Stages and stages of conflict. Phases and stages of conflict development. Main stages of conflict development

The peculiarity of conflict as a social phenomenon, the mechanisms of its occurrence and resolution is that the conflict does not appear as a one-time phenomenon, but as a process that arises, goes through certain stages and ends.

The conflict in its real form is preceded by a latent phase. At this stage, almost all the elements of the conflict have been formed, only active actions are missing. This stage in itself is not one-time, it contains several stages and can last a very long time.

The first stage includes the emergence of an objective problem situation of a future conflict.

The second stage includes the process of the subject’s awareness of the objective problem situation. At this stage, there is the most real opportunity to avoid the situation escalating into a conflict at a latent stage. The events of this stage carry the following aspects: the first aspect is the awareness of one of the parties to the problematic nature of the current situation. Interests may be quite real, but they may also be misperceived.

The second aspect contains the process of recognizing obstacles that may stand in the way of realizing one’s interests. Future obstacles can be of three types:

Obstacles that arise from the objective situation and are not at all

depend on other, possible subjects of a future conflict;

Obstacles that may arise depending on personal

qualities of a possible participant in the conflict;

External obstacles that can act as

personalized. The third aspect includes awareness of the relationship between one’s interests and possible and obvious obstacles.

The third stage can be considered as an attempt to resolve a conflict situation in non-conflict ways. The possibility of such a solution to the situation may lie in the fact that the opposite side, while realizing its interest, may not lead to a conflict through its actions. Mutual understanding at this stage creates a real opportunity to prevent a problematic situation from developing into a real conflict.

The fourth stage is characterized by specific actions that were aimed at realizing their interests by both parties and which, as a result, had negative consequences. At this stage, the positions of both parties are clearly defined and preparatory work is carried out. From a formal point of view, this stage can be considered as pre-conflict, although in fact the conflict has already begun.

The stages presented can be considered as an ideal scenario for the emergence of a conflict. In real life, some stages may be omitted or even repeated.

The end of the last stage completes the latent phase of the conflict dynamics. The transition to the open phase is determined by several circumstances. First, the state of conflict becomes obvious to all participants. Secondly, the actions of the participants in the brewing conflict are increasingly taking on the form of an external focus. Thirdly, a third party will learn about the conflict’s exit from the latent phase. The conflict begins to feel external influence; it may not necessarily lead to its escalation; this influence can play a positive role, that is, extinguish it.

The open phase of the conflict begins with an incident - an action, a clash, that is clearly irreconcilable in nature. Such actions can be either random or organized by one of the parties. The significance of the incident is that it begins open actions against the opponent, and the incident gives these actions a seemingly legal (legitimate) character. The size of the incident does not matter. On the contrary, the insignificance, in the opinion of an outside observer, of the incident that led to the open manifestation of the conflict may indicate the depth of the contradictions and the non-accidentality of open confrontation.

Separately, it is necessary to highlight a group of incidents that can be classified as random, since they, to a greater extent than other cases, may depend on an external factor influencing the development of a conflict situation. Some random incidents can be associated with objective factors, the nature of which depends little on human influence. Very often their characteristics are associated with a coincidence of objective circumstances. The second group of random incidents can be associated with a subjective factor, namely, with the purposeful activities of third parties interested in the escalation of conflict confrontation.

After an incident, the conflict can develop in both a negative and positive direction. However, more often than not, the struggle intensifies, and the conflict itself grows. This period of the open confrontation phase is called escalation.

A pattern of conflict escalation is the consolidation of the subjects of confrontation by attracting new participants. Interpersonal conflict can develop into intergroup conflict. In conditions of escalation, each subsequent action by one of the parties becomes more destructive in intensity than the previous ones. This is justified in motivation, as opposition to the other side. This, in turn, causes aggressive and therefore stronger actions. The situation is becoming more and more confusing. At this stage, most often the conflict moves from a dispute of arguments to peremptory claims, to personal accusations and even physical actions. Criticism is perceived only in the form of a threat. The confrontation acquires such a form of severity when its parties can begin to understand the need to move to constructive actions and search for mutually understandable positions. Differentiation may be replaced by integration of interests, the possibility of which arises from the need to resolve the conflict. The cause and source of the conflict do not disappear, but the consequences of the conflict may force both sides to begin to look for ways to end open confrontation.

The situation at this stage is quite unpredictable and difficult to predict, so the option of beginning to resolve the conflict is possible both due to the actions of the parties to the conflict themselves, and by involving a third force. There is a high degree of probability of the conflict developing in another option, when one of the parties decides to intensify its actions and sees the end of the conflict only in the destruction of the other party. This may be the result of realizing the possibility of emerging victorious from the conflict or simply the decision to go to the end.

All actions in a conflict have a specific focus and can be divided into several types of confrontation:

A) actions aimed at capturing or holding an object in various life situations;

B) creating obstacles and indirect harm;

C) the use of words and actions that are directly offensive

and directed directly against the opposite side; D) subordination or destruction of the subject, depriving him of motivation and desire for independent action through psychological pressure or direct violence. D) incurring direct losses, physical losses in order to transform one of the parties to the conflict from a subject of struggle into an object of power. The end of a conflict is the end of active actions by the parties to the conflict for various reasons. Forms of ending a conflict can be different:

♦ ending the conflict due to mutual reconciliation of the parties;

♦ ending the conflict through its symmetrical solution, when both sides either win or lose;

♦ ending the conflict through its asymmetric solution, when one side wins and the other loses;

♦ escalation of a conflict into another confrontation;

♦ gradual fading of the conflict.

The end of conflicts can also take place in other forms, such as peaceful resolution, the use of violence by a third party, the so-called. "deadlock", avoidance of the conflict by one of the parties, proposal of a third option for resolving the conflict.

The cessation of a conflict does not mean the automatic cessation of the existence of a conflict situation, therefore the conflict can move from the open phase back to the latent - post-conflict phase. its peculiarity lies in the fact that at this stage the conflict can flow around the search for normalization of relations and the creation of conditions for a complete resolution of problematic issues.

After the active phase of the conflict, the latent, post-conflict phase may again begin, which may include two stages.

The first stage may include a partial normalization of relations, when the depth of contradictions still exists, but the mechanisms for the escalation of the conflict have already been eliminated. The confrontation may still persist and may even be frozen for a long time while the object of the conflict is present. The second stage is the complete normalization of the conflict. Activities carried out at this stage are aimed at overcoming the very causes of the conflict situation. Such actions are possible if there is a mutual desire to eliminate them. At the same time, we should not forget that the possibility of resumption of the conflict may remain at this stage; the reason may be omissions, understatements, as well as moments of a moral nature.

2. Periods and stages in the development of the conflict

Any conflict has time boundaries - the beginning and end of the conflict.

The beginning of a conflict is characterized by the emergence of the first acts of counteraction.

The conflict is considered to have begun if three conditions coincide:

* one participant consciously and actively acts to the detriment of another participant (both physically and morally, informationally);

* the second participant realizes that these actions are directed against his interests;

* in this regard, the second participant takes active actions in relation to the first participant.

Thus, the folk wisdom that says that two people always argue is quite fair, and not only the initiator bears responsibility for the conflict.

The end of the conflict is the cessation of actions against each other.

The following periods and stages can be distinguished in the dynamics of the conflict:

Latent period(pre-conflict) includes the stages:

The emergence of an objective problem situation - there is a contradiction between subjects, but it is not yet realized and there are no conflicting actions.

Awareness of an objective problem situation is the perception of reality as problematic and an understanding of the need to take some action.

Attempts by the parties to resolve the objective situation without conflictways(persuasion, explanation, requests, information).

Pre-conflict situation - the situation is perceived as a threat to security, the public interests of one of the parties to the interaction, which provokes conflict behavior.

It is important to understand that the threat is perceived not as potential, but as immediate.

Open period often called the conflict itself. It includes the following steps:

The incident is the first clash between the parties. If there is a significant imbalance of power, the conflict may end in an incident.

Escalation (from Latin scala - ladder) is a sharp intensification of the opponents' struggle. Its signs:

1) narrowing of the cognitive sphere in behavior and activity, transition to more primitive methods of reflection.

2) displacement of adequate perception of another by the image of the enemy, accentuation of negative qualities (both real and illusory). Warning signs indicating that the “enemy image” is dominant:

* distrust (everything that comes from the enemy is either bad or, if reasonable, pursues dishonest goals);

* placing blame on the enemy (the enemy is responsible for all problems that have arisen and is to blame for everything);

* negative expectation (everything the enemy does, he does with the sole purpose of harming you);

* identification with evil (the enemy embodies the opposite of what you are and what you strive for, he wants to destroy what you value and therefore must be destroyed himself);

* the concept of “zero sum” (everything that benefits the enemy harms you and vice versa);

* deindividuation (anyone who belongs to a given group is automatically an enemy);

* refusal of sympathy (you have nothing in common with your enemy, no information can induce you to show humane feelings towards him, being guided by ethical criteria in relation to the enemy is dangerous and unwise).

3) increase in emotional stress. Arises as a reaction to an increase in the threat of possible damage; decreased controllability of the opposite side; inability to realize your interests to the desired extent in a short time; opponent's resistance.

4) transition from arguments to claims and personal attacks. The conflict usually begins with the expression of fairly reasonable arguments. But the arguments are accompanied by strong emotional overtones. The opponent, as a rule, reacts not to the argument, but to the coloring. His answer is no longer perceived as a counter-argument, but as an insult, a threat to a person’s self-esteem. The conflict shifts from the rational plane to the emotional level.

5) growth of the hierarchical rank of violated and protected interests and their polarization. More intense action affects the more important interests of the other side, and therefore the escalation of the conflict can be considered as a process of deepening contradictions. During escalation, the interests of the conflicting parties seem to be divided into two opposite poles.

6) use of violence. As a rule, aggression is associated with some kind of internal compensation, compensation for damage. It is important to take into account that at this stage, not only the real threat matters, but sometimes even more - the potential threat.

7) 7) 7) loss of the original subject of disagreement

8) 8) 8) expansion of the boundaries of the conflict (generalization) - a transition to deeper contradictions, an increase in potential points of collision.

9) there may be an increase in the number of participants.

If you want to better imagine the external side of the conflict, I recommend that you use the theory of “symmetrical schimogenesis” by G. Bateson.

If you are interested in the internal causes of the conflict, refer to the theory of evolutionary epistemology by G. Volmer and K. Lorenz. This theory draws interesting parallels between human behavior in conflict and human behavior at the time of threat in general, such properties of the human psyche as, for example, a craving for the unknown. As the conflict intensifies, according to this theory, a person goes through all stages of ontogenesis, but only in reverse order.

First two stages reflect the development of the pre-conflict situation. The importance of one’s own desires and arguments increases. There is a fear that the basis for a joint solution to the problem will be lost. Mental tension is growing.

Third stage- the beginning of escalation. Forceful action (not necessarily physical force, but any effort) replaces useless discussions. The expectations of the participants are paradoxical: both sides hope to force a change in the opponent’s positions through pressure and firmness, but no one is ready to voluntarily give in. This level of mental response, when rational behavior is replaced by emotional behavior, corresponds to the age of 8-10 years.

Fourth stage- age 6-8 years, when the image of the “other” is still preserved, but the person no longer takes into account the thoughts, feelings, position of this “other”. In the emotional sphere, a black and white approach dominates. Everything that is “not me” and “not us” is bad and rejected.

At the fifth stage there is an absolutization of the negative assessment of the opponent and the positive assessment of oneself. “Sacred values,” all the highest forms of belief and the highest moral obligations are at stake. The opponent becomes an absolute enemy and only an enemy, devalued to the state of a thing and deprived of human traits. But at the same time, in relation to other people, the person continues to behave like an adult, which prevents an inexperienced observer from understanding the essence of what is happening.

At the moment of escalation of a conflict, a person is often driven by aggression - i.e. the desire to cause harm or pain to another.

There are two types of aggression - aggression as an end in itself (hostile aggression) and aggression as a tool to achieve something (instrumental aggression.

AGGRESSION



HOSTILE INSTRUMENTAL

The debate about the nature of aggression has been going on since time immemorial and continues to this day. What is aggression? J. J. Rousseau believed that this was a consequence of the distortion of human nature. Z. Freud spoke about the naturalness of this state and partially explained it by the existence of the death instinct (Thanatos), which manifests itself in direct and sublimated form. Rather, aggression is a function of a complex interaction between innate tendencies and learned responses.

Next stage- balanced counteraction - the parties continue to counteract, but the intensity of the struggle decreases.

Ending the conflict- transition to finding a solution to the problem.

The main forms of ending a conflict are resolution, settlement, fading, elimination or escalation into another conflict.

Post-conflict period includes stages - partial and complete normalization of relations between opponents.

Partial normalization occurs when negative emotions have not completely disappeared and is accompanied by feelings, comprehension of what happened, correction of the opponent’s assessments, and a feeling of guilt for one’s actions during the conflict.

Complete normalization of relations occurs when the parties realize the importance of further constructive interaction.

All these periods and stages can have different durations. Some stages may be omitted or occupy such a short period of time that it is practically impossible to distinguish between them.

R. Walton identifies the stages of differentiation and integration of the parties in a conflict. The latter comes from the moment of realizing the pointlessness of further escalation.

So, conflict is a phenomenon with a complex structure and dynamics, and therefore tactics for resolving it should differ depending on the stage, period and their duration.

Often conflicting parties see struggle as the only possible way of being. They forget about other possibilities and lose sight of the fact that they can achieve more if they solve problems constructively. The end of a conflict is sometimes achieved simply because opponents get tired of fighting and adapt to coexistence. Having shown sufficient tolerance, if contacts are inevitable, they gradually learn to live in peace, without demanding from each other complete agreement of views and habits.

However, much more often, the end of the conflict becomes possible to achieve only through special efforts aimed at resolving it. Such efforts may require considerable skill and great ingenuity.

Resolving interpersonal conflict is quite difficult, since usually both opponents consider themselves to be right. A rational, objective assessment of the conflict situation by each opponent is very difficult due to the negative emotions of the conflicting parties.

Judgment of Solomon, Peter Paul Rubens, 1617

Let's consider the sequence of actions of one of the opponents who decided to take the initiative to resolve the conflict.

Step 1. Stop fighting with your opponent.

Understand that through conflict I will not be able to protect my interests. Assess the possible immediate and long-term consequences of the conflict for me.

Step 2. Whoever is smarter is wrong.

Internally agree that when two people conflict, the one who is smarter is wrong. It is difficult to expect initiative from this stubborn opponent. It is much more realistic for me to change my behavior in conflict. I will only gain from this, or at least not lose.

Step 3. Reduce negativity.

Minimize my negative emotions towards my opponent. Try to find an opportunity to reduce his negative emotions towards me.

Step 4. Cooperation or compromise.

Be prepared for the fact that it will take some effort to solve the problem through cooperation or compromise.

Step 5. Hear your opponent.

Try to understand and agree that the opponent, like me, is pursuing his own interests in the conflict. The fact that he defends them is as natural as defending many of his own interests.

Step 6. Evaluate from the outside.

Assess the essence of the conflict as if from the outside, imagining our counterparts in my place and the opponent’s place. To do this, you need to mentally get out of the conflict situation and imagine that exactly the same conflict is happening in another team. It involves my double and my opponent’s double. It is important to see the strengths, partial rightness in the position of the opponent’s double and the weaknesses and partial wrongness in the position of my double.

Step 7. Identify your opponent’s interests.

Find out what the true interests of my opponent are in this conflict. What does he ultimately want to achieve? See behind the reason and external picture of the conflict its hidden essence.

Step 8. Understand your opponent's main concerns.

Determine what he is afraid of losing. Find out what possible damage the opponent is trying to prevent.

Step 9. Separate the conflict problem from the people.

Understand what the main cause of the conflict is, if you do not take into account the individual characteristics of its participants.

Step 10. Develop a maximum program.

To think over and develop a maximum program aimed at the optimal solution to the problem, taking into account not only my interests, but also those of my opponent. Ignoring the interests of the opponent will make the conflict resolution program a wishful thinking. Prepare 3-4 options for solving the problem.

Step 11. Develop a minimum program.

Consider and develop a minimum program aimed at mitigating the conflict as much as possible. Practice shows that mitigating the conflict and reducing its severity create a good basis for the subsequent resolution of the contradiction. Prepare 3-4 options for partially solving the problem or mitigating the conflict.

Step 12: Identify Opportunities.

Determine, if possible, objective criteria for resolving the conflict.

Step 13. Predict responses.

Predict possible responses of the opponent and your reactions to them as the conflict develops: if my forecast of the development of the conflict is correct, this will make my behavior more constructive. The better the forecast for the development of the situation, the lower the losses of both sides in the conflict.

Step 14. Open conversation.

Have an open conversation with your opponent to resolve the conflict.

The logic of the conversation could be as follows:

You will have to work and live together, it is better to help rather than harm;
- I propose to discuss how to peacefully solve the problem;
- Admit your mistakes that led to the conflict;
- Concede to the opponent in what is not the main thing in this situation;
- Gently express a wish for concessions on the part of the opponent;
- Discuss mutual concessions;
- Resolve the conflict completely or partially.

If the conversation is unsuccessful, do not escalate the situation, but offer to return to discussing the problem again in 2-3 days.

Naturally, the technique of open conversation is most often based on the idea of ​​achieving a compromise in which we follow the path of gradual rapprochement. The decision made on the basis of the proposed technique, in most cases, has a constructive component, and most importantly, it allows you to avoid opposition and resolve the contradiction, moving towards mutual agreement.

Step 15. Try to resolve the conflict.

Try to resolve the conflict by constantly adjusting not only tactics, but also the strategy of your behavior in accordance with the specific situation.

Step 16. Identify errors in case of failure.

Once again evaluate your actions at the stages of the emergence, development and completion of the conflict. Determine what was done correctly and where mistakes were made.

Step 17. Assess the behavior of other parties to the conflict.

Assess the behavior of other participants in the conflict, those who supported me or my opponent. Conflict itself tests people and reveals those characteristics that were previously hidden.

Let's consider the stages of conflict development.

Causes of interpersonal conflicts.

1. The subject matter is business disagreements. For example: students had disagreements in what form to hold the Last Bell - in the style of the 19th century nobility or a fantasy story. This conflict does not lead to a breakdown in interpersonal relationships and emotional hostility.

2. Divergence of personal interests. When there are no common goals, there is a situation of competition, everyone pursues personal goals, where the gain of one is the loss of the other (often these are artists, athletes, painters, poets).

Sometimes long-term substantive and business disagreements lead to personal conflicts.

3. Communication barriers(see lecture No. 3) + semantic barrier, when an adult and a child, a man and a woman do not understand the meaning of the requirements, so they are not fulfilled. It is important to be able to put yourself in the shoes of another and understand why he acts this way.

Stage 1: Conflict situation – it is a positional difference in the perception of objectivity. For example: a student does not go to class and thinks that there is nothing wrong. The teacher knows for sure that the student has the right to skip classes, but does not have the right not to know the material. Until positions are discovered, each hopes that the other will understand his position.

Stage 2: Incident– this is a misunderstanding, an unpleasant incident in the current situation. For example: a student missed class and then came back with an unprepared assignment. Here the parties are clearly revealing their positions . It may be the other way around: first an incident, and then a conflict situation.

Stage 3: Conflict – clash of parties, showdown.

What is the solution to this conflict, what should be done in this situation?

We can talk about resolving the conflict only if both sides win or, at least, no one loses.

1.Conflict detection. The perceptual side of communication is triggered. One notices a change in the attitude of another person towards himself. As a rule, the first signs are not captured by consciousness and can rather be felt by barely noticeable signs (greeted dryly, closed off, does not call, etc.)

2. Analysis of the situation. Determine whether the conflict is empty or meaningful. (If empty, then see above for ways to solve or repay it). If meaningful, then plan further actions:

Determine the interests of both parties

The prospect of personal development as a result of resolving the conflict (what I lose, what I gain)

The degree of development of the conflict from simple discontent(ooh-ooh) disagreements ( when no one listens to anyone, everyone says their own) opposition and confrontation(open challenge, wall to wall) to breakup or coercion take the other's side.

3. Direct conflict resolution:

- Relieving psychological stress(a request for forgiveness: “Please forgive me...”, a joke, an expression of sympathy, granting the right to disagree: “Maybe I’m wrong” or “You don’t have to agree with me...”, intonation of tenderness: “When you’re angry, I I love you especially...”, “I always do this: the one I love the most gets the most from me.”

Requesting a favor (E. Osadov “He was the thunderstorm of our area...”

Using positive interaction skills in communication (I-concept, skills of confident behavior, the position of an “adult” in interaction, active listening skills, etc.)

Compromise is a mutual, mutual or temporary concession by one person for the sake of settling relations with another. This is the most common and effective form of conflict resolution. It is always an expression of respect for another.

Unexpected reaction (For example, a male teacher and a female teacher to a child’s complaint, the actions of a mother after being called to the school to see the principal)

Delayed reaction (wait it out, give it time. And then use other methods)

Arbitration - when conflicting parties turn to a third party to resolve the problem. Moreover, to the one who is respected by both sides and not often

Ultimatum, coercion in extreme cases, when it is impossible to change the behavior of another in any other way (A.S. Makarenko). However, adults very often use this method: “If you don’t do it, you won’t get it.”

If the conflict is not resolved after using all possible methods, separation is possible as the only way to resolve the protracted conflict. This method is often used by children and teenagers when running away or leaving home.

The ability to resolve conflicts is developed both in the process of life and in specially organized forms of training, which we partially try to implement in practical classes.

On house: select your own examples of conflicts, identify the cause of their occurrence, and find ways to solve them.