How to be in a conflict situation. How to behave in a conflict situation

Due to excessive temper and irritability, it is often not possible to resolve the conflict peacefully. However, even when the interlocutor refuses to understand his opponent, one should not forget about the banal norms of etiquette and rules of conduct, usually familiar to many from childhood. It is also worth paying attention to the advice of conflict psychologists - professionals in resolving controversial situations.

Conflict and its phases

To identify the main rules of behavior, it is necessary to start with the definition of conflict. This is a situation in which two parties participate, adhering to a certain position that does not meet the interests of the opponent or several opponents. Conflicts occur because of a mismatch of interests of certain individuals or groups of people. The rules of conduct in a conflict situation determine what character the discussion will take on.

The conflict itself includes three main phases:

Awareness. The parties come to the understanding that their interests do not converge, the interaction between them takes on the character of a confrontation.
Strategy. After realizing the difference in their positions, the parties determine the lines of behavior that serve as a source of resolving the issue or problem.
Action. The subjects of the quarrel determine effective methods of action, depending on the goal that they want to achieve in the end. The final stage may lead to a compromise, a consensus, or to the fact that each participant remains in the original position.

As a rule, quarrels arise spontaneously and are accompanied by the manifestation of strong emotional reactions. Sometimes a conflict can spoil the relationship between people who have entered into a dispute because of its negative component. But the conflict also has its advantages: in such situations, the subjects can identify contradictions among themselves, speak out and no longer keep negative emotions in themselves.

The effective use of these aspects of the situation helps to build stronger non-conflict relationships and treat with greater calmness the manifestation of the interlocutor's complex character traits.

Basic Behavior Strategies

Social relations are a phenomenon that is not always easy to deal with. Sometimes the accumulated problems get out of control and turn into a quarrel. If a controversial situation has occurred, and participation in it is inevitable, the participants in the conflict usually follow 5 basic patterns of behavior that lead to one or another move and the end of the confrontation. These diagrams look like this.

fixture

Adaptation. The essence of this method is that one side of the conflict is silent about its interests and adapts to the requirements of the other participant in the quarrel. This will reduce the time of the quarrel, but will in no way lead to long-term mutually respectful relations, since sooner or later the subject of the dispute will again make itself felt.

Avoidance

avoidance. A fairly large number of people tend to minimize their participation in quarrels in this way. This is due to the emotional discomfort caused by the conflict. In an effort to avoid such a situation, one of the parties moves away from the quarrel psychologically or even physically.

The method is justified in cases where it is unsafe to continue the dispute. However, it should be borne in mind that avoiding the problem does not bring closer to the implementation of its desired solution.

Compromise

Compromise. This type of problem solving is characteristic of mature people who are able to make certain concessions. The final solution will require some sacrifice on each side, but all parties to the dispute will receive some satisfaction in their interests.

Rivalry

Rivalry is a method of active interaction, in which all participants in the conflict take quite aggressive positions, trying to prove the correctness of their point of view. This is not justified if you want to build a constructive dialogue and continue long-term cooperation, because after some time, dissatisfaction with the resolution of the quarrel will make itself felt.

Cooperation

Cooperation is the resolution of a disputable situation in such a way that the wishes of all the subjects of the conflict are taken into account. In the process of resolving the issue, the parties discuss the problem and ways to deal with it, voice their attitude to the situation. The result obtained necessarily satisfies all parties to the dispute.

How to behave in a conflict situation

Conflict is just as much a form of interaction and communication as any other. And even in a conflict situation, it is necessary to communicate correctly with each other. Being ethical will not resolve the fight, but it will make it less difficult to get out of it. There are certain rules of conduct recommended by experts. As a guide to action, a memo is presented based on the main rules they developed:

As a rule, a quarrel arises due to excessive tension or obsession with a problem, and an irritated person is not able to adequately perceive information. It is necessary to allow the party to the conflict to speak out, and only then try to soundly voice their position.
Quite often in conflicts, aggression caused by irritation is manifested. In turn, anger arises from the inability to convey or impose one's point of view. In such cases, it is worth switching the attention of the opponent, transferring it to abstract objects that bring positive emotions. It is important not to show retaliatory aggression, otherwise there is a risk of not finding a worthy resolution to the disputed situation.
It is necessary to observe a culture of behavior. In quarrels, both aggression and disrespect for the opponent are unacceptable. You should not give an emotional assessment of the actions of another participant in the conflict, insult his opinion or simply defiantly ignore him.
It is necessary to try to listen to the position of the opponent, ask clarifying questions, and then, in the same way, briefly and competently state your opinion. Talk to him gently and as less aggressively as possible.
We should not forget that, trying to prove their point of view by all available methods, one of the parties runs the risk of remaining completely misunderstood.
If there is a consciousness of being wrong, the best way to get out of the conflict is a sincere apology.

Conflict is something that can arise both in family and friendships, and in a work environment. The behavior of people in determines the outcome of not only the quarrel itself, but also the relationship as a whole. That is why it is very important to be able to correctly resolve various disagreements or, even better, to be able to get around them. So how to behave in conflict situations correctly? Let's find out!

What is conflict?

The types of disagreements and quarrels are varied, but they all have the same essence.

First of all, a conflict is a situation created to resolve the contradiction of two people in the form of activity on both sides, which is necessary in order to achieve justice. It is extremely undesirable to avoid disputes, since in most cases misunderstandings occur due to understatement, and this does not benefit any of the conflicting parties. Suppressing fights and disagreements is dangerous because it can lead to rash decisions.

The first stage is the stage of potential formation of conflicting values, interests, views, norms of behavior.
The second stage - at this stage, the potential contention turns into a real one, or the participants in the conflict situation are aware of their true and false interests.
The third stage is the quarrel itself.
The fourth stage is the removal or resolution of conflicts.

What are the main reasons for disagreement?

Conflict resolution is based on understanding the causes of their occurrence. Often the causes of disputes are the lack of mutual understanding between people, as well as the presence of diametrically opposed interests and approaches to solving problems. Perhaps the reason for the disagreement is revenge, envy, resentment, or a low culture of communication. The quarrel may be based on such things as the usual incompatibility of characters or the inability to find a common language. The reasons may be the behavior of "difficult" employees or simple troubles in the organization, such as emergency work.

What differences between people can give rise to conflict?

One of the leading causes of disagreement is the differences between the disputants. Despite the fact that people are born equal in rights and free in their dignity, most often in reality they turn out to be more than unequal. Compatibility is influenced by many factors, for example, a different understanding of the meaning of the work than that of the opponent, differences in worldview, non-identity of interests, incompatibility of characters, a dissimilar attitude to work and duties, as well as a different degree of preparedness for doing work and, most importantly, available them ways of resolving conflict situations.

Types of conflicts

In most classifications, collisions are divided into constructive and destructive.

For a characteristic feature is the impact on the fundamental aspects and problems of the life of the participants in the dispute. The resolution of this type of disagreement brings the participants of the quarrel to a new stage in the development of personality, while destructive disputes often have disappointing consequences. Destructive actions in conflict situations, such as squabbles, gossip or other negative phenomena, in most cases reduce the effectiveness of the group.

What are the types of conflict personalities?

First of all, it should be noted that there are several classifications of people involved in disputes. Your personality type will help determine the test. Behavior in a conflict situation largely depends on this. The following is a list of possible courses of action.

Pedant. This type of personality is extremely precise: he is punctual, boring, picky, although he is executive. He tends to push people away.

As a rule, these people are choleric. They are characterized by a constant stormy activity, which is conducted in a variety of directions. For the demonstrative type, they are vital. These people like to be constantly in sight and often have high self-esteem.

Conflict-free. This type of personality tends to consciously move away from conflict situations. In addition, he knows how to shift the solution of problems to others. Often unprincipled. And the conflict, in turn, grows like a snowball and, falling on the head of this type of personality, leaves unpleasant consequences.

Leech. This person will not be rude to you, will not say nasty things, will not offend. However, after communicating with him, both mood and well-being worsen, fatigue appears.

Inert or personality. People who do not know how to rebuild, or, in other words, who do not take into account changes in circumstances and situations, as well as accept the opinions and points of view of others. This type is capable of showing painful resentment. They are ambitious and suspicious.

Tank. This type of personality is characterized by such qualities as rudeness, pressure and arrogance. Style of behavior: go ahead to the very end. These people in most cases tend to despise all the subtleties of relationships, other people's opinions and feelings.

Cotton wool. At first glance, this type of personality gives the impression of a decent and complaisant person. Often he is accommodating and ready to make concessions. At the very beginning of communication, there are no problems. However, in the future you will notice that this type of personality does not fulfill promises.

Prosecutor. A person belonging to this type of personality criticizes very specific people: neighbors, car owners, sellers and controllers. After he tells you who and how should work, gives arguments and draws conclusions, he will certainly feel better. This personality type is driven by the desire to speak and be heard.

What will contribute to ending disagreements?

Any type of conflict situations can be successfully resolved if the following two circumstances are observed.

The first factor: the participants in the quarrel understand the existing differences, and also recognize the right of each other to their opinion.

The second factor is that both sides agree to abide by certain rules of the game. This makes communication between them more efficient.

Possible styles of behavior when dealing with "harmful" people

Management is important in order not to aggravate the quarrel.

One style of behavior is to earn the opponent's love and simply prevent conflict from arising.

The second style of communication is stress relief. Are you openly provoked? Take a deep breath through your nose, draw fresh air into your lungs, imagine all the anger or irritation that is in you, and exhale it all. This technique will allow you to control yourself and not act “on emotions”.

To make it easier to get along with people, collect jokes, funny pictures and stories. When communicating with a "harmful" person, they will help you.

Among other things, you can openly protest against rudeness.

If the “harmful” person still spoiled your mood, then just don’t think about it. Either think about something good, or about someone you don't like. The choice is yours.

How to behave in conflict situations?

During a quarrel, each of the parties can choose one of three possible strategies: 1) by all means available at the moment, achieve victory; 2) to get away from the scandal, not to oppose; 3) to negotiate in order to overcome differences peacefully, or by finding a compromise. So how to behave in conflict situations? What course of action to choose?

Avoiding or Avoiding an Argument

When you get into a conflict situation, you just need to ignore your opponent and not succumb to provocations. In this strategy of behavior, the essence is the same: I absolutely do not care what decision will be made and what actions will follow. Naturally, by this you show disregard for your own interests.

Compulsion

There are situations when it is not important for you to get out of the conflict, but it is important to defend your views. The "Coercion" tactic is to convince, to force the opponent to agree with your point of view. This strategy is used when you think that your opinion is the most important and correct, and the opinion of others is absolutely indifferent to you. It forces people to do what you want and fully comply with your intentions.

Compliance

It is used when we have a high interest in the opinions of others and a low interest in our own. You need to fully agree with the opinion of the opponent, while not expressing any of your desires and considerations. This tactic helps not to create a conflict at all or to resolve it quickly.

Compromise

The strategy is used when you have an average interest in relation to the opponent's opinion and there is a desire to resolve the dispute or avoid it altogether. The tactic is based on the fact that both you and the opponent give up part of their desires in order to resolve conflicts, trying to find a solution that will satisfy both.

This strategy is very effective, very useful, but the main disadvantage of it is that you have to give up some part of your claims. As a result, the solution of the conflict situation does not satisfy all needs.

Cooperation

Immediately make a reservation that this is the most effective strategy of behavior. It is effective when you have a high interest in both the opinion of the opponent and in your own interests. The "Cooperation" strategy is to fully satisfy the interests of both parties.

Possible obstacles to ending disagreements

In addition to the main question of how to behave in conflict situations, it is also important to know what can prevent you from repaying quarrels:

If the participants in the dispute see only in their victory.
If there are emotional aspects in a quarrel that prevent concessions or compromises.
If the parties to the conflict lack the skills to develop a compromise and negotiate.
If the parties use ineffective strategies in the conduct of the dispute.

What hinders conflict management?

One or both parties wish to continue to quarrel.
The participants in the conflict believe that their interests are mutually exclusive, which is why they perceive the dispute as a struggle.
The emotional relationship between the disputants is such that they cannot interact constructively.
If the parties differently perceive the essence of the quarrel. This can happen if the participants in the conflict situation have an initial divergence in values or they interpret what is happening differently.
The fact that disagreements and disputes are just the tip of the iceberg, and its resolution is of little importance.

In the life of every person, conflicts periodically arise: with the boss at work, with colleagues, with relatives, and simply with a difficult person on the street. Any conflict situation "unsettles", and in a state of stress, we often behave inappropriately and only then - "on a sober head" - we regret the words or deeds said in anger.

But in order to get your bearings in time in the midst of a conflict and remember how to behave through the veil of emotions, we recommend that you remember the following rules.

How to behave when provoked to a conflict: the ABC of peacekeepers

When a conflict arises with a difficult person, first of all, you need to soberly and objectively assess the situation: what is the reason for the quarrel, and what became the true cause of the conflict - often these are different things.

For example, if a conflict arises with a colleague at work, the opponent may have a hidden grudge against you (due to additional work responsibilities, an unfair bonus, etc.), which will become the true cause of the conflict. In this case, every little thing can be the reason for an emotional “explosion”: an unsuccessful joke, a window ajar in cool weather, or a working air conditioner.

In addition, envy, jealousy and internal irritation often become the foundation of a conflict situation, which, at every opportunity, “pour out” into a quarrel.

Much less often, a conflict with a difficult person arises solely through the fault of the opponent’s bad character: for a certain category of people, an outbreak of a dispute is just a way to humiliate another and demonstrate his own superiority to him.

In any case, at the beginning of the conflict, you need to determine for yourself who is “on the other side of the barricades”:

- a verbose opponent who does not shy away from a showdown is usually self-confident;
- only an insecure person who stubbornly refuses to look at the situation objectively and reckon with the interests of the opponent will elude the conflict and hide his goals (which indicates his internal weakness);
- "to say the last word" seeks only a primitive debater who, in his stubbornness, does not seek the truth and benefit of the case;
- and it is hardly worth waiting for a diplomatic resolution of the conflict situation from an unbalanced personality - a person for whom aggression, insults and even a fight are the norm.

So, in any conflict situation, the same simple postulate “the best treatment for a disease is prevention” applies. In order to create harmonious relations in the team, it is worth making every effort to avoid conflict altogether and extinguish the flaring scandal “in the bud”.

In practice, you can adhere to the classic "three O" scheme:

That is, you should not prove anything to your opponent during the conflict, defend your point of view and support further "hot discussion".

If you are provoked into a conflict, it is best to simply “step aside”: for example, firmly but politely invite the interlocutor to return to this conversation a little later, when “passions subside”, refer to being busy and “take a bow” or calmly listen to your opponent and promise to think it over his words.

After that, you should take a break and calm down - drink coffee, do your current work or chat with friends. In a couple of hours, when the mind cools down and emotions subside, you need to objectively assess the current situation: determine the true cause of the conflict, the strategy of behavior and the optimal solution to the problem that has arisen.

After a while, you can return to the “hot topic” and offer the interlocutor a compromise (if there is still a need for that).

How to behave with dignity during a conflict?

If you still couldn’t avoid the dispute, then your main task during the conflict is to maintain external and internal calmness and fully control your own emotions.

Indeed, when they provoke a conflict, it is quite difficult to act rationally and not succumb to emotions. However, even a momentary weakness can cost you your reputation, and make you later bitterly regret your deed.

At such a moment, one can recall the well-known plot when a hysterical lady at the peak of a scandal squeals, stamps her feet and throws cups. From the outside, this behavior looks extremely unpleasant, right? And try to prevent such incidents from your side: your voice, facial expressions, gestures, speech speed - everything should remain under strict control.

No matter how the opponent behaves during the conflict, your communication with him should not go beyond the bounds of decency, and any actions must be guided by logic and common sense.

At the same time, there are a number of strict prohibitions, which are unacceptable to violate in any conflict situation. So you can't:

- resort to harsh criticism of the opposite side;

- be sure in advance of the bad intentions of opponents;

- look at the enemy "down";

- relieve yourself of any responsibility and blame another person for everything;

- completely ignore the interests of the other side of the conflict;

- look at the situation only from your own position;

- underestimate the affairs of partners;

- elevate their own importance;

- allow yourself to get annoyed and reach swearing;

- manipulate painful topics;

- descend to primitive claims against opponents.

In order not to heat up the situation, it is worth allowing a person to speak out, showing maximum patience and tact. This is the only way to relieve tension and move on to the stage of a constructive solution of the issue. All claims made must be properly substantiated.

Sometimes, in order to defuse the situation, you can resort to non-standard methods: for example, tell a joke in time or make a sincere compliment.

Also, as a foundation for a way out of a conflict situation, you can use legislation, the practical experience of other participants or the opinion of a person who has earned the trust of both parties. A respectful attitude towards the enemy will also help to achieve positive results, when the assessment of actions does not affect the personality itself. This will be noticed even by a partner overwhelmed with emotions. What, if not clarifying the point of view of the opponent and emphasizing attention to him, can reduce the degree of heat and aggression? And in no case should you answer swearing for swearing. Calmness, confidence and restrained tone will always be the most effective.

Realizing your own wrong, do not hesitate to apologize sincerely: this is not weakness at all, but proof of emotional maturity and intelligence. And regardless of the outcome of the conflict, you should not burn bridges, because in any conflict situation you can find a compromise.

1. The main models of personality behavior in conflict.

2. Strategies of personality behavior in conflict.

3. Types of conflict personalities. Constructive interaction with conflict people.

When analyzing a conflict and choosing adequate solutions for conflict management, the following models of behavior of subjects of conflict interaction are distinguished: constructive, destructive and conformist. Each of these models is determined by the subject of the conflict, the conflict situation, the value of interpersonal relations and the individual psychological characteristics of the subjects of conflict interaction.

Constructive. The person seeks to resolve the conflict; aims to find an acceptable solution; distinguished by endurance and self-control, friendly attitude towards the opponent, open and sincere in communication, concise and laconic.

Destructive. The personality is constantly striving to expand and aggravate the conflict; constantly belittles the partner, negatively evaluates his personality; shows suspicion and distrust of the opponent, violates the ethics of communication.

Conformist. The personality is passive, prone to concessions; inconsistent in assessments, judgments, behavior; easily agrees with the opponent's point of view; avoids tough questions.

Giving a general assessment of these behaviors, the desired and necessary model is constructive. A destructive model cannot be justified. It can turn a constructive conflict into a destructive one. The danger of the conformist model of behavior is that it contributes to the aggressiveness of the opponent, and sometimes even provokes it. But if the contradictions that caused the conflict are insignificant, then conformist behavior leads to a quick resolution of such a conflict.

Thus, the universal reaction of a person to emerging contradictions, bifurcation, disintegration (both in oneself and in relations with other people) is the desire to overcome this disharmony. Internal contradictions are considered as manifestations of conflicts that destroy the human psyche. None of the above strategies and behaviors can be called unequivocally "good" or "bad". Each of them can be optimal and provide the best effect, depending on the specific conditions for the emergence and development of the conflict. At the same time, it is cooperation, a constructive model of behavior in conflict, that is most consistent with modern ideas about long-term interaction between people. Achieving inner harmony cannot be a problem solved by a person for himself once and for all. The strategies used to find the optimal solution to the problem, to develop a point of view that integrates opposing positions, should be a priority for everyone.

The two-dimensional model of personality behavior strategies in conflict interaction developed by K. Thomas and R. Kilman has become widely used in conflictology. This model is based on the orientation of the participants in the conflict to their own interests and the interests of the opposite side.

In any conflict, each participant evaluates and correlates his interests and the interests of his opponent, asking himself the questions: “What will I gain ...?”, “What will I lose ...?”, “What is the significance of the subject of the dispute for my opponent ...?” etc. On the basis of such an analysis, he consciously chooses one or another strategy of behavior (withdrawal, coercion, compromise; concession or cooperation). It often happens that the reflection of these interests occurs unconsciously, and then the behavior in conflict interaction is saturated with powerful emotional stress and is spontaneous.

The assessment of interests in a conflict is a qualitative characteristic of the chosen behavior. In the Thomas-Kilman model, it correlates with quantitative parameters: low, medium, or high interest orientation.

Graphically, a two-dimensional model of behavior strategies in the Thomas-Kilman conflict is shown in Fig. one.

Rice. 1. Two-dimensional model of behavior strategies in the conflict of Thomas-Kilman

When analyzing conflicts based on the model under consideration, it is important to remember that the level of focus on one’s own interests or the interests of an opponent depends on three circumstances:

2) values of interpersonal relationships;

3) individual psychological characteristics of a person.

A special place in the assessment of models and strategies of personality behavior in conflict occupies a value for her interpersonal relationships with the opposing side. If for one of the rivals interpersonal relations with another (friendship, love, comradeship, partnership, etc.) are of no value, then his behavior in the conflict will also differ in destructive content or extreme positions in the strategy (coercion, struggle, rivalry) . And, conversely, the value of interpersonal relationships for the subject of conflict interaction, as a rule, is a significant reason for constructive behavior in conflict or the orientation of such behavior towards compromise, cooperation, withdrawal or concession.

Based on the foregoing, it seems possible to supplement the two-dimensional Thomas-Kilman model with a third dimension - the value of interpersonal relationships (IHR). Schematically, it is shown in Fig..2.

Rice. 2. Three-dimensional model of behavior strategies in conflict

Characteristics of the main strategies of behavior

1. Coercion (fight, rivalry)

The one who chooses this strategy of behavior, first of all, proceeds from the assessment of personal interests in the conflict as high, and the interests of his opponent as low. The choice of a coercive strategy ultimately comes down to a choice: either the interest of the struggle, or the relationship.

The choice in favor of the fight is distinguished by a style of behavior that is characteristic of the destructive model. With such a strategy, power, the force of law, connections, authority, etc. are actively used. It is expedient and effective in two cases. Firstly, when protecting the interests of the case from encroachments on them by a conflicting personality. For example, a conflict personality of an uncontrollable type often refuses to perform unattractive tasks, “shifts” his work onto others, etc. And secondly, when the existence of an organization or team is threatened. In this case, there is a situation of "Who wins...". Especially often it arises in the conditions of reforming enterprises and institutions. Often, when reforming the organizational and staffing structure of an enterprise (institution), the alleged “infusion” of some departments into others is unreasonable. And in these cases, the person who defends the interests of such units must take a tough stance.

2. Care

The exit strategy is characterized by the desire to get away from the conflict. It is characterized by a low level of focus on personal interests and the interests of the opponent and is mutual. It is essentially a give and take.

When analyzing this strategy, it is important to consider two options for its manifestation:

a) when the subject of the conflict is not significant for any of the subjects and is adequately reflected in the images of the conflict situation;

b) when the subject of the dispute is significant for one or both parties, but is underestimated in the images of the conflict situation, that is, the subjects of conflict interaction perceive the subject of the conflict as insignificant. In the first case, the conflict is exhausted by the exit strategy, and in the second case, it may have a relapse.

Interpersonal relationships when choosing this strategy do not undergo major changes.

3. Concession

A person who adheres to this strategy, as in the previous case, seeks to get away from the conflict. But the reasons for "leaving" in this case are different. The focus on personal interests is low here, and the assessment of the opponent's interests is high. In other words, the person who adopts the concession strategy sacrifices personal interests in favor of the interests of the rival.

The concession strategy has some similarities with the coercion strategy. This similarity lies in the choice between the value of the subject of the conflict and the value of interpersonal relationships. Unlike the strategy of struggle, in the strategy of concession, priority is given to interpersonal relationships.

When analyzing this strategy, some points should be taken into account.

Sometimes such a strategy reflects the tactics of a decisive struggle for victory. A concession here may turn out to be only a tactical step towards achieving the main strategic goal.

A concession can cause an inadequate assessment of the subject of the conflict (understatement of its value for oneself). In this case, the adopted strategy is self-deception and does not lead to conflict resolution.

This strategy can be dominant for a person due to his individual psychological characteristics. In particular, this is typical for a conformist personality, a conflict personality of a “conflict-free” type. Because of this, the strategy of concession can give a constructive conflict a destructive direction.

With all the highlighted features of the concession strategy, it is important to keep in mind that it is justified in cases where the conditions for resolving the conflict are not ripe. And in this case, it leads to a temporary "truce", is an important step towards a constructive resolution of the conflict situation.

4. Compromise

A compromise strategy of behavior is characterized by a balance of interests of the conflicting parties at the middle level. Otherwise, it can be called a strategy of mutual concession.

The strategy of compromise does not spoil interpersonal relationships. Moreover, it contributes to their positive development.

When analyzing this strategy, it is important to keep in mind a number of significant points.

Compromise should not be seen as a way to resolve the conflict. Giving in is often a step towards finding an acceptable solution to a problem.

Sometimes a compromise can exhaust a conflict situation. This occurs when the circumstances that caused the tension change. For example, two employees applied for the same position, which should be vacated in six months. But after three months it was cut. The subject of the conflict has disappeared.

Compromise can take active and passive forms. An active form of compromise can be manifested in the conclusion of clear agreements, the acceptance of some obligations, etc. A passive compromise is nothing more than a refusal to take any active steps to achieve certain mutual concessions in certain conditions. In other words, under specific conditions, a truce can be ensured by the passivity of the subjects of conflict interaction. In the previous example, the compromise between two employees was that neither of them took any direct or indirect active actions towards each other. Three months later, the position for which they applied was reduced, each remained in his own interests, and the absence of unnecessary "battles" made it possible to maintain normal relations between them.

Analyzing the compromise strategy, one should also keep in mind that the conditions for compromise can be imaginary when the subjects of conflict interaction have reached a compromise based on inadequate images of the conflict situation.

The concept of "compromise" is close in its content to the concept of "consensus". Their similarity lies in the fact that both compromise and consensus in their essence reflect the mutual concessions of the subjects of social interaction. Therefore, when analyzing and justifying a compromise strategy, it is important to rely on the rules and mechanisms for reaching consensus in social practice.

5. Cooperation

The cooperation strategy is characterized by a high level of focus on both one's own interests and the interests of the opponent. This strategy is built not only on the basis of a balance of interests, but also on the recognition of the value of interpersonal relationships.

Analyzing the strategy of cooperation in conflict interaction, some circumstances should be taken into account.

A special place in the choice of this strategy is occupied by the subject of conflict. If the subject of the conflict is of vital importance for one or both subjects of conflict interaction, then cooperation is out of the question. In this case, only the choice of struggle, rivalry is possible. Cooperation is possible only when the complex subject of the conflict allows the maneuvering of the interests of the warring parties, ensuring their coexistence within the framework of the problem that has arisen and the development of events in a favorable direction.

The cooperation strategy includes all other strategies (withdrawal, concession, compromise, confrontation). At the same time, other strategies in the complex process of cooperation play a subordinate role, they are more psychological factors in the development of relationships between the subjects of the conflict. For example, confrontation can be used by one of the participants in the conflict as a demonstration of their principled position in an adequate situation.

Being one of the most complex strategies, the cooperation strategy reflects the desire of the warring parties to solve the problem by joint efforts.

Types of conflict personalities

Many textbooks on conflictology describe five types of conflict personalities, which we present in Table. one.

Types of conflict personalities

The described approaches to conflict resolution are designed to communicate with ordinary people who meet in life on a daily basis. However, there are people who will not meet you halfway, no matter how hard you try to reconcile. What do you do when confronted with a particularly difficult person with certain personality characteristics who gets in the way of solving the problem or "puts you on the buttons" and infuriates you?

There are some general principles that you can follow in such situations, not forgetting those that have already been described earlier. In addition to this, you can use special approaches to dealing with difficult people in well-known categories.

Each person can have his own classification of difficult people, based on his personal qualities and life experience. For example, a woman who has suffered for many years as the daughter of a domineering tyrannical mother will categorize anyone who exhibits similar qualities, especially if it is a woman, into the category of difficult people to communicate with. Or a man who is divorced from his wife who has been harassing him and hates talkativeness may classify a person who is not characterized by conciseness as a category of people with whom it is difficult to communicate. But apart from these specific cases of classification, there are certain types of people who are considered difficult by those who constantly encounter different people because of their professional interests - consultants, service workers, doctors, etc. The designation and description of these types makes it easier to work with them: after identification, you will already know how to communicate with a person of this type.

Difficult people of a different type create hope in others, and then act contrary to expectations. Thus, their behavior undermines the foundations of people's trust in each other, which should soften human relationships. You may come across another type of "crazy" who gives conflicting hopes or expresses conflicting desires and expects you to satisfy them. Sometimes the "maddening" may ask you for something, and then create an environment in which it becomes impossible for you to fulfill his request and you cannot keep your word.

Some General Principles for Dealing with Difficult People

A good general principle in dealing with difficult people of any kind is to be aware of the existence of some hidden interests or needs that they satisfy by acting in this way. For example, a super-aggressive person may act like a steamroller because deep down he is afraid of dealing with other people or because he does not want to experience fear of the possibility of error; a calm silent person can withdraw into himself, afraid to open up to other people; the eternal pessimist can always prophesy failure, because it is more convenient for him to live with the certainty of failure than with the certainty of success. Therefore, if you decide to enter into communication with a difficult person, then you should identify his hidden needs and interests, and also think about how to satisfy them.

Overcoming negative emotions that arise when dealing with difficult people.

Dealing with a difficult person can make you upset, angry, confused, overwhelmed, and other unsettling feelings. Such a person can carry an emotional charge on his own, such as "dynamite" that "explodes" when something happens against his will.

Thus, one of the first steps should be to take control of your emotions or give vent to the other person's emotions if you decide to continue communicating to resolve the conflict. Below are some settings to remember.

Try not to take personally the words and behavior of another person. To meet his needs, a difficult person behaves similarly with everyone. Remind yourself of this to avoid negative emotions.

Determine if you categorized this person as a difficult person because they remind you of someone with whom you had difficulty communicating in the past (for example, does this person resemble your domineering mother or older brother who always possessed top over you, etc.). If so, then try to separate your perception of this person from the feelings that you had for the one he reminds you of.

Use creative visualization or other calming techniques to master the emotions you are experiencing.

Use those communication techniques that allow you to give vent to the emotions of another person.

If you feel that you are increasingly falling under the influence of a difficult person (for example, communicating with an eternal pessimist, you yourself begin to lose hope for success or begin to feel hostility when in contact with an aggressive person, etc.), then note this fact, and then you can stop. Remind yourself that you allowed yourself to look at the situation from another person's point of view just to understand that point of view, and that you are a completely different person with a different position. So separate yourself from that person; repeat to yourself over and over: "I'm not that person. I have my own view of the world" or something like that. Then exhale and mentally wave your hand at it. You will get rid of the other person's point of view and take back your own.

Difficult people can be especially sensitive about guilt and responsibility. They may be more inclined to blame others or make accusations in a more blunt way. Or they may become more defensive, feeling that someone is blaming them; and they may do so simply by feeling they are wrong and unwilling to admit it either to other people or to themselves. There are people of the type of "chronic accusers" who always look out for the mistakes of others and denounce the guilty. As if they think blaming can solve the problem. It can humiliate a person - the alleged culprit, create an atmosphere of discomfort for him. He may start making excuses (eg, "I didn't do it" or "Maybe I did it, but I was only following orders"). You may also meet a "martyr" type of person who wants to be blamed for everything and thus creates many problems. By accepting blame for something he didn't do, or by making his mistakes look bad, the "martyr" acts as if his self-deprecation can mitigate or solve the problem. He can hope to be more loved and respected for his role as a scapegoat. However, this does not contribute to solving the problem at all.

The problem with both "martyrs" and "chronic accusers" is that they try to dramatize and therefore escalate the conflict. For example, the accuser usually believes that he is always right, giving the impression during the course of the conflict that others are wrong. The martyr, on the contrary, desperately wants to please people, for which he takes on the role of a scapegoat, believing that by doing so he will make life easier for others and they will be grateful to him for this. You may find that such people combine other qualities that make it difficult to communicate with them, which makes things even more difficult. For example, a hostile-aggressive "steamroller" can easily become an "accuser", and a quiet silent one can turn into a sufferer ("martyr"), allowing himself to be blamed.

Thus, when dealing with a difficult person, it is especially important not to fall into the trap of responsibility. Try not to let the discussion focus on the question of responsibility for this or that problem. This can be done by moving the discussion away from the past and focusing on the future in order to resolve the conflict. You can say: yes, it happened and you (or another person, or someone else) bear some responsibility for it. But now it is no longer so important. What really matters at the moment is what you should do to solve the problem.

In other words, you need to neutralize the problem person's concerns about past responsibilities and take the initiative to steer the process toward resolving the conflict for the future. This strategy would seem to stem from the need to get people to accept responsibility when they are at fault, so that they can take some action to correct the mistake. It may also seem that this does not correspond to the importance of recognizing your own responsibility if you also contributed to the conflict. However, when you are dealing with a difficult person who tends to over-blame others or himself, it is best to suppress such urges. The focus should be on what to do now with the conflict, regardless of who is to blame for its occurrence.

When choosing the appropriate style of action in a conflict situation with a difficult person, you should consider what type of person he belongs to. As noted above, there are five basic styles: competition, accommodation, compromise, cooperation, and avoidance.

Faced with a difficult person, you may want to avoid contact with him altogether. You will want to avoid conflict with the accuser, the steamroller, the perpetual pessimist, the complainer, or some other type of difficult person. However, there are times when you cannot do this. You may be working with or for such a person, or it may be that the difficult person has something that you need. For example, I once did a project with a particularly difficult person, whom I would describe as a combination of "accuser", "complainer", and "pessimist". To a large extent, these types of behavior manifested themselves due to the novelty of the project, since this person had not written anything like this before. He was constantly worried, believing that everything would be bad, did not trust me, the publisher, and the book publishing company as a whole, although he passionately desired to become the author of the book. Whatever the reason, the man was very difficult to deal with; it seemed to me that I was walking on a razor's edge all the time, because practically nothing had an effect on it. But I had already made a commitment to finish the book, I was counting on payment, and the draft of the book had already been approved by the publisher. Thus, I found ways to calm my difficult co-author, to convince him of success. Hence, I used the fixture style. Any attempts to reach a compromise only kindled his hidden suspicions and fears that in an area unknown to him, his rights and interests might be infringed. Cooperation was out of the question, because his emotions were so close to coming to the surface that it would be unwise to count on a calm discussion of the problem. Thus, apart from avoiding the problem entirely, for practical reasons, accommodation was the only possible option. I chose him, because it was much more important for me to finish the book. You may find that more often than not, when you encounter a difficult person, you choose one of these two approaches - avoidance or accommodation. A difficult person tries to use the distinctive features of his behavior to achieve his goals. "Steamroller" goes ahead, "complainer" complains, "explosive" explodes, etc., because it assumes that other people, in order to evade conflict, will not want to counteract. If the subject of the conflict is not very important to you, then it may be better to evade it or give in. This approach will allow you to at least maintain peace and tranquility.

On the other hand, if you have time and the problem is important enough to you, you can try to use more other approaches to meet your interests - most likely a compromise or cooperation. But then you will already need to take into account the special needs and interests that make a person difficult to communicate in order to develop solutions through compromise or cooperation that would satisfy these needs and interests to a certain extent. Imagine, for example, that you work for a company where one of the employees is constantly looking for an excuse to humiliate you. Criticizes your work in front of other people, tells the boss that you didn’t do something, although the work was done by you in full, and you even suspect that this person deliberately messes up your documents and mail, while you do nothing cannot prove and are afraid to make unfounded accusations. You can try to avoid contact with this person, shy away from personal meetings in order to avoid an open quarrel, which can further poison the atmosphere. However, if you take some time to look deeper, you can discover the true reason for this behavior and find some peaceful solution through compromise or cooperation.

You can even turn this difficult person into an ally or friend. For example, if this person does this to you out of jealousy, then you should act in the direction of dissuasion; if you are simply reminding this person of someone who has wronged them in the past, then you should act in that direction. One way to deal with such problems is to take the time to discuss them. If you feel that a person does not want to talk to you, start by preparing the ground for a friendly conversation, win him over with small courtesies or small favors. In short, try to eliminate the hidden reasons that this person is difficult to communicate with. To this end, it is necessary to be accommodating, sympathetic and benevolent in order to encourage him to treat you in a similar way. Of course, you may have every reason to avoid contact with such a person or to get him out of your way. Difficult people always arouse such desires in us. But if you are not tempted by such a simplified solution, then you have a chance to find the root of the problem. And then, having deflated the atmosphere, having eliminated the causes of the "difficulty" of a person, you can begin to search for a solution that will satisfy both of you.

How to deal with difficult people of various types.

The general principles outlined above can be used with success when dealing with difficult people of all types, but special approaches that take into account the characteristics of each type individually can be most effective. Below are examples of them, taking into account the fact that a difficult person may combine several characteristic features (say, an explosive person may in some cases behave like a calm and silent person). The key is to remain flexible, to treat the individual in the appropriate way, taking into account their hidden needs and interests, as well as your own priorities in the current situation.

Type "steam roller" / "Sherman tank". These are rude and unceremonious people, who believe that everyone around should give way to them. They can behave this way because they are convinced that they are right and want everyone around them to know about it. At the same time, some of these people may be afraid of being wrong. For the "steam roller", undermining its image is a terrible prospect. If the subject of the conflict is not particularly important to you, then it is better to avoid it or adapt. Get out of the way or give in to this person in a small way to calm him down. If you have chosen a different approach, then it is better to start by letting such a person "blow off steam." Then calmly and confidently state your own point of view, but try not to question its correctness, because as a result you will inevitably encounter a hostile reaction. Define your role as that of a peacemaker who stands above conflict. Suppress the rage of a man with your own calmness; this will help him cope with his aggressiveness, and you can come to a common decision.

Type "hidden aggressor" / "sniper". A person belonging to this type of difficult people tries to cause trouble to people through behind-the-scenes machinations, barbs and other hidden manifestations of aggression. Usually he believes that his behavior is completely justified; someone else did wrong, and he plays the role of a secret avenger, restoring justice. He may also behave this way because he does not have enough power to act openly.

Again, if you decide that avoiding or tolerating such a person is not for you, then the best way is to identify the specific fact of causing evil and then uncover the hidden causes. Let the person attacking you know that you are above this by saying something like, "What are you trying to achieve with this?" If he starts denying the facts, provide evidence. At the same time, you should remain calm so that the person does not think that you are aggressive towards him, as this can only lead to an open skirmish. If you give a few more revealing examples, then the person will understand that the mask has been torn off him. Now he should either stop attacking you, or openly admit them. When everything is brought to the surface, you will be able to identify the true causes of the "difficulty" of a person and find a solution to the problem.

An angry child/explosive person type. A person belonging to this type of people is not inherently evil; he explodes like a child in a bad mood. Usually, a person who behaves in this way is frightened and helpless, and the explosion of emotions reflects his desire to take control of the situation. So, for example, a husband may explode, jealous of his wife, afraid of losing her and fearful of losing control; or the boss may flare up, feeling that the subordinates are completely out of hand. If an exploding person's tirade comes at you, the basic principle to follow in order to avoid escalating the conflict (if you decide not to avoid it at all) is to let the person scream, to give vent to his emotions. Or convince the person that you are listening to him. It is necessary to let him know that he is in control of the situation, and thereby calm him down. Then, when he calms down, treat him like an ordinary, reasonable person, as if there was no explosion on his part. Diplomatically and kindly invite him to discuss the problem. You may find that the person is somewhat embarrassed after such an outburst. Accept his apologies if they follow, and he will feel better. But it is even better to divert attention from what happened, and then it will be easier for a person to forget about it. Feeling that he is again in control of the situation, such a person will again appear calm and reasonable.

"Complainant". There are actually two types of complainers: realistic ones and paranoid ones who complain about imaginary circumstances. Complainers of both types are often caught up in some idea and blame others - someone in particular or the whole world as a whole - for all the sins. In some cases, you may only encounter the complainer as a gracious listener. In others - as the subject of his complaints and accusations.

Type "super-compliant". Such people may seem pleasant in all respects and do not create difficulties in communicating with them, because they always give in in order to help and thereby please other people. But from time to time they create problems: you rely on such a person who agrees with you on everything, and then it turns out that his words are at odds with his deeds. An employee takes on some work - and does not do it; a friend agrees to do something for you, but at the last minute finds a reason to refuse. If you find it necessary to continue communicating with such a person, then the key to solving the problem is to show him that you want truthfulness on his part. Insist that you want to know what the person really thinks and only want him to do what he is able or willing to do. Emphasize that your concern is not whether he agrees with you or not, but his inconsistency. You must insist that the person tell the truth, no matter what. He should be convinced that your attitude towards him will be determined not by the fact that he agrees with you in everything, but by how truthful he will be with you and how consistently he will act in the future.

Thus, when you encounter a difficult person to communicate with, you should use an approach that suits the specific nature of the behavior. These approaches differ for different types of people, but they are all built on the following basic principles:

1) Realize that the person is difficult to communicate with, and determine what type of person he is.

2) Do not fall under the influence of this person, his point of view, attitude; keep calm and neutral.

3) If you do not want to shy away from communicating with such a person, try to talk to him and identify the reasons for his "difficulty".

4) Try to find a way to satisfy his hidden interests and needs.

5) Use a collaborative approach to resolving conflicts that begin to emerge after classifying, neutralizing, or controlling a difficult person's behavior.

Due to different characters, temperaments and opinions, disputable and conflict situations often occur between people. The conflict can be between people you know, relatives who love each other, or just colleagues. Psychologists note that conflicts are inherent in any person, there is nothing to worry about. It is only important to know how to behave in a conflict situation in order to complete it painlessly and without loss.

The ground for the emergence of conflicts are often minor disagreements and the inability of people to properly resolve such situations. Due to emotionality, low awareness and wisdom against the background of small differences of opinion, people can inflate the conflict to a large scale. There are also serious problems in which only a literate person can know how to get out of a conflict situation while maintaining favorable relations.

Before looking for ways and means of how to behave correctly during a conflict in order to suppress it, it is worth familiarizing yourself with the concept and causes of its occurrence. In a literal translation, the word conflictus is translated as collided, from which it can be concluded that conflict is a sharp way to resolve confrontations of interests and opinions. Conflict always arises against the background of social interaction, which is inherent in all people.

Many experts note that the conflict is always a speech impact on the part of several parties who express their position, belief, opinion. The object of the conflict is the subject of the dispute, the subjects are opponents, groups, organizations. The scale can be interpersonal or global, much in its solution depends on the conditions, tactics and strategies of the parties.

Expert opinion

Victor Brenz

Psychologist and self-development expert

Any conflict is a complex, dynamic process consisting of several phases. This is the formation of objective reasons for that, that is, the substantive situation between opponents, the second phase is the development of the incident in the course of interaction, at the end the conflict ends with an absolute or partial solution.

Reasons for disagreement

It will be impossible for any opponent to get out of the conflict without consequences if its causes and provoking factors are not analyzed. The nature of the conflict is actually the true goal of the participants in communication, that is, the outcome of the collision. Psychologists note that the following circumstances may be the precursors of a controversial situation:

Objective reasons - they are usually associated with existing problems or shortcomings in a person.
Subjective reasons - these can be people's assessments of actions, events, other people.

Conflicts themselves can be destructive, that is, they act in a destructive way without a chance for resolution and a favorable outcome, as well as constructive, which can provide for rational transformations of the prevailing circumstances. If we consider in more detail, the most common causes of conflicts are judgments and condemnations of other people, assessments of actions and people in general, etc.

How to behave in a conflict situation depending on its type?

First of all, psychologists talk about how to get out of the conflict as a winner. Today, he often uses 5 conflict resolution strategies, namely:

Dodging a dispute- if a person does not have the time and energy to find a way out of a controversial situation, you can postpone the process of clarifying the relationship, giving both parties a chance to analyze the situation. Such a technique is especially relevant in resolving disputes with management at work, if a person does not see a solution, doubts that he is right, if the interlocutor is more persistent in proving his point of view, and agreeing with him would be an appropriate decision.
Rivalry- open upholding of one's position is appropriate if one's rightness is extremely important to both opponents. In order not to lose in a dispute, it is important to behave correctly.
Cooperation- this is the longest process leading to the resolution of the conflict, if there is a desire to maintain good relations with the opponent, the parties are equal, there is time to resolve the dispute and mutual benefit in this.
fixture- yielding to the opponent in the conflict is permissible, if the dispute may otherwise become more serious, the issue is not fundamental for one side, the conflict arose with the leadership.
Compromise- this situation provides an opportunity to prove one's point of view, but subject to at least partial acceptance of the other side. This strategy is appropriate if the parties are equal, and it is also important for both parties to maintain favorable relations.

After that, you can proceed to the second stage of conflict resolution. Psychologists advise to adhere to several rules:

be open in front of the opponent, do not fold your arms in the lock on your chest;
try not to drill the interlocutor with an evil and intent look;
control intonation, facial expressions and manner of speaking;
you should beware of harsh and premature assessments of the opponent's opinion;
it is important not to interrupt, but to hear each other;
when an opponent expresses his point of view, it is important to show his attitude, and not an assessment of this;
do not show defiant intellectual superiority;
to reduce the degree of the dispute, it is possible to divert the conflict vector in the other direction for a short time.

The allies of a self-confident and wise person should be poise and calmness, psychologists even advise such a technique as pauses during a conversation in order to suppress emotional outbursts. Arguments and a clear wording of speech will simplify the process of mutual understanding between people.

How to get out of conflict at work?

As a rule, the desire to get out of the conflict without solving it is a tactic that is appropriate when the parties are unequal, for example, when working with management. In this regard, psychologists recommend following simple rules on how best to suppress a conflict without consequences for both parties, namely:

do not rush to answer - before each spoken word it is better to think carefully;
you need to think not only about yourself, but also about the feelings of your opponent - this will reduce the degree of aggression;
control over the speed of speech, intonation and volume - you need to speak measuredly, calmly without unnecessary emotions;
respite - if you take a timeout during the height of the conflict, this will help calm down both sides;
risk aversion - you should not go for broke with weighty arguments, risking your position at work and relationships with your opponent;
result orientation - during a dispute, it is worth remembering what goals are pursued by the parties, and not how to more offend and hurt the opponent.

Can you avoid conflicts?

YesNot

Psychologists advise paying attention to your emotional state, trying not to succumb to provoking "baits" and words that are aimed at unbalancing a person. You should not respond to a blow with a blow, it is better to simply hush up the conflict so as not to aggravate the situation. After some time, the passions subside, and the solution itself will appear on the surface.

How to get out of the conflict: a reminder

Summing up, experts offer a top list of the easiest ways to resolve the conflict. The memo consists of only a few points, namely:

recognition of the conflict situation;
agreement on negotiations face to face or with the help of an intermediary;
determination of the subject of confrontation and points of contact;
development of several optimal options for resolving the conflict without prejudice to both parties;
written confirmation that the conflict will be voluntarily resolved in one way or another;
implementation and implementation of mutually adopted decisions.

Such scenarios for resolving conflicts are practiced in life not only against the background of domestic disputes, but also in a legally certified way with the help of a notary. Psychologists consider this method the most appropriate between business partners, work colleagues, management and subordinates, in interpersonal relationships.

Conclusion

Each person is so individual that he can have his own and not similar opinion, point of view or views. Due to the different mindset, type of character and temperament, disputes and conflicts can arise. You can solve them competently without negative consequences, if you have the skills and abilities. Leading psychologists share how to behave in such situations.