Strategies, tactics, models and styles of behavior in conflict

When describing a person’s behavior in a conflict, it is appropriate to talk about his strategy, tactics, model and style of behavior. What is the difference?

Let's define each element:

1. A strategy of behavior in a conflict is a plan to achieve the goal of the conflict, the subject’s attitude towards conflicts in general, and not with a specific person and not in specific conditions.
2. Tactics of behavior in conflict are techniques, means of achieving a goal that correspond to the chosen strategy. As a rule, the set is limited.
3. A model of behavior in a conflict is actions, words and deeds that reflect the experience, worldview and individual psychological characteristics of a person (character, temperament).
4. Behavior style in conflict is a person’s behavior directly when in contact with a certain person, in certain situations.

Now let's look at each component in more detail.

Strategies

In psychology, it is customary to distinguish the following strategies:

1. Rivalry . Victory is more important than resolving the conflict. This strategy assumes the complete victory of one of the parties.
2. Evasion . The participant takes the position of a victim, refuses to discuss anything or take any action. Those around them help and feel sorry for the victim, but the conflict remains unresolved.
3. Compromise . Both participants make concessions to satisfy as many of each other's needs as possible. However, the conflict still remains unresolved, and discontent persists.
4. Device . The goal is to maintain good relationships. A person is ready to sacrifice something in order to continue to be friends with him. With this approach, minor conflicts can resolve themselves, but with serious contradictions this will only aggravate the situation.
5. Cooperation . The goal is to eliminate the cause of the conflict and resolve the problem. Both participants communicate a lot, express their needs and desires, listen to their opponent, and are interested in making sure that both feel as good as possible.

LiveInternetLiveInternet

The behavioral strategies chosen by the participants in the conflict are crucial for its subsequent development, and often for the final result, the outcome of the conflict. The following strategies of behavior of participants in the conflict are distinguished: :

1. dominance (competition, rivalry, struggle, assertiveness);
2. care (avoidance, ignoring);
3. compliance (sometimes referred to as accommodation);
4. cooperation (cooperation, integration).
5. compromise.

Typical destructive methods of influencing a partner in a conflict situation are the use of threats, “emotional blows” (humiliation, insults to the enemy), reference to authority (or, conversely, its denial), avoidance of discussing the problem, flattery, etc. Let’s consider several examples of destructive techniques.

1. Intimidation and threats. General formula: “because I am stronger than you”, “because if you don’t ..., then I ...” Examples: “I have the ability to influence you”, “If you do not solve my problem, I will have to contact your leadership "
2. Humiliation of a partner, insults towards him. The general formula: “because you (always do it wrong; you can never clearly explain what you want; you never follow through; you’re just a fool; you don’t understand anything about it).” Examples: “You are not even able to understand the problem,” “You constantly make mistakes in the simplest situations.”
3. References to one's own authority or denial of the authority of another. The general formula: “because I... (decide here; I understand this better than you)”, “because you... (are not at all as competent, right, as you think).” Examples: “Believe me, I have had to make similar decisions many times before,” “I don’t think you understand this better than others.”
4. Avoiding discussing the problem. Examples: “In my opinion, you are dramatizing the situation,” “I don’t see any problem here at all.”
5. Flattery. Examples: “You understand this so much better than me that it won’t be difficult for you to find the right solution to the problem,” “Won’t you meet me halfway, because you can do everything and it doesn’t cost you anything.”

Research and analysis of specific situations in work collectives, where confrontation between the administration and the employee arose, allows us to analyze some methods of force, using destructive techniques.

• Among the most frequently and typically used, a kind of “psychological reduction” was highlighted, reducing the conflict situation that has arisen to the “bad character” of the participant (or participants) in the conflict. An employee complains about poor work organization or managerial injustice, and he is accused of being “scandalous.” With the help of this technique, the position taken by a person is interpreted as a consequence of one or another of his personal characteristics and is thereby devalued. At the same time, he is dealt an “emotional blow,” often forcing him to take a position of defense and justification of himself.
• Another technique is to “link” the employee’s unsatisfactory behavior to the interests of the group, which consists of contrasting the interests of the individual and the group as a whole. In this case, there is a potential for pressure on the person from the group.
• The next method of weakening a partner’s position is to compromise him, and no matter what areas are affected, it generally contributes to a decrease in trust in the person, which ultimately weakens his position.

In addition to the mentioned methods of influencing the “conflicting” person, other tactics of “forceful” influence on a person were also observed (“catch them by surprise,” “find vulnerabilities in a partner and take advantage of his weakness,” and finally, the use of threats and other methods of the most brutal pressure). All of them, however, involve the use of force and are aimed at “overwhelming” the partner.

However, methods of influencing a partner may include “soft” techniques and various forms of manipulation that allow one to “outplay” the partner. All manipulation techniques are aimed at creating situations that help the manipulator use his partner to achieve his goals.

Five groups of signs characterizing manipulation:

1. psychological impact as a generic sign of the concept;
2. the manipulator’s attitude towards another as a means of achieving his own goals;
3. the desire to obtain a one-sided gain;
4. hidden nature of the impact;
5. using (psychological) strength, playing on weaknesses.

One of the most well-known descriptions of interaction techniques is the rules for conducting a constructive dispute according to S. Kratochvil (Tables 1 and 2), including descriptions of positive and destructive techniques of verbal communication in a conflict situation.

Table 1. Constructive dispute according to Kratochvil: style of argument

Table 2. Constructive dispute according to Kratochvil: the result of the dispute

The most common methods of conducting a discussion and presenting one’s position are the methods of argumentation and counter-argumentation. Argumentation techniques usually include the presentation of arguments, the development of arguments and the method of positive answers, and the techniques of counter-argumentation include the “reversal” of the partner’s arguments, their dismemberment and the counter-development of argumentation.

For example, the method of positive answers involves asking specific questions with the help of which the opponent’s agreement is achieved on each individual point and thus both partners gradually come to the same conclusion; the reversal method is aimed at leading the partner to opposite conclusions by gradually tracing the solution to the problem together with him; the dismemberment method involves specifying and dividing the partner’s arguments with their subsequent elaboration, etc.

sdo.elitarium.ru

Tactics

Each strategy corresponds to a specific set of tactics.

Rivalry:

• strict control over the actions and sources of information of the other party;
• systematic pressure (physical, psychological, moral);
• deception, flattery, manipulation, cunning, “set-ups”, provocations;
• refusal to make contact, to discuss anything (the person adheres to the position “I have my opinion and it’s wrong - there’s nothing to discuss”).

Evasion:

• demonstrative avoidance of discussion (“I was offended”, “don’t touch me”);
• refusal to use physical force;
• ignorance and mistrust, refusal to collect information and analyze facts;
• shifting responsibility;
• delaying decision making;
• denial of the conflict.

Compromise:

• bargaining and discussion of problems, active negotiations;
• deception and flattery (needed to convince an opponent that he has certain qualities).

There is an attitude towards equal sharing of benefits.

Device:

• agreement in everything, constant concessions;
• demonstrative reluctance to enter into confrontation;
• flattery, servility, indulgence.

Cooperation:

• collecting information about the opponent, problem, conflict;
• analysis of your resources and the capabilities of your opponent;
• selection and presentation of alternative solutions;
• open discussion identifying specific problems;
• listening and accepting the opponent’s position.

Destructive behavior

Any human behavior is realized in society and is of a social nature and is always associated with speech, action and goal setting. Destructive behavior reflects a low degree of socialization of the individual, avoidance of society, and poor adaptation to internal and external conditions.

Important! The degree of adaptation largely determines the behavior of an individual.

Often, destructive behavior is demonstrated by people who do not have a developed sense of responsibility, who do not know how to make independent decisions and choices. At the individual level, such individuals are more likely to choose the path of abnormal behavior. They can display their destructive behavior in relation to the following social principles:

1. Spiritual and moral norms (universal human values).
2. Moral and ethical standards (rules not written down on paper).
3. Legal norms (rules enshrined in legal acts).
4. Organizational and professional standards (instructions).
5. Individual norms (individual rights in society, personal orientation towards certain attitudes and needs).

Models

There are 3 models of behavior in conflicts:

1. Constructive . Contributes to conflict resolution, strengthening relationships between people, and meeting the needs of each participant. Characteristic of sociable, friendly, open, reserved people.
2. Destructive . Does not resolve the conflict, leads to deterioration of relationships between people, and exhausts each of the participants. Characteristic of suspicious, withdrawn, distrustful people.
3. Conformist . Characteristic of passive and inconsistent people, dependent on the opinions of others. It can turn the conflict into both constructive and destructive directions.

Types of destructive behavior

Classification of destructive behavior is difficult, since specialists have to work with a floating value - the norm. It is subject to change, and what is considered acceptable today will be beyond the scope of adequate behavior tomorrow, and vice versa. Basically, psychologists divide destructive behavior into two large groups:

• delinquent behavior (exceeding legal boundaries, breaking the law);
• deviant behavior (non-compliance with generally accepted standards of morality and morality).

Since the first third of the 20th century, many scientists, psychologists and sociologists have been thinking about what kind of behavior can be placed within the framework of deviations and destructive behavior, and whether such behavior always carries exclusively negative consequences. Many classifications have been developed. Here is a table showing different approaches to understanding destructive behavior.

Styles

In psychology, it is customary to distinguish 6 styles:

1. Affiliate. Characteristic of long-term relationships where both opponents know each other well and want to maintain mutual understanding and trust.
2. Pragmatic. Suitable for situations where the relationship with a person is not important. It is more important to push the conflict away from yourself.
3. Psychoprotective. The goal is to maintain internal harmony. It arises where the mutually exclusive interests of opponents are noticeable.
4. Dominant. One or both participants behave selfishly, aggressively, or violate social norms.
5. Contact. One person behaves as contactably as possible, trying to find out as much as possible about the opponent in order to then control him.
6. Self-affirming. One person is trying to “break” the other so that he himself gives up the confrontation.

The first 3 styles relate to constructive conflict resolution, the last 3 to destructive ones.