual and a group. These differences can also be vertical or horizontal. The first type is implemented in the case of appointing a new boss to an existing team. The new manager is often overly diligent, picky and demanding; it is difficult to come to an agreement with him, as with the previous one. The second type occurs when a new employee does not find a common language with colleagues. There can be two options for the development of events here - either the new employee quits, or he changes himself or manages to change his attitude towards himself.

The third type of confrontation in a team is confrontation between groups. If the work environment is unhealthy, then the team is fragmented into various clans, groups, united by the common ideas of rejection or, conversely, support of management initiatives.

This is the general scheme for classifying types of conflicts at work. Let us now consider in more detail those of them that occur most often.

Read also:

Conflicts in a team and ways to resolve them

Conflict with a colleague

There are several types of "pest" employees: conflict with which it is most likely. It is important to identify them in time and behave correctly with them. Here are the most typical varieties:

1. Chatterbox and brawler. There are such people in almost every organization. They have little interest in work, they are irresponsible and dishonest. Such people always need an interlocutor who will listen to “how bad everything is” or, conversely, “how good everything is”; the main thing is not to work.
2. A troublemaker and a gossip. An unpleasant and harmful type. This is a person who is haunted by the successes of other employees and the good attitude of management towards these “right” employees. They gain confidence in them, and then set them up.
3. Oppositionist or spy. Such an employee either openly hates management or secretly snitches on his colleagues. Or both together. A distinctive feature of such people is that they love to talk about their bosses.

Remedies against fellow pests:

Chatterboxes and brawlers are the safest type of pests. The only way they can harm you is to take up your time and ruin your mood. There is only one remedy - to avoid starting a conversation for any reason. Refer to the urgent task and remain silent. The chatterbox will go looking for other ears.

The second type is very dangerous. Try to be polite with him and avoid quarrels. The main thing is to avoid depending on him in work matters by all means.

Protection from third parties is obvious - do not discuss with your superiors under any pretext. Whatever you say - good or bad - will be used against you.

A universal defense against all three types of pests is to avoid conversations that are not relevant to the matter. Personal conversations, discussion of problems, criticism of superiors will ultimately backfire on you. If only simply because you are wasting your time and nerves on it. It’s better to be considered silent than to be “responsible for the market” later.

Conflict with the boss

The old saying goes that the boss is always right. Certainly, argue with management not worth it. It is worth finding out the reason for the disagreement. If problems with management arose due to the fact that you did not cope with the work, this is one thing, but if the root of the problem lies in personal hostility, then this is completely different. In any case, you can’t do without a calm and constructive conversation. Your communication strategy should be based on the following principles:

You should respond to reproaches politely but with dignity;

Under no circumstances should you lose your temper or get irritated; in a word, keep the blow and keep your distance;

If the conversation does not bring results, contact your superior and talk to him. If you are absolutely sure that the manager is to blame, not you, and you have evidence of this, you can safely take this step.

If the complaints against you relate to poorly done work, and you find the strength to admit this fact, then proceed according to the following algorithm:

Discuss in detail all the problems, all the complaints, all the shortcomings of your work;

Admit your mistakes;

Get to work immediately.

Clarifying relationships and getting personal is a dead end.

Ways and methods of resolving conflicts in a team

There are quite a lot of practice-tested methods and techniques for resolving conflicts in an organization. Let's talk about four structural methods: using a system of subordination and coordination, a method of clarifying requirements, setting common goals, and using incentives and rewards.

Method number 1.

Using a system of subordination and coordination.
A very effective way to prevent and resolve conflict situations. Its essence lies in the fact that the company establishes a clear chain of command and hierarchy. At the head of this entire structure is one person. If two or more employees have a misunderstanding or disagreement, they turn to this person to resolve the problem.

Method number 2.

Setting general objectives.
This method requires the coordinated efforts of several employees or structural units. The leader's task is to direct the efforts of subordinates to achieve the overall goal of the organization.

Method No. 3.

Requirements clarification method.
From the point of view of preventing conflicts that reduce the overall efficiency of the company (the so-called “dysfunctional conflicts”), this method is considered the most productive. His idea is that each employee should clearly understand the value of the contribution he makes to achieving the common goal. He must understand what results are expected of him in this regard. Each employee must know his powers, his responsibilities and the rules that he must adhere to in his work. The task of management is to convey to subordinates an understanding of these ideas.

Method number 4.

Use of incentives and rewards.
This method helps to avoid or significantly reduce the consequences of conflicts leading to a decrease in work efficiency. Those employees who took an active part in solving general problems of the company should be rewarded financially or promoted. This will give them the opportunity to feel recognized by management for their services to the company.

Interpersonal conflict resolution styles: avoidance, smoothing, coercion, compromise and problem solving:

Of course, practice shows that conflict resolution in each specific situation hardly fits into any theoretical scheme and will always be unique.

However, there is one general principle for resolving conflict in a team that is applicable in almost all cases - this is a substantive conversation between the two sides of the confrontation, i.e. negotiation.

Methods for reducing the emotional level of a controversial situation are based primarily on constructive dialogue, detailed discussion of problems, analysis of what does not suit the conflicting parties and joint elimination of shortcomings.

In any company whose team of employees consists of more than one person, sooner or later conflicts arise, which are one of the main enemies of effective work. The task of a competent manager is to reduce the number of conflicts to a minimum and resolve all disputes as quickly as possible.

The manager must consider conflicts between employees objectively, not rush to take one side, and not show his own emotions.
It would be a big mistake to “turn a blind eye” to a dispute that has arisen and put off resolving it until later.

A number of factors that can be of internal or external origin lead to the emergence of disagreements in a team. For example, disputes between employees can arise both due to methods of solving production problems, and, say, due to different political views, which is especially important at the present time.

There is a whole theory that studies conflicts, according to it the following types are distinguished:

— Disagreements regarding achieving the general goals of the company;
— Obstacles in achieving personal goals of individual employees. This is career growth, incorrect, from the point of view of the parties to the conflict, distribution of tasks and the like;
— Conflicts based on personal hostility and rejection of the norms of behavior of some team members by others.

Methods for resolving disputes in a team are also well known. This is avoidance of conflict, smoothing, compromise and coercion.
Most managers resolve disputes precisely by coercion, harshly forcing one of the parties to accept the opinion of the other in the form of an order and without any argumentation. This, on the one hand, really removes the external manifestations of the conflict. But, on the other hand, it transforms the relationship between the participants into the category of a “time bomb.”
The actions of a manager in the event of a conflict in a team should be based on objectivity and listening to the position of each party. In the event that the dispute that arises is constructive in nature, it is necessary to look for a solution that would, to a greater or lesser extent, suit each of the parties.

It is easier to prevent any conflict in advance. This is facilitated by the leadership style and the introduction of corporate ethics, which best prevents the emergence of any personal conflicts not related to direct work activity.

Actions of a leader in case of conflict in a team

Have an honest one-on-one conversation with each side

Talk diplomatically with each of the parties and be sure to individually. Listen to claims, grievances, the history of the conflict, and refrain from voicing your assessment of what happened.
Try to smooth out rough edges, get the employee out of a stressful situation, normalize the employee’s psycho-emotional state, and switch to other topics.

Look for motives on both sides

Try to understand the motives of each party. Put yourself in the shoes of your colleagues and think about what could have become the real cause of the offense.

Show kindness and empathy

One of the simple and effective ways to relieve tension is to show kindness and understanding to your colleagues. Therefore, try to be friendly to each side of the conflict, especially if the conflict occurs in front of the entire team.

Be open to communication with colleagues

Your employees should have confidence in you that they can always talk to you about topics and problems that concern them, and not keep them to themselves. Each employee must be confident that you will maintain the confidentiality of personal information.

Don't add fuel to the fire of conflict

Avoid behavior that will further fuel feelings of resentment and hostility in employees. No statements about the participants in the conflict in front of the team. Do not discuss the identities of the parties to the conflict with other colleagues.

Stop the spread of gossip and rumors

Most often, conflicts arise on emotional grounds, when emotions take precedence over logic. Therefore, women are more often exposed to open conflicts, as they are more emotional. If for some reason the conflict has not been fully resolved, then it can smoothly turn into the spread of gossip and intrigue. Therefore, resolve conflict situations as early and quickly as possible. Identify sources of dissemination of compromising information and talk to them.

Analyze yourself and circumstances

You must accept responsibility for conflict in your team. Analyze conflict situations, adapt your management style, look for an individual approach to your subordinates and colleagues.

Conflict- a clash in the sphere of communication caused by conflicting goals, attitudes, and behavior of people.

Conflict is not an anomaly or dysfunction for an organization. This is the norm in people’s relationships, a necessary element of work life, which helps to release socio-psychological tension that has accumulated in the team, forms a new idea about promising areas of activity, and helps in finding the right solution...

Conflict always pursues a specific goal. Consequently, only those who are capable of purposeful, conscious behavior (i.e., planning their actions, using available resources... to achieve a goal) can be recognized as conflicting parties. In this way, real participants in the conflict are separated from those individuals and groups who are instruments, instruments of any subjects of conflict interaction.

It is necessary to distinguish between the subject and the object of the conflict.

Subject of the conflict- an objectively existing (or imaginary) problem that serves as the reason for a public analysis of the situation that has arisen between the conflicting parties. The subject of the conflict is the internal cause of the conflict, the main contradiction, because of which and for the sake of resolving which the conflicting parties enter into confrontation. It is very important to determine the subject of the conflict, because due to accumulated problems and disputes around it, its boundaries are blurred and become illusory. Sometimes the main subject of the conflict breaks down into separate private problems.

Object of conflict can be any object of the material world or social reality.

Conflicting relationships may turn out to be indifferent to object and just hold on subject conflict.

There are emotional and business conflicts.

Emotional conflicts arise due to the incompatibility of personal qualities of opponents, their psychological incompatibility.

Business conflicts are based on very specific objects (the procedure for filling a vacant position, the distribution of limited resources, the division of powers...).

Business and emotional conflicts can escalate into each other. Any business conflict or a continuous series of them involving the same opponents tends to develop into an emotional conflict. Sometimes a protracted business conflict, due to the laws operating in it, can lead to the loss of the object of the conflict, i.e. the object itself will lose significance for opponents, and their relationships with each other will acquire a negative psychological connotation, which is very dangerous for the effectiveness of the organization. Therefore, it is very important to detect the emergence of a conflict in time and prevent it from growing. When resolving a conflict situation, you need to influence the reason that led to it, i.e. to the object of the conflict.

A conflict, as a rule, is preceded by the formation of a conflict situation and actions on the part of opponents aimed at mastering the object. Such actions are called incident.

Thus, a conflict is preceded by a conflict situation and emerging incidents that give rise to the emergence of opponents in the process of striving to take possession of the object of the conflict.

Any enterprise forms structures, both vertical and horizontal. Due to the presence of many divisions in an organization, there are always divisions whose interactions are potentially conflicting. In this case it is possible vertical conflicts And conflicts along the organizational horizon. Sometimes such conflicts (for example, due to resource scarcity) can become positional character.

There are interpersonal, intergroup conflicts and conflicts between an individual and a group (Fig. 17.5).

Examples of some reasons for conflicts in an organization, regardless of the type of relationship between employees, are given in Table. 17.1.

Table 17.1

Causes of conflicts

Sometimes in teams it happens that there are employees, each on their own, but there is no team. Employee unity is usually hampered by frequent conflicts. I think the topic of interpersonal relationships in a team is one of the main ones. Let's look at it in detail.

Problems associated with confrontation between one person and another, or between groups of people, cannot be resolved immediately. Both the boss and the subordinates have to do a lot of work.

Since managers have a wide range of functions and have great responsibility, they often have no time to deal with the interpersonal relationships of their subordinates. An invited psychologist specializing in conflicts can correct the situation, but for now let’s talk about the role of the top manager in resolving disagreements.

Most often, conflicts arise when the usual working and living conditions change, which is relevant today. The success of the company largely depends on how relationships develop within the team.

Is conflict really that bad?

Let us note that there is no need to be afraid of conflicts; confrontations are even useful. If employees sort things out, it means that the opposing parties are not indifferent to what they do and how they perform their work. As a rule, they want to work in a company and develop it, they are afraid of losing their job. This means that the manager has every chance of creating an effective team.

In addition, conflict is a good way to get rid of negativity. Every psychologist knows: under no circumstances should you keep negative emotions to yourself. We are not talking about intentionally offending someone; it is enough to simply speak out, tell a psychologist or a loved one about your problems.

Conflict resolution

What to do if an employee cannot cope with emotions? There are several ways to build relationships:

Reducing the likelihood of contradictions

To prevent disagreements within your team, choose your staff wisely. The manager should think carefully about what kind of employees he wants to see in his office. Characteristics and behavior of an applicant for a position are revealed during an interview using tests and the formulation of hypothetical situations.

It is equally important to find out whether a potential employee shares the company’s values, is ready to fulfill the mission of the enterprise, and can be on the same page with other team members.

Ask how the interlocutor imagines future work, what useful things he plans to do for the company. Compare the candidate’s answers with your views on the company’s activities and its development strategy.

Immediately familiarize the specialist with job responsibilities in detail. If an employee's ideas about them are superficial, disagreements cannot be avoided. The fewer abstractions, the less conflicts arise.

Overcoming obstacles

I distinguish two types of barriers: communication and perception. Communication barriers arise due to a lack of understanding of the goals and motives of specialists from other departments. Ignorance of the specifics of the work of a neighboring department leads to speculation and gossip. People don’t bother finding out the functionality of their colleagues, they’re not interested in what problems other employees are solving, whether difficulties arise, or whether help is needed. As a result, distorted information spreads throughout the office.

Many workers have hidden attitudes towards struggle. People do not always remember the need to work as a team in order to achieve goals together, so they prefer competition to constructive dialogue.

The perception barrier is the inability to listen to the interlocutor. In most cases, such behavior is determined by the temperament properties and thinking of a particular person. Some people are focused on getting work done, and therefore do not want to waste time on “idle chatter,” while for others, on the contrary, it is important to “talk about life.” During a conversation or discussion, the parties do not understand each other, so a conflict flares up. They do not contribute to understanding differences in social status, education, vocabulary, and level of knowledge of employees. A person does not always take into account the needs of his opponent.

The manager removes communication barriers. It defines the responsibilities of each employee and designates areas of responsibility. The main thing is to stimulate the team to achieve results. To build team spirit, planning meetings, meetings, individual meetings are held, and corporate parties are organized. Financial incentives for subordinates play an important role in preventing conflicts.

With barriers of perception everything is much simpler. If, with the help of leadership, it is possible to break down the communication barrier, then people will gradually learn to listen and hear each other.

Neutralization of the conflict

Let's say the staff is staffed, everyone is working conscientiously, barriers have been removed, but from time to time office life ceases to be calm. To stop a spontaneously arising quarrel, it is necessary to talk with its participants, find out what the conflict is about and whether reconciliation is planned. This is the responsibility of the leader, since it can be difficult for the conflicting parties to agree to a truce and objectively assess the situation over which the conflict broke out. He puts the disputants in a positive mood and explains the importance of effective interaction. Setting a common goal motivates well to improve relationships.

It is equally important to take into account the individual characteristics of people, strive to understand and accept each member of the team, and be able to find an approach to any employee, be he a manager, colleague or subordinate. Focusing on the personality of each participant in the discussion is the basis for conflict resolution.

Methods of reconciliation

The ways out of conflict are the same for superiors and subordinates. This:

• Taking responsibility for the quarrel and its consequences, apologizing, regretting misbehavior.
• Search for mutually beneficial solutions to problems, concessions, compromises.
• Understanding and accepting the interlocutor, establishing feedback (“another person has the right to a point of view different from mine”), expressing good feelings.
• Explaining personal motivation, talking about your own needs, thoughts and experiences.

What should a boss do in the event of a conflict? First of all, try to find out the objective reason for the confrontation, listen to each side. You can organize a dialogue between the parties to the conflict, ask them to express their complaints in a civilized manner, and take part in the conversation yourself.

If the situation does not change, clearly delineate the job responsibilities and areas of responsibility of those in conflict. Treat the emergence of a conflict wisely and with a dose of irony. “Switch” your subordinates to the positive.

Confrontations will arise infrequently if people are allowed to “throw out” everything that has “accumulated.” This can be done during a conversation. It would not be superfluous to take care of the psychological well-being of employees in the long term: organizing quests, team games, bowling trips, etc.

It is necessary to remember that each of us is a person, an individual with different desires, needs, character traits, motives and ambitions. Understanding this, we take a big step towards positive relationships, even if the confrontation is still in force.

Anger, aggression, malice are normal mental reactions, protection from “attack” from the outside. It happens that the interlocutor is mistaken, and the opponent defends his position, which seems logical. In fact, if the one who is truly right takes the initiative for reconciliation, both will benefit.

Each of us makes mistakes from time to time, but not everyone can admit them. People tend to defend their position, even if it is wrong, while even negative opponents react to a decisive statement about their own wrongness.

Daria Pantyukh

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION OF THE REPUBLIC OF BELARUS

EE "BELARUSIAN STATE ECONOMIC UNIVERSITY"

Department of Organization and Management

by discipline: Management

on the topic of: Conflicts and ways to resolve them (on example enterprisesI Unitary Enterprise "***")

assistant department D.V. Zubik

Each of us has had to deal with conflict situations. Conflicts manifest themselves in relationships between people and play a key role in the life of an individual, family, team, state, society and person as a whole. Therefore, the problem of studying, managing and resolving conflicts becomes relevant not only as a negative phenomenon that causes disputes, but also as its positive qualities that contribute to the development of the organization.

The word "conflict" comes from the Latin conflictus - clash. When people think of conflict, they most often associate it with aggression, threats, arguments, and hostility. As a result, there is an opinion that conflict is always an undesirable phenomenon and that it should be resolved immediately as soon as it arises.

Conflicts are an eternal companion of our lives. At the heart of any conflict is a contradiction, which usually leads to either constructive or destructive consequences.

The basis of any organization is people (team), and without them the functioning of the organization is impossible. In this regard, production situations often arise in teams, during which contradictions are discovered between people on a wide range of issues. In themselves, these disagreements and contradictions can act as a positive factor in the movement of creative thought. However, when they become acute, they can hinder successful teamwork and lead to conflict.

Conflict in an organization is a conscious contradiction between communicating members of this team, which is accompanied by attempts to resolve it against the backdrop of emotional relationships within the organization.

Most conflicts arise beyond the wishes of their participants. This is due to the fact that most people do not have a basic understanding of conflicts or do not attach importance to them.

The head of the organization, according to his role, is usually at the center of any conflict and is called upon to resolve it by all means available to him. Conflict management is one of the most important functions of a leader. On average, managers spend 20% of their working time resolving various types of conflicts. Every manager needs to know about conflicts, how to behave when they arise, means and methods of prevention and resolution. Most people are characterized by the inability to find a decent way out of conflict situations.

The relevance of the chosen topic is due to the fact that in the modern world, with the rapid pace of development of market relations, the timeliness and correctness of making management decisions largely depends on how effectively the work of personnel is organized. Therefore, to ensure effective work of the team, it is necessary to minimize the number of conflict situations.

The purpose of this course work is to study the problem of conflict management, as well as to analyze the conflict management system at the enterprise UE "***" and suggest ways to improve the efficiency of this company through more rational conflict management.

To achieve this goal, the following tasks were formulated:

1) Study the theoretical foundations of the study of conflicts in an enterprise: their essence and methods of resolution.

2) Conduct an analysis of conflict resolution at the enterprise Unitary Enterprise “***”.

1 The essence of conflicts and ways to resolve them

Conflict has played and continues to play an important role in the life of society and in the life of an organization. In this regard, it is not surprising that the study of conflict is a topic that attracts the attention of many scholars. Psychology has a significant tradition in the study of conflict. A large amount of theoretical and empirical material accumulated over almost a century is reflected in the variety of approaches and theoretical platforms.

Like many concepts, conflict has many definitions and interpretations. One of them defines conflict as a lack of agreement between two or more parties, which may be specific individuals or groups. Each side does everything to ensure that its point of view or goal is accepted, and prevents the other side from doing the same.

When people think of conflict, they most often associate it with aggression, threats, disputes, hostility, war, etc. As a result, there is an opinion that conflict is always undesirable, that it should be avoided if possible and that it should be resolved immediately as soon as it arises. This attitude is clearly visible in the works of authors belonging to the school of scientific management, the administrative school and sharing the concept of bureaucracy according to Weber. These approaches to organizational effectiveness relied heavily on defining tasks, procedures, rules, interactions among officials, and developing a rational organizational structure. It was believed that such mechanisms would mainly eliminate the conditions conducive to conflict and could be used to solve emerging problems.

Authors belonging to the “human relations” school also tended to believe that conflict could and should be avoided. They recognized the possibility of conflicts between the goals of an individual and the goals of the organization as a whole, between line and staff personnel, between the powers and capabilities of one individual, and between different groups of managers. However, they generally viewed conflict as a sign of organizational dysfunction and poor management. In their opinion, good relationships in an organization can prevent conflict from arising.

The modern view is that even in well-managed organizations, some conflict is not only possible, but may even be desirable. Of course, conflict is not always positive. In some cases, it can interfere with meeting the needs of the individual and achieving the goals of the organization as a whole. For example, a person who argues in a committee meeting just because he can't help but argue is likely to reduce the satisfaction of the need for belonging and esteem and possibly reduce the group's ability to make effective decisions. Group members may accept the arguer's point of view only in order to avoid conflict and all the troubles associated with it, even without being sure that they are doing the right thing. But in many situations, conflict helps bring out a diversity of points of view, provides additional information, helps identify more alternatives or problems, etc. This makes the group's decision-making process more effective and also gives people the opportunity to express their thoughts and thereby satisfy their personal needs for esteem and power. It can also lead to more effective implementation of plans, strategies and projects, as different perspectives on these documents are discussed before they are actually executed.

Thus, conflict can be functional and lead to improved organizational performance. Or it may be dysfunctional and lead to decreased personal satisfaction, group cooperation, and organizational effectiveness. The role of conflict mainly depends on how effectively it is managed. To manage conflict, it is necessary to understand the causes of the conflict situation. Too often, managers believe that the main cause of conflict is a clash of personalities. However, subsequent analysis shows that other factors are to blame.

It is very important to know the conflict formula and master it effectively:

Conflict + Conflict situation + Incident (1)

Conflict is open confrontation as a consequence of mutually exclusive interests and positions. A conflict situation is accumulated contradictions that contain the true cause of the conflict. An incident is a set of circumstances that gives rise to a conflict. It is clear from the formula that the conflict situation and the incident are independent of each other, that is, none of them is a consequence or manifestation of the other.

Resolving a conflict means eliminating a conflict situation and ending the incident. It is clear that the first is more difficult to do, but also more important. Unfortunately, in practice, in most cases, the matter is limited only to the exhaustion of the incident.

There are five levels of conflict in an organization: within an individual, between individuals, within a group, between groups, within an organization. These levels are closely related to each other. For example, intrapersonal conflict may cause an individual to act aggressively towards others and thereby cause interpersonal conflict.

Intrapersonal conflict occurs within an individual and is often a conflict of goals or a conflict of views. It becomes a conflict of goals when an individual chooses and tries to achieve mutually exclusive goals. Intrapersonal conflict becomes a conflict of views when an individual recognizes the inconsistency of his thoughts, dispositions, values, or his behavior in general.

Interpersonal conflict involves two or more individuals when they perceive themselves to be in opposition to each other in terms of goals, dispositions, values, or behavior. Ershov A.A. complements the existing definition: the spread of conflict to all relationships between the conflicting parties and the emergence of a tendency to categorically perceive the opponent. This is the most common type of conflict that occurs in organizations. Its manifestations are: the struggle for limited resources, labor, capital investments, investments between departments; fight for one position. Another form of interpersonal conflict is clashes between individuals with different character traits, temperaments, and value orientations, who, due to opposing goals, are unable to get along with each other. The emergence is determined by: the personal identity of the team members, the individual’s attitude to the situation, the psychological characteristics of the team members, the labor process and the production situation.

Intragroup conflict is not simply the sum of interpersonal conflicts, but a clash between parts or all members of a group that affects group dynamics and the performance of the group as a whole. Production, social and emotional processes within the group influence the emergence of the causes and ways of resolving intragroup conflicts. Often, intragroup conflict arises as a result of a change in the balance of power in the group: a change in leadership, the emergence of an informal leader, the development of groupism.

Intergroup conflict is an opposition or clash between two or more groups in an organization. Such confrontation can be professional - industrial, social or emotional. Typically, such conflicts are intense and, if not managed correctly, do not result in gains for either group. The transition of intergroup conflict to the emotional stage has a destructive effect not only on the groups involved in it, but also on the organization as a whole and on each individual participant separately. The development of intragroup conflict leads to intra-organizational conflict.

Intraorganizational conflict arises from opposition that arises over the way individual jobs or the organization as a whole have been designed or over the way power is formally distributed within the organization. There are four types of this conflict: vertical is a conflict between levels of management in an organization. Its emergence and resolution are determined by those aspects of the life of an organization that influence vertical connections in the organizational structure: goals, power, communications, culture. Horizontal conflict involves parts of the organization of equal status and most often acts as a conflict of goals.

Conflicts in the workplace: how to get out of it with dignity?

A third of an adult's life is spent sleeping. The rest of his conscious time (400 hours per month) is devoted to work and leisure. Moreover, 160 of them, 2/5 of the total time, are given to work for the benefit of society. If a person has conflicts at work, then he is in a stressful state almost half of the time.

Impact on labor efficiency

There are situations when an increase in adrenaline in the blood contributes to the achievement of high results, records, and the birth of masterpieces. Athletes, artists, musicians and performers can work successfully in such an internal limiting state.

However, an extraordinary situation that forces the average member of society to experience strong negative emotions can leave them unable to work for a long time. What kind of effectiveness can we talk about if your eyes are filled with tears of resentment, your hands are shaking, and you want to run?!

A conflict situation negatively affects the results of common work also because it ceases to be collective. Sometimes the struggle of interests not only completely excludes mutual assistance, but even gives rise to sabotage.

A conflict between engineering workers from different departments can only ruin their mood, but discord in the team will certainly affect the quality and efficiency of the work of the entire team.

Causes and types of conflicts at work

With colleagues

Disputes and quarrels

Conflict is disagreement between people. There is no agreement in either a dispute or a quarrel. What is the difference then:

1. Arguing colleagues They do not set themselves the goal of offending or humiliating their opponent. The task of the parties, on the contrary, is to make the enemy their ally, convincing him that he is wrong. It is in such disputes that truth is born. Such conflicts are called constructive.
2. Quarreling people also have a theme of disagreement. But they do not present demonstrative arguments, but by influencing the feelings of the enemy, they try to scare him, eliminate him, and force him to remain silent. By appealing not to the mind, but to the feelings, it is impossible to get to the bottom of the truth. These conflicts, in which winning at any cost is more important than finding a solution to the problem, are generally considered destructive.

Both types of behavior are possible between colleagues, but have different consequences.

If disputes lead to the achievement of positive results, provide experience in cooperation and improve relationships in the team, then quarrels, on the contrary, create intolerant relationships, worsen mood, lead away from the common goal and reduce work efficiency.

Interpersonal conflict

Most often in a team it appears on the basis of dissatisfaction with the inequality of distribution of benefits, resources, burden or sanctions. This happens often where several people do the same job.

Discontent and calculations begin not only in places where there is a shortage of resources or goods, and not only in places where the loads are very high and the sanctions are terrible. Conflicts due to unfair distribution occur even in the most prosperous organizations.

Personality and group

If there is a conflict in a team with a colleague who violates the norms of behavior, communication, and appearance accepted here, then this is natural and justified. But not only that.

How to avoid conflict with parents? Read the article.

Sometimes the reason for a “boycott” may be the existence of an informal leader whose personal interests push him into conflict. A support group forms around him. It is difficult to get out of this situation. You will have to either recruit the same group of associates or overcome your pride and have a heart-to-heart talk with the leader.

With the leader

Internal conflict

There are often managers who devote themselves completely to their work. The need to be a husband, wife, father, mother, to live a full family life and the inability to achieve this tear apart the human psyche. The director lashes out at his subordinates and sees them as to blame for the current situation.

Convince the boss?!

Is there any point in conflicting with your manager? Yes, if there is real support from outside and above, if a quarrel precedes dismissal.

And if the boss listens carefully to the complaints, is inspired and, despite the risk of losing respect from the rest of the team, admits that he is wrong. This perspective on conflict resolution is found only in movies. In reality, “the boss is always right, and if he’s wrong, read point one.”

3. To prevent conflict situations and remove the soil for their growth, the manager needs to fairly distribute material benefits. Having accurate information, it is correct to distribute “carrots and slaps in the face.”
4. Gossip and denunciations should not be encouraged.
5. Don't be afraid to get fired.
6. You can't have a public showdown.
7. To resolve a conflict, you should not take sides, at least apparently.
8. A real leader should be happy when his subordinates not only come together to sing and sing, but also demand from him all together not to fire their grandfather-guard-veteran.



If such a team can be raised, the manager will have someone to rely on in difficult times.

1. When applying for a job, find out, as much as possible about your professional responsibilities, salary, bonuses, rules of conduct in a team, work hours, dress code, etc. This information will save you from disappointments, grievances, and first conflicts and will tell you what to do if they arise.
2. Remember, the team does not require keep pace with everyone, but it won’t allow you to stray too far from the pack. You cannot be allowed to smoke in a room where everyone else is a non-smoker. Don't irritate the team with your extravagance. Believe me, everyone here is like that, but they know how to keep things in moderation.
3. Don't quarrel, but argue. It's great when a difference of opinion leads not to a fight, but to a compromise. Never discuss your opponent's appearance or character when it comes to an accounting report.

Read about the signs of conflict between an individual and a group in the article.

How does generational conflict manifest itself in a modern family? Read here.

How to behave to avoid work disputes

Everything listed in the previous section should be repeated here. But you can add different situations.

Very often conflicts arise due to gossip and rumors. The more closed you are, the less information the team has about you, the more your colleagues will speculate and speculate about your personal life. This is how a person works - everything unknown excites and intrigues him.

It's easy to deal with this. Tell us everything about yourself. It is not interesting to write on already printed text. You will no longer be a “blank slate” that can be filled with any scribble. Gossip will die out on its own.

Nothing can overcome this feeling. There are people who can be jealous of anything. even your 6 fingers. Try to have a heart-to-heart talk and tell them how inconvenient it is when you have 6 fingers on your hand. Or simply ignore the negative message, thinking: if they are jealous, then there is something to be desired.

You must behave honestly, with dignity and never shy away from official disputes. Avoid quarrels! Remember that anyone who insults you in a quarrel can be discouraged (even defeated) by your calm smile “And I love you.”

Video: Conflict at work

Conflicts at work and ways to resolve them



An enterprise, no matter what the foundations of kindness and partnership it is based on, is not possible without conflicts that arise from time to time. The existing corporate culture suggests ways of resolving emerging conflict situations that have been formed and accepted in this organization.

style=”display:inline-block;width:240px;height:400px”
data-ad-client=”ca-pub-4472270966127159″
data-ad-slot=”1061076221″>

So, let's figure out what conflict is and whether it is so terrible for an organization. Conflict- this is a contradiction that has arisen between two or more people who are trying to resolve it with varying degrees of emotionality. It may occur for completely different reasons – production, when, for example, you and your deputy see a solution to a certain situation differently, between employees in a department who cannot share one computer, fax or telephone, between a foreman and workers due to a lack of authority of the manager, etc. Conflict may manifest itself open (in the form of discussion, argument, clarification of relationships) or secretly (without verbal and effective manifestations), then it is more likely to be felt in a painful thunderstorm atmosphere. Contributes to hidden conflict poor psychological microclimate in the team, understatement, mutual distrust, hostility, aggressiveness, dissatisfaction with oneself. The reason for the start of a conflict can be either objective (to accept or not to accept, for example, this or that employee, since you see the result of his work in your team differently), or subjective (to wear makeup for work or not), since the result It has nothing to do with work, it’s just your personal preferences. The first is more typical for male groups, the second - for mixed and female groups.

Most often, conflicts arise between superiors and subordinates in organizations. which occurs before all conflict situations arise. This is not only the most common, but also the most dangerous type of conflict for a leader, since others look at the development of the situation and check the influence, authority, actions of their boss, all his actions and words are passed through the developing tense situation. The conflict must be resolved, otherwise the painful atmosphere will drag on and affect the results of the work of the entire team. To resolve the conflict first it is necessary to establish the cause of the conflict, on the surface the situation may look completely different. To do this, if a dispute arises between subordinates, it is better for the manager to listen to both sides and try to understand the source of the disagreement. If your workers are constantly quarreling over who took the wrong tool, check whether they have enough tools; it is possible that there is simply not enough, and they either do not dare to contact you or have not thought about it. Then resolving the situation will only increase your authority as a leader, and the workers, seeing your interest in their work, will receive additional motivation. Or, for example, your accountant is constantly late and you have morning clashes with him because of this. The reason for the conflict may not be its disorganization, but, for example, that otherwise she cannot send the child to kindergarten, then transferring the child or shifting her work schedule will resolve the conflict and again add “points” to you in your relationship with the team. The main thing when a conflict arises is not to make hasty conclusions or take urgent measures, but to stop and try to figure it out by looking at the situation from several sides. Because design approval conflict will lead to team unity, increased trust, improve the process of interaction between colleagues, and improve the management culture of the enterprise. Extinguishing the conflict transfers it to the “smoldering stage”, which can last for years, resulting in unjustified dismissals, low mood and performance, frequent illnesses of employees, and dissatisfaction. Therefore, open conflict is useful in that it allows one to reveal and express contradictions and can ultimately lead to its complete resolution at the negotiating table. On the other hand, the conflict-free existence of the organization is not as cloudless as it seems. This may indicate inertia and indifference of employees, lack of development, lack of ideas, independence in decisions, reluctance to give their all emotionally at work, or formal fulfillment of their duties.

To effectively lead an organization, a manager needs to competently resolve conflicts and find common ground with his employees. Here is one example from my practice; such situations occur quite often in small family-type organizations. A young relative joins the established core of business old-timers who stood at the very origins of the company. He worked for some time in lower management positions, proved himself well, and they decided to promote him to the head of a department, which consists of people much older than him. On the first day, having introduced himself, he, remembering his practice in other departments and other organizations, asks all subordinates present to give him a report on the work for the last month. He needed this to determine the situation and plan further activities of the department. And then, completely unexpectedly for him, one of the ladies, his cousin, openly expresses her disobedience. Like, “the milk on my lips hasn’t dried yet to demand reports. Before you, Uncle Petya was in charge, so he managed without any reports and trusted people more. So, no reports for you, Vovochka.”

The conflict situation that arose required quick resolution. It was pointless to enter into an argument with a loud lady in front of the rest of the employees - you would further lose your already sufficiently undermined authority. Vladimir calmly asked Valentina Ivanovna to come to him for a cup of tea at the end of the working day and left. But quite often I had to deal with such situations when the leader decided to stop sabotage on the spot, got into a quarrel with subordinates and often lost, losing even more authority, while the instigator acquired additional power as an informal leader and asserted himself at the expense of a weak leader.

Vladimir spent the whole day trying to understand where he made a mistake; he did not blame the woman’s emotionality and nonsense for everything, but took a pencil and began to write down all the options for the conflict. Then he rejected some, leaving two, of which he decided to find the real one in person. Having learned the true cause of the conflict in a conversation with the obstinate aunt, he developed two solutions - to fire him or to reassure him that he was not going to fire him.

He decided to start with the worst - he assumed that Valentina Ivanovna had decided to sit on him; for the last month she had been gossiping and spreading unflattering rumors about their future leader more than fulfilling her official duties. At the same time, he knew that as the head of the department, she had a certain authority among the employees, which was only strengthened through active confrontation with the new leader. As a result, her goal was to remove the young man. For this case, he decided to show his strength and power, to conduct a further conversation in the spirit of “I am the boss here, and you will either have to accept my terms of the game, or we will part ways.”

The second option was more optimistic because it allowed the company to retain a fairly valuable employee.

It is possible that Valentina Ivanovna was simply offended by the formal attitude towards her, like everyone else. Perhaps, due to many years of work in the company, she hoped that the new manager would first turn to her for advice, offer a heart-to-heart conversation, and come for help. But instead, there is a demand for a “report”, distrust, a demand to confirm one’s competence, a reproach for doing nothing and being functionally useless. Perhaps her sabotage is just a manifestation of stress, then it’s best to just talk about what suits her and what doesn’t, explain why the report is needed. Maybe it just needs to be replaced with the word “information and analytical note”, and Valentina Ivanovna’s anger will subside. He will invite her to lead the training of new employees, which will give her additional importance and value. And at the end of the conversation, firmly say that in the future he will not allow such declarative statements in front of the entire team.

Having weighed all the pros and cons, Vladimir began to wait for Valentina Ivanovna. Fortunately, it turned out that she was offended by the unfair, in her opinion, attitude of the young boss towards her, and the conflict was quickly resolved. Subsequently, Valentina Ivanovna became Vladimir’s excellent deputy, trained new employees and helped him in business with advice and action.

So, to effectively lead a team, a manager needs to correctly assess the psychological situation in the team, wisely choose a leadership style and help strengthen a favorable moral and psychological climate in your organization. And this, first of all, is to notice in time the prerequisites for the emergence of conflicts, to prevent them in a timely manner, to be careful in choosing the right communication channel to build trusting relationships with subordinates, the ability to notice in time the unmet needs of one’s subordinates for the successful use of motivation systems, the ability to emerge as a leader from any situation .

It is precisely this behavior of a leader that can unite the team and lead the organization out of the most difficult situations. Your authority will only strengthen over time, and your relatives will rightfully consider you the head of the family clan.

Conflicts in the team and their regulation

In its most general form, a conflict can be defined as a clash, a serious disagreement, or an extreme case of aggravation of contradiction. Conflict is a multifaceted phenomenon that relates to a wide variety of areas and forms of life. When solving socio-psychological problems of management, the focus is on conflicts that arise and occur in the sphere of direct communication between people, as a corresponding result of aggravated contradictions between them. And here interpersonal conflicts in teams become of primary importance.

In interpersonal conflict, people confront each other directly. At the same time, they develop and maintain tense relationships. Interpersonal conflict that arises and occurs in the sphere of communication is caused by conflicting goals, modes of behavior, and attitudes of people that manifest themselves in the course of joint activities. The participant in the conflict perceives and explains the specific situation of the clashes in his own way and in different ways. The ways of resolving the conflict are also seen differently.

The most obvious interpersonal conflicts manifest themselves in mutual accusations, disputes, attacks and defenses. It is noteworthy that, according to available data, the period of visible manifestation of the conflict is preceded by a period of “preparatory tension” 6-8 times longer. In addition, it takes 12-16 times more time for the parties to the conflict to “cool down” to their normal state, when the ability to calmly assess the situation and not be biased about what is happening is restored.

Thus, in reality, a conflict takes about 20 times longer than its external manifestation, which is most often perceived as “the conflict itself.”

The negative, destructive sides of the conflict that destroy interpersonal relationships and the integrity of the team include:
polarization of partners' value judgments;
a tendency for initial positions to diverge;
the desire to force a partner to make a decision that is unfavorable for him;
escalation of the conflict;
refusal to solve the original problem;
painful forms of conflict resolution.

With a destructive resolution of the conflict, the relationship between its participants may become tense in the future if feelings of indignation and resentment are experienced by at least one of the parties. At the same time, a participant who feels like a loser often blames himself for the fact that he behaved ineptly in the conflict, and therefore lost. This can lead to a decrease in his self-esteem and self-esteem. Finally, dissatisfaction with the form of resolution of interpersonal problems has a negative impact on the health of those in conflict.

Interpersonal conflict acquires a positive, constructive meaning by clarifying the relationship between the parties and stimulating the discovery of new directions for the development of the team and the personal qualities of the participants in the conflict. The usefulness of conflict, as defined by N.V. Grishina, is associated with its signaling function: “the more objective reasons there are for the emergence of a conflict, the more directly the conflict indicates one or another problem in the social and production situation and the need for its optimization.” By exposing the contradictions that exist between team members, conflict prevents stagnation and conservation of interpersonal relationships. Thus, the resolution of interpersonal conflict contributes to the emergence of progressive new formations in the system of group activity and their consolidation at a new level of development of the team.

Constructive consequences of interpersonal conflicts can manifest themselves, for example:
in creating a community of people involved in solving the problem and thereby ensuring its better implementation;
in expanding the scope of cooperation to other areas, resolving other controversial issues;
in faster self-awareness, clarification of the interests of partners.

The presence of positive and negative sides of conflicts emphasizes their objective nature. Conflicts in everyday life are inevitable and one should strive to reduce the harm they can cause, or even try to derive some benefit from them.
Most conflicts have the following common elements:
the presence of at least two parties having contact with each other;
mutual incompatibility of the values ​​and intentions of the parties;
behavior aimed at destroying the plans and intentions of the other party in order to acquire something at its expense;
the opposition of the actions of one side to the other and vice versa.

For a conflict to develop, it is necessary to recognize the situation as a conflict. This includes awareness of the situation itself as significant, that is, capable of achieving a significant goal, as well as awareness of the fact that the other party is preventing its achievement. For this stage of the conflict, it is very important whether or not the parties recognize the legitimacy of each other’s demands. In cases where the legitimacy of the demands and claims of the other party is initially rejected, the conflict will be more destructive. Emotional manifestations in the behavior of the parties actively influence the awareness of the conflict. Demonstration of feelings of enmity, aggression, or antipathy by at least one of the participants stimulates the perception of conflict and mobilizes confrontation. A conflict situation becomes especially complicated when the number of empathizers on each of the conflicting parties increases, which leads to increased emotional tension. Thus, each of the participants in the conflict develops his own image of the situation, depending on which the attitude towards what is happening and the reaction to it in the form of appropriate actions and deeds is formed.

The totality of such actions and deeds form the corresponding type of behavior in a conflict. A classification has become widespread that identifies the following types of such behavior: competition, concession, compromise, withdrawal, cooperation. Rivalry is the realization of one's own interests, the achievement of one's own goals while neglecting the interests of others. Concession or adaptation means the desire to maintain or establish favorable relationships, to ensure the interests of others, agreeing with their demands, claims, while sacrificing one’s own interests. Compromise involves the desire to resolve disagreements, conceding something in exchange for concessions from the other, the search for middle solutions, when no one loses much, but also does not gain much, as a result of which the interests of both parties are not fully satisfied. Withdrawal, avoidance is the desire not to take responsibility for making decisions, not to see disagreements, to deny conflict, to get out of the situation without giving in, but also without insisting on one’s own. Cooperation is manifested in the search for solutions that fully satisfy the interests of both parties, when initiative, responsibility and execution are distributed by mutual agreement.

The nature of interaction between the parties to a conflict determines the form of its resolution and its outcome. The outcome is often considered as the final result, the ratio of rewards received and losses. If we assume that with the outcome and a certain level of compromise, the prerequisites for the conflict are preserved, then it turns out to be possible, somewhat schematizing, to distinguish two types of conflict outcomes: mutual gain and unilateral gain. It is believed that a one-sided outcome is associated with much greater potential risk and in most cases involves open confrontation between the parties. Therefore, it is often recommended to avoid pursuing this type of conflict resolution, giving absolute preference to a win-win option. However, it is difficult to consider this approach adequate for conflicts in which priority for one of the parties is mandatory and necessary according to generally accepted criteria, for example, in the case of a conflict between the criminal and the victim. Thus, when regulating or managing a conflict, one should keep in mind both of its possible outcomes, and the choice should be made based on the substantive characteristics of the confrontation, the specifics of the activity in which the conflict arose and is developing, and the nature of its causes.

In the most general form, the causes of conflicts can be reduced to three groups. One group of reasons is determined by the very content of the interaction (joint activity) of the participants in the conflict, the other group is formed by the characteristics of their interpersonal relationships, the third - by their personal characteristics. Among the reasons of the first group, the social psychology of management is limited to factors that depend on the activities of the participants in the conflict, since only in this case do actions to regulate it make sense, that is, reasons that have one or another psychological component should be considered.

From these positions, it is advisable to turn to V. Lincoln’s classification, which identifies the following causal factors of conflicts: informational, behavioral, relational, value and structural. Information factors are associated with the unacceptability of information for one of the conflicting parties. The information factors can be:
incomplete and inaccurate facts, including issues related to the accuracy of the issue and the history of the conflict;
rumors: unwitting misinformation;
premature and late information;
unreliability of experts, witnesses, sources of information or data, inaccuracy of translations and media reports;
unwanted release of information that may offend the values ​​of one of the parties, violate confidentiality and even leave unpleasant memories;
interpretation of expressions such as “approximately”, “substantially”, “intentionally”, “excessively”, etc.;
extraneous facts, controversial issues of legislation, rules, procedures, stereotypes, etc. Behavioral factors are various characteristics of behavior rejected by one of the parties. Most often, the reasons for such rejection are manifestations of superiority, aggressiveness and selfishness, as well as cases when someone:
threatens personal safety (physical, financial, emotional and social);
undermines self-esteem;
does not live up to positive expectations, breaks promises;
constantly distracts, causes stress, inconvenience, discomfort, embarrassment;
behaves unpredictably, rudely, exaggeratedly.

The relationship factor consists of the peculiarities of interaction between the parties to the conflict, which can lead to a state of dissatisfaction. Often such dissatisfaction is generated not only by the already established interaction, but also by the unacceptability for one of the parties of proposals regarding its further development.

The most important relationship factors are:
contribution of the parties to the relationship, balance of the parties in the relationship;
the importance of the relationship for each party;
incompatibility of the parties in terms of values, behavior, personal or professional goals and personal communication;
differences in educational level, class differences;
history of relationships, their duration, negative aftertaste from past conflicts;
the values ​​of the groups to which the parties belong and their pressure on the parties' attitudes.

Value factors include asocial orientations that can cause feelings of rejection by the other side of the conflict. Values ​​vary in strength and importance. The main ones include:
personal systems of beliefs and behavior (prejudices, preferences, priorities);
group and professional traditions, norms, methods of action;
religious, cultural, regional and political values;
traditional belief systems and associated expectations: ideas about right and wrong, bad and good; ways and methods of assessing appropriateness, practicality, fairness; attitude towards progress and preservation of the old. Structural factors are relatively stable circumstances that are independent of the conflicting parties, but often determine the emergence of negative attitudes between them. Any interpersonal conflict unfolds against the background of structural factors that are “external” to it, but significantly influence its course. The political system, wage system, level of development of means of labor, etc. can act as structural factors.

Comparing the characteristics of different types of conflicts allows us to separately identify small-scale clashes caused by informational and structural factors. In the first case, when the confrontation has no objective basis and exists only due to errors in perception and understanding of the subjects of interaction, the conflict can be considered a false, pseudo-conflict, or phantom conflict. When a conflict arises under the influence of structural factors that exist objectively, regardless of subjective desires, which are difficult or even impossible to change, the confrontation can be classified as insoluble. Conflicts formed by informational and structural factors, due to the fundamental differences between them, require different ways of regulating them. If in one case all efforts should be concentrated on obtaining information that sheds additional light on the causes of the conflict, then in the other the search for a new “third” solution becomes paramount, allowing the conflict to be taken from the plane of alternative mutual confrontation to a different level that makes it possible to satisfy interests both sides.

As for conflicts caused by behavioral, relational, and value factors, in their characteristics they occupy an intermediate position between conflicts that have informational and structural causes. In this case, the most important characteristic should be recognized as the indicator of variability and lability of factors. In this regard, values ​​are located closer to structural factors, and behavioral factors associated with “erroneous”, unacceptable forms of behavior are closer to informational ones. Accordingly, the approaches that are preferred when regulating conflicts differ.

In case of a conflict due to “wrong” information or “unworthy” behavior, that is, when it does not have objective prerequisites, it is probably more possible to talk about resolving the conflict when a one-sided gain is achieved, since with other options for resolving such a pseudo-conflict, the status of a pseudo-conflict is preserved. quo, the relationship returns to its generally accepted level. Conflicts of this kind are typical for vertical interpersonal relationships between superiors and subordinates. In this case, the main task of the manager is to prove the error and incompleteness of the information used by the other party. To achieve this goal, it is important for a leader to be principled and consistent, to show persistence and pressure, and to use administrative measures.

It is especially important for a boss or manager to prevent himself from being drawn into a conflict as an active opposing party. This is facilitated by measures of anticipation and prevention of such forms of counteraction. One of the effective management methods that prevent destructive conflicts is to clarify the requirements for the work results of each individual employee and the team as a whole, the presence of clearly and unambiguously formulated rights and responsibilities, and rules for performing work. Strict adherence to the principle of unity of command makes it easier to manage a large group of conflict situations, since subordinates know whose orders they must follow. Informing all employees about the policy, strategy and prospects of the organization, about the state of current affairs contributes to the formation among team members of common values ​​that correspond to the goals of the organization and enterprise. It is also important to establish performance criteria that would exclude conflicts of interests among employees.

To prevent and prevent interpersonal conflicts that arise at the horizontal level of interaction between team members, it is first of all important to create and maintain a healthy socio-psychological climate in the team. Along with ensuring the psychological compatibility of team members, the creation of a favorable socio-psychological climate is facilitated by the manager's friendly attitude towards subordinates, knowledge and consideration of their interests, and democratic leadership.

Only under such conditions can a manager become a person who effectively and efficiently regulates and resolves conflicts between subordinates. A study conducted among technical workers in a conflict situation showed that in more than 50% of cases they were inclined to seek help from a superior manager to resolve a dispute with their immediate superior, in about 40% of cases - a dispute with their colleague, in about 25 % - with his subordinate. When regulating interpersonal conflict in horizontal relationships between team members, the opposing parties are more often viewed as equal in rights, parity, and conflict resolution is usually focused on achieving a win-win option. As a rule, this involves searching for a new, non-standard solution at a level that allows one to overcome the mutually exclusive aspirations of the parties.

With this approach, the main task of the conflict management manager is to translate the conflicting situation that has arisen into a business-like and constructive discussion of the problem. For this, it is useful for a manager to:
listen to both sides to avoid bias;
be as tactful as possible in communication, be friendly, demonstrate a respectful attitude, tolerance towards interlocutors, consult with them in order to create an atmosphere of agreement and show readiness to interact;
do not completely trust the words of the participants in the conflict, but in order to overcome subjectivity, compare their accusations and opinions with real deeds and the opinions of others;
do not express final judgments and assessments about the personality and behavior of those in conflict, because this can be interpreted as support or opposition;
distract or redirect the attention of those in conflict in case of increased emotionality;
do not convey the negative things that the parties to the conflict said about each other, but try to convey the positive aspects of the relationship;
encourage those in conflict to once again calmly think about the situation and their role in it. Concluding the presentation of materials related to the management of interpersonal conflicts in teams, the main thing should be emphasized: the choice of the main direction of regulatory influences is determined by the specifics of the collective activity being performed. When the goals and structure of an activity are clearly defined and the criteria for its effectiveness are generally accepted, ensuring resolution of destructive conflicts between managers and subordinates comes to the fore. At the same time, the manager is called upon to persistently and consistently defend a position that objectively meets the requirements of achieving the goals of the activity. If such clarity of the structure of activity is absent, it is predominantly functional in nature, and conflict resolution between work colleagues becomes especially important. To manage conflicts of this kind, the role of an adviser and consultant is more acceptable for a manager, providing a constructive resolution of the contradiction. The choice by the leader of the form of his behavior to resolve the conflict can be carried out using special psychodiagnostic techniques. Also, for targeted actions to resolve conflicts, diagnostic information about the types of behavior of those in conflict may be useful (examples of techniques of both types are given in Appendices 12 and 13).