Conflict- a clash of opposing goals, interests, positions, opinions or views of two or more people. There are many types of conflicts, they can be classified, for example, by factors. So, according to the direction, conflicts are divided into horizontal (they do not involve people who are subordinate to each other), vertical (between leaders and subordinates) and mixed (between a leader and subordinates who are not in direct subordination).

Another typology of conflicts is shown in Fig. 12.1.

Rice. 12.1. Typology of conflicts

By origin. Conflicts are objectively conditioned. These are those conflicts that are associated with objective reasons and do not depend on the relationship of workers (fuzzy division of labor and responsibility, social tension, etc.). Subjectively conditioned conflicts are associated with the personal characteristics of those in conflict and with situations that prevent the fulfillment of desires and the satisfaction of people's interests.

By the nature of occurrence. It is possible to single out social conflicts - the highest stage of social contradictions in the system of relations between social groups. Organizational conflicts - incorrect regulation of the activities of the individual (job descriptions, management structures). Emotional conflicts - dissatisfaction with the interests of an individual, clash with others (envy, hostility, antipathy). Sometimes it is very difficult to externally determine the motivation for such a conflict.

According to the duration of the conflicts are short-lived. They arise from misunderstandings or mistakes; they are usually quickly recognized and resolved. Protracted conflicts are often associated with moral and psychological trauma. The duration of such conflicts depends on the features of the conflicting people and on the subject of the conflict.

In the direction of impact conflicts are vertical. They involve people at different social levels: boss - subordinate, department - institution, etc. The conflicting parties initially have an unequal amount of power. In a horizontal conflict, the parties have an equal amount of power, stand on the same hierarchical level (heads of departments, suppliers among themselves, etc.).

The severity of conflicts are open (impulsive) - this is a direct clash of the parties, it manifests itself in disputes, screams, fights, etc. The regulation of such conflicts will depend on the level of their manifestation and on the situation itself. Measures can be legal, social, and even international. Hidden conflicts (latent) do not have a pronounced form, they proceed hidden, but indirectly affect the opposite side. Most often this happens when it is impossible to openly resolve the conflict (the difference in the social status of the parties: the boss is a subordinate, there is fear and even fear for their well-being). Measures of regulation in this case depend on the personality, the level of its upbringing, moral and ethical principles. The presence of an object and an opponent creates a conflict situation. But not always a conflict situation provokes a conflict. If there is no incident, then we can talk about a potential conflict.

The scale of the conflict (in terms of the number of participants) may be small. So, an intrapersonal conflict consists in a collision of oppositely directed, but equal in strength, motives, needs and interests within a person - one person. It may arise due to a discrepancy between external requirements and internal values ​​and needs of the individual. Interpersonal conflicts arise due to claims for limited resources. Intergroup conflicts arise within the same group or between groups. For example, between formal and informal groups. The conflict between the individual and the group is the contradictions that arise between the requirements of the individual and the norms that have developed in the group. There may also be a conflict between the manager and employees on different views on the management system.

By way of resolution conflicts are antagonistic. They are resolved by forcing all but one of the participants to renounce any claim. Compromise conflicts are resolved by mutual agreement of the conflicting parties.

There are many different opinions about the benefits or harms of conflict situations. Conflicts are an extremely complex and contradictory phenomenon that cannot be defined unambiguously. Conflicts can play both a negative and a positive role. With all the pros and cons, conflicts are inevitable. Consider carefully the positive and negative functions of conflicts.

Positive functions of conflict:

1 helps to identify the problem and consider it from different points of view;

* relieves tension between the parties to the conflict;

* makes it possible to better know the properties of the opponent;

directs relationships in a new direction;

Stimulates change and development;

The unity of like-minded people is growing;

Stimulates creativity.

Negative functions of conflict:

Causes strong emotional stress;

Increases nervousness, creates stress;

There are layoffs of workers;

Reduces the level of cooperation and mutual understanding;

Damages work

Creates a belief that “winning” is more important than resolving the conflict in essence.

Plan

1. Characteristics of the concepts of social conflict.

2. The main stages of the analysis of social conflict.

3. Common causes of social conflicts. Typology of conflicts.

4. Functions of social conflicts.

1. Characteristics of the concepts of social conflict

Describing the basic concepts of social conflict, it should be noted that today in the conflictological literature there are a variety of definitions of conflict.

Thus, the American sociologist L. Koser believes that conflict is a struggle for values ​​and claims to a certain status, power and resources, in which the opponent's goals are to neutralize, damage or eliminate the opponent. A well-known domestic conflictologist A. Zdravomyslov defines conflict as a form of relationship between potential or actual subjects of social action, the motivation of which is due to opposing values ​​and norms, interests and needs. Yu. Zaprudsky sees in the conflict this explicit or hidden state of confrontation between objectively divergent interests, goals and trends in the development of social objects; direct and indirect clash of social forces on the basis of opposition to the existing social order is a special form of historical movement towards a new social unity. A. Dmitriev is convinced that a social conflict is a confrontation in which the parties seek to seize territory or resources, threaten oppositional individuals or groups, their property or culture in such a way that the struggle takes the form of an attack or defense.

There are currently two general approaches to understanding social conflict. The first approach defines conflict as a clash of parties, opinions, forces. The interpretation of the conflict in this case is broad. From this point of view, conflicts are also possible in inanimate nature. The second approach to conflict defines it as a clash of opposing positions, goals, interests, opinions of opponents or subjects of interaction. In this case, the subject of interaction can be both an individual and groups of people. Since the second approach interprets the conflict as a social phenomenon, assumes the occurrence of conflicts only in the presence of social interaction, it can be considered more relevant.

For the first time, the outstanding Scottish economist and philosopher A. Smith pointed out the social nature of the conflict in his 1776 work “Studies on the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations”. He suggested that the conflict is based on the division of society into classes, which, according to A. Smith, is the driving force behind the development of society.

Today in the theory of social conflict there are many views and points of view. There are five main concepts of the nature of the conflict: socio-biological, socio-psychological, class, functionalism, dialectic.

Socio-biological concept comes from the belief that conflict is inherent in man, as in all animals. Ch. Darwin's theory of natural selection was transferred to the human community, and a conclusion was made about the natural aggressiveness of man. This view was called "social Darwinism", whose supporters explained the evolution of society by the biological laws of natural selection.

Based on the principle of the struggle for existence, he developed his sociological concept of conflict in the second half of the 19th century. English philosopher and sociologist Spencer. He argued that the state of confrontation is universal. Conflict is a universal law. Confrontation ensures balance both in society and in the relationship between society and nature. Until a complete balance between peoples and races is achieved, conflicts are inevitable.

From the standpoint of social Darwinism, the conflict was also considered by the American sociologist W. Sumner. He argued that the weak, the worst representatives of humanity perish in the struggle for existence. The best people are the winners, the true creators of value. By such winners, W. Sumner meant, first of all, prosperous American industrialists and bankers.

Today, the ideas of social Darwinism are used by individual researchers mainly when describing various types of aggressive behavior of people: sexual aggression, aggression of a robber, aggression of a victim, aggression of parents, a child, etc.

Explaining conflict using tension theory characterizes socio-psychological concept. The basis of this concept is the belief that modern society is the cause of the state of tension in most people. There is a constant violation of the balance between the individual and the social environment. This violation comes from the instability of relationships, impersonality, overcrowding and crowding. The result is a state of frustration - disorganization of the internal state of the individual, which can manifest itself in the reaction of withdrawing into oneself, the reaction of regression or the reaction of aggression. Speaking about this concept, it should be borne in mind that stress indicators are very individual, and they cannot be used to analyze the collective manifestation of conflicts.

The fact that social conflict is reproduced by societies with a certain social structure, supporters are convinced class concept. In the study of social conflict, they start from the class theory of Marxism. So, K. Marx believed that the cause of the conflict is the division of people into classes, which are determined by the position in the economic system. Between the main classes of modern society - the bourgeoisie and the proletariat - there is a constant enmity. These antagonistic conflicts lead to revolutions, which, according to K. Marx, are the locomotives of history. Therefore, from the point of view of Marxism, conflict is an inevitable clash. In order to accelerate the development of society, this conflict must be properly organized.

The views of K. Marx on the nature of social conflict were developed both by his followers F. Engels, V. Ulyanov, Mao Zedong, and by representatives of neo-Marxism - the American sociologist G. Marcuse, representatives of the Italian school of political sociology, creators of the theory of elites V. Pareto, G. Mosca , as well as the American radical left sociologist C.R. Mills.

It should be noted that the class concept of the nature of the conflict cannot be applied to the analysis of ethnic conflicts, conflicts of corporate, interpersonal, intrapersonal conflicts, etc.

The concept of functionalism sees conflict as a distortion or dysfunctional process in social systems.

From the point of view of the leading representative of this trend, the American sociologist T. Parsons, conflict is a social anomaly, it is a disaster. T. Parsons paid the main attention to overcoming the conflict, achieving the stability of the social system. This requires a number of prerequisites, namely, it is necessary to achieve the coincidence of individual motivations with social attitudes, to satisfy the basic needs, both biological and psychological, of the majority of society. In addition, the effective activity of social control bodies is also important. Consensus is possible only in a well-functioning, well-functioning social system. It has no grounds for conflict.

The concept of functionalism should include representatives of the school of "human relations". Thus, one of the founders of the public relations school, E. Mayo, considered it necessary to focus on improving industrial relations: establishing peace in industry, democratic leadership style, replacing individual rewards with group ones, economic rewards with socio-psychological ones, and job satisfaction.

At present, the most successful dialectical concepts, which are united by the belief that conflict is functional for social systems.

These concepts include, first of all, theory of positive-functional conflict , developed by L. Koser. In The Functions of Social Conflict, he argued that the more conflicts that are independent of each other in a society, the better for the unity of this society. L. Koser was convinced that the more different conflicts intersect in society, the more difficult it is to create a united front that will divide society into two hostile camps.

In the book of the German-British sociologist and public figure R. Dahrendorf "Modern Social Conflict" presented a theory called "conflict model of society" . R. Dahrendorf believed that in every society there is a certain disintegration. In his opinion, conflict is a permanent state of any social organism. Any society is subject to change every moment. Therefore, any society experiences social conflict at every moment.

Within the framework of the dialectical concept, a theory was developed, called "general theory of conflict" . Its author - the American sociologist and economist K. Boulding - in the work “Conflict and Defense. General Theory" used conflict in the analysis of not only social phenomena, but also physical and biological phenomena. In his opinion, nature, both living and non-living, is filled with conflicts. K. Boulding is convinced that conflict is inseparable from public life. Its basis is in human nature. This is the desire of a person for constant enmity with his own kind. The main concept of conflict in K. Boulding is competition between people. In a real conflict, there is the awareness of the parties, as well as the incompatibility of their desires. All conflicts have common patterns of development. Since it is impossible to avoid conflicts, the main task is to overcome them or limit them.

In general, it should be noted that the dialectical concept of social conflict, namely, the theories of L. Koser, R. Dahrendorf and K. Boulding, prevails in modern foreign conflictological literature. Their supporters emphasize the positive role of the conflict. It is seen in the fact that conflicts can strengthen morality, enrich relationships between people, conflicts make life more interesting, awaken curiosity, and stimulate development. Conflicts help to clarify the problem, they enhance the organization's ability to change, improve the quality of decisions made, contribute to the production of new creative ideas, etc.

2. The main stages of the analysis of social conflict

It should be noted that conflicts do not arise from scratch. Their causes accumulate, sometimes they can mature for quite a long time. Therefore, the period of maturation of the conflict can be divided into four stages.

First stage maturation of the conflict is a latent stage. It, as a rule, is associated with the unequal position of groups of individuals in the spheres of "to have" and "to be able". People are constantly striving to improve their status, striving for excellence. This is the main reason for the development of the first stage. Degree second stage - tension - depends on the position of the opposing side, which has great power or superiority. Third stage antagonism manifests itself as a consequence of high tension. fourth stage is the stage of incompatibility. This is already a consequence of high tension, the actual conflict. Moreover, the emergence of the conflict itself does not exclude the preservation of the previous stages.

To successfully resolve the conflict, it must be well studied. First step analysis, we can consider the development of the conflict from the moment it starts to the beginning of observation of it. This time can be significant. At this stage of the analysis, several issues need to be explored.

First, it is necessary to find out the subject and object of the conflict. Under n subject of conflict one should understand an objectively existing or imagined problem that is the cause of contention between the parties. It can be a problem of power, possession of any values, a problem of primacy or incompatibility. It must be borne in mind that in complex, large conflicts, the subject of the conflict may not have clear boundaries. Under object of conflict is understood as a material, social, political or spiritual value, over which there is a confrontation between the parties seeking to possess or use this value. To become an object of conflict, this value must be at the intersection of the interests of social actors who seek to control it. A resource, power, idea, norm, principle, etc. can become such a value.

Secondly, at the first stage it is important analysis of the composition of the participants in the conflict.To do this, it is advisable to single out the direct participants in the conflict and their allies. It is also necessary to identify those who are indirectly interested in supporting the participants in the conflict.

The analysis of the composition of the participants in the conflict involves the identification of their resources, the forces possessed by the participant in the conflict. So, for example, when analyzing an international conflict, it is necessary to calculate material resources (the level of production, mineral reserves), ideological resources (moral and political unity of the nation); military resources (composition of the armed forces, armaments); political resources (type of state, political regime, its stability, leadership qualities); foreign policy resources (the alignment of forces in warring coalitions).

In addition, to analyze the composition of the participants in the conflict, it is necessary to determine the level of their claims. At the same time, the goals of the parties should be considered from the point of view of the possibilities of their achievement by any of the conflicting parties.

Thirdly, at the first stage of the analysis of the conflict, it is necessary to determine its occasion, i.e. find out the specific events that led to the conflict. The reason for the conflict is the case, circumstances or pretext that were used to unleash the conflict. The reasons for the conflict can be very different: the adoption of an administrative act that infringes on the rights of one of the groups; planned provocations; acceptance of customs restrictions, etc.

Fourth, it is necessary to determine tension level or stability in relations between the parties at the starting point of the conflict. For example, this level can be represented as the degree of satisfaction of various social groups with government policy, the level of organization of social groups, and the possibility of their pressure on the policy of the authorities. Social tension is an indicator of conflict, the psychological state of significant social groups, and group emotions.

On second stage analysis of the conflict is the study of its course. The main attention here is focused on identifying events that bring a fundamentally new quality to the development of the conflict, moving it to a new stage of escalation. They accumulate some quality for the jump or artificially delay its progress. For example, such events can be rallies, strikes, decisions of informal bodies, etc. It is especially important to determine the transition of the conflict into a crisis, i.e. into a situation of sudden exacerbation that requires prompt solutions or intervention.

Third stage analysis of the conflict should be devoted to its prediction. A forecast is a scientifically substantiated judgment about the possible states of a particular phenomenon in the future and (or) about alternative ways and terms for the implementation of these states. In other words, based on the available data, it is necessary to make a prediction about the development and outcome of the conflict. The main task of the forecast is to get an answer to the question: what will happen if certain events take place.

In conclusion, we note that fourth stage analysis of the conflict is its resolution. It is a problem solving process. The purpose of the process is to resolve the conflict in its very essence, to reach its real causes. It is necessary to find out, to recognize those needs and values ​​that cannot be agreed upon, to achieve agreement.

3. Common causes of social conflicts. Typology of conflicts

The main condition for successful influence on conflicts is knowledge of the causes of their occurrence. As domestic conflictologists A. Antsupov and A. Shipilov point out, the causes of conflicts are of an objective-subjective nature. They can be combined into four groups: objective, organizational and managerial, socio-psychological and personal.

objective reasons the emergence of conflicts are: a natural clash of interests of people in the process of their life; poor development and use of normative procedures for resolving social contradictions; lack or unfair distribution of material and spiritual benefits that are significant for the life of people; a way of life associated with material disorder, radical changes; stereotypes of conflict resolution of social contradictions.

Main organizational and managerial reasons conflicts: structural-organizational, functional-organizational, personal-functional and situational-management reasons; the unequal position of people in imperatively coordinated associations, when some govern, others obey.

typical socio-psychological reasons conflicts are: loss or distortion of information in the course of interpersonal and intergroup communication; unbalancing the role interaction of people; a different way of evaluating performance; different evaluation of the same complex events; competition and competition, etc.

Among the main personal reasons conflicts should be highlighted: a subjective assessment of the partner's behavior as unacceptable; inadequate level of claims; poorly developed ability to resist conflicts, different or absolutely opposite perception of goals, values, interests by people; the imperfection of the human psyche, the discrepancy between reality and ideas about it, etc.

To successfully regulate the process of conflicts, it is important to know their typology. The importance of the typology of social conflicts is due to the need to regulate the process of their flow.

The emergence of conflicts is inextricably linked with various aspects of the activities of people and organizations, which explains their rather large diversity. The ambiguity of the criteria used in the description and classification of many conflicts gives rise to a number of typologies. Currently, depending on the criterion used, there are a variety of classifications of conflicts.

In accordance with the organization of society, conflicts are formed at different levels. It is possible to single out conflicts at the level of individuals and between them; at the level of groups of individuals; at the level of large systems (subsystems); at the level of social class division of society; at the level of society as a whole; conflicts at the global (regional) levels.

Mention should be made of the multivariate typology proposed by social psychology, according to which four types of conflicts can be classified: intrapersonal, interpersonal, between an individual and the organization to which he belongs, between organizations or groups of the same or different status.

Depending on the direction of conflict interaction, horizontal, vertical and mixed conflicts are distinguished. Horizontal conflict occurs between people who are not subordinate to each other. A vertical conflict develops between people who are in imperatively coordinated associations. Mixed conflict presents both horizontal and vertical connections between people.

It is generally recognized that conflicts are divided into constructive and destructive. There is a certain norm within which the conflict has a constructive content. Going beyond these limits leads to a pathological transformation of a constructive conflict into a destructive one.

Of particular interest may be the author's typologies of conflicts. Thus, according to the American researcher M. Deutsch, the decisive role in the conflict is played by the adequacy of its perception by opponents. On this basis, M. Deutsch identifies six types of conflicts.

1. Genuine conflict - the conflict exists objectively and is perceived adequately.

2. Random conflict, the existence of which depends on easily changeable circumstances. But this is not realized by the opponents.

3. A displaced conflict is an "obvious" conflict, behind which some other latent conflict is hidden, which is the basis of the "explicit". The real problem that caused the conflict is veiled by other problems.

4. Misattributed conflict is a conflict between misunderstood parties and, as a result, over a misunderstood problem. The real problem exists, but its initiator is not at all the person who is accused of it.

5. A latent conflict is a conflict that should have occurred, but which is clearly not present, since for one reason or another it is not recognized by the parties.

6. False conflict, the objective basis of which is absent and it exists only due to errors of perception.

The typology of the German-American psychologist, a representative of Gestalt psychology, an experimental study of will and affect K. Levin, gained fame. He singled out four types of conflict situations, depending on the influences that guide the behavior of the subject.

1. The conflict "aspiration-aspiration", in which two objects or goals are considered that have a positive and approximately equal valency.

2. The conflict "desire-avoidance", when the same thing attracts and repels at the same time.

3. The conflict "avoidance-avoidance", when you have to choose one of two equally unattractive solutions.

4. The conflict of "double aspirations-avoidances", or double ambivalence, when the choice is made from two objects, each of which has its positive and negative sides.

Based on the doctrine of motivation, K. Levin identified three types of conflicts:

choice between positive and positive;

choice between positive and negative;

choice between negative and negative.

Conflictologist G. Bisno identified six types of conflicts:

1) conflicts of interest, which are characterized by a real interweaving of interests or obligations;

2) forced conflicts - intentionally created conflicts to achieve goals other than those declared;

3) falsely correlated - these are conflicts entangled by the discrepancy between the characteristics of the participants' behavior, content and causes;

4) illusory conflicts that are based on misperception or misunderstanding;

5) substituted conflicts, where the antagonism is directed at a person or considerations other than those actually offended by the participants or real topics;

6) expressive conflicts, characterized by a desire to express hostility, antagonism.

The American researcher J. Himes proposed his own typology of social conflicts, the criterion of which was the breadth of the masses involved and the degree of impact on society. Firstly, these are private conflicts where the state or government does not play a major role: gang wars, inter-religious, inter-ethnic, inter-clan, inter-tribal, inter-regional clashes, conflict between an employee and a manager. Secondly, it is civil disobedience: riots (actions directed against the government), collusion, internal war (uprising, riot, civil war, revolution), etc.

In addition, J. Hymes singled out simple and complex forms of pathological conflict. Simple pathological forms of conflict: boycott, sabotage, bullying (persecution), verbal and physical aggression. Complex pathological forms of conflict: protest, rebellion, revolution, war.

According to the American scientist R. Fisher, three types of conflict can be distinguished. Economic conflict is based on the motives of possession of limited resources, including territory. The conflict of values ​​is formed around incompatible preferences, principles that people believe in and that correlate with group cultural, religious and ideological identification. A violent conflict that occurs when one side seeks to maximize its influence over the other side through force.

As we can see, the typology of conflicts is complex. This is due to a number of circumstances. First, conflicts belong to the category of social phenomena, the boundaries of which are not clearly traced. Secondly, any conflict has many sides, aspects and possible facets, which makes it impossible to create a single classification and unambiguously distinguish one type of conflict from another. Thirdly, the essence of the conflict is often impossible to determine even after the passage of time: the latency of the true sources, causes and motives of the participants. In addition, the subjectivity of the researcher can be attributed to the number of such circumstances.

4. Functions of social conflicts

In general, all functions of social conflicts can be divided into two groups: constructive(positive) and destructive(negative). In relation to the participants in the conflict, it can play both a positive and a negative role.

Speaking of first group of functions, the following should be noted.

The conflict eliminates completely (or partially) the contradictions that arise due to the imperfection of the organization, management errors, performance of duties, etc. When resolving conflicts, in most cases it is possible to fully or partially resolve the contradictions underlying them.

The conflict allows you to more fully assess the individual psychological characteristics of the people participating in it. The conflict highlights the value orientations of a person, the relative strength of his motives, reveals psychological resistance to the stress factors of a difficult situation. It contributes to the disclosure of not only negative, but also positive aspects in a person.

The conflict allows you to weaken the psychological tension, which is the reaction of the participants to the conflict situation. Conflict interaction, accompanied by violent emotions, relieves a person of emotional tension, leads to a subsequent decrease in the intensity of negative emotions. One of the final feelings of conflict can be catharsis, i.e. the release of accumulated energy that pressed on a person for a long time.

The conflict serves as a source of personality development, interpersonal relationships. Subject to a constructive resolution, the conflict allows a person to rise to new heights, expand the scope and ways of interacting with others. A person gains social experience in solving difficult situations.

Conflict can improve the quality of individual performance. When defending just goals, the authority of one of the participants increases, the attitude of the people around him noticeably improves. Regardless of the outcome of the conflict, this happens more often than in relation to an opponent advocating dubious goals. In addition, it must be borne in mind that interpersonal conflicts serve as a means of human socialization, contribute to the self-affirmation of the individual.

Conflict acts as a means of activating the social life of a group or society (innovative conflict). It highlights unresolved issues. Interpersonal conflicts in organizations often have a positive effect on the effectiveness of joint activities than negatively. Conflict sometimes contributes to the creation of new, more favorable conditions for human activity. It can act as a group cohesive. The end of the conflict is often accompanied by an increase in the discipline of employees, an acceleration of their response to each other's comments and wishes, and the establishment of a more benevolent environment.

Concerning second group of functions, it is advisable to note the obvious negative impact of most conflicts on the mental state of its participants. After the end of the conflict, the mood generally deteriorates and almost never improves immediately after the end of the conflict. Conflict comes with stress. With frequent emotionally intense conflicts, the likelihood of cardiovascular and other diseases increases dramatically.

The conflict forms a negative image of the other, which is easily restored in the event of even minor complications in the relationship and often leads to a new conflict. Defeat in a conflict negatively affects a person's self-esteem.

Unfavorably developing conflicts can be accompanied by psychological and physical violence. According to statistics, the majority of intentional killings are committed as a result of the escalation of the conflict. If the victory in the conflict is won with the help of violence, it is likely that subsequently a person without sufficient reason will resort to the same method of solving the problem in a similar situation.

In addition, the conflict affects not only the parties involved. It often affects the macro-environment and the micro-environment of the participants. The degree of influence of the conflict on the group is directly proportional to the degree of connection of the parties with the environment in which this conflict takes place. It is directly proportional to the rank of the participants, the intensity of the confrontation.

The conflict is always accompanied by a temporary disruption of the communication system, relationships in the team. If the conflict ended with the adoption of a destructive decision, the relationship in the team worsens. Frequent conflicts lead to a decrease in group cohesion. Sometimes the quality of joint activities deteriorates during a conflict. If the conflict is not resolved, but slowly fades or the advantage is on the side of the one who, from the point of view of the group, is wrong, the quality of joint activity decreases even after the end of the conflict.

So, assessing the constructiveness and destructiveness of the functions of the conflict, it must be borne in mind that they are of a dual nature. There are no clear criteria for distinguishing between constructive and destructive conflicts. The line between them loses its unambiguity when it comes to assessing the consequences of the conflict. The vast majority of conflicts have both constructive and destructive functions. The same conflict can play a positive and negative role in the relations of the conflicting parties. The degree of constructiveness and destructiveness of a particular conflict may vary at different stages. It can be constructive and destructive at different moments of its development. It is necessary to take into account for which of the participants this conflict is constructive, and for which it is destructive. It is not the opposing sides themselves that may be interested in the conflict, but other participants: instigators, accomplices, organizers.

Questions and tasks

1. What concept of social conflict, in your opinion, most fully reveals its nature? Why?

2. What is the subject of the conflict and its object? Give examples.

3. Conduct an analysis of social conflicts known to you from the history.

4. Describe the main groups of causes of social conflicts. Give examples.

5. Give an example of a conflict and characterize it in terms of various typologies of social conflicts.

6. Describe the constructive and destructive functions of social conflicts using examples known to you.

L. Koser. "Functions of Social Conflict"

American functionalist sociologist Lewis Coser (1913-2003) developed the leading theoretical provisions, which became the fundamental prerequisites for the formation of the science of conflictology. His theory of conflict is presented in the writings "The Functions of Social Conflict" (1956), "Further Studies in Social Conflict" (1967).

For L. Koser conflicts- not social anomalies, but necessary, normal natural forms of existence and development of social life. In almost every act of social interaction lies the possibility of conflict. He defines conflict as a confrontation between social subjects (individuals, groups) arising from a lack of power, status or means necessary to satisfy value claims, and involving the neutralization, infringement or destruction (symbolic, ideological, practical) of the enemy.

The main questions considered by Coser:

• - causes of conflicts;
• - types of conflicts;
• - functions of conflicts;
• - types of society;
• - severity of the conflict;
• - consequences of the conflict.

Causes of conflicts coser saw in short supply any resources And violation of the principles of social justice in their distribution: authorities; prestige; values.

The initiators of the exacerbation relations and bringing them to the point of conflict are most often representatives of those social groups that consider themselves socially disadvantaged. The more stable their confidence in this, the more actively they initiate conflicts and the more often they clothe them in illegal, violent forms.

L. Koser highlights two types of social systems:

• 1 type - hard or rigid systems of a despotic-totalitarian nature, within which an ideological taboo may dominate to mention the existence of internal conflicts. In such state systems, there are no institutional political and legal mechanisms for conflict resolution. The reaction of state mechanisms to individual outbreaks of conflict situations has a harsh, repressive character. Within such social systems, individuals and groups do not develop the skills of constructive behavior, and conflicts themselves do not have the opportunity to play a constructive role in the life of society and the state.
• 2 type - flexible. They have officially recognized, actively practiced institutional and non-institutional means of conflict resolution. This allows you to improve conflict resolution skills, to identify constructive elements in conflicts.

Hard-rigid systems are gradually destroyed from the perturbations of social matter coming from within.

Flexible social macrosystems, due to their adaptation to such disturbances, turn out to be more durable.

There are conflicts two kinds:

• 1. realistic conflicts. He refers to them those of them for the resolution of which society has all the necessary prerequisites.
• 2. Unrealistic conflicts- these are the collisions where the participants found themselves in captivity of antagonized emotions and passions and went along the path of putting forward clearly inflated demands and claims to each other.

Positive functions of the conflict according to L. Kozer

• 1. group-creating and group-preserving functions. Thanks to the conflict, there is a détente between its antagonistic sides.
• 2. communicative-informational and connecting functions, since based on the identification of information and the establishment of communication, hostile relations can be replaced by friendly ones.
• 3. creation and construction of public associations that contribute to the cohesion of the group.
• 4. stimulating social change.

But with improper development, it can carry out:

- negative or destructive function (for example, reduced cooperation during the conflict, material and emotional costs at the stage of conflict resolution, reduced productivity), but considers them less significant in comparison with the positive consequences of the conflict.

The emotions prevailing among the participants in the conflict, the level of values ​​for which there was a struggle, determine the degree of severity of the conflict. The theory of functional conflict is often compared with the theory R. Dahrendorf, Although coser criticized his German colleague for the lack of research on the positive consequences of the conflict. The focus of conflict theory L. Koser generally opposed to the ideas of the theory of class struggle K. Marx and the theory of social consent and "human relations" E. Mayo, which dominated the socialist countries.

L. Koser comes to a conclusion regarding the analysis of the conflict both at the intra-group and extra-group levels and linking it with social structures, institutions and the social system. It is not a matter of conflict as such, but of the nature of the social structure and social system itself.

Read: L. Koser refers to the work of Simmel, which is built around the main thesis: " conflict is a form of socialization ". In essence, this means that no group is completely harmonious, since in this case it would be devoid of movement and structure. Groups need both harmony and disharmony, both association and dissociation; and conflicts within groups are neither are in no case exclusively destructive factors.Group formation is the result of processes of both kinds.The belief that one process destroys what the other creates, and that what remains in the end is the result of subtracting one from the other, "On the contrary, both "positive" and "negative" factors create group bonds. Conflict, like cooperation, has social functions. A certain level of conflict is not necessarily dysfunctional, but is an essential component of both the process of group formation and and its sustainable existence

He believed that the conflictcertain function in complex pluralistic societies:

L. Koser analyzed "cross conflicts as characteristic of contemporary American bourgeois society. In it, allies in one issue can be opponents in another issue and vice versa. This leads to a blurring of the conflict, which prevents the development of dangerous conflicts along one axis that divides society along a dichotomous principle. For example, the owner is a hired worker. In modern Western society, there is a diffusion of society. In a complex society

many interests and conflicts are combined, which represent a kind of balancing mechanism that prevents instability.

L. Koser on Marxism :

L. Koser was a critic and a follower of K. Marx at the same time, he developed his views, relying on him. He also sees society as a fluid balance of opposing forces that generate social tension and struggle. He is a defender of capitalism. Class struggle is the source of progress. And social conflict is the core. The basis of society is not the relations that people enter into in the process of material production, but the superstructure is a cultural superstructure that encompasses social, political and spiritual processes. By the fact of birth, people belong to different classes, they cannot choose or change their social affiliation. Thus, the class struggle and class roles are predetermined and social mobility is impossible. According to L. Koser, many provisions of the conflict are true for early capitalism, and modern capitalism is characterized by a number of new features that allow regulating emerging conflicts.

Forms of completion of social conflicts

There are also many approaches to determining the forms of ending the conflict.

According to N.I. Leonov, social conflict can end with three results:

1. Eliminate conflict

2. Conflict resolution

3. Resolution of the conflict See: Leonov N.I. Decree. Op.S. 61.

Eliminate conflict. Conflict resolution has the following possible outcome:

1. The destruction of one of the warring parties as a result of the victory of the other.

2. Destruction of both opposing sides.

3. The escalation of one conflict into another.

Settlement of the conflict. The settlement of the conflict means its completion under the following conditions:

1. The settlement takes place on the basis of an agreement between the warring parties to make mutual concessions while maintaining opposing interests and a conflict situation.

2. Reconciliation of the warring parties based on the recognition of the victory of one of the parties and fixing this in the relevant agreement. But even in this case, the conflict situation persists and can manifest itself.

Conflict resolution. The resolution of the conflict lies in the elimination of its causes, in the elimination of the opposition of the interests of the warring parties.

We believe that this systematization reflects the main forms of the end of the conflict, and therefore it can be used in the analysis of conflict situations.

AND I. Antsupov and A.I. Shipilov in his work "Conflictology" offer the following classification of forms of conflict completion:

1. Conflict resolution

2. Conflict resolution

3. Conflict fading

Permission- the joint activity of its participants, aimed at stopping opposition and solving the problem that led to the collision. Conflict resolution involves the activity of both parties to change the conditions of interaction and eliminate the causes of the conflict.

Settlement- a third party is involved in the elimination of contradictions.

attenuation- temporary cessation of resistance while maintaining the main signs of the conflict: contradictions and tensions.

As you can see, the grounds for highlighting the forms of ending conflicts are different. If N.I. Leonov focuses on the internal motives of the conflicting parties (the causes of the conflict, the motives of the participants, the ability to make concessions, etc.), then A.Ya. Antsupov and A.I. Shipilov - on the outside of conflict interaction (independent conflict resolution by opponents, involvement of a third party, etc.). In our opinion, in order to choose the optimal way to manage the conflict, it is necessary to rely on various approaches and their groupings.

The main functions of social conflict

In the views of many people, conflicts are associated with purely negative phenomena: wars and revolutions, civil strife and scandals. Therefore, as a rule, the conflict is presented as an undesirable and harmful phenomenon. In fact, this is not always the case. We agree with those researchers who say that the consequences of the conflict can be both negative and positive.

Under the function of the conflict, we will understand the role that the conflict plays in relation to society and its various structural formations: social groups, organizations and individuals Burtovaya E.V. Conflictology: Textbook. 2000.S. 9. .

The presence of opposing points of view on the role of conflicts in the life of an individual and groups of various levels is observed throughout the entire time of studying conflicts both among Western conflictologists and domestic specialists.

So, the main functions of the conflict can be combined into a block of constructive and a block of destructive functions See: Antsupov A.Ya., Shipilov A.I. Conflictology: Textbook for universities. - M., 2000.S. 53.

The most important destructive functions of conflict include:

1. Deterioration of the social climate, decrease in labor productivity;

3. decrease in cooperation between the conflicting parties during the conflict and after it;

4. the spirit of confrontation, dragging people into the struggle and making them strive more for victory, by all means, than for solving real problems and overcoming differences;

5. material and emotional costs of conflict resolution. Allahverdova O.V. Conflictology: textbook. pp. 15-16.

We agree that these provisions are the main destructive functions of social conflict. However, there are still many destructive functions: the conflict is often accompanied by stress, in addition, if the victory in the conflict is won with the help of violence, it is likely that later on in a similar situation a person will resort to the same method of solving the problem without sufficient grounds Antsupov A.Ya., Shipilov A.I. Decree. Op.S. 55. etc.

The main constructive functions of the conflict are:

1. the conflict does not allow the existing system of relations to freeze, ossify, it pushes it to change and development, opens the way for innovations that can improve it;

2. it plays an informational and connecting role, because during the conflict, its participants get to know each other better;

3. conflict contributes to the structuring of social groups, the creation of organizations, the rallying of teams of like-minded people;

4. it relieves the "submission syndrome", stimulates the activity of people;

5. it stimulates the development of the individual, the growth of people's sense of responsibility, their awareness of their importance;

6. in critical situations that arise during a conflict, previously invisible advantages and disadvantages of people are revealed in terms of their moral qualities - steadfastness, courage, etc., for the promotion and formation of leaders;

7. unleashing the conflict removes the underlying tension and gives it a way out;

8. the conflict performs a diagnostic function (sometimes it is even useful to provoke it in order to clarify the situation and understand the state of affairs) Allahverdova O.V. There. .

Evaluation of conflict functions as positive or negative is always specific. From the point of view of one subject of the conflict, it can be considered as positive, from the point of view of another - as negative. In other words, there is subjective relativity in assessing the nature of conflict functions. In addition, the same conflict in different respects and at different times can be evaluated from different or even opposite positions.

Thus, we were convinced that conflict is a complex and contradictory phenomenon that can have both positive and negative effects on the social system. The predominance of certain functions depends on how its participants and others are aware of the consequences of the conflict and make efforts to regulate it.

Conflict performs both positive and negative social functions. There are objective subjective assessments of the consequences of the conflict. The positive or negative impact of conflict is largely determined by the social system. In loosely structured groups where conflict is accepted as the norm and there are a variety of mechanisms for resolving it, conflict tends to promote great vitality, dynamism, and receptivity to progress. In a totalitarianly organized social group, conflict is not recognized in principle, and the only mechanism for resolving it is suppression by force. The suppressed conflict becomes dysfunctional, leading people to disintegration, exacerbation of old and the emergence of new contradictions. Unresolved contradictions accumulate, and if they manifest themselves in the form of a conflict, they lead to serious social upheavals.

Let us consider some of the positive functions of conflict characteristic of open social structures:

conflict reveals and resolves contradictions and thereby contributes to social development. Timely identified and resolved conflict can prevent more serious conflicts leading to dire consequences;

in an open group, the conflict performs the functions of stabilizing and integrating intragroup and intergroup relations, reduces social tension;

conflict greatly increases the intensity of ties and relationships, stimulates social processes, gives society dynamism, encourages creativity and innovation, promotes social progress;

in a state of conflict, people are more clearly aware of both their own and opposing interests, more fully reveal the existence of objective problems and contradictions of social development;

conflicts contribute to obtaining information about the surrounding social environment, the ratio of the power potential of competing formations;

external conflict promotes intra-group integration and identification, strengthens the unity of the group, mobilizes internal resources, it also helps to find friends and allies, identify enemies and ill-wishers;

internal conflicts perform the following functions:

creating and maintaining a balance of power;

social control over the observance of generally accepted norms, rules, values;

creation of new social norms and institutions, renewal of existing ones;

adaptation and socialization of individuals and groups

group formation, establishment and maintenance of normative and physical boundaries of groups;

establishing and maintaining a relatively stable structure of intragroup and intergroup relations;

the establishment of an informal hierarchy in the group and society, including the identification of informal leaders;

the conflict clarifies the positions, interests and goals of the participants and thereby contributes to a balanced solution of emerging problems. In an open social system, conflict plays the role of a "safety valve", promptly identifying emerging contradictions and preserving the social structure as a whole.

Conflict carries negative functions when:

leads to disorder and instability;

society is unable to ensure peace and order;

the struggle is carried out by violent methods;

the consequences of the conflict are large material and moral losses;

there is a threat to the life and health of people.

Most emotional conflicts and, in particular, conflicts arising from the socio-psychological incompatibility of people can be attributed to the negative ones. Conflicts that make it difficult to make negative decisions are considered negative. A protracted positive conflict can also have negative consequences.

Among the positive functions of the conflict in relation to the main participants, the following can be distinguished:

the conflict completely or partially eliminates the contradiction that arises due to the imperfection of many factors; it highlights bottlenecks, unresolved issues. At the end of conflicts in more than 5% of cases, it is possible to completely, basically, or partially resolve the contradictions underlying them;

conflict allows you to more deeply assess the individual psychological characteristics of the people involved in it. The conflict tests the value orientations of a person, the relative strength of his motives aimed at activity, at himself or at relationships, reveals psychological resistance to the stress factors of a difficult situation. It contributes to a deeper knowledge of each other, the disclosure of not only unattractive character traits, but also valuable in a person;

the conflict allows to weaken the psychological tension, which is the reaction of the participants to the conflict situation. Conflict interaction, especially accompanied by violent emotional reactions, in addition to possible negative consequences, relieves a person of emotional tension, leads to a subsequent decrease in the intensity of negative emotions;

conflict serves as a source of personality development, interpersonal relationships. Under the condition of a constructive resolution, the conflict allows a person to rise to new heights, expand the ways and scope of interaction with others. The personality acquires social experience in solving difficult situations;

conflict can improve the quality of individual performance;

when defending just goals in a conflict, the opponent increases his authority among others;

interpersonal conflicts, being a reflection of the process of socialization, serve as one of the means of self-affirmation of the personality, the formation of its active position in interaction with others and can be defined as conflicts of formation, self-affirmation, socialization.

In addition to constructive functions, the conflict, as a rule, also has destructive consequences (we talked about this above, now we are clarifying the negative functions of interpersonal conflicts):

most conflicts have a pronounced negative impact on the mental state of its participants;

unfavorably developing conflicts can be accompanied by psychological and physical violence, and, therefore, by traumatizing opponents;

conflict as a difficult situation is always accompanied by stress. With frequent and emotionally intense conflicts, the likelihood of cardiovascular diseases, as well as chronic disorders of the functioning of the gastrointestinal tract, increases sharply;

conflicts are the destruction of the system of interpersonal relations that have developed between the subjects of interaction before it begins. The emerging hostility to the other side, hostility, hatred violate the mutual ties that developed before the conflict. Sometimes, as a result of the conflict, the relationship of the participants ceases altogether;

the conflict forms a negative image of the other - the "image of the enemy", which contributes to the formation of a negative attitude towards the opponent. This is expressed in a prejudiced attitude towards him and a readiness to act to his detriment;

conflicts can negatively affect the effectiveness of the individual activities of opponents. Participants in the conflict pay less attention to the quality of work and education. But even after the conflict, opponents cannot always work with the same productivity as before the conflict;

conflict reinforces violent ways of solving problems in the social experience of the individual. Having won once with the help of violence, a person reproduces this experience in other similar situations of social interaction;

Conflicts often have a negative impact on personal development. They can contribute to the formation in a person of disbelief in the triumph of justice, the conviction that the other is always right, etc.

Thus, the impact of the conflict on its participants and the social environment has a dual contradictory character. This is due to the fact that there are no clear criteria for distinguishing constructive and destructive conflicts, it is difficult to give a generalized assessment of the results of the conflict. In addition, the degree of constructiveness of the conflict may change as it develops. It is also necessary to take into account for which of the participants it is constructive, and for which it is destructive.