Lesson 2. Causes of conflicts and stages of their development

No action aimed at preventing or effectively resolving conflicts can be taken if we know nothing about the causes of their occurrence and the characteristics of their development. Therefore, in this lesson the main focus will be on these issues.

You will learn about what groups of causes of conflicts exist and how they differ from each other, as well as what the main stages and stages of their development are and what their dynamics are.

And the first issue on the agenda will be the causes of conflicts.

Causes of conflicts in society

The emergence and development of conflicts is caused by the following groups of causes of conflicts :
1) objective;

2) organizational and managerial:

• structural and organizational;
• functional and organizational;
• personal-functional;
• situational and managerial.

3) socio-psychological:

• loss and distortion of information;
• unbalanced role behavior;
• different ways of assessing each other’s performance and personality.

4) personal:

• lack of psychological resistance to the negative impact on the psyche of stress factors of social interaction (conflict resistance);
• poorly developed ability to empathize;
• overestimated or underestimated level of aspirations and the associated level of self-esteem;
• character accentuations.

How to react to different conflicts: passive aggression, irritability and direct attack?

- Kitty, do you need to warm up the food?

– What do you think?

Your man doesn’t say rude words or shout, but his words make you feel offended? This is most likely passive aggression.

He can also make caustic jokes, ignore you, and remain pointedly silent. These are all bricks from the same wall.

How to respond to passive aggression?

Answering in the same manner is not the best solution: you will just waste time and blow each other's minds. Constant such squabbles are exhausting, the result will be fatigue and a lack of intimacy between you.

There is no need to pick up the aggressor's game, even if he continues to attack. It’s better to calmly take a few deep breaths and exhale and speak as openly as possible:

- Kitty, do you need to warm up the food?

– What do you think?

– (Inhale-exhale) I think you could have dinner at your favorite cafe near the office. If you haven't eaten yet, I'll heat up the pasta now, it'll take a couple of minutes. I see you're not in a good mood. Tell me, are you upset about something?

Even if such calm answers of yours do not help the man switch to a normal tone, you will save your nerves and will not aggravate the quarrel.

After the situation is over, analyze when the man begins to behave passive-aggressively. Also think about whether he communicates this way with everyone or just with you.

By the way, take care of yourself. We don't always notice that we are also behaving aggressively.

Yes, we often forgive ourselves for what we do not tolerate in others. The next time you want to remain silent, pout and feel like a victim, try to openly discuss with your man what is unpleasant to you.

Another option in which a man can be rude or raise his voice is that something has happened to him and he is on edge.

He's not angry at you, but he needs to get over those negative emotions. This is fine. Completely suppressing irritation and anger can even be harmful to health: psychosomatics can catch up at any moment, and the problem will emerge as a sudden illness.

If you see that a man is nervous, then it is better to say: “You are right”

, and explain when you both have calmed down.

The worst option is when you see that he likes to offend you.

Such a man will not change, no matter how patiently and calmly you talk to him. Don’t look for excuses for him: “He had a hard day,” “It’s my own fault, I shouldn’t have asked where he was.”

Even if as a child his parents told him that it is okay to be angry, but it is absolutely forbidden to intimidate a woman and threaten her with assault, he is unlikely to remember this.

If a man hits you, leave. Straightaway. Without looking back.

Objective causes of conflicts

The objective reasons for the emergence of social conflicts include mainly those circumstances of social interaction between people that led to a clash of interests, opinions, and attitudes. Objective reasons lead to the creation of a pre-conflict environment or situation.

Objective reasons for conflicts:

• natural collision of significant material and spiritual interests of people in the process of life;
• poor development of legal and other regulatory procedures for resolving social contradictions;
• lack of material and spiritual benefits that are significant for the normal life of people;
• lifestyle (material and everyday conditions, lack of opportunities to satisfy one’s basic needs);
• fairly stable stereotypes of interpersonal and intergroup relations that contribute to the emergence of conflicts.

Ways to end conflicts

A conflict can be resolved in different ways: resolved, settled, extinguished, eliminated the cause, or found a compromise that suits both parties. Sometimes a conflict ends because a new one arises in its place. Let's consider the main options for ending conflicts.

Permission

This outcome usually results from the mutual desire of the parties to the dispute to peacefully resolve the situation. It includes the following steps:

1. Determining the parties to the conflict.
2. Determining the motives of each side.
3. Determining the true cause of the dispute.
4. Joint clarification of how the parties see the conflict.
5. Gathering outside opinions.
6. Finding and implementing the best conflict resolution strategy.

Settlement

This option implies the involvement of a disinterested person who is trusted by both participants in the disputable situation. The regulator must weigh all the arguments and find a solution that will be fair for both parties to the conflict. Typically this process includes the following steps:

1. Determining the true causes of the conflict.
2. Determining the powers of the involved regulator.
3. Search for real motives for the conflict (to understand not only the reasons, but also the goals of the participants).

Attenuation

Often the conflict simply gets boring for the participants and fades away, but this does not mean that it has stopped. Usually it simply goes into a latent form, and tension remains between the parties. Typically, attenuation occurs for the following reasons:

1. reducing the significance of the object of dispute;
2. distracting the parties to other problems;
3. exhaustion of the parties.

Eliminating the cause

Everything is obvious here. In some situations, discussion allows you to understand the problem and simply eliminate it in a way that suits all parties to the conflict. Sometimes the solution can be quite radical. For example, if two employees have a conflict, one of them may be transferred to another department.

Transformation

Sometimes during a conflict a new conflict situation arises. The participants switch to it, partially or completely forgetting about the old object of the dispute.

Subjective causes of conflicts

Subjective causes of conflicts are mainly associated with those individual psychological characteristics of opponents, which lead them to choose a conflict method rather than any other method of resolving an objective contradiction. A rigid division between the objective and subjective causes of conflicts, and even more so their opposition, is unlawful. The seemingly purely subjective cause of a conflict may ultimately be based on a factor that has little dependence on a person, i.e. objective. And, perhaps, there is not a single conflict that was or was not somehow caused by objective and subjective factors.

The conflict attitude is characterized by the dominance of the subjective side. Subjective causes and conditions are the main component of the determination of the conflict. This includes the most diverse forms of manifestation and functioning of interests as conscious needs.

Types of conflicting personalities

Conflict-prone individuals have various characteristics that indicate whether they are capable of aggravating or provoking conflicts through their behavior. So, according to the theory of F.M. Borodkin and N.M. Koryak, the following types of conflicting personalities can be distinguished:

• Demonstrative type. She wants to constantly be in the center of attention, and is ready to use any methods and techniques for this. The attitude of a given person towards others is determined by how others treat him. In “superficial” conflicts, he is able to emerge victorious, since those around him do not take him seriously and are ready to give in. At the same time, he is not afraid of conflicts, feeling confident. Conflict acts as a way to demonstrate oneself. Often the demonstrative type acts as a source of conflict, but does not show it.
• Rigid type. Is suspicious and has inflated self-esteem. Needs self-affirmation, confirmation of one's own importance. Not ready to accept someone else's point of view, touchy. He is often straightforward and lacks flexibility, which is why he constantly gets involved in conflicts.
• Unmanaged type. He is impulsive and can behave unpredictably in any situation. Capable of defiant behavior and aggression. Needs regular confirmation of his own importance, can blame anyone for his failures. Plans are not his strong point. Mistakes and past experiences do not teach him.
• Ultra-precise type. Scrupulous, makes high demands on himself, as well as on others. Is sensitive to details and little things. He may not communicate with certain categories of people because it seemed to him that they were treating him negatively. He himself suffers from his hyper-precision, which can lead to diseases, for example, insomnia.
• Conflict-free type. Unstable, quickly changes his mind. Inconsistent in his behavior. Always wants to appear “good” to his superiors. Lack of sufficient willpower.
• Purposefully conflict type. He uses conflict to achieve his goals by provoking it. He knows how to manipulate, for example, he can be affectionate with someone, but not with others. Masters the technique of emotional argument.

Get paid for your student work

Coursework, abstracts or other works

Organizational and managerial causes of conflicts

Structural and organizational reasons lie in the inconsistency of the organization's structure with the requirements of the activities in which it is engaged. The structure should be determined by the tasks that this organization will solve or is solving. However, it is almost impossible to achieve perfect compliance of the organization's structure with the tasks being solved.

Functional-organizational reasons are caused by suboptimal functional connections of the organization with the external environment, between the structural elements of the organization, and between individual employees.

Personal-functional reasons are associated with the employee’s incomplete compliance with professional, moral and other qualities with the requirements of the position held.

Situational managerial reasons are caused by mistakes made by managers and subordinates in the process of solving managerial and other problems (making an erroneous management decision).

Social and psychological causes of conflicts

Due to possible significant losses and distortion of information in the process of interpersonal communication (limited vocabulary of a person in general and a specific person in particular, lack of time, deliberate withholding of information, difficulties in understanding due to information filters, inattention, difficulties in quickly understanding), a person does not take what he hears on faith. , but evaluates, drawing conclusions that differ and sometimes are opposite to what the interlocutor said.

Unbalanced role behavior in the interaction of two people leads to people not understanding that when discussing a problem, especially a complex one, the discrepancy in positions can often be associated not with a real difference in views on the same thing, but with an approach to the problem from different sides.

Different ways of assessing each other's performance and personality lead to the fact that the same work is assessed in completely different ways.

The objective source of conflicts is the value-normative system of society. In any conflict, along with the struggle for certain benefits, there is competition over values, including cultural patterns. Changes taking place in society necessitate the transformation of the normative value system. In addition, culture and subcultures constantly coexist in society, competing with each other. Under these conditions, contradictions between expectations and their implementation are inevitable.

The source of conflict is contained in the management process. Management is the choice of alternatives, the mobilization of resources, the use of power, which means forcing the governed to certain actions, limiting spontaneous behavior. In general, the management process includes the constant emergence and resolution of contradictions between the subject and the object of management. And this fills management activities with a series of conflicts.
0

Positive and negative consequences of conflicts

In the most general form, the subjective causes of any organizational conflicts associated with people, their consciousness and behavior, as a rule, are caused by three factors:

1. interdependence and incompatibility of the parties’ goals;
2. awareness of this;
3. the desire of each side to realize its goals at the expense of the opponent.

A different, more detailed classification of the general causes of conflicts is given by M. Meskon, M. Albert and F. Khedouri, who identify the following main causes of conflict.
1. Resource distribution. In almost any organization, resources are always limited, so the task of management is the rational distribution of materials, people and money between various departments and groups. Since people tend to strive to maximize resources and overestimate the importance of their work, the distribution of resources almost inevitably leads to various kinds of conflicts.

2. Task interdependence. The possibility of conflict exists wherever one person (group) depends on another person (group) to perform its functions. Due to the fact that any organization is a system consisting of a number of interdependent elements - departments or people, if one of them is not performing adequately, as well as if there is insufficient coordination of their activities, the interdependence of tasks can become a cause of conflict.

3. Differences in goals. The possibility of conflict increases with the complexity of organizations, their further structural division and associated autonomy. As a result, individual specialized units (groups) begin to largely independently formulate their goals, which may diverge significantly from the goals of the entire organization. In the practical implementation of autonomous (group) goals, this leads to conflicts.

4. Differences in ideas and values. Different ideas, interests and desires of people influence their assessment of the situation, leading to a biased perception of it and an appropriate reaction to it. This gives rise to contradictions and conflicts.

5. Differences in behavior and life experiences. Differences in life experience, education, length of service, age, value orientations, social characteristics, and even just habits hinder mutual understanding and cooperation between people and increase the possibility of conflict.

6. Poor communications. Lack, distortion, and sometimes excess of information can serve as a cause, consequence and catalyst for conflict. In the latter case, poor communications intensify the conflict, preventing its participants from understanding each other and the situation as a whole.

This classification of the causes of conflict can be used in its practical diagnosis, but in general it is quite abstract. A more specific classification of the causes of the conflict is proposed by R. Dahrendorf. Using and supplementing it, we can distinguish the following types of causes of social conflicts:

1. Personal reasons (“personal friction”). These include individual traits, likes and dislikes, psychological and ideological incompatibility, differences in education and life experience, etc.

2. Structural reasons. They manifest themselves in imperfection:

• communication structure: absence, distortion or inconsistency of information, weak contacts between management and ordinary employees, distrust and inconsistency of actions between them due to imperfections or breakdowns in communications, etc.;
• role structure: inconsistency of job descriptions, various formal requirements for an employee, official requirements and personal goals, etc.;
• technical structure: unequal equipment of different departments with equipment, exhausting pace of work, etc.;
• organizational structure: disproportionality of various departments that disrupts the general rhythm of work, duplication of their activities, lack of effective control and responsibility, conflicting aspirations of formal and informal groups in the organization, etc.;
• power structures: disproportionality of rights and duties, competencies and responsibilities, as well as the distribution of power in general, including formal and informal leadership and the struggle for it.

3. Change in organization, and above all technical development. Organizational changes lead to changes in role structures, management and other employees, which often causes dissatisfaction and conflict.
Quite often they are generated by technological progress, leading to job cuts, intensification of labor, and increased qualifications and other requirements. 4. Conditions and nature of work . Harmful or dangerous working conditions, unhealthy environmental environment, poor relationships in the team and with management, dissatisfaction with the content of work, etc. — all this also creates fertile ground for conflicts to arise.

5. Distribution relations . Remuneration in the form of wages, bonuses, rewards, social privileges, etc. not only serves as a means of satisfying the various needs of people, but is also perceived as an indicator of social prestige and recognition from management. The cause of the conflict may be not so much the absolute amount of payment as the distribution relations in the team, assessed by employees from the point of view of their fairness.

6. Differences in identification . They manifest themselves in the tendency of employees to identify themselves mainly with their group (unit) and exaggerate their importance and merits, while underestimating the importance of others and forgetting about the overall goals of the organization. This kind of inclination is based on the intensity and emotional coloring of communications in primary groups, the relatively high personal significance of such groups and the issues resolved in them, group interests and group egoism. Reasons of this type often determine conflicts between various departments, as well as between individual teams and the center, the leadership of the organization.

7. The organization’s desire to expand and increase its significance . This trend is reflected by the famous Parkinson's law, according to which every organization strives to expand its staff, resources and influence, regardless of the volume of work performed. The trend towards expansion is based on the interest of each department, and above all actual and potential managers, in obtaining new, including higher and more prestigious positions, resources, power, and authority. On the way to realizing the expansion trend, there are usually similar or restraining positions of other departments and management (center), which tries to limit aspirations and retain power, control functions and resources of the organization primarily within itself. As a result of this kind of relationship, conflicts arise.

8. Difference in starting positions . This may be a different level of education, qualifications and values ​​of personnel, and unequal working conditions and material and technical equipment, etc. various departments. Such reasons lead to misunderstanding, ambiguous perception of tasks and responsibilities, uncoordinated activities of interdependent departments and, ultimately, to conflicts.

The last three reasons characterize mainly interorganizational conflicts. In real life, conflicts are often generated not by one, but by several reasons, each of which in turn changes depending on the specific situation. However, this does not eliminate the need to know the causes and sources of conflicts in order to use and manage them constructively.

The causes of conflicts largely determine the nature of their consequences.

Negative consequences of conflict

There are two directions for assessing the consequences of conflicts: functionalist (integration) and sociological (dialectical). The first of them, which is represented, for example, by the famous American experimental scientist E. Mayo. He views conflict as a dysfunctional phenomenon that disrupts the normal existence of an organization and reduces the effectiveness of its activities. The functionalist direction focuses on the negative consequences of conflict. Summarizing the work of various representatives of this area, we can highlight the following negative consequences of conflicts:

• destabilization of the organization, the generation of chaotic and anarchic processes, decreased controllability;
• distracting personnel from the real problems and goals of the organization, shifting these goals towards group selfish interests and ensuring victory over the enemy;
• dissatisfaction of the conflict participants with their stay in the organization, increase in frustration, depression, stress, etc. and, as a consequence, a decrease in labor productivity, an increase in staff turnover;
• increasing emotionality and irrationality, hostility and aggressive behavior, distrust of management and others;
• weakening opportunities for communication and cooperation with opponents in the future;
• distracting the conflict participants from solving the organization’s problems and fruitlessly wasting their strength, energy, resources and time fighting each other.

Positive consequences of conflict
In contrast to functionalists, supporters of the sociological approach to conflicts (they are represented, for example, by the largest modern German conflictologist R. Dahrendorf) consider them as an integral source of social change and development. Under certain conditions, conflicts have functional, positive results for the organization:

• initiating change, renewal, progress. The new is always a negation of the old, and since behind both new and old ideas and forms of organization there are always certain people, any renewal is impossible without conflicts;
• articulation, clear formulation and expression of interests, making public the real positions of the parties on a particular issue. This allows you to see the pressing problem more clearly and creates favorable conditions for solving it;
• mobilization of attention, interest and resources to solve problems and, as a result, saving the organization’s working time and resources. Very often, pressing issues, especially those that concern the entire organization, are not resolved until a conflict arises, since in conflict-free, “normal” functioning, out of respect for organizational norms and traditions, as well as out of a sense of politeness, managers and employees often bypass thorny issues;
• creating a sense of ownership among the participants in the conflict in the resulting decision, which facilitates its implementation;
• stimulating more thoughtful and informed actions in order to prove one’s case;
• encouraging participants to interact and develop new, more effective solutions that eliminate the problem itself or its significance. This usually happens when the parties show understanding of each other’s interests and realize the disadvantages of deepening the conflict;
• development of the ability of the parties to the conflict to cooperate in the future, when the conflict is resolved as a result of the interaction of both parties. Fair competition that leads to consensus increases the mutual respect and trust necessary for further cooperation;
• relaxation of psychological tension in relations between people, clearer clarification of their interests and positions;
• overcoming the traditions of groupthink, conformism, “submissiveness syndrome” and the development of free-thinking, individuality of the employee. As a result of this, the staff’s ability to develop original ideas and find optimal ways to solve the organization’s problems increases;
• involving the usually passive part of employees in solving organizational problems. This contributes to the personal development of employees and serves the goals of the organization;
• identification of informal groups, their leaders and smaller groups, which can be used by the manager to improve management efficiency;
• developing the skills and abilities of the participants in the conflict to solve relatively painless problems that arise in the future;
• strengthening group cohesion in the event of intergroup conflicts. As is known from social psychology, the easiest way to unite a group and muffle or even overcome internal discord is to find a common enemy, a competitor. External conflict is capable of extinguishing internal strife, the causes of which often disappear over time, lose relevance, severity and are forgotten.

Of course, both negative and positive consequences of conflicts cannot be absolutized and considered outside of a specific situation.
The real ratio of functional and dysfunctional consequences of a conflict directly depends on their nature, the causes that give rise to them, as well as on skillful conflict management. Based on an assessment of the consequences of conflicts, a strategy for dealing with them in the organization is built.

TAX PEOPLE ARE COMING TO YOU!

The editors of Clerk received information from sources in the Federal Tax Service that in 2022 tax authorities will begin to massively withdraw company expenses.

To prepare you for the difficult 2022, Clerk quickly developed a unique course on protection during tax audits . Sign up and receive a gift here .

At the end - a certificate of advanced training (with entry into the FIS FRDO). The program complies with the professional standard “Accountant” (see here) .