7 effective strategies for dealing with conflict

Have you ever tried to find two absolutely identical people? Even if there are those who can answer this question in the affirmative, the likelihood that their search will be successful is very small, because there cannot be two identical people, just like two identical fingerprints or two identical irises. This is, perhaps, one of the reasons why conflicts arise between people from time to time.

And in order to be able to effectively resolve conflict situations, a person simply needs to know how to behave when they arise, i.e. be able to choose a manner of behavior that is most suitable for the characteristics of each specific situation. But many people always behave the same way during conflict interactions, having absolutely no idea that they can change the strategy of their behavior. It is about strategies for behavior in conflict that we will talk about today.

And you can learn how to find approaches to different people and establish connections in our online program “The Best Communication Techniques.”

But first, it is worth saying that one of the most prominent conflict experts, Kenneth Thomas, divided all types of behavior in conflict situations into two main areas - the desire of the subject of the conflict to defend his personal interests and the desire of the subject of the conflict to take into account the interests of other people. It is on the basis of these criteria that we can identify the main strategies of people’s behavior in conflict. There are five of them in total:

Rivalry
Device
Evasion
Compromise
Cooperation

We will, of course, consider them all. But while these five strategies are exhaustive for most jobs like this, we'll look at two more effective strategies. Namely:

Suppression
Negotiation

So, let’s not, as they say, use “airtime” unnecessarily, and let’s get down to the main topic of today’s article.

Rivalry

Rivalry is a type of behavior when a subject strives to satisfy his own interests, causing damage to the interests of the opposing subject. Following the presented strategy, a person is confident that only one participant can gain the upper hand in a conflict, and victory for one will always mean defeat for the other. A person who prefers competition will “push his line” in every way available to him. They will not take into account the opposite position.

Basic human actions with the “Competition” strategy

Tight control over your opponent's actions
Constant and deliberate pressure on an opponent by any means
The use of deception and tricks to create an advantage in one’s favor
Provoking your opponent to make mistakes and ill-considered steps
Reluctance to engage in constructive dialogue due to overconfidence

Pros and cons of the “Rivalry” strategy

Rigidly defending one's position can, of course, help the subject gain the upper hand in the event of a conflict. But such a strategy cannot be applied if the subsequent interaction of people involves long-term relationships, for example, joint work, friendship, love. After all, relationships can develop and generally have the right to exist only if the desires and interests of all people are taken into account, and the defeat of one will mean defeat for everyone. Therefore, if the person with whom you have a conflict is dear to you or the relationship with him is important to you for some reason, it is better not to use the strategy of competition to resolve the conflict.

Strategies

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

Rivalry . Victory is more important than resolving the conflict. This strategy assumes the complete victory of one of the parties.
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.
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.
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.
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.

Device

Adaptation as a way of behavior in a conflict is characterized by the fact that the subject is ready to put his needs, desires and interests into the background and make concessions to the opponent in order to prevent confrontation. This strategy is often chosen by people with low self-esteem, insecure and who believe that their position and opinion should not be taken into account.

Basic human actions with the “Adaptation” strategy

Constant agreement with the opponent’s demands to please him
Active demonstration of a passive position
No claim to victory and resistance
Flattery, pandering to the opponent

Pros and cons of the Accommodation strategy

In the event that the subject of the conflict is not particularly important, and the main thing is to maintain constructive interaction, allowing the person to gain the upper hand, thereby asserting himself, can be the most effective way to resolve the conflict. However, if the cause of the conflict is something significant, something that affects the feelings of all people involved in the conflict, then such a strategy will not bring the desired result. In this case, the result will be only negative emotions of the one who made concessions, and all trust, mutual understanding and respect between the participants may completely disappear.

Behavior in a conflict situation

Our behavior in personal relationships also varies depending on who we are in contact with: for example, the model of behavior in the family circle and in the work team will be different. The question arises, how many roles can one person simultaneously perform?

Not everyone is capable of engaging in self-observation and analyzing their actions, the feelings they experience, and predicting the reactions of those around them. However, there are those who constantly think about the consequences and predict possible reactions. And so the second type more often chooses a model of behavior that it considers more acceptable to others, that is, it adapts to them.

Photo: Pexels.com

Avoidance

The essence of this strategy is that a person tries to do everything possible to postpone conflict and important decisions until later. With this strategy, a person not only does not defend his own interests, but also does not pay attention to the interests of his opponent.

Basic human actions with the “Avoidance” strategy

Refusal to interact with an opponent
Demonstrative withdrawal tactics
Refusal to use force
Ignoring any information from the opponent, refusing to collect facts
Denial of the importance and seriousness of the conflict
Deliberate slowness in decision making
Fear of making a retaliatory move

Pros and cons of the Avoidance strategy

The “Avoidance” strategy can be useful in a situation where the essence of the conflict is not particularly important or when there are no plans to maintain relations with the opponent. But here again: if a relationship with a person is important to you, then avoiding responsibility and shifting problems onto someone else’s shoulders will not resolve the situation, otherwise it threatens not only to worsen the situation, but also to deteriorate the relationship and even its final break.

Rivalry tactics

Photo by Keira Burton: Pexels
If you choose this tactic, then the outcome of the dispute is important to you. You stand up for what you really believe in, and it is very important for you to emerge victorious in a conflict situation. You feel your strength, your truth. You have the necessary resources, and by any means you must achieve your goal.

Relations with the conflicting party are generally unimportant. Or perhaps they are important, but there is no time to think and an urgent decision needs to be made. In such situations it will be fast and effective. There are times when you really want to get your way, even if the subject of the dispute itself is complete nonsense. Once again prove to someone that you are right by demonstrating your authority.

But you should not constantly adhere to this form of behavior. This position does not allow one to look at different options and does not allow for listening to other opinions. And even more so does not take into account other people's interests.

Compromise

Compromise is a partial satisfaction of the interests of all subjects of conflict interaction.

Basic human actions with the “Compromise” strategy

Focus on equality of positions
Offering your own options in response to your opponent’s offer of options
Sometimes using cunning or flattery to gain favor from an opponent
Striving to find a mutually beneficial solution

Pros and cons of the “Compromise” strategy

Despite the fact that compromise implies satisfaction of the interests of all subjects of conflict interaction, which, in fact, is fair, it is important to keep in mind that in most situations this strategy should be considered only as an intermediate stage in resolving the situation, preceding the search for the most optimal solution, completely satisfactory to the conflicting parties.

Topic 3. Personal behavior in conflict

“Difficult character” is a common expression. Usually it refers to vivid and persistent manifestations associated with personality accentuations and creating difficulties in communication.

Accentuations can appear already in childhood, reaching their peak in adolescence. Then they gradually smooth out, but under unfavorable circumstances they become stronger and become a distinctive characteristic of an adult. In this case, we meet with a difficult, problematic personality.

The peculiarity of accentuations is that they can be not only one of the reasons for the formation of a “difficult character”, but also a source of various qualities that contribute to success in certain areas of communication and activity. Accentuations give personality originality, make it bright and non-standard. Thanks to a specific combination of such features, we can not only recognize a person and his capabilities, but determine for ourselves ways to effectively interact with him.

This textbook can be useful to those who strive to understand the resources of their own personality and the people who live and work nearby, who care about how their relationships with others develop. By turning to the manual, you will be able to understand what type of accentuation is most likely characteristic of you or the person you are interested in, what circumstances aggravate the accentuation of his character, what are the positive and repulsive features of this accentuation, what methods of interaction with him are best to use.

Character concept

"Character"

- a Greek word meaning “to scratch on a hard material”, or a tool for branding, embossing.

The origins of the doctrine of character go back to the 3rd century BC. and are associated with the name of the ancient Greek philosopher Theophrastus, a student of Aristotle. The subject of his research is a private person, an Athenian man in the street. Theophrastus is not interested in an individual personality; among the many qualities of a person, he finds a certain constant trait - “character”, by which an idea of human experiences is created. “Characters” according to Theophrastus are the sum of mental properties expressed through actions and words; a series of sketches depicting the types of carriers of a particular deficiency. For example, a flatterer, a talker, a curmudgeon, a braggart, a gossip, etc. Theophrastus was sure that there are only negative characters and only servants and slaves have them.

As society developed, scientific knowledge and social experience accumulated, the doctrine of character was enriched with new ideas. It became obvious that any person is endowed with character, regardless of his social class. At different age periods, character develops under the influence of external and internal prerequisites; it includes not only experiences, but also other features - both negative and positive, from the point of view of a person’s compliance with ethical standards, the characteristics of his interaction with others and the overall effectiveness of achievements.

The famous Russian psychologist Lev Semenovich Vygotsky (1896–1934) defined character as a holistic and stable individual structure of a person’s mental life, acquired in addition to the innate properties of the nervous system. Character is manifested in individual mental acts and states of a person, his manners and habits, mentality and emotional experiences.

In later definitions, in addition to the stability and uniqueness of character properties, its active influence on the characteristics of a person’s activity and communication is emphasized. According to these definitions, character is a framework of personality, which includes only the most pronounced and closely interrelated properties, clearly manifested in various types of activities. Thus, all character traits are personality traits, but not all personality traits are character traits.

In addition, the achievements of modern psychology allow us to assert that character is formed not only in the process of socialization of the individual, but also under the influence of innate prerequisites that form the basis of temperament.

For further work, we propose to use the following definition formulated by A.V. Libin: Character

(from the Greek “character” - trait, attribute, seal, coinage) - a set of stable individual characteristics of a person that develop and manifest themselves in activity and communication, determining typical modes of behavior for him [6].

The concept of accentuation

The term "accentuation"

was first introduced in 1964 by the German psychiatrist and psychologist, professor of neurology at the neurological clinic of the University of Berlin, Karl Leonhard (1904–1988).

K. Leonhard developed a well-known classification of accentuated personalities. In addition, the classification of character accentuations by the famous domestic psychiatrist, the founder of adolescent psychiatry, Professor Alexander Evgenievich Lichko (1926–1994) is widespread. Despite some differences, both approaches maintain a common understanding of the meaning of accentuations.

In the most succinct form, accentuation can be defined as a disharmonious development of character, a strong expression of its individual traits, which makes it difficult for the individual to adapt in some specific situations. At the same time, it is important to emphasize that an individual’s adaptation difficulties in some specific situations can be combined with good abilities for social adaptation in other situations [1].

Concept of type

In the encyclopedic dictionary the concept of “type”

is defined as a group, category, category of objects or phenomena that have common essential features.
In addition, a type may imply a separate item (object) that is part of a given group. “typing”
is also used , which implies grouping objects according to certain characteristic characteristics.

In psychology, a type is a group of people who are united according to a psychological (in some cases, psychophysiological) characteristic or characteristics. In this case, the signs must meet a number of the following criteria:

originality (uniqueness for a given group),

“sharpness” (brightness, significant deviation from the norm),

· stability (over time and in different situations).

Peculiarities of psychological types also include:

· similarity within the group, interchangeability of representatives of the type according to selected characteristics;

· significant difference between representatives of the type from other groups according to the selected characteristics.

The identification of types is the result of attempts to classify information about the differences between people in order to explain and predict their behavior, as well as to determine the most adequate areas of application of their abilities. To identify types in psychology, two main methods are used.

1. According to the first method, the type is distinguished in accordance with the most pronounced feature

among those used in measuring differences. An example of such a typology is the classification of E.P. Klimova, dividing people according to the principle of the preferred object of professional activity (Man, Technology, Nature, Sign or Artistic Image). A similar approach was used by K. Leongard and A.E. Lichko when developing classifications of accentuated personalities.

2. The second method involves grouping people based on a combination of several features

, such as, for example, those used in diagnosing the type of temperament in the method of Hans Eysenck. The combination of manifestations of introversion/extraversion and high/low levels of neuroticism in this case allows us to classify a person into one of four corresponding groups: sanguine, phlegmatic, choleric, or melancholic.

When using different typologies, it is important to understand the limitations of such classifications. Typologies are an economical way of cognition that gives quick and expressive results, but their weak point is the neglect of specific manifestations of individuality. Everything that does not relate to the selected feature or set of features remains outside the scope of consideration.

Thus, attempts to attribute a person to a certain type can stereotype and narrow ideas about a possible behavioral repertoire, which inevitably reduces the level of understanding of the individual characteristics of the subject [6].

Trait concept

The evolution of psychological research has led scientists to believe that types are nothing more than extreme manifestations of a particular psychological characteristic. People for the most part do not belong to extreme groups and still differ from each other.

In this regard, the concept of “trait”

– a stable psychological characteristic that has wide individual differences. By comparing people on each specific trait, it is possible to determine how wide individual differences are (what individual values can be found in a population), and how much more the trait is expressed in one person than in another.

Unlike a type, a trait unites groups of closely related characteristics (rather than specific people) and acts as some integral characteristics that generalize the information contained in a given group of characteristics.

An example of a trait is extraversion. Extraversion manifests itself in different situations - in the ability to easily come into contact with strangers, in a large number of friendships, in the choice of activities related to communication with other people, in the tendency to receive information from other people rather than from books, etc. However, some people turn out to be more extroverted than others. These differences are persistent—some people tend to be more extraverted than others over long periods of time.

As a practitioner and scientist, K. Leonhard tried to find an approach to a holistic description of a person by identifying the main characteristics, or traits, that determine the core of personality - its development, adaptation processes and mental health.

According to the concept of K. Leonhard, the main features of different people manifest themselves to varying degrees and usually vary within normal limits. However, if the trait is expressed to a large extent, then under the influence of unfavorable factors it can develop into pathology. The presence of “pointed” features leaves an imprint on the entire personality, which in this case is characterized as accentuated.

Explaining his understanding of accentuated personalities, Leonhard emphasized that they, as a rule, are not pathological, and argued his position as follows: “With a different interpretation, we would be forced to come to the conclusion that only the average person can be considered normal, and any deviation from the average (average norm) would have to be recognized as a pathology. This would force us to take beyond the norm those individuals who, by their originality, clearly stand out from the background of the average level. However, this category would also include that category of people about whom they speak of “personality” in a positive sense, emphasizing that it has a clearly expressed original mental makeup” [5].

Thus, accentuated individuals potentially contain both the possibility of socially positive achievements and a socially negative charge. A mild degree of accentuation is most often associated with positive personality manifestations, a high degree – with negative manifestations.

We can talk about pathology only when the accentuated trait is expressed to a very strong degree and has a destructive effect on the personality as a whole. It would be wrong to interpret accentuation as a pathological manifestation of personality; accentuation is an extreme variant of the norm.

According to K. Leonhard, in 20...50% of adults, some character traits are sharpened (accentuated).

The personality model developed by K. Leonhard contains 12 types of accentuations, each of which is described in his book “Accentuated Personalities” (1975). Since the author worked in a psychiatric clinic and dealt with pathological personalities, his descriptions of accentuations contain extreme, pronounced manifestations, typical for patients, but exaggerated from the point of view of the norm. This fact must be taken into account when analyzing the accentuations of mentally healthy people in order to avoid “labels” that have no real basis.

Model A.E. Lichko

A. E. Lichko shared the position of K. Leonhard in the part where we are talking about accentuations as extreme variants of the norm, but he believed that it would be more correct to talk not about accentuated personalities, but about accentuations of character. According to Lichko, “it is the types of character, and not the personality as a whole, with its characteristics, inclinations and other structural components, that are described in Leonhard’s monograph; it is the character traits that distinguish these individuals from others” [7].

A.E. Lichko drew attention to the fact that excessive strengthening of individual character traits, in which deviations in human behavior that do not go beyond the norms, bordering on pathology, are most often observed in adolescence and young adulthood. For people of this age, a classification was developed that is similar in content to K. Leonhard’s classification (Table 1).

Table 1

Comparison of accentuated personality types according to K. Leonhard

and types of character accentuation according to A.E. Lichko

Accented personality type K. Leonhard	Type of character accentuation A.E. Lichko
Stuck	
Demonstrative	Hysterical
Pedantic	Psychasthenic
Excitable	Epileptoid
Hyperthymic	Hyperthymic
Disthymic	
Affectively labile	Cycloid
Affectively exalted	Labile
Emotive	Labile
Anxious (fearful)	Sensitive
Extroverted	Hyperthymic-conformal
Introverted	Schizoid
	Unstable
	Conformal
	Astheno-neurotic

As can be seen from the table, the list of accentuations according to A.E. Lichko is somewhat different from the list proposed by K. Leonhard. In particular, Lichko does not have a description of dysthymic

and
stuck
type
,
since they practically do not occur in adolescence.
At the same time, in adolescence, unstable, conformal
and
astheno-neurotic
types, which are included in the classification of A.E., Lichko, and are absent in K. Leonhard’s classification.

To complete the picture of character accentuations, below is a brief description of the three indicated types, as well as the labile type,

uniting two accentuations of temperament -
exaltation
and
emotiveness
.

Topic 3. Personal behavior in conflict

Strategies of behavior in conflict (competition, cooperation, compromise, avoidance, adaptation) (K. Thomas). Conflict and manipulation (R. Cialdini).

Types of conflicting personalities. The theory of character accentuation (K. Leongard, A.E. Lichko, etc.). Conflict personality of demonstrative and rigid type. Conflict personality of an uncontrollable and hyper-precise type. Conflict personality of the “conflict-free” type. Techniques for communicating with conflicting individuals.

When analyzing a conflict and choosing adequate solutions to manage this conflict, it is necessary to take into account the typical behavior patterns of personal subjects of conflict interaction. This topic discusses some theories that reveal the behavior of an individual in a conflict, caused by various factors.

1Next ⇒

Recommended pages:

Cooperation

By choosing a cooperation strategy, the subject of the conflict is determined to resolve the conflict in such a way that it is beneficial to all participants. Moreover, here the position of the opponent or opponents is not simply taken into account, but there is also a desire to ensure that their demands are satisfied as much as possible, as well as one’s own.

Basic human actions with the “Cooperation” strategy

Gathering information about the opponent, the subject of the conflict and the conflict itself
Calculating the resources of all participants in the interaction in order to develop alternative proposals
Open discussion of the conflict, the desire to objectify it
Consideration of opponent's proposals

Pros and cons of the Collaboration strategy

Cooperation is focused mainly on understanding the opposing position, paying attention to the opponent’s point of view, and finding a solution that suits everyone. Thanks to this approach, mutual respect, understanding and trust can be achieved, which best contributes to the development of long-term, strong and stable relationships. Cooperation is most effective when the subject of the conflict is important to all parties. However, it is important to note that in some situations it can be very difficult to find a solution that suits everyone, especially if the opponent is not cooperative. In this case, the “Cooperation” strategy can only complicate the conflict and delay its resolution indefinitely.

These are the five main strategies for dealing with conflict. As a rule, they are usually used in confrontations with other people. And this is quite justified, because... their effectiveness is undeniable. But, at the same time, other equally effective strategies, such as suppression and negotiations, can be used to resolve conflicts.

What is conflict

The conflict itself reflects the inconsistency of the interests of two or more people: it is a difference of opinions that cannot be satisfied at the same time. When talking about interpersonal conflicts, we are often dealing with a clash between two egos, two universes with their own needs for recognition, and social attitudes. There is no generally accepted theory of conflicts that could unambiguously explain the nature of their occurrence. But many authors from the field of psychology often divide conflicts into several types.

Intrapersonal

Intrapersonal conflicts, as a rule, reflect a clash between different personal needs, motives, feelings, and values. This can be a role conflict when a person's different roles make conflicting demands on him. For example, being a good family man, a person should spend his evenings at home, as his role dictates, but his position as a manager may oblige him to stay late at work. A conflict arises when one role cannot be realized because another is being realized at the same time. How to resolve intrapersonal conflicts? Through reassessment of values, through greater awareness, through the desire for balance - to find time for both work and family.

Photo: Pexels.com

Interpersonal

The other most common type of conflict is interpersonal conflict. This type is not necessarily associated with the dissimilarity of the opponents’ characters. Quite often, the basis of such conflicts is the struggle for limited resources. Everyone believes that they are the ones who need the resources. It is important to remember that such a struggle for resources is not always objective.

Photo: Pexels.com

Between the individual and the group

A conflict between an individual and a group arises when the group establishes certain standards of behavior, and one of the participants breaks out and does not comply with them. It is such a deviation from accepted norms that leads to conflict between the individual and the group.

Intergroup

The clash of several groups with different interests leads to intergroup conflict, where the dispute is conducted at the level of interests of the whole group, the position of the team is defended, and not of each person individually.

Suppression

Suppression is used mainly if the subject of the conflict is not clear or if it has entered a destructive phase, i.e. has become a direct threat to the participants; and also when it is impossible to enter into an open conflict for any reason or when there is a risk of “falling face down in the mud”, losing authority, etc.

Basic human actions with the “Suppression” strategy

Targeted and consistent reduction in the number of opponents
Development and application of a system of norms and rules that can streamline relations between opponents
Creating and maintaining conditions that prevent or complicate conflict interaction between the parties

Pros and cons of the Suppression strategy

Effective suppression of conflict is possible if the essence of the conflict is not clear enough, because this will nullify the mutual attacks of opponents and protect them from senseless waste of their energy. Suppression can also be effective when continued conflict would cause serious harm to both sides. But when resorting to suppression, it is important to correctly calculate your strength, otherwise the situation may worsen and turn against you (if your opponent turns out to be stronger or has more resources). The issue of suppression should be approached by thinking through all the details.

Accommodation (concession)

Adaptation (concession) - the style of passive behavior is characterized by the tendency of the conflict participants to soften, smooth out the conflict situation, maintain or restore harmony in relationships through compliance, trust, and readiness for reconciliation. Unlike evasion, this style takes into account the interests of opponents to a greater extent and does not avoid joint actions with them. Typically, the device is given a solution in situations where:

the participant in the conflict is not very concerned about the problem that has arisen, does not consider it significant enough for himself and therefore shows a willingness to take into account the interests of the other party, yielding to it if he has a higher rank, or adapting to it if he is of a lower rank;
opponents demonstrate compliance and deliberately concede to each other in something, taking into account the fact that while losing little, they gain more, including good relationships, mutual consent, partnerships;
a deadlock situation is created, requiring a weakening of the intensity of passions, making some kind of sacrifice in order to maintain peace in relations and prevent confrontational actions, without, of course, sacrificing one’s principles, primarily moral ones;
there is a sincere desire of one of the conflicting parties to support the opponent, while feeling completely satisfied with his kindness;
competitive interaction between opponents is manifested, not aimed at fierce competition, but inevitably causing damage to the other side.

The adaptation is applicable to any type of conflict.
But this style of behavior is most suitable for conflicts of an organizational nature, in particular along the hierarchical vertical: subordinate - superior, subordinate - boss, etc. In such situations, it is extremely necessary to value the maintenance of mutual understanding, friendly disposition and an atmosphere of business cooperation, not to give room for heated polemics, expressions of anger, and especially threats, to be constantly ready to sacrifice one’s own preferences if they are capable of damaging the interests and rights of the opponent.

At the same time, this style is unacceptable in situations where the subjects of the conflict are gripped by feelings of resentment and irritation, do not want to respond to each other with friendly reciprocity, and their interests and goals cannot be smoothed out and agreed upon.

Negotiation

Negotiation is one of the most common conflict resolution strategies. With the help of negotiations, both micro-conflicts (in families, organizations) and macro-level conflicts are resolved, i.e. conflicts on a global and national scale.

Basic human actions with the “Negotiations” strategy

Focus on finding a mutually beneficial solution
Stopping any aggressive actions
Showing attention to your opponent's position
Carefully consider next steps
Using an intermediary

Pros and cons of the Negotiation strategy

The Negotiation strategy allows the warring parties to find a common language without incurring any losses. It is very effective because... neutralizes aggressive confrontation and smoothes out the situation, and also provides the parties with time to think about what is happening and search for new solutions. However, if negotiations suddenly drag on for some reason, this may be perceived by either party as avoiding the conflict or unwillingness to solve the problem, which may lead to even more aggressive offensive actions.

You should choose a strategy for behavior in a conflict as thoughtfully, consciously, and taking into account the specifics of the situation itself. A correctly chosen strategy will give maximum results, while an incorrectly chosen one, on the contrary, can only aggravate the situation. Therefore, once again carefully study this material and try to apply the acquired knowledge in practice even in small things, because by learning to resolve small conflicts, you will be able to effectively influence large ones. And remember that it is best to prevent the emergence of a conflict situation than to eliminate an already “raging flame.”

Peace to your home!

We also recommend reading:

Storytelling
Negotiation Matrix
Eldred's Power Strategy
Conflicts and strategies for dealing with them
Thomas Questionnaire for Behavior in Conflict
Porter's Five Forces in Business
Mintzberg's 5 Ps Strategy for Business Strategy
IBR Conflict Resolution Approach
How to Deal with Conflicts of Interest
Game theory: history and application
How to competently enter into conflict

Key words:1Communication

Behavior strategies in conflict situations

To analyze behavior strategies and types of conflicts, let’s consider the series “Unprincipled” about the life and morals of Moscow residents. This series was released in October and was based on the stories of the writer Alexander Tsypkin.

Photo: Kinopoisk.ru

The main narrator of the series, played by Pavel Derevyanko, is an incorrigible rogue who often faces conflict situations due to lies. On the one hand, a lie for him is a way of communication that allows him to gently avoid sharp corners in his relationship with his wife and maintain his status as a family man, despite an endless string of affairs. On the other hand, it gives it lightness and charm, which make it attractive to the fairer sex. At the same time, the hero does not suffer from internal conflict, but we see a picture of an external conflict with others: when he has to surrender his territory to his opponent. In order to restore relations with your wife and lull vigilance, give unexpected and expensive gifts; in the case of inheritance, agree to a deal that is unfavorable for oneself.

Photo: Kinopoisk.ru

Slavik’s closest friend, Kostya, played by Maxim Vitorgan, is an example of a different model of behavior in conflict situations. In the family he adapts to his wife, at work he acts as a leader. And in his case, the role of henpecked is a conscious choice, which allows him to delegate household chores to his wife, and in the meantime, at work, build a career and reach new heights.

Photo: Kinopoisk.ru

Another hero worth paying attention to is Roman, played by Yuri Kolokolnikov. He appears in a very common image: wealthy, lonely and in an eternal search for “the one,” which is what his new employee, Vera, seems to him at some point. And it clearly expresses the internal conflict between the search for adventure and the desire to find some kind of constant comfort.

All these stories give us a valuable conclusion: each of us performs many social roles throughout our lives, therefore masks and costumes must be changed in accordance with the scenery.

Examples of conflict resolution

To better understand how each strategy works, let's look at them using specific examples.

Compromise

This strategy involves resolving conflict situations through mutual concessions from both parties. Each participant in the conflict makes concessions, sacrificing some of his own interests in exchange for the concessions of the other, in order to ultimately come to a common solution that will suit both of them.

The compromise strategy is usually chosen in situations where there is a goal to reach an agreement in a conflict, but in such a way that each party wins at least something, when the conflicting parties recognize each other’s interests and values and want the outcome of the conflict to be as objective as possible.

The use of compromise is justified if the parties to the conflict have mutually exclusive interests and are in equal conditions. Often this method is used as the last opportunity to resolve a controversial situation while preserving the relationship.

Example: A husband wants his wife to cook dinner every day. And my wife says that she gets tired after work, especially since she also has to wash the dishes. Then the spouses find a compromise solution: the wife cooks and the husband washes the dishes.

Cooperation

The cooperation strategy involves the longest and most detailed study of a controversial issue. Resolving a conflict situation is not the main goal here; the most important thing is to satisfy the interests of each participant in the dispute and develop a mutually beneficial long-term solution to the problem.

Cooperation will be justified and effective if the resolution of the conflict is equally important for all its participants, they are interested in maintaining good long-term relations with each other and are ready to clearly formulate the essence of their claims and interests, listen (the main thing is to hear) the opponent.

The cooperation strategy is ideal for resolving conflict situations with loved ones and relatives, as it involves long and repeated negotiations between the parties.

Collaboration often feels like compromise. The strategies are similar because they can only be used if both parties are interested in resolving the conflict and maintaining the relationship. The key difference between the strategies is that a compromise is achieved at a superficial level and the parties to the conflict are not necessarily in a long-term relationship, but cooperation involves a deeper study of the controversial issue; the conflicting parties, as a rule, are in close and long-term relationships, and therefore are interested in a long-term solution to the issue .

For example , a family with children came to relax at the seaside. On one of the days of rest, the husband and children wanted to spend time actively, so they suggested going to the water park. On the contrary, my wife planned to lie on the beach and sunbathe. Then the husband and wife discuss the current situation and decide to go to the water park with the whole family, because there are slides for active recreation and sun loungers to lie on. As a result, the issue was resolved, each participant in the conflict satisfied their interests.

Device

This model of exiting a conflict situation is most often formed in early childhood. You can identify it using the online test “How your parents raised you as a child.”

Adaptation is a way of smoothing out or resolving a conflict when one of its participants, sacrificing their interests and opinions, yields to another participant, accepting his version of solving the problem.

This strategy is used when:

· the outcome of the conflict is extremely important for the opponent, but at the same time the yielding side “loses almost nothing”;

· maintaining good relationships is more important than standing up for being right;

· the yielding party chooses an adaptation in order to ultimately achieve a resolution of the conflict in its favor in a roundabout way;

· during a dispute, the yielding party realizes that the opponent is truly right;

· the opponent has more power.

Adaptive behavior is justified if the conflict is not that significant, but the disagreements that arise can ruin the relationship. That is, making concessions or losing in a conflict will help maintain relationships with your opponent, which in a particular situation is much more important than defending your position.

If the conflict is serious and greatly violates personal boundaries or affects your life values, then the adaptation will be ineffective, because the opponent will decide that everything is in order and will violate the boundaries again next time. Such a situation may ultimately result in an even more serious conflict, since the dissatisfaction you have accumulated will sooner or later burst out, or will remain “with you” as passive aggression.

Example strategy : you have a rule that you don’t let anyone wear your clothes. A friend came to visit and accidentally spilled coffee on her T-shirt. You love your friend very much and, of course, you will help her out and, as an exception, let her wear your T-shirt.

Convenient woman, who is she?

Rivalry

A person who chooses a strategy of competition in a conflict situation is determined to defeat his opponent no matter what.

Typically, rivalry involves open conflict, when its participants try to prove to each other that they are right, resorting to pressure, raised voices, often insults, or even the use of physical force.

The reasons for this method of conflict resolution may be: protecting life and health, defending personal boundaries when they are violated, a constant desire for leadership in everything, bad manners, and self-centeredness.

Rivalry is unjustified when you are trying to prove that you are right, regardless of the situation and the importance of maintaining a good relationship with your opponent. In conflict situations with close relatives or friends, with children and spouses who are very significant to us, the strategy of competition will fail.

There are situations in life when competition is a necessary strategy of behavior. It should be used if the life and health (yours or those close to you) are in danger, your personal boundaries are severely violated, or your opponent, as they say, simply “does not understand in a good way.” The strategy is also justified in cases where it is necessary to protect someone from physical or moral violence, or unjustified rash acts.

Do you want to witness the conflict from a competitive position? You just need to go to a public place. Although, unfortunately, most often it is in clinics, shops and public catering places that such conflicts are unjustified, and indicate bad manners and emotional licentiousness of those in conflict.

An example of using a strategy : the neighbors listen to music loudly after 23-00, and you are getting ready for bed. In this situation, your neighbors are violating your personal boundaries, so the best thing to do is to go down to the floor below and remind you that night has fallen. Often this is enough. But sometimes the violators, nodding their heads, 10 minutes later again disturb the neighbors’ peace at night. In this case, it would be best to first warn, and if this does not help, call the police.

Avoidance

This strategy involves leaving, self-elimination, and removing oneself from a conflict situation.

Avoidance of conflict can be expressed both physically - leaving, running away, hanging up the phone, and emotionally - silence, ignoring the topic of conversation, trying to start a conversation on another topic.

Thus, a person does not try to adapt, come to a common decision, or go into open conflict. The reason for this behavior can be both self-doubt and lack of motivation, energy or time to clarify the situation.

If a conflict situation directly affects your interests, then avoidance is not an appropriate way to solve the problem. Yes, you will save your nerve cells and time, but then the conflict will remain unresolved and will only get worse, or it will be resolved, but without your participation, and therefore without taking into account your opinion.

The avoidance strategy is good in situations where the conflict does not directly affect your interests at the moment; whether it is resolved or not does not matter much to you.

The situation with neighbors is also suitable as an example Let’s say this is not the first time your neighbors have turned on music this late, and you know that after about an hour they usually turn it off. And just in the next hour you are not going to sleep, and the noise does not interfere with your business. The best option would be not to waste your strength and avoid a possible conflict.