Ways to constructively resolve conflict. Basic principles and methods of constructive conflict resolution

Most people consider conflict to be a purely negative phenomenon that only leads to quarrels, contradictions and destruction. However, this is a misconception. In addition to destructive ones, there are also constructive conflicts that lead to the resolution of many hidden problems.

Definition of concepts

A conflict is a certain contradiction or opposition that arises due to the incompatibility of the interests of the parties. It can arise between individuals or their groups in the process of life.

In accordance with the nature of the consequences, psychologists distinguish between destructive and constructive conflicts. In the first case, there will be nothing but quarrels, negativity and strained relationships. Sometimes destructive conflicts can progress to the stage of physical violence. They often arise out of bias and the desire for profit.

Constructive conflicts have absolutely the opposite meaning. They help resolve obvious and hidden problems, relieve tension in the team, and strengthen friendly relations. When it comes to enterprises, managers sometimes deliberately provoke conflicts in order to defuse tense situations.

Constructive and destructive conflict - difficulties of assessment

It is worth noting that the confrontation between individuals or their groups is quite difficult to assess. It is not always possible to determine the variety due to the following objective factors:

• There are no clear criteria according to which constructive and destructive conflict are distinguished. Most often, this can only be done after the confrontation is over, when the consequences can be assessed (and even then the answer may not be clear-cut).
• Most conflicts, regardless of the environment in which they arise, are characterized by both constructive and destructive functions simultaneously.
• The characteristics of the confrontation can vary significantly depending on what stage it is at. A constructive conflict can become such only after an acute phase or, conversely, move into the realm of destruction.
• When assessing a conflict, it is always worth considering the subjective side. So, one side may consider it constructive, while for the other it will be destructive. In addition, it is important to take into account the interests of third parties who may initiate the confrontation.

Constructive functions of social conflict

Despite the general negative connotation of such a phenomenon as conflict, it performs a number of functions of positive significance. So, the constructive side of conflicts is as follows:

• conflict allows us to identify contradictions and problems at the very moment when they have reached the stage of maturity and need immediate elimination;
• can act as a mechanism for relieving tension in society and resolving situations that are a source of stress;
• in the process of finding ways out of the conflict, individuals can integrate, showing mutual assistance and understanding;
• as a result of resolving a controversial situation and eliminating its source, the social system becomes more stable;
• A conflict that arises in time can warn against more serious clashes and contradictions.

Thus, it is impossible to speak unequivocally about the negative nature of the conflict. Constructive social conflict is aimed not at aggravating, but at resolving problems.

Constructive functions of interpersonal conflict

Constructive interpersonal conflict performs the following positive functions:

• allows you to discover the opponent’s true character traits, as well as reveal the true motives of his behavior;
• conflict situations contribute to strengthening character and personality development;
• contributes to the adaptation of the individual in society, his self-realization and self-affirmation.

Destructive functions of conflict

Conflicts are characterized by the following destructive functions:

• due to the fact that the confrontation can move from verbal to physical, there is a high risk of material losses, as well as human casualties;
• disorganization of society due to tension in relations;
• slowdown in the pace of socio-economic development due to disruption of interpersonal and intergroup connections;
• in the process of confrontation, new conflicts may open up, which will be even more destructive;
• decreased level of discipline and disorientation;
• deterioration of the psychological climate in a team or society;
• from the point of view of an individual, self-doubt may develop, disappointment in beliefs and values ​​may occur;
• negative assessment of others;
• During the conflict, protective mechanisms of the psyche can be triggered, which can lead to painful conditions.

Types of conflicting personalities

A constructive solution to a conflict is not always possible due to the individual characteristics of its participants. Psychologists identify six personality types that most often come into conflict with others:

• demonstrative- they like to be in the center of events, they are quite emotional, and therefore are often the initiators of disputes and confrontations;
• rigid- due to high self-esteem and touchiness, they often neglect the opinions and interests of others, which leads to serious conflict situations;
• uncontrollable- characterized by excessive impulsiveness and lack of self-control skills;
• ultra-precise- too demanding of themselves and others, picky about little things, distrustful;
• conflict- purposefully enter into confrontation with others, considering such behavior as a way of manipulation and achieving their goals;
• conflict-free- they are afraid of any disputes and confrontations, as a result of which they can provoke aggression and irritation of others, which leads to the opposite effect.

Models of conflict behavior

Three main models of conflict behavior can be distinguished, namely:

• Destructive characterized by a desire to escalate confrontation and increase tension. A person may try to involve even more participants in the conflict, expanding its scope. This model is characterized by the following:
  • neglect of the partner in order to reduce his role in resolving the dispute;
  • personal insult and negative performance assessments;
  • open expression of mistrust and doubt;
  • deviation from moral and ethical standards of communication.
• Constructive behavior in a conflict is aimed at “extinguishing” the confrontation as soon as possible and solving the problem diplomatically. If one of the participants is aimed at reconciliation, then he will show restraint and self-control, regardless of the opponent’s behavior. It is important to behave openly and kindly, while maintaining few words.
• Compromise model of behavior aimed at finding an alternative solution, it is characteristic of insecure individuals. They act rather passively and avoid direct answers to questions. Participants do not insist on respecting their interests and willingly make concessions.

Constructive development of the conflict

In order for the conflict to develop according to a constructive scenario, the following conditions must be met:

• participants acknowledge the existence of disagreements, try to understand their nature and recognize the opponent’s right to respect their rights and defend their personal position;
• Before we begin to eliminate the causes of the contradiction, negative manifestations of the conflict, such as increased tone, mutual insults, and so on, must be completely eliminated;
• if it is impossible to reach a consensus on your own, then it is possible to involve a third disinterested party in resolving the controversial situation, who can give an objective assessment of the problem;
• agreement of all parties to the conflict with the established rules of behavior, which contributes to effective communications.

Smoothing out destructive conflict

It is worth noting that a conflict that is destructive in nature can have a completely favorable outcome. In this regard, the following constructive ways to resolve conflicts are distinguished:

• Eliminating the cause of the confrontation by limiting contact between the parties. If we talk about managing an organization, then we can talk about the division of powers or
• Strengthening interaction between conflicting parties. If the confrontation does not directly concern the duties performed, then it is advisable to set a common goal for them, which will force the participants to search for a common language.
• Encouraging independent search Moreover, we are not necessarily talking about encouragement in the event of a speedy end to the confrontation. It is quite possible to develop a system of sanctions that will apply if the dispute is not resolved.

Conflict management

Managing constructive conflicts includes the following basic techniques:

• A clear distinction between its participants. It is unacceptable to criticize personal qualities or interests. Thus, all attention is focused directly on the problem.
• Development of options that satisfy both parties. To come to a common decision, the parties to the conflict must direct all their efforts not to personal confrontation, but concentrate them on finding alternatives. It is worth uniting against the problem, and not opposing each other. The brainstorming method works well here, in which you can also involve third parties.
• The use of objective criteria implies an objective view of the problem, regardless of the interests of the parties to the conflict. In this case, a decision can be made that will be stable and neutral.
• Elimination of the influence of principled positions. First of all, each side must decide what its rational interest is in this or that development of events. It is quite possible that the conflicting parties will have them in common, or at least will not be mutually exclusive.

Ending the conflict

The end of the conflict can occur in the following forms:

• permission- the parties to the confrontation, through joint efforts, came to a final decision that, to one degree or another, satisfies their interests;
• settlement- elimination of contradictions through the efforts of a third party;
• attenuation- this is a temporary or complete cessation of active confrontation, which can be associated both with the depletion of the resources of the participants and with the loss of relevance of the cause of the conflict;
• eliminating the conflict consists of "liquidation" of its structural elements(withdrawal from the dispute by one of the parties or a long absence of contacts between opponents, neutralization of the problem);
• in some cases, an ongoing conflict may lead to the emergence of new confrontations around objects, which were identified during attempts to resolve it.

Conclusions

Despite the fact that most people consider conflict to be a purely negative phenomenon, this is not entirely fair. It may well be constructive in nature. Moreover, in some cases it is simply necessary. For example, the leaders of some organizations deliberately provoke constructive conflicts in work collectives. This helps to identify existing problems, relieve emotional stress and create a healthy work environment. It is also worth remembering that with a competent approach to conflict management, even destructive confrontation can have a constructive conclusion.

In conflictology, it has become traditional to designate the final stage in the dynamics of a conflict with the term - conflict resolution. However, many authors also use other concepts that reflect the completeness of the cessation of conflict actions, for example, “attenuation,” “suppression,” and “settlement.” The complexity and multivariate development of the conflict imply ambiguity in the ways, methods and forms of its completion. The main forms of ending a conflict: resolution, settlement, attenuation, elimination, escalation into another conflict.

The term “resolution” of conflict - is usually used in two meanings: firstly, in the sense of resolving the conflict by its participants themselves; secondly, in the sense of objective resolution of conflicts, based on identifying and neutralizing their causes and preventing open clashes.

Conflict resolution is a joint activity of its participants aimed at ending opposition and solving the problem that led to the clash. Conflict resolution presupposes the activity of both in transforming the conditions in which they interact, in eliminating the causes of the conflict. To resolve the conflict, it is necessary to change the opponents themselves (or at least one of them), their positions that they defended in the conflict. Often the resolution of a conflict is based on changing the attitude of opponents towards its object or towards each other.

Settlement conflict - differs from resolution in that a third party takes part in eliminating the contradiction between opponents. Its participation is possible both with the consent of the warring parties and without their consent.

Decay of conflict- this is a temporary cessation of opposition while maintaining the main conflict: contradictions and tense relations. The conflict moves from an “overt” form to a hidden one. Conflict subsides usually as a result of:

· depletion of the resources of both sides necessary for the fight;

· loss of motive to fight, reduction in the importance of the object of the conflict;

· reorientation of the motivation of opponents (the emergence of new problems that are more significant than the struggle in the conflict).

Under eliminating conflict understand such an impact on it, as a result of which the main structural elements of the conflict are eliminated. Despite the “unconstructiveness” of elimination, there are situations that require quick and decisive impacts on the conflict (threat of human violence, lack of time or material capabilities ).

Resolving the conflict is possible using the following methods:

Removal of one of the opponents from the conflict (transfer to another department, branch; dismissal from work);

Exclusion of interaction between opponents for a long time (sending one or both on a business trip, etc.);

Eliminating the object of the conflict (the mother takes away the toy from the quarreling children that caused the conflict);

Eliminating the shortage of the conflict object (the third party has the opportunity to provide each of the conflicting parties with the object they were striving to possess).

Evolving into another conflict occurs when a new, more significant contradiction arises in the relations of the parties and the object of the conflict changes. However, regardless of the approach, when resolving a conflict should be guided by the following psychological principles.

1. Conflict resolution taking into account the essence and content of the contradiction. In this case you need:

· determine its business basis;

· understand the true, and not declarative, motives for people entering into conflict.

Conflict resolution becomes significantly more complicated if the leader himself is a representative of one of the warring parties. In this case, it is difficult for him to be objective and the conflict becomes public and goes beyond the organization.

2. Conflict resolution taking into account its goals. It is extremely important to quickly determine the goals of the conflicting parties and draw a clear line between the features of interpersonal and business interaction. If personal goals are dominant, then it is advisable to first apply educational measures to the opponent and put forward certain strict requirements. If one of the opponents has a higher rank than the other, then he should be pointed out the need to adhere to certain standards of behavior.

3. Conflict resolution taking into account emotional states. If the conflict has taken on an emotional nature and is accompanied by violent reactions, then it is advisable to show with specific examples how high tension affects work performance, how opponents lose their objectivity, and how their criticality decreases. In other words, an explanatory conversation is needed in a calm and confidential atmosphere.

4. Conflict resolution taking into account the characteristics of its participants. In this case, before proceeding to resolve the conflict, it is necessary to understand the personality characteristics of each (another argument in favor of psychological testing when applying for a job): are they balanced, are they prone to affective behavior, what are their character traits, temperament, etc. . This will help not only to correctly understand the motives of behavior, but also to choose the right tone in communication when resolving a conflict.

5. Conflict resolution taking into account its dynamics. As noted earlier, the conflict develops in certain stages. Naturally, for each of them there are certain forms of its resolution. If at the first stages conversations and persuasion are advisable, then at the stage of uncompromising clashes it is necessary to apply all possible measures, including administrative ones. Here it is also necessary to determine the choice of influence, taking into account the personal characteristics of the conflicting parties and the nature of their actions.

In conflict studies, other principles of conflict resolution have been noted, which are more of an organizational nature. They do not contradict the psychological ones noted above and complement them. In relation to conflict resolutionpsychological principles in educational institutionscan be formulated as follows.

1. The principle of interest in the psychological consequences of the conflict. This principle means the need to see the educational significance of the conflict, its possible use for the moral development of the individual, and the extraction of positive experience for each of its participants. Compliance with this principle requires an understanding that formal administrative measures to eliminate the incident still do not eliminate the conflict situation that led to its occurrence, which may require lengthy pedagogical work.

A conflict can have objective consequences: a restructuring of objective circumstances and conditions in the organization of the educational process, in the system of collective norms governing relationships in the classroom, school, teaching staff, etc., as well as subjective consequences for its participants or persons observing development of the conflict. It is by these consequences that one can judge him. At the same time, its assessment must be differentiated in relation to each individual participant in the conflict and the entire situation as a whole, since for one the conflict can be constructive, and for another destructive.

The most general principle that should be followed when assessing the psychological (subjective) consequences of conflicts is the impact of the conflict on the ability of each of its participants to gain some new experience that can change his behavior in the future. The constructive grain of this new experience is that the participant in the conflict becomes able to take the position of his opponent and understand the motives that prompted the enemy to conflict. This new psychological turn in consciousness is an impetus for the conflict participant to reconsider his position, his motives, goals and means used by him in conflict interaction, and, consequently, to a psychological restructuring of his personality. In this sense, the conflict is future-oriented: if its participants were able to learn lessons from it, then it is psychologically effective, but if not, then it is not effective, and perhaps even harmful. The responsibilities of the team leader include conflict management, with the goal of making it effective. Let us note that in the educational process, the leader should primarily be concerned with the psychological consequences of the conflict for its participants.

2. The principle of systematic analysis of the causes of the conflict implies the use of all three levels of analysis, understanding the relationship between objective and subjective factors in its occurrence, since effective ways of resolving a conflict are most closely related to a correct understanding of the interconnectedness and interdependence of various factors that influenced the emergence of a conflict situation.

Levels of conflict analysis. Depending on what factors and causes are identified when considering a given conflict, it can be analyzed at the following three levels:

1) sociological (analysis of the conditions for organizing the pedagogical process as a certain system of industrial relations);

2) socio-psychological (analysis of the psychological structure and characteristics of the team involved in the conflict);

3) individual psychological (analysis of the psychological characteristics of individuals participating in the conflict).

1. The principle of excluding unilateral responsibility for the occurrence of a conflict.

There are two sides involved in the conflict, and each makes its own “contribution” to the development of the conflict.

Attributing unilateral responsibility and finding someone to blame is usually not the best pedagogical strategy for dealing with conflict. Respect for each of the conflicting parties is required, the desire to understand its problems and the motives that pushed it into conflict interaction. The teacher managing the development of the conflict is faced with the task of making it effective for each participant, of bringing to his consciousness those internal “defects” that led to the emergence of the conflict on his part.

4. The principle of neutrality. A neutral position in relation to the warring parties is absolutely necessary for the effective resolution of a conflict situation, because the loss of neutrality by a person occupying the position of an “arbiter” in a conflict, working with a conflict situation, threatens only with the growth of the conflict situation, the inclusion of new participants in it. However, this neutrality cannot be contemplative, but must be actively interested in effective assistance to each of the parties to the conflict interaction.

5. The principle of conflict prevention. In the pedagogical process, there are much more potential conflicts than actual ones, and it is better to prevent conflicts than to resolve and eliminate them when they result in conflict interactions. Conflict prevention is associated with the ability to isolate the basis of the conflict - a conflict situation and eliminate it. Effective conflict prevention does not consist in ignoring conflict situations, but in identifying them and working with them individually. Working with a conflict situation, as we tried to show, almost excludes formal administrative measures and involves pedagogical ones. If the concerns of teachers are reduced only to extinguishing the incident, then the conflict can take on a hidden course, which is dangerous due to its destructive consequences for all participants in the conflict.

These are the general principles of conflict resolution; they should be relied upon when organizing conflict resolution activities and choosing appropriate methods.

The noted principles determine the nature of conflict resolution activities, which should include:

· analysis and identification of the reasons and composition of its participants (especially those who are “shadow opponents”);

· making a decision to intervene in a conflict, taking into account its possible outcomes;

· implementation of the decision made, i.e. activities aimed at eliminating conflict.

When resolving a conflict, the following must be analyzed:

1. Sources of conflict, including purely psychological ones.

2. “Biography” of the conflict, i.e. his history, the background against which he progressed; the growth of the conflict, the chosen methods of conflict confrontation, the crisis and turning points in its development.

3. Opponents, be they individuals or groups, their psychological and other characteristics, the real forces behind opponents.

4. Positions and attitudes of the conflicting parties (including whether the parties seek to resolve the conflict on a fair basis, how firm and irreconcilable their positions are, what their hopes and expectations are).

Based on this analysis, a complete description of the conflict is carried out, a forecast of its development and outcomes is given, and methods for resolving it are selected. Let's turn to existing methods and methods conflict resolution.

2. Methods and means of conflict resolution.

Let us dwell on methods of conflict resolution. Choosing conflict resolution methods is not an easy task. Just as there is no abstract conflict, there are no universal ways to resolve it. And yet, it is advisable to pay special attention to some that have a psychological basis.

1.Formation of public opinion.

Public opinion is a very powerful regulator of people's behavior. Many people are very dependent on the attitudes of others and need approval and support. When they conflict, they may find themselves isolated, which they experience very painfully and are sometimes even ready to stop conflicting.

2. Appeal to the “arbitrator”.

This method is often found in psychological recommendations. It can be very effective if there is a very authoritative person whose opinion will be decisive for opponents regarding their confrontation. Practice shows that such a person must have, first of all, moral authority and be distinguished by justice, integrity, honesty and kindness. True, finding such a person is now extremely difficult. An appeal to the “arbitrator” will give the necessary result if he manages to separate the object of the conflict from its subject, and this is not easy to do. In this case, the following techniques are recommended.

1. 4. “Frank conversation.”

Participants are given the opportunity to speak in any form about the conflict itself, its causes, and the behavior of the opposite side. The point of using this technique is as follows: if the conflict is caused by business reasons, the opponents will talk only about them, but if it is due to interpersonal problems, then, having talked a little about the declared reason, the opponents will quickly move on to impartial interpersonal assessments. This is where the “frank conversation” ends, the opponents are given the opportunity to “cool down”, and the analysis of the conflict should be returned in a day or two. The “arbitrator” in the process of “frank conversation” should observe more than speak.

5. “Objectification of the conflict.”

Participants are given the opportunity to speak out again on this matter, but exclusively in a business form, without any emotional assessments of the opponent - facts, actions, events, information. In this case, the “arbiter” must resolutely suppress any emotional reactions of his opponents. The conflict is thus sorted out into its component parts, it gradually acquires a business basis again, opponents begin to see their mistakes, incorrect actions and assessments. As a result, the conflict loses its emotional severity and tension, the opponents’ false images of the situation and each other are removed, and the psychological barriers of interpersonal relationships are eliminated. The conflict returns to its original state when it can be resolved. This is what the “arbiter” does. It should be emphasized that in resolving conflicts by objectifying them, a lot depends on the behavior of the “arbitrator,” including the use of non-standard actions based on knowledge of opponents. You must not only be objective, tactful, fair, but also sometimes act in an extraordinary way. I remember a case when the “arbitrator,” having brilliantly analyzed the conflict, discouraged his opponents, and realizing that they still had emotional tension, did this: he took out a bottle of good cognac (the opponents were men), two glasses, two sandwiches, and said, that this is for them, and he himself will come in two hours. When he returned, one glass was filled with cognac, next to it lay half a sandwich (the bottle was empty) - this was left to him by his former opponents. The conflict no longer existed.

Difficult relationships.

It often happens that even when a conflict is resolved between opponents, difficult relationships remain that can result in a new conflict. In this case, it is advisable to organize their cooperation, although obviously this will not be easy. In this case, the opponents are entrusted with one common task, in the implementation of which they should be extremely interested, but they will not be able to cope with it alone. The situation of forced cooperation initially brings people together formally, but this contributes to the growth of mutual trust and forms a positive psychological attitude towards the opponent. As a result, the relationship is restored.

1. 5. “Explosion.”

This method is advisable to use if the opponents do not stop the conflict, understanding its negative consequences for the organization, but at the same time they are valuable personnel with whom it is not advisable to part with. “Explosion” is a method of public condemnation of conflicting parties by the entire team. The method, as they say, works, but it must be applied very tactfully so as not to offend people who are already in a difficult situation. It can only be used taking into account the character of the opponents, the degree of maturity of the team, and also... with a certain amount of humor.

Now let's look at ways and means of resolving conflicts involving conflicting personalities . In this case, it is necessary, first of all, to decide how much these conflicting personalities are worth to the organization, which outweighs: their positive professional activity or the damage caused by them as a result of private conflicts. Therefore, if a conflict involves conflicting individuals who are not valuable to the organization, the use of administrative methods of resolution is recommended. They are:

· structural changes in the team, increasing the degree of its organization;

· removal of opponents from the team if their activities began to harm the team;

· changing the opponent’s status or including him in another system “not intersecting” with another opponent.

If conflicting individuals, despite the damage caused by their behavior, are still valuable to the organization, then it is necessary to build appropriate relationships with them, communicate in a special way in order to minimize the manifestations of their conflict. In this case, you should carefully analyze the system of their internal conditions that lead to conflict behavior. For example, if such behavior is due to the presence of an intrapersonal conflict, then There are two possible ways to resolve it: open and hidden (latent).

Open way based on the awareness of the existence of intrapersonal conflict and an act of will (self-criticism, self-hypnosis, self-regulation) aimed at compensating for it. Such an act may be accompanied by a choice of non-conflict social roles.

Hidden (latent)the methods are much more complicated, but they exist spontaneous and constructive.

Natural ones include:

- hysteria, simulation, suffering;

Escaping reality (indulging in dreams, fantasies, thoughts);

Neurasthenia;

Idealization (separation from reality);

Euphoria (ostentatious fun, demonstration of satisfaction);

Regression (avoiding responsibility, resorting to primitive forms of behavior);

Projection (the desire to free oneself from negative qualities by attributing them to another);

Constructive ways to resolve intrapersonal conflict are:

Sublimation (transfer of psychic energy to other areas of activity);

Compensation (compensation for what was lost by acquiring other values, forming new goals);

Nomadism (change of place of work, residence, marital status);

Rationalization (self-justification through logical reasoning, targeted selection of facts and the transition to new values).

Open and latent constructive ways of resolving intrapersonal conflict are usually selected in the process of joint analysis of the behavior, relationships and communication of the conflicting individual. The sources of intrapersonal conflict are identified and a program and means for resolving it are jointly developed. The spontaneous latent method of resolution is chosen by the individual independently and only strengthens the intrapersonal conflict. Identifying the causes and psychological essence of intrapersonal conflict is a complex and responsible matter; mistakes in it can complicate the situation. Therefore, it is necessary to involve specialist psychologists with experience in psychoanalytic work in such work.

One of the ways to resolve conflicts is to implement certain behavior patterns. Generally speaking, behavioral patterns do not destroy conflict, but can significantly reduce its emotional intensity and thereby make it possible to look at the situation from a constructive position, allowing one to find a rational way to resolve contradictions. The use of behavioral models also makes it possible to effectively manage conflict in the phase of open confrontation. Let's look at the main models.

1. 1. Model of “ignoring” conflict.

It is used when the conflict is not of such an acute and dangerous nature and represents postponing the resolution of the conflict for a distant period. This model of behavior allows not only to gain time to strengthen the resources of the conflicting parties, but also provides them with the opportunity to reconsider their relationships and analyze the existing contradiction in a different way. In addition, over time, emotional tension may decrease and this will allow the conflict to be resolved on a business basis.

1. 2. “Compromise” model.

The use of this model gives a positive result under the following conditions: opponents have almost equal capabilities and reserves for strengthening resources; opponents are not interested in the destructive consequences of the conflict. The implementation of the “compromise” model requires certain mutual concessions from opponents, but still does not destroy the system of relations and allows you to at least partially achieve what you want. Unfortunately, opponents often view this model of behavior as a tactical trick that allows them to gain time and thereby strengthen their own resources for the incoming use of the “coercion” strategy.

3. The "concessions" model.

It is effective when opponents do not have the opportunity to strengthen their positions and it is important for them to maintain partnerships. It is not difficult to see that this model of behavior is possible if the conflict is businesslike, short-term and hectic. In other cases, the use of this model is problematic. The disadvantage of this model of behavior is that concessions are often one-sided, which gives grounds for the other conflicting party to make greater and greater demands and thereby complicate the relationship.

Model of cooperation.

(This method of conflict resolution was discussed above; in this case, it is considered as one of the models of conflict behavior). This model makes it possible to achieve the desired results under the following conditions: opponents do not yet experience hostility towards each other; opponents have no experience of conflict confrontation; they are interested in maintaining and developing partnerships. The use of this model is unacceptable if there is no possibility of making a decision beneficial for the conflicting parties, as well as if one of the parties seeks to use the situation to strengthen its positions.

©2015-2019 site
All rights belong to their authors. This site does not claim authorship, but provides free use.
Page creation date: 2016-08-08

Natalya Vladimirovna Grishina, Doctor of Psychology, Professor of St. Petersburg State University.

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

dominance (competition, rivalry, struggle, assertiveness);

care (avoidance, ignoring);

compliance (sometimes referred to as accommodation);

cooperation (cooperation, integration).

compromise.

Destructive methods of interaction in conflict

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

Intimidation and threats. General formula: “because I am stronger than you”, “because if you don’t..., then I will...”. Examples: “I have the ability to influence you,” “If you do not resolve my issue, I will have to contact your management.”

Humiliation of a partner, insults towards him. General formula: “because you (always do it wrong; you can never clearly explain what you want; you never follow through; you’re just a fool; you don’t understand anything about it).” Examples : “You are not even able to understand the problem,” “You constantly make mistakes in the simplest situations.”

References to one’s own authority or denial of the authority of another. General formula: “because I... (I decide here; I understand this better than you)”, “because you... (are not at all as competent, right, as you think)” .Examples: “Believe me, I have had to make similar decisions many times before,” “I don’t think you understand this better than others.”

Avoiding discussing the problem. Examples: “In my opinion, you are dramatizing the situation,” “I don’t see any problem here at all.”

Flattery. Examples: “You understand this so much better than me that it won’t be difficult for you to find the right solution to the problem,” “Won’t you meet me halfway, because you can do everything and it doesn’t cost you anything.”

The empirical research we have carried out, the analysis of specific situations in work collectives where confrontation between the administration and the employee arose, allows us to analyze some methods of force, using destructive techniques.

Among the most frequently and typically used, a kind of “psychological reduction” was highlighted, reducing the conflict situation that has arisen to the “bad character” of the participant (or participants) in the conflict. An employee complains about poor work organization or managerial injustice, and he is accused of being “scandalous.” With the help of this technique, the position taken by a person is interpreted as a consequence of one or another of his personal characteristics and is thereby devalued. At the same time, he is dealt an “emotional blow,” often forcing him to take a position of defense and justification of himself.

Another technique is to “link” the employee’s unsatisfactory behavior to the interests of the group, which consists of contrasting the interests of the individual and the group as a whole. In this case, there is a potential for pressure on the person from the group.

The next method of weakening a partner’s position is to compromise him, and no matter what areas are affected, it generally contributes to a decrease in trust in the person, which ultimately weakens his position.

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

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

E. Dotsenko, based on an analysis of the works of different authors, identified five groups of signs characterizing manipulation:

psychological impact as a generic sign of the concept;

the manipulator’s attitude towards another as a means of achieving his own goals;

the desire to obtain a one-sided gain;

hidden nature of the impact;

using (psychological) strength, playing on weaknesses.

Techniques for constructive interaction

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

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

+	-
1. Specificity	In a dispute there is a subject, attack or defense is reduced to specific behavior.	Generalization: Behavior is said to be “typical,” a reference to past or unrelated events.
2. Engagement	Both are passionate, giving and receiving strong “hits.”	One of the participants is not involved, is on the sidelines of the dispute, is insulted, ends the dispute prematurely, etc.
3. Communication	Clear, open, everyone speaks for themselves, means what they say. You can understand him and answer him. Good feedback.	Repeating your own arguments too often and not paying attention to the arguments of others. Hidden signs of misunderstanding, hints, ambiguities “noise”.
4. "Fair play"	“Low blows” are not allowed and what is taken into account is how much the partner can bear.	The arguments do not relate to the subject of the dispute, but are aimed at a sensitive place.

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

+	-
1. Information content	I learned or received something, learned something new.	I didn't learn anything new.
2. Response	Tension has disappeared, anger has decreased, and grievances have been clarified.	The tension did not disappear, but remained or intensified.
3. Rapprochement	The dispute led to mutual understanding and rapprochement between the partners. There is a feeling that this concerns them, that this is how it should be. Maintain their dignity.	Partners are more distant than before. The feeling that they are misunderstood or greatly offended.
4. Improvement	Eliminating the problem, resolving the situation, excuses, apologies, plans for the future.	Nothing is resolved, the participant does not try to fix anything or leaves it to someone else and does not want to forgive him.

The most common methods of conducting a discussion and presenting one’s position are the methods of argumentation and counter-argumentation. Argumentation techniques usually include the presentation of arguments, the development of arguments and the method of positive answers, and the techniques of counter-argumentation include the “reversal” of the partner’s arguments, their dismemberment and the counter-development of argumentation. For example, the method of positive answers involves asking specific questions with the help of which the opponent’s agreement is achieved on each individual point and thus both partners gradually come to the same conclusion; the reversal method is aimed at leading the partner to opposite conclusions by gradually tracing the solution to the problem together with him; the dismemberment method involves specifying and dividing the partner’s arguments with their subsequent elaboration, etc.

Now about methods of conflict resolution. It is advisable to divide the entire set of methods, depending on the types of conflict resolution models, into two groups:

• · the first one will be conventionally called a group of negative methods, including all types of struggle, pursuing the goal of achieving victory of one side over the other. The term “negative” methods in this context is justified by the expected end result of the end of the conflict: the destruction of the unity of the conflicting parties as a basic relationship.
• · We will call the second group positive methods, since when using them it is assumed that the basis of the relationship (unity) between the subjects of the conflict will be preserved. These are, first of all, various types of negotiations and constructive competition.

The difference between negative and positive methods is relative, conditional. In practical conflict management activities, these methods often complement each other. In addition, the concept of “struggle” as a method of conflict resolution is very general in its content. It is known that a principled negotiation process may include elements of struggle on certain issues. At the same time, the toughest struggle between conflicting agents does not exclude the possibility of negotiations on certain rules of struggle. Without the struggle between the new and the old, there is no creative rivalry, although the latter presupposes the presence of a moment of cooperation in relations between rivals, since we are talking about achieving a common goal - progress in a specific area of ​​public life.

The main positive method of conflict resolution is negotiation. Let's consider the most essential characteristics of the negotiation method and methods of its implementation.

Negotiations are a joint discussion between the conflicting parties, with the possible involvement of a mediator, of controversial issues in order to reach an agreement. They act as a continuation of the conflict and at the same time serve as a means of overcoming it. When the emphasis is on negotiations as part of a conflict, they are sought to be conducted from a position of strength, with the goal of achieving a one-sided victory. Naturally, this nature of negotiations usually leads to a temporary, partial resolution of the conflict, and negotiations serve only as an addition to the struggle for victory over the enemy. If negotiations are understood primarily as a method of conflict resolution, then they take the form of honest, open debates, designed for mutual concessions and mutual satisfaction of a certain part of the interests of the parties.

When negotiating, both parties operate within the same rules, which helps maintain the basis for agreement.

American conflictologists Fisher R. and Yuri U. analyze the method of principled negotiations. It consists in the requirement to solve a problem based on its qualitative characteristics, i.e. based on the merits of the matter. This method, the authors write, “assumes that you seek to find mutual benefit wherever possible; and where your interests do not coincide, you should insist on a result that would be justified by some fair standards, regardless of the will of each of the parties. The method of principled negotiations means a tough approach to the consideration of the merits of the case, but provides a soft approach to the relations between the negotiators.”

The method of principled negotiation, or "negotiation based on certain principles", is characterized by four basic rules. Each of them constitutes a basic element of negotiations and serves as a recommendation for their conduct:

• 1. “Make a distinction between the negotiators and the subject of negotiation,” “separate the person from the problem.” Negotiations are led by people; possessing certain character traits. Discussing them is unacceptable, as this introduces an emotional factor into the negotiations that interferes with solving the problem. Criticism of the personal qualities of the negotiators only aggravates the conflict or, at least, does not contribute to the search for ways to resolve it.
• 2. “Focus on interests, not positions.” The positions of opponents may hide their true goals, and even more so, their interests. Meanwhile, conflicting positions are always based on interests. Therefore, instead of arguing about positions, we need to explore the interests that determine them. Behind opposing positions there are always more interests than those reflected in these positions. In other words, behind opposing positions, along with contradictions, there are shared and acceptable interests.
• 3. “Develop win-win options.” An interest-based arrangement facilitates the search for a mutually beneficial solution by exploring options that satisfy both parties. In this case, the dialogue becomes a discussion with the orientation - “we are against the problem”, and not “me against you”. With this orientation, it is possible to use brainstorming. As a result, more than one alternative solution may be obtained. This will allow you to select the desired option that meets the interests of the negotiating parties.
• 4. “Find objective criteria.” Consent as the goal of negotiations should be based on criteria that would be neutral with respect to the interests of the conflicting parties. Only then will it be fair, stable and lasting. If the criteria are subjective, that is, not neutral in relation to any party, then the other party will feel disadvantaged, and therefore the agreement will be perceived as unfair and ultimately it will not be fulfilled. Objective criteria follow from a principled approach to discussing controversial issues; they are formulated on the basis of an adequate understanding of the content of these problems.

Finally, the fairness of the solutions reached depends on the procedures used during negotiations for resolving conflicting interests. Such procedures include: resolving disagreements using lots, delegating the right to decide to a mediator, etc. The last way to resolve the dispute, i.e. when a third party plays a key role is widespread and its variations are numerous.

One of the main ways to resolve conflicts is communication between people. This is the most common method, which also includes negotiations. The essence and technology of communication are quite widely described in the literature. D. Dehn, in his work “Overcoming Disagreement,” developed a “4-step method.” In his opinion, this method serves to achieve agreement between people and their fruitful cooperation. It is based on two rules:

• · “don’t interrupt communication,” since refusal to communicate creates and means conflict;
• · “do not use power games to win the struggle for power through coercion, threats, or ultimatums.”

It is important to prepare suitable conditions for conversation, which means, in addition to time, also a place and environment favorable for conversation. The duration of the dialogue is determined by the time required to achieve a breakthrough in smoothing out the conflict. The content of the conversation must be kept secret, since untimely publicity of it gives rise to rumors, gossip and intensifies the conflict.

Thus, until a certain time, until a positive result is achieved, the confidentiality of the conversation must be maintained. Dialogue and its successful completion presuppose constant adherence to the subject of discussion, exclusion from the conversation of elements that are not related to the problem under discussion (talk about colleagues, about the events of the day, etc.). During the conversation, you should constantly make gestures of reconciliation, not take advantage of the other’s vulnerability and, at the same time, not show unscrupulousness. Conversations about a problem of concern to both parties should be conducted with a focus on a mutually beneficial solution and the exclusion of illusions about its result based on the “win-lose” principle. The result of the dialogue is an agreement describing the relations of the parties for the future, recording in writing balanced, coordinated behavior and actions to realize conflicting interests.

The described methods of communication and negotiations involve the interaction of individuals and teams. In life, conflicts that arise among mass communities, between not only small but also large groups, play a big role. Of course, such conflicts can be resolved through various negotiations and types of communication. However, communication in such cases takes the form not of dialogue, but of multi-subject discussion of problems. These are various kinds of business meetings, seminars, conferences, conventions, etc.

A diverse discussion of controversial issues of vital importance to everyone, with the participation of numerous individuals and organizations, certainly ensures the resolution of some conflicts. The positive result of such measures is achieved subject to a number of conditions.

• - Firstly, ensuring an objective consideration of controversial issues;
• - Secondly, free discussion of all positions and points of view with equal opportunities for participation in the discussion of each subject;
• - Thirdly, formalizing the results of the discussion in the form of recommendations summarizing the revealed unity of views and positions on certain issues.

These forms are effective in resolving political, ideological, and scientific conflict problems. In these forms, democratic principles of discussion and conflict resolution work best.

The use of positive methods of conflict resolution is embodied by the achievement of compromises or consensuses between opposing entities. These are forms of ending conflicts, mainly of the “win-win”, “win-win” type. They represent the implementation of styles of compromise and cooperation.

The causes of conflicts, rooted in the personal identity of team members, arise in connection with the personal characteristics of each person. Inability to control your emotional state, low level of self-esteem, aggressiveness, high self-esteem, lack of communication, excessive adherence to principles... The list of personal causes of conflict is not limited to a set of relevant traits. Demographic characteristics also play a significant role here. Thus, women are characterized by a tendency to conflicts related to personal needs (salary, distribution of vacations, etc.). Men are predisposed to conflicts related directly to work activity itself (labor organization, definition of work functions).

Constructive conflict resolution depends on at least four factors:

• Adequacy of perception of the conflict;
• Openness and effectiveness of communication;
• Creating an atmosphere of mutual trust and cooperation;
• Definitions of the essence of the conflict.

Likewise, each member of the group occupies part of the common space and is not enthusiastic about the intrusion of outsiders into it. For example, if we have our own desk, we are unlikely to experience joy when we find another employee at it. If such a situation is repeated many times, it can irritate the “owner” of the territory and provoke a conflict situation.

It is important to consider both the actions of the participants in the conflict themselves and the role of the mediator, who may be the leader.

As for the adequacy of the perception of the conflict, here we mean an assessment of actions, intentions, positions - both one’s own and those of opponents - that is not distorted by personal biases. And sometimes it’s very difficult to get such an assessment.

In particular, it is difficult to avoid the influence of a negative attitude towards the other party, which is revealed in the biased assessment of the other. In him, in his behavior, only hostility is seen and felt. This can lead to the so-called. self-confirming assumption. Assuming that our partner is extremely hostile, we begin to defend ourselves, gradually going on the offensive. Seeing this, the partner experiences hostility towards us, and our preliminary assumption, although initially incorrect, is confirmed.

Therefore, it is necessary to be as leisurely as possible in your assessments of other people, especially in a conflict situation.

The next factor in constructive conflict resolution is the openness and effectiveness of communication between the opposing parties. An open discussion of the problem, during which the parties honestly express their attitude to what is happening, helps to stop the spread of all kinds of rumors. Often, open expression of views and feelings lays the foundation for building further trusting relationships between opponents.

Openness of communication is not only a violent manifestation of feelings, but also the organization of a constructive search for a solution to a problem. Since interpersonal conflicts involve at least two people, we must talk about a group solution to the problem, which inevitably requires the cooperation of the participants in the interaction.

To correctly determine the essence of the conflict, its participants must agree on their ideas about the current situation and develop a specific strategy of behavior. Their actions will be step-by-step in nature and include the following components.

1. Definition of the main problem. At this stage, it is necessary to clearly understand the reason that led to the conflict. It is very important that opponents respect not only their own vision of the problem, but also that of their opponent.

2. Determining the secondary causes of the conflict. Often they are the reason for conflict, often obscuring the true cause and complicating analysis. Therefore, after understanding the main problem, it is advisable to analyze your own behavior to identify conflicting details.

3. Search for possible ways to resolve the conflict. It can be expressed, in particular, by the following questions that the parties to the conflict should ask themselves:

• what can I do to resolve the conflict?
• What can my partner do about this?
• What are our common goals, in the name of which it is necessary to find a way out of the conflict?

1. Joint decision to exit the conflict. At this stage, we are talking about choosing the most appropriate way to resolve the situation, causing mutual satisfaction among the rivals

2. Implementation of the intended method of conflict resolution. Here it is very important for opponents, adhering to the intended strategy of action, not to provoke them with a thoughtless word? behavior, etc. each other have any doubts regarding the sincerity of previously expressed intentions to resolve the conflict

3. Assessing the effectiveness of efforts made to resolve the conflict. Based on it, either the problem is considered resolved, or a conclusion is made that it is necessary to continue working on it. In the second case, the sequence of actions described above is sometimes repeated.

It should be added that the movement of rivals towards resolving the conflict is impossible without the simultaneous action of such elements (factors) of this process as the adequacy of people’s perception of what is happening, the openness of their relations and the presence of an atmosphere of mutual trust and cooperation.

Efforts to resolve a conflict can be made not only by those involved in it, but also by people from the outside - mediators. The latter, by the way, often manage to do much more than the opposing sides.

To resolve a conflict situation, the presence of a mediator is extremely important. This gives its participants the opportunity, despite mutual concessions, to “save face.”

In such a case, a curious situation arises: if concessions are necessary, opponents make them, addressing not each other, but a third party. It is to her that a “favor” is done, as it were, in response to a corresponding request for a concession. Thus, often the psychological steps of the warring parties towards the mediator do not mean a concession to him, but a willingness to cooperate with him (and, consequently, with each other) in solving a common problem.

In the interests of the effective functioning of the organization, the leader should not be drawn into all sorts of intra-collective conflicts, accepting the point of view of one side or another. It makes the most sense to be “above the fray”, as a person interested in normalizing the interpersonal complications that have arisen and trying to influence the ongoing processes. The role of a mediator is best suited for this. In addition, the successful implementation of the mediation function will increase the authority of the manager, which is important in management activities.

Because of existing attitudes toward conflict as a negative phenomenon, most people believe that they cannot manage it and try to avoid it whenever possible. But the conflict is difficult to correct, especially if it has acquired destructive force. This must be remembered. And managers and employees must understand that conflict enriches life if you know how to manage it correctly.

Conflict forces employees to constantly communicate with each other and learn more about each other. Team members begin to understand their colleagues better, become more sensitive to the problems of other people, and more tolerant of their shortcomings.

Living and working together is not easy. You need to constantly learn this. Conflict, giving rise to disputes, tests both the team as a whole and each employee individually and can significantly help both in the process of analyzing the problem and making the right decision.

Feedback in communication

Typically, oral communication bidirectional. Each of its participants becomes initiator (speaking), That recipient (listening) transmitted information.

The activity of oral communication, effectiveness, and efficiency of interaction are largely determined by the how did you understand participants in communication with each other, how they reacted on the words and behavior of the interlocutor, what actions confirmed the correctness of perception in feedback. Feedback in a situation (act) of communication means the solution of communicative problems, implemented in the reactive (speech or non-speech) actions of the interlocutors.

To establish feedback in oral communication, it is necessary, firstly, attention to the interlocutor: understand not only his words, but also his behavior in the process of communication (facial expressions, gaze, gesture, intonation, etc.); secondly, constant self-control, the need to help your interlocutor understand you with your verbal and non-verbal behavior.

Without establishing feedback with the interlocutor, you can mistakenly assume that he accurately understood what was said, although in fact the effect is completely different. In such a situation, the correct orientation of everyone to transmit and receive specific information should help. Types of listening, stages and levels of perception are included in the concept of “setting for interaction and mutual understanding.” Listening skills developed in real or simulated speech activities help improve the effectiveness of communication.

Depending on the goals of oral communication and the behavior of each communicant, unbiased, positive feedback or aggressive feedback with a negative connotation is possible. Types of Feedback correspond to the listener’s reaction to the message and are divided as follows:

• active listening- listening-empathy;
• hearing-advice- listening with the purpose of giving advice and listening, implying the inclusion of replicas of advice in the reactive actions of the listener;
• hearing-question- listening, the purpose of which is to check the speaker’s knowledge or obtain additional information for oneself by formulating questions to the speaker in internal speech;
• listening-criticism- biased listening, which involves a discrepancy between the interlocutors’ points of view on the problem and the listener’s attempts to adjust the content of the message. Only those who are absolutely confident in their position and their knowledge can afford such a reaction in disputes, negotiations, and discussions.

From an early age, a person is “programmed” to respond in the following types: “question”, “answer”, “advice”. Gaining life experience, a person begins to react more subtly to what he hears, learns to empathize, and comprehend the points of view of other people. If, while listening, a person tries to show concern for the speaker and pays attention to the non-verbal signals emanating from him, he can be called an effective listener.

It is possible to predict or initiate feedback during verbal interaction provided that each of the participants in communication uses means and mechanisms, skills and abilities of listening and speaking.

Let's name some ways to develop speaking and listening skills:

Speaking:

• speak interestingly and intelligibly (taking into account the interests of the listeners);
• convey to listeners only information that is useful to them;
• correctly format speech works, arranging them in large compositional blocks (speeches, monologues, arguments) according to the principle: introduction, main part, conclusions (conclusion);
• use speech means in accordance with the quantitative composition of the audience (interpersonal, intergroup, public communication);
• use speech means that correspond to the functional style, situation, area of ​​communication;
• convey content using nonverbal cues;
• analyze the feedback of listeners during the speaking process;
• regulate the pace of speaking, taking into account the fact that oral speech is more difficult to perceive and understand than written speech;

Hearing:

• find something useful for yourself in what you hear;
• strive to “reveal the truth” through reactive speech actions;
• focus on the main thing;
• record the main provisions of the message in writing (synopsis, theses, supporting words, quotes, etc.);
• refrain from giving advice and “sentences” until serious consideration of what has been said;
• ask clarifying questions;
• formulate conclusions in inner speech;
• analyze the speaker’s nonverbal signals;
• analyze and evaluate the content of the message, not the behavior of the speaker, etc.

Improving the quality of information received or reactive actions is facilitated by certain psychological characteristics of the participants in communication and the level of development of their communicative competence. Thus, a person who has better intuition, the ability to isolate the main information from what he hears, generalize and rank conclusions, establishes more effective feedback (which is manifested in answers to questions, requests for information, personal judgments, generalization of elements of subject content, non-verbal reactive actions, etc.). d.). Establishing feedback and helping clarifying questions, which the listener asks in the process of perceiving information: what exactly? when exactly? Why? This clarification is especially important if communication is accompanied by the “broken phone” effect.

The initiator of communication must answer questions listener. Not paying attention to a clarifying question means provoking misunderstanding or misunderstanding of your own words. In response to such questions, there is no need to repeat a large information block in detail. You can limit yourself to repeating a fact, figure, concept, definition. The micro-situation of clarification must be followed by perception control. The listener expresses complete understanding with the remarks: “Now it’s clear!”, “So,” etc.

The feedback effect is especially important in business communication, when a team of employees makes or develops common decisions. The reasons for ineffective business communication may be incompleteness of perceived information, poor memory of performers, poor structure of instructions or other messages, and inattention to interlocutors.

Table 1 allows us to better understand which psychological attitudes contribute to increasing the effectiveness of feedback.

Table 1.

Every person strives to better understand and be understood. However, both sides of communication are most often to blame for misunderstandings.

To achieve feedback, it is necessary to overcome a number of barriers and communication obstacles:

• barriers to information transfer - unclear understanding of the subject of conversation by the initiator of communication, lack of logic in statements, articulation problems, voice timbre, intonation, etc. The processing of the message in the internal speech of the listener is the more successful, the better the speaker presents the subject of his statement in form and content. Difficulties in sending a message are most often associated with poor (inaccurate) wording of the content, incomplete statements, inaccuracy, and ambiguity of the facts presented. If the speaker fails to clearly and logically present the content of the problem or information, his words will not convince anyone of anything;
• barriers to information perception - unpreparedness for a conversation on a given topic, lack of skills in comprehension, transformation, generalization of information blocks, underdevelopment of probabilistic forecasting mechanisms, poor memory, etc. Difficulties in receiving a message are usually due to the fact that the message is not fully understood or is incorrect because the listener did not ask for clarification; the message is misjudged due to the listener's bias towards the speaker; the message was received at the wrong time and therefore not seriously analyzed;
• objective interference in communication - physiological interference (cold, heat, noise), psychological (mood, attitude towards the interlocutor, passion for another idea), as well as the lack of a common language of communication, unexpectedness of the message, etc. Barriers to communication can be irritation or anger, stress, a feeling of dissatisfaction, which provoke inattention, hasty conclusions, etc. Such personal attitudes of interlocutors are often insurmountable obstacles when establishing business contacts. To overcome the misunderstanding that arises, participants in communication can rely on the principles of mutual understanding: knowledge of a professional language or a common language (sometimes an intermediary language); desire to obtain the most complete information; concentration on the main thing; taking into account the nature of the situation (dispute, controversy, conversation, discussion, negotiations);
• self-control or control of the situation by the listener , carried out throughout the entire communication process and including several stages: control of the preparation of information for transmission; control of the completeness of information perception; control of the formulation of reactive speech statements in accordance with the type of feedback.

Among the control methods, the most popular is clarifying or leading questions, repeating words or statements.

Feedback works best when interlocutors demonstrate natural engagement and understanding of the overall message. A good way to mutual understanding is responsiveness to the needs of the interlocutor. Such responsiveness and readiness for empathy in real communication is expressed in the corresponding reactive remarks of the listener or in his retelling of what he heard with elements of his own analysis and evaluation.

A distorted perception and incorrect reaction are led to by: statements that are unclear in form and content and are offered for comprehension; lack of attention of the parties to the subject of the conversation.

To avoid mistakes when interacting with your interlocutor, it is advisable to ask yourself the following questions:

• Do I understand the content and form of the speaker’s speech correctly?
• Am I completely focused on the statement, or are my thoughts occupied with something else?
• Am I careful about misinterpreting the statement?
• Am I responding correctly to the speaker's emotions?

If barriers, obstacles, and dangers of misunderstanding are overcome in the process of active interaction, the information received (knowledge, definitions, instructions, explanations, etc.) will be more complete, and the feedback will be more effective.