Interpersonal conflict. Conflict between the individual and the group Conflict between the individual and the group

Below are the four main types of conflict. Conflicts of mixed types often occur.

Intrapersonal conflict.

This type of conflict does not meet the definition given above. However, its possible dysfunctional consequences are similar to those of other types of conflict. It can take many forms, and the most common form of role conflict is when one person is presented with conflicting demands about what the outcome of his work should be or, for example, when job requirements are not consistent with personal needs or values. Research shows that such conflict can arise with low job satisfaction, low self-confidence and organization, and stress.

Interpersonal conflict.

This is the most common type of conflict. It manifests itself in different ways in organizations. Most often, this is a struggle among managers for limited resources, capital or labor, time to use equipment, or approval of a project. Each of them believes that since resources are limited, he must persuade higher management to allocate those resources to him rather than to another manager.

Interpersonal conflict can also manifest itself as a clash of personalities. People with different personality traits, views and values are sometimes simply unable to get along with each other. As a rule, the views and goals of such people differ radically.

Conflict between the individual and the group.

Conflict may arise between an individual and a group if that individual takes a position that differs from that of the group. For example, when discussing ways to increase sales at a meeting, most will assume that this can be achieved by lowering the price. And someone alone will be convinced that such tactics will lead to a decrease in profits. Although this person, whose opinion differs from the group, may have the company's interests at heart, he can still be seen as a source of conflict because he goes against the group's opinion.

Intergroup conflict.

Organizations are made up of many formal and informal groups. Even in the best organizations, conflicts can arise between such groups. Informal groups that believe that the leader is treating them unfairly may become more united and try to “get even” with him by reducing productivity. A striking example of intergroup conflict is the conflict between the trade union and the administration. Unfortunately, a common example of intergroup conflict is disagreement between line and staff personnel. Staff personnel tend to be younger and more educated than line personnel and tend to use technical jargon when communicating. These differences lead to clashes between people and difficulties in communication. Line managers may reject the recommendations of staff specialists and express dissatisfaction with their dependence on them for everything related to information. In extreme situations, line managers may deliberately choose to implement the specialists' proposal in such a way that the whole undertaking will end in failure. And all this in order to put specialists “in their place.” Staff personnel, in turn, may be indignant that their representatives are not given the opportunity to implement their decisions themselves, and try to maintain the information dependence of line personnel on them. These are clear examples of dysfunctional conflict.

LECTURE "GROUP CONFLICTS" (Topic 8).

Group conflicts in social practice are less common than interpersonal ones. At the same time, most researchers note that group conflicts are characterized by greater scale and severity of consequences. A feature of such conflicts is the possibility of expanding its scope by involving certain participants (colleagues, relatives). Finding out the causes of group conflicts plays an important role in building effective group relationships.

1. The concept of group conflicts and their classification

· Group conflict is a confrontation in which at least one of the parties is represented by a small social group.

We agree to consider a small group to be a small group (from 3 to 40 people) of people who have a common goal, are connected by joint activities and are in direct personal contact (communication) for a long time.

You can select two main types of group conflicts:

1. Conflict "person-group"

2. Group-group conflict (sometimes called intergroup conflict).

In accordance with this division, let us consider the classification of group conflicts.

1. Classification of conflicts of the “person-group” type:

1.1. Conflict between the leader and the team usually arises as a result of low competence of the boss, unacceptable management style, appointment of a new manager with unique requirements;

1.2. Conflict between an ordinary employee and the team can develop when someone deviates from established group norms of behavior. Sometimes the cause of such a conflict is the presence in the team of a personality with a pronounced conflict orientation (the so-called conflict personality);

1.3. Conflict between the individual and the microgroup may arise as a result of changes in group consciousness, the leader exceeding his authority, low professional training

2. Classification of conflicts of the “group-group” type:

2.1. Conflict between the administration and staff of the organization may arise due to a violation legal norms, low wages, poor communication;

2.2. Conflict between divisions in an organization it usually arises due to the distribution of resources, mutual dependence on tasks performed, structural restructuring;

2.3. Conflict between microgroups in an organization is associated with the opposition of their interests, the ambitions of their leaders, the presence of mutually exclusive goals and values;

2.4. Conflict between organizations has the following reasons: failure to fulfill contractual obligations, struggle for sales markets, access to resources, spheres of influence;

2.5. Conflict between informal groups in society is based on group extremism or a discrepancy in spiritual interests and values.

In the study and description of group conflicts there are three main approach:

A. Motivational approach to the study of group conflicts, he proposes consideration of a complex of motivating reasons as a basis for explaining group behavior. For example, within the framework of this approach, group hostility towards “outsiders” is considered as a mechanism for maintaining internal stability and cohesion of the group.

B. Situational approach to the study of group conflicts focuses the attention of researchers on the analysis of the situation as a set of external factors. The situation may be in the nature of cooperation or competition. Proof of the situational conditionality of group conflicts was produced by American psychologists M. Sheriff, R. Blake, J. Mouton. The findings of these researchers helped to refute the idea that intergroup hostility is inevitable, rooted in human nature and human relationships.

B. Cognitive approach to the study of group conflicts emphasizes the decisive role of the group’s cognitive (cognitive) attitudes towards each other. According to scientists, the decisive factor in intergroup interaction is not the cooperative or competitive nature of the situation, but the social attitudes that arise.

Currently, a promising direction in the study of group conflicts is the combination of different approaches. All group conflicts have general dynamics development:

1) Gradual strengthening of the parties to the conflict due to the introduction of increasingly active forces, as well as through the accumulation of experience;

2) An increase in the number of problem situations and a deepening of the primary conflict situation;

3) Increasing the conflict activity of participants, changing the nature of the conflict towards toughening, involving new people in the conflict;

4) An increase in emotional tension that accompanies conflict interactions, which can influence the behavior of participants in both mobilizing and disorganizing ways;

5) Changing attitude towards problematic situation and the conflict in general.

Let's move on to studying ways to manage group conflicts.

2. Conflicts of the “person-group” type: features, causes and specifics of management .

Main featuresconflicts between the individual and the group are as follows:

1. Structuresuch a conflict is heterogeneous. The subjects of the conflict are, on the one hand, the individual, and on the other, the group. Therefore, conflict interaction occurs on the basis of a collision of personal and group motives, and images of a conflict situation are presented, respectively, in individual and group views and assessments;

2. ReasonsConflicts of this type are unique. Three main groups of reasons can be distinguished, namely:

2.1. role expectations;

2.2. Reasons related to inadequacy of the internal attitude to the status of the individual. Here we will keep in mind that the internal attitude reflects the individual’s subjective perception of his status, and the status shows the real position of the individual in the system of intra-group relations;

2.3. Reasons associated with the violation group norms or general rules behaviors that all members of the group adhere to;

3. Forms of manifestation Such conflicts are quite diverse:

3.1. Application of group sanctions;

3.2. Significant restriction or complete cessation of communication between group members and the conflicting person;

3.3. Sharp criticism of the conflicting person;

3.4. Euphoria on the part of the conflicting party.

You should focus on such a variety asconflict between group and leader . Such conflicts occur most acutely in cases where the manager’s competence does not correspond to accepted standards and existing expectations, or in cases of non-acceptance of the manager’s moral character and character.

Let us consider the main stages of managing such conflicts and the corresponding management actions.

1. Conflict prediction stage . At this stage, the following actions are advisable:

1.1. Studying the individual psychological characteristics of employees;

1.2. Study and analysis public opinion, group motives and values;

1.3. Analysis of relationships in a team, identification of microgroups, identification of leaders and outcasts;

1.4. Knowledge and analysis of early symptoms of hidden conflict:

– actualization of personal interests and needs of the conflicting personality;

– critical statements addressed to the conflicting personality;

– restriction of communications with a conflicting personality;

1.5. Violating group norms, displaying arrogance and contempt;

2. Warning stage conflict is characterized by the adoption of specific measures to neutralize conflict behavior. These include:

2.1. Application pedagogical measures:

– conversation;

– explanation;

– formation of internal readiness (to accept group norms);

2.2. Application administrative measures:

– bringing the responsibilities and professional training of a potential conflictant into line;

– transfer of active participants in the brewing conflict to other units;

3. Regulatory stage conflict is characterized by the work of recognizing its reality by the conflicting personality. In addition, at this stage the following actions give results:

– clarificationconflict personality causes of the current situation and consequences of the conflict;

– explanationthe leader of the microgroup in which the conflict has arisen, ways of possible resolution of the conflict;

4. Resolution stageconflict is usually associated with active actions its participants. There are two main ways to resolve conflict:

– firstwhen a conflicting person realizes and admits his mistakes and shortcomings and corrects them;

– second, when the interests and needs of a conflicting individual are not consistent with the interests of the group, a personnel decision (dismissal, transfer) is necessary.

Let's move on to consider the conflict between groups.

3. Conflict of the “group-group” type: features, causes and specifics of management I.

In an intergroup conflict, the subjects are groups (small, medium or micro groups) pursuing goals that are incompatible with the goals of the opposing group. Thus, the basis of this conflict is the collision of opposing group motives, interests, values and goals. Let's highlightpeculiaritiesintergroup interests:

1. Subjective content of the image of a conflict situation is in the nature of group views, opinions and assessments. It is characterized by the presence of three phenomena:

1.1. Deindividuation of mutual perception comes down to blurring the individual characteristics of members of conflicting groups and approaching them in accordance with their belonging to one’s own or a hostile community;

1.2. Inadequate group comparison represents the use of double standards for evaluating groups, when one's own group is rated higher, and the merits of the opposing group are underestimated;

1.3. Group attribution or explanation of group behavior for various reasons. Thus, the positive behavior of the in-group and the negative behavior of the out-group is explained by internal reasons, and the negative behavior of the in-group and the positive behavior of the out-group is explained by external reasons;

2. Intergroup conflicts are different forms manifestations and progression. Such forms can be meetings, conferences, rallies, strikes, discussions, negotiations.

3. Intergroup conflicts manifest themselves additional features, such as cohesion of a group defending just interests; the split of a group defending illegal interests; approval of the individual’s status in the group.

Let's move on to studying ways to manage intergroup conflicts. To do this, we use the same stages as in the case of studying conflicts between an individual and a group, which we discussed earlier.

1. At the forecasting stage conflict it is necessary:

1.1. Constant interaction with external organizations for the purpose of analyzing public opinion;

1.2. Organization of work with leaders of opposing groups;

1.3. Identifying early symptoms of intergroup conflicts in the latent phase.

2. At the warning stage conflict management comes down to the following actions:

2.1. Development of measures to neutralize the conflict based on an analysis of its causes and factors;

2.2. Continue to work with leaders to exchange information about potential rivals;

2.3. Application of pedagogical and administrative measures;

3. At the regulatory stage conflict it is necessary:

3.1. Recognition of the reality of the conflict by the leaders of conflicting groups;

3.2. Legitimization of the conflict, i.e. establishing norms and rules for conflict group interaction;

3.3. Institution of conflict, i.e. creation of working groups to resolve conflicts;

3.4. Application of conflict regulation technologies (information, communication, socio-psychological, organizational).

4. At the resolution stage conflict, it is necessary to organize negotiations between the conflicting parties and direct them to harmonize interests and positions.

As a result of studying this topic, the following can be formulated:conclusions:

· In the study of group conflicts, there are three main approaches - motivational, situational and cognitive, which differ in the interpretation of the main sources of conflict.

· There are conflicts between groups and conflicts between individuals and groups. They have specific features, but there is a certain commonality in their management.

Task 8

Analyze the cases of group conflicts of the “person-group” type known to you. Focus on the method of resolving such conflicts (real and optimal). Enter the analysis data into the table.

Description of the conflict between the individual and the group	Analysis of the causes	Resolution method
		Real	Optimal

Conflict (lat. conflictus) is a collision of oppositely directed, mutually incompatible tendencies in the consciousness of an individual, in interpersonal interactions or interpersonal relationships of individuals or groups of people, associated with acute negative emotional experiences. Any organizational changes, contradictory situations, business and personal relationships between people often give rise to conflict situations, which are subjectively accompanied by serious psychological experiences.

From an ordinary point of view, conflict has a negative meaning and is associated with aggression, deep emotions, disputes, threats, hostility, etc. There is an opinion that conflict is always an undesirable phenomenon and should be avoided if possible and, if it arises, immediately allow. Modern psychology considers conflict not only in a negative, but also in a positive way: as a way of developing an organization, group and individual, highlighting the inconsistency conflict situations positive aspects associated with development and subjective understanding of life situations.

Intrapersonal conflict is, as a rule, a conflict of motivation, feelings, needs, interests and behavior in the same person.

Interpersonal conflict is the most frequently occurring conflict. The emergence of interpersonal conflicts is determined by the situation, personal characteristics people, the individual’s attitude to the situation and psychological characteristics interpersonal relationships. The emergence and development of interpersonal conflict is largely determined by demographic and individual psychological characteristics. For women, conflicts related to personal problems are more common, for men - with professional activities.

Intergroup conflicts assume that the parties to the conflict are social groups pursuing incompatible goals and interfering with each other through their practical actions. This may be a conflict between representatives of different social categories(for example, in an organization: workers and engineers, line and office staff, trade union and administration, etc.). Social and psychological studies have shown that the “own” group looks better than the “other” in any situation. This is the so-called phenomenon of in-group favoritism, which is expressed in the fact that group members favor their group in one form or another. It is a source of intergroup tension and conflict. The main conclusion that social psychologists draw from these patterns is the following: if we want to eliminate intergroup conflict, then it is necessary to reduce differences between groups (for example, lack of privileges, fair wages, etc.).

The basis of the conflict between the individual and the group, as a rule, lies in attempts to change in the group and outside it.

Even if the majority of group members understand the need for these changes and approve of them, individual group members for one reason or another may find themselves in opposition and even leave the group.

The very membership of an individual in a group is conflictual. On the one hand, a person needs others to realize his personal goals and interests, and on the other hand, he is forced to submit to group norms and requirements that do not always correspond to his personal plans and desires. Therefore, violation of group norms is the most common cause of intragroup conflicts.

We can identify the main reasons why a group member violates group norms and requirements:

1) pursuing your personal goals;
2) by accident or because he has not yet fully mastered these norms;
3) the individual is unable to fulfill the requirements prescribed by the group

We can identify a number of reasons underlying the conflict between the individual and the team:

1) the expectations of the individual contradict the expectations of the group;
2) contradictions between the individual and the group in goals, values, interests, positions, etc.;
3) the struggle to improve one’s status in the group;
4) conflict between governing bodies and an informal group;
5) searching and finding the real and imaginary culprit of failures.

An attempt to change one's place in a group gives rise to structural or status-role changes. Such changes may be due to role conflicts that arise due to a discrepancy between the role accepted (voluntarily or under pressure) by a group member with group norms or expectations. Most often, such conflicts occur when a vacant position is occupied by a new group member.

Adaptation and socialization are always fraught with conflicts. Firstly, the group’s requirements for newcomers are usually too high. Secondly, a new group member usually does not fully master all the subtleties of intra-group interaction.

Structural and status-role changes can also be associated with changes in group goals and activities that involve a redistribution of roles, functions, means, rights, responsibilities, responsibilities and power.

person individual communication conflict

A social group reflects the diversity of society. Therefore, a wide variety of types of conflicts can take place in it to one degree or another. The most characteristic of them is conflict between a group and a group member.

At the heart of such conflicts, as a rule, are attempts to change in the group and outside it.

1) pursuing your personal goals;
2) by accident or because he has not yet fully mastered these norms;
3) the individual is unable to fulfill the requirements prescribed by the group.

We can identify a number of reasons underlying the conflict between an individual and a group:

1) the expectations of the individual contradict the expectations of the group;
2) contradictions between the individual and the group in goals, values, interests, positions, etc.;
3) the struggle to improve one’s status in the group; 4) conflict between governing bodies and an informal group;
5) searching and finding the real and imaginary culprit of failures.

An attempt to change one's place in a group gives rise to structural or status-role changes. Such changes may be caused by role conflicts that arise due to a discrepancy between the role accepted (voluntarily or under pressure) by a group member with group norms or expectations. Most often, such conflicts occur when a new member of the group takes a vacant position. Adaptation and socialization are always fraught with conflicts. Firstly, the group’s requirements for newcomers are usually too high. Secondly, a new group member usually does not fully master all the subtleties of intra-group interaction.

Structural and status-role changes can also be associated with changes in group goals and activities that involve a redistribution of roles, functions, means, rights, duties, responsibilities and power.

Characteristics of intergroup conflicts

Intergroup conflicts are a clash between individual groups over the emergence of conflicting contradictions between them. Intergroup interaction is based on concepts such as social identity and social comparison. These concepts imply dividing people into “us” and “outsiders”, separating one’s own group (we-group) from the general mass of other groups (outgroups). Through comparison and contrast, individuals identify themselves with a particular social community and ensure relative stability of intragroup relations. Attributing oneself to any group, in opinion A. Rapoport, generates a negative image “even if there is no real conflict of interests and no long history of intergroup relations.”

The peculiarities of intergroup conflict also include the fact that they contribute to the strengthening of intragroup ties and relationships, the unification of all group members to fight the external enemy.

The phenomenon of unity in the face of an external threat is often used by leaders of groups and large social communities to maintain intra-group unity and strengthen their personal power. To the greatest extent, such a policy is characteristic of closed groups with an authoritarian control system. IN open groups With democratic management methods, intra-group balance is largely maintained due to the multiplicity of conflict situations and the presence of various methods and mechanisms for resolving them. “In conditions of structural flexibility, heterogeneous internal conflicts constantly overlap each other, thereby preventing the group from splitting globally in any one direction.”

The interaction of different groups in society can be built on different foundations. Groups may maintain relative neutrality towards each other; can cooperate on the basis of division and addition of functions in joint activities; can wage an irreconcilable struggle to destroy each other.

In market conditions, the strategy and tactics of individual and group survival objectively imply intergroup competition and struggle for various types resources. This struggle especially intensifies during periods of socio-political, economic and socio-cultural changes, when norms, values, attitudes towards power, property and moral principles change. During such periods, intergroup struggle for the distribution and redistribution of resources turns into an open “war of all against all” without rules or morality.

The desire of people to unite in groups is eternal. This is genetically embedded in them as a phenomenon most conducive to the survival of the species. But nature doesn't care about existence individual person, and even more so about his comfortable existence. A person takes care of this himself to the best of his ability.

When considering this type of conflict, it is necessary to consider the concept of “informal group”. An informal group is a type small group, arises within the framework of a formal social organization on the basis of interpersonal relationships, common interests, mutual sympathy, etc. This is the type of organization social relations, which is characterized by relative independence from social structures, an unclear purpose of group activity and informal control based on tradition and depending on the degree of awareness of group membership. This group is also called “psychological” or “interest group”, since its formation is based on either purely psychological, emotional relationships or common personal interests. An informal group can be formed both within the formal group and in addition to it. Contacts between members are of a strongly personal nature. This group does not always have a strict organization; more often the order is based on tradition, respect and authority. The factors of unity are the sympathies, habits, and interests of its members. It has an informal leader, control is exercised with the help of informal norms and traditions, the essence of which depends on the level of cohesion of the group, the degree of its “closedness” to members of other social systems.

Informal groups establish their own norms of behavior and the nature of communication. Each member of such a group is obliged to comply with them (the group considers deviation from accepted norms as a negative phenomenon, and a conflict arises between the individual and the group). Let us refer to adaptation conflicts: between those rules and norms of internal communication that have developed in a given organization, and newcomers who are not aware of the existence of such rules. We can distinguish conflicts between a group and an individual who is not a member of the group, as well as intragroup conflicts between a group and one of its members.

Another common conflict of this type is the conflict between the group and the leader. Here it is necessary to distinguish between conflicts between a manager and his subordinate division, a division and the head of another group, between managers of different divisions, if members of different groups are involved in the conflict. In the last two cases, the conflict can develop into an intergroup conflict. Such conflicts occur most severely under an authoritarian leadership style.

Conflicts in organizations occupy a special place among crisis situations. An organization is not only a production and technological association of people and means of production. It is also a team of workers who combine their efforts and abilities to develop production and take an active part in solving socio-economic problems. An organization is a collection of people in which individuals are united by certain connections and relationships.

There are different types of organizations operating in society: enterprises; institutions; universities; institutions; financial structures; public organizations(For example, political parties, trade unions, etc.); associative organizations (for example, family).

Conflict in an organization is an open form of existence of contradictions of interests that arise in the process of interaction between people when resolving issues of production and personal nature.

Conflicts in an organization develop, as a rule, through confrontation of private and general interests. The balance of interests can be expressed as:

Complete identity, i.e. unidirectionality of interests;

The difference in the focus of interests, i.e. what is beneficial to some is not beneficial to others to the same extent;

The opposite direction of interests is when subjects must move in opposite directions to satisfy their needs.

People occupying different statuses in an organization, may or may not be aware of their objective interests and their inconsistency. But only conscious interests turn into a source of active social action for the employee. This awareness occurs either as a result of independent comprehension of one’s own life experience in the organization, either through the explanatory work of those who had previously realized the contradictory nature of the interests that had arisen, or as a result of manipulating the consciousness of members of the organization. However, awareness of opposing interests does not automatically lead to conflict. Conflict is an open form of existence of conflicting interests.

Conflict can arise both from really opposing objective interests, and from an illusory idea of their opposition. A conflict on artificial grounds can arise when its participants mistake differences in interests for their opposite.