Fitting style. Grebenyuk O.S.
- The advantage of the conflict management method;
- Methods of conflict regulation depending on the situation and other objective factors:
* Competition style;
* Style of evasion;
* Fixture style;
* Style compromise;
* Collaboration style.
Benefits of Conflict Management Method
The conflict requires from each person, especially from the leader of the group, team, the ability to choose a certain style of behavior for effective problem solving considering one's own style, the style of others involved in the conflict, and the nature of the conflict itself. It is necessary to be guided in the choice of style and its most effective use - to be armed with an appropriate strategy for resolving the conflict. However, in last years there have been significant changes in the attitude of specialists to this aspect of the study of conflicts, and more precisely to the concept of "resolution" of the conflict. It was caused, according to K. Thomas, at least two circumstances: the realization of the futility of efforts to completely eliminate conflicts and the increase number of studies pointing to the positive functions of conflicts. From here, according to the author, the emphasis should be shifted from the elimination of conflicts to their management and regulation.
Considering the most characteristic forms of people's behavior in conflict situations, it is possible to determine which of them are more productive and which are destructive; how to stimulate productive behavior.
Ways of conflict regulation depending on the situation and other objective factors
K. Thomas identifies five ways to regulate the conflict, related to the common source of any conflict - the mismatch of interests of two or more parties:
1. competition (competition) - as the desire to achieve the satisfaction of one's interests to the detriment of another;
2. evasion, which is characterized by both the lack of desire for cooperation and the lack of a tendency to achieve one's own goals;
3. adaptation, meaning, in contrast to rivalry, sacrificing one's own interests for the sake of another;
4. compromise;
5. cooperation, when the participants in the situation come to an alternative that fully satisfies the interests of both parties.
K.Thomas believes that when avoiding conflict, neither side achieves success; in behavior such as competition, accommodation, and compromise, only one wins, or both lose. And only in a situation of cooperation do both parties win, as they make joint efforts to manage the situation.
Let us consider in more detail all the options for behavior in a conflict situation.
1. Competition style2. Evasion Style3. Fixture style4. Style compromise5. Collaborative styleA person who uses the style of competition is quite active, enterprising and prefers to resolve the conflict in his own way, making a strong-willed decision. Obviously not interested in cooperation with his opponents, he tries first of all to satisfy his own interests to the detriment of the interests of others, forcing them to make their own decisions. This style is effective when a person has a certain amount of power: he knows that his approach and decision are correct, and he has the ability to insist on them.
In personal relationships, this style is unacceptable, it only causes a feeling of alienation.
The use of this style in a situation where a person is not endowed with power (with a deputy leader, for example), and his point of view diverges from the point of view of the boss - the conflict will intensify, up to a break in relations.
· the outcome of the conflict is very important for you personally and you make a big bet on your solution to the problem that has arisen;
The decision needs to be made quickly and you have enough power and authority to do so;
You feel that you have no other choice and that you have nothing to lose;
You are in a critical situation that requires an immediate response;
· You have to make an unpopular decision, but now you need to act and you have enough authority to choose this step.
With a positive result of this approach of yours, you will win supporters. But if your main goal is popularity and a good relationship with everyone, then this style should not be used, you will achieve the opposite results on a personal level.
At first glance, this style resembles an "escape" from problems and responsibilities, rather than an effective approach to conflict resolution; in fact, leaving or postponing may be an appropriate and constructive response to conflict under certain circumstances. This approach works perfectly when you don't stand up for your rights, don't cooperate with anyone to develop a solution to the problem, you just step back to deal with it later when you're more prepared for it, or hope that the conflict will resolve itself over time.
You can use this style when a problem is not so important to you, when you do not want to spend energy on solving it, or when you feel that the situation is hopeless, there is no other way out but to ignore the situation, do not express your attitude towards it by changing the subject. conversations or just leaving the room.
The tension is too high and you feel the need to loosen the heat;
• the outcome is not very important for you and you think that the decision is so trivial that it is not worth wasting energy on it;
You have a hard day, there are more important problems, and the solution to this problem can bring additional complications, pull new troubles;
You know that you are wrong, that you cannot or even do not want to resolve the conflict in your favor (so as not to make public your wrong position, for example);
· You want to buy time, perhaps in order to obtain additional information in order to enlist someone's support;
· the situation is very difficult and you feel that the resolution of the conflict will require undue effort or means;
· you have little power to solve the problem or to solve it in your preferred way;
You feel that others are more likely to solve this problem in their favor;
· to try to solve the problem immediately is dangerous, because the opening and open discussion of the conflict can worsen the situation.
The accommodating style can be similar to the evasive style in that it can be used to gain a delay in solving a problem. However, the main difference is that you act together with another or others. When you use the avoidance style, you are not doing anything to satisfy the interests of the other person, other people, you are simply pushing the problem away from yourself.
This style means that you do not try to defend your interests by acting in conjunction with another person. It can be used when the outcome of a case is extremely important to another and not very significant to you. It is also useful in cases where you cannot win because the other person has more power. We have to give in and come to terms with the situation.
This style is unacceptable when you have to give in on something very important for yourself or when you feel that this person will not appreciate the concession you made, take it for granted.
You are not particularly worried about what happened and the outcome;
You understand that the result is much more important for the other person;
You understand that the truth is not on your side;
You have little power or little chance of winning;
· You believe that the other person can learn from this situation a useful lesson if you give in to his demands, even if you do not agree with what he is doing, or consider that he is making a mistake.
By using the compromise style, you give in a little to your advantage in order to achieve what you want in the main; the other side does the same. You do this by trading concessions and haggling to work out a compromise solution.
Compromise is achieved at a more superficial level than cooperation, where attention is focused on satisfying hidden needs and desires. With the compromise style, you take the conflict situation for granted and look for a way to influence or change it by giving and exchanging concessions, and this can be a short-term option, as opposed to cooperation, when the goal is to develop a long-term mutually beneficial solution.
In such situations, cooperation may even be impossible: none of the parties has neither the time nor the strength necessary for it, in addition, the conflicting parties may not have the same interests to establish long-term or short-term relations. And then only compromise can help you.
Both parties have the same power and mutually exclusive interests;
· You want to get a decision quickly, because this is the most efficient and cost-effective way;
Are you satisfied with the temporary solution?
You can take advantage of short-term benefits;
Satisfying your desire is not very important for you and it is possible to change the original goal;
Compromise is often a happy retreat, or even a last chance to reach a solution. You can choose this approach from the very beginning of negotiating or discussing a conflict if you do not have enough power to achieve what you want, if cooperation is impossible and if no one wants unilateral concessions.
Following this style, you actively participate in resolving the conflict and defend your interests, but at the same time try to cooperate with your opponent. This style requires more work than most other approaches to conflict, as you first make public all the motives, reasons, needs, concerns, difficulties and interests of both parties, and then discuss them in search of a mutually beneficial result and satisfaction of the interests of all parties.
Successful use of the collaborative style requires spending time searching for hidden interests and needs in order to develop a way to meet the true desires of both parties. Since the conflicting parties know the cause of the conflict, there is a real opportunity to find a new alternative or develop acceptable compromises.
solving the problem is very important for both parties and no one wants to completely get rid of it;
you have a close, long-term and interdependent relationship with the other party;
You have time to work on the problem that has arisen (this is a good approach to resolving conflicts based on long-term projects);
· both you and the other party are aware of the problem, the desires of both parties are known;
· You and your opponent want to discuss some ideas and work on developing a solution;
Both of you are able to express the essence of your interests and listen to each other;
· the parties involved in the conflict have equal power or can ignore the difference in positions in order to seek a solution to the problem on an equal footing.
Cooperation is a friendly, wise approach to the task of identifying and meeting the interests of both parties. Collaboration among other styles is the most difficult, but it allows you to work out the most satisfying solution for both parties in complex and important conflict situations, which results in the possibility of conflict management.
Note; K.Thomas cited by Grishina N.V. in Art. “On the issue of predisposition to conflict behavior”, in the book: Mental states. L., 1981. p.91.
When you are in a conflict situation, in order to more effectively resolve the problem, you need to choose a certain style of behavior, taking into account your own style, the style of other people involved in the conflict, as well as the nature of the conflict itself. This material is designed to help you identify these styles and use them most effectively so that when you find yourself in various conflict situations, you are armed with an appropriate conflict resolution strategy.
In total, there are five styles of behavior in situations of disagreement, according to scientists (W. Thomas, R. Kilmen): cooperation is optimal almost always; compromise - quite acceptable in some cases; avoidance (leaving) - recommended in case of unprovoked partner "fires"; adaptation - possible in cases where the opponent is really right; rivalry (competition) is the least effective, but the most frequently used way of behavior in conflicts. Each person can use all these styles to some extent, but usually he has priority styles, fixed by life circumstances. The main styles of behavior in a conflict situation are associated with a common source of any conflict - a mismatch of interests of two or more parties.
Your style of behavior in a particular conflict is determined by the extent to which you want to satisfy your own interests (acting passively or actively) and the interests of the other side (acting jointly or individually). If your reaction is passive, then you will try to get out of the conflict; if it is active, then you will attempt to resolve it. You can make such assessments for yourself and for other parties involved in the conflict.
It is also necessary to analyze the conflict situation from the point of view of the interaction of its participants. If you prefer joint action, then you will try to resolve the conflict together with another person or group of people who are involved in it. If you prefer to act individually, then you will look for your own way of solving a problem or a way of avoiding solving it. The degree of cooperative behavior can also easily be assessed for you and for other people.
If you carefully consider and try on different styles for yourself, then you can recognize the one that you usually resort to in conflict situations; you can also define styles that are commonly used by people associated with you. Each of these styles is briefly described below.
Style of competition (rivalry).
A person who uses the competitive style is very active and prefers to go his own way to resolve the conflict. He is not very interested in cooperation with other people, but he is capable of strong-willed decisions. This style is characterized by the desire to satisfy one's own interests first of all at the expense of the interests of others, forcing other people to accept your solution to the problem.
This can be an effective style when you have some power; you know that your decision or approach in a given situation is correct, and you have the opportunity to insist on it. However, it is not recommended to use it in personal relationships, as it can make people feel alienated.
Here are examples of when this style should be used: the outcome is very important to you, and you are betting heavily on solving the problem that has arisen; you have sufficient authority to make a decision, and it seems obvious that the solution you propose is the best; the decision must be made quickly, and you have enough power to do so; you feel that you have no other choice and you have nothing to lose; you are in a critical situation that requires instant response; you have to make an unpopular decision, but now you need to act and you have enough authority to choose this step.
Conclusion: when you use this approach, you may not be very popular, but you will win over supporters if it gives a positive result. But if your main goal is popularity and good relations with everyone, then this style cannot be used. It is recommended rather in cases where the solution you proposed has a problem for you. great importance; you feel that in order to realize it you need to act quickly; you believe in victory because you have sufficient will and power to do so.
Forms of manifestation of the competition style: the desire to prove that the other person is wrong; the person “pouts” until the other party changes their mind; a person strives to shout down another; the use of physical violence; failure to accept an explicit refusal; the requirement of unconditional obedience; the desire to outwit the other; seeking help from allies for support; requiring the opponent to agree with you in order to save the relationship.
Evasion (avoidance) style.
This is the second of the five basic approaches to a conflict situation, implemented when you do not stand up for your rights, do not cooperate with anyone to develop a solution to the problem, or simply avoid resolving the conflict. You can use this style when the issue at hand is not that important to you, when you don't want to spend time and effort on it, or when you feel like you're in a hopeless situation. This style is also recommended in those cases when you feel wrong and foresee the rightness of the other person; your opponent has more power; you are forced to communicate with a difficult person; there are no serious grounds for continuing contacts with him; you do not know what to do, or there is no need to make any specific decision now; you don't have enough information to solve a particular problem, and so on. All these are serious grounds for not defending one's own position.
So, this style is implemented when you do not stand up for your rights, do not cooperate with anyone to develop a solution to the problem, or simply evade resolving the conflict.
Typical cases in which it is recommended to use the evasion style: the outcome is not very important to you, and you think that the decision is so trivial that it is not worth spending energy on it; the tension is too great and you feel the need to loosen the heat; you have a hard day, and solving this problem can bring additional trouble; you know that you cannot or even do not want to resolve the conflict in your favor; you want to win time; a very difficult situation, and its resolution will require too much from you; you have little power to solve the problem; an attempt to resolve the situation now is dangerous, since the disclosure of the conflict and its open discussion can only worsen the situation.
Conclusion: the style of evasion is considered by many to be an escape from problems, but this is not so. In fact, withdrawal can be a very appropriate and constructive response to a conflict situation. It is likely that if you try to ignore her without expressing your attitude towards her, avoid solving problems, change the subject or shift attention to something else, then the conflict will resolve itself. If not, you can tackle it later when you're more ready for it.
Forms of manifestation of the style of evasion: silence, defiant removal, offended withdrawal, hidden anger, depression, ignoring offenders, caustic remarks about them behind their backs, switching to purely business relations, an indifferent attitude, a complete rejection of friendly or business relations with the offending party.
Fitting style.
It means that you, acting together with another person, do not try to defend your own interests. This style is useful when you can't win because the other person has more power, you don't contribute much, and you don't bet on a positive outcome for you. You feel that by giving in a little, you have little to lose. Or that in these conditions it is necessary to soften the situation somewhat.
What is the difference between accommodation and conflict avoidance style? How attractive can be the style of adaptation? It allows you to feel comfortable in relation to another person, his desires.
Here are the most typical situations in which the style of accommodation is recommended: you don't really care what happened; you want to maintain peace and good relations with other people; you feel that it is more important to maintain a good relationship with someone than to defend your interests; you understand that the result is much more important for another person than for you; you understand that the truth is not on your side; you have little power and little chance of winning; you think that this situation will be a useful lesson for the person to whom you are yielding.
Conclusion: by yielding or agreeing, sacrificing your interests, you can mitigate the conflict situation and restore harmony.
Views: 3198Category: PEDAGOGY
Grebenyuk O.S.
When you are in a conflict situation, in order to solve the problem more effectively, you need to choose a certain style of behavior, taking into account your own style, the style of other people involved in the conflict, as well as the nature of the conflict itself. This material is intended to help you identify these styles and use them most effectively so that you are armed with the appropriate conflict resolution strategy when you find yourself in various conflict situations.
According to scientists (W. Thomas, R. Kilman - see: J. Scott), there are five styles of behavior in situations of disagreement: cooperation is optimal almost always; compromise - quite acceptable in some cases; avoidance (leaving) - recommended in case of unprovoked partner "fires"; adaptation is possible in cases where the opponent is really right, and rivalry (competition) is the least effective, but most often used way of behaving in conflicts. Each person can use all these styles to some extent, but usually he has priority, fixed by life circumstances, styles. The main styles of behavior in a conflict situation are associated with a common source of any conflict - a mismatch of interests of two or more parties.
Your style of behavior in a particular conflict is determined by the extent to which you want to satisfy your own interests (acting passively or actively) and the interests of the other side (acting jointly or individually). If your reaction is passive, then you will try to get out of the conflict; if it is active, then you will attempt to resolve it. You can make such assessments for yourself and for other parties involved in the conflict.
It is also necessary to analyze the conflict situation from the point of view of the interaction of its participants. If you prefer joint action, then you will try to resolve the conflict together with another person or group of people who are involved in it. If you prefer to act individually, then you will look for your own way of solving a problem or a way of avoiding solving it. The degree of cooperative behavior can also easily be appreciated for you and for other people.
If you carefully consider and try on different styles, then you can recognize the one that you usually resort to in conflict situations; you can also define styles that are commonly used by people associated with you. Each of these styles is briefly described below.
1. Style of competition (rivalry)
A person who uses the competitive style is very active and prefers to go his own way to resolve the conflict. He is not very interested in cooperation with other people, but he is capable of strong-willed decisions. This style is characterized by the desire to satisfy one's own interests first of all to the detriment of the interests of others, forcing other people to accept your solution to the problem.
This can be an effective style when you have some power; you know that your decision or approach in a given situation is correct, and you have the opportunity to insist on it. However, it is not recommended to use it in personal relationships as it can make people feel alienated.
Here are examples of when to use this style: The outcome is very important to you and you are betting heavily on solving the problem that has arisen; you have sufficient authority to make a decision and it seems obvious that the solution you propose is the best; the decision must be made quickly and you have enough power to do so; you feel that you have no other choice and you have nothing to lose; you are in a critical situation that requires instant response; you have to make an unpopular decision, but now you need to act and you have enough authority to choose this step.
Conclusion: When you use this approach, you may not be very popular, but you will win over supporters if it gives a positive result. But if your main goal is popularity and good relations with everyone, then this style cannot be used. It is recommended rather in cases where your proposed solution to the problem is of great importance to you; you feel that to implement it you need to act quickly; you believe in victory because you have sufficient will and power to do so.
Forms of manifestation of the style of competition: the desire to prove that the other person is wrong; the person pouts until the other side changes their mind; a person seeks to shout down another; the use of physical violence; not accepting an explicit refusal; the demand for unconditional obedience; the desire to outwit another; seeking help from allies for support; demanding that the opponent agrees with you in order to maintain the relationship.
2. Style of evasion (leaving)
The second of the five basic approaches to conflict occurs when you don't stand up for your rights, don't work with anyone to work out a solution, or simply avoid resolving the conflict. You can use this style when the issue at hand is not that important to you, when you don't want to spend time and effort on it, or when you feel like you're in a hopeless situation. This style is also recommended in cases where the problem involved is not so important to you; you do not want to waste energy on its solution; you are in a hopeless position; you feel wrong and foresee the rightness of the other person; your opponent has more power; you are forced to communicate with a difficult person; there are no serious reasons to continue contacts with him; you do not know what to do and there is no need to make this decision now; you do not have enough information to solve a specific problem, etc. All these are serious grounds for not defending one's own position.
So, this style is realized when you do not stand up for your rights, do not cooperate with anyone to work out a solution to the problem, or simply evade resolving the conflict.
Typical cases in which the evasion style is recommended are: the outcome is not very important to you and you think that the solution is so trivial that it is not worth spending effort on it; the tension is too great and you feel the need to weaken the heat; you have a hard day, and solving this problem can bring additional trouble; you know that you cannot or even do not want to resolve the conflict in your favor; you want to buy time; a very difficult situation and its resolution will require too much from you; you have little power to solve the problem; an attempt to resolve the situation now is dangerous, since revealing the conflict and discussing it openly can only worsen the situation.
Conclusion: The style of avoidance is considered by many to be an escape from problems, but it is not. In fact, withdrawal can be a very appropriate and constructive response to a conflict situation. It is likely that if you try to ignore her without expressing your attitude towards her, avoid solving problems, change the subject or shift attention to something else, then the conflict will resolve itself. If not, you can tackle it later when you're more ready for it.
Forms of manifestation of the style of evasion: silence, defiant removal, offended withdrawal, hidden anger, depression, ignoring the offender, caustic remarks about them behind “their” backs, switching to purely business relations, an indifferent attitude, a complete rejection of friendly or business relations with the offender side.
3 Fixture style.
It means that you are acting together with another person, not trying to defend your own interests. This style is useful when you can't win because the other person has more power, your input is not great, and you don't bet on a positive outcome for you. You feel that by giving in a little, you lose little. Or in these conditions it is necessary to soften the situation somewhat.
What is the difference between care and adaptation? What is attractive about this style? It allows you to feel comfortable in relation to another person, his desires.
Here are the most typical situations in which the style of accommodation is recommended: you don't really care what happened; you want to maintain peace and good relations with other people; you feel it is more important to maintain a good relationship with someone than to defend your interests; you understand that the result is much more important for the other person than for you; you understand that the truth is not on your side; you have little power and little chance of winning; this situation will be a useful lesson for the person to whom you are yielding - you think.
Conclusion: by yielding, or agreeing, sacrificing your interests, you can mitigate the conflict situation and restore harmony.
4. Style of cooperation.
What does this style mean? When should it be applied? What obstacles do you see for applying the style? With this style, you actively participate in conflict resolution and defend your interests, but at the same time try to cooperate with the other person. This style requires more work than most other approaches to conflict, as you first "put on the table" the needs, concerns and interests of both parties, and then discuss them. However, if you have time and solving the problem is important enough for you, then this good way search for a mutually beneficial result and satisfaction of the interests of all parties.
This style is especially effective when the parties have different hidden needs. In such cases, it is difficult to determine the source of dissatisfaction. At first it may seem that both want the same thing or have opposite goals for the distant future, which is an immediate source of conflict. However, there is a difference between external declarations or positions in a dispute and underlying interests or needs that serve as the true causes of a conflict situation.
In other words, the successful use of the collaborative style requires spending some time looking for hidden interests and needs in order to develop a way to meet the true desires of both parties. Once you both understand what the cause of the conflict is, you have the opportunity to work together to look for new alternatives or work out acceptable compromises.
So, the satisfaction of the interests of both parties. Attention to hidden needs and needs. The result - the essence of the contradiction and its causes are eliminated, as well as the prevention of other conflicts.
This approach is recommended to be used in the situations described below: the solution of the problem is very important for both parties and no one wants to get rid of it; a close, long-term and interdependent relationship with the other party; you have enough time to work on the problem; you and your partner are ready and able to discuss the essence of their own and other people's interests; both sides of the conflict situation have equal power or want to ignore the difference in position in order to seek a solution to the problem on an equal footing.
Conclusion: This style is a friendly and wise approach to solving the situation and satisfying the interests of both parties. But it requires certain conditions: enough time for both sides, they must be able to explain their desires, express their needs, be able to listen to each other and then develop alternatives to solve the problem.
5. Style of compromise.
What does this style mean? In what cases is it recommended to use it? You give in a little in your interests to satisfy them in the rest, the other side does the same. In other words, you converge on the partial satisfaction of your desire and the partial fulfillment of the desire of another person. You do this by trading concessions and bargaining for a compromise solution.
Such actions may to some extent resemble cooperation. However, compromise is reached at a more superficial level than cooperation; you yield in something, the other person also yields in something, and as a result you can come to common decision. You are not looking for hidden needs and interests as you would with a collaborative style. You only consider what you say to each other about your desires.
The compromise style is most effective when you and the other person want the same thing, but know that it's impossible for you to do it at the same time. As a result of a successful compromise, a person can express his agreement in the following way: "I can put up with it." The emphasis is not on a solution that satisfies the interests of both parties, but on an option that can be expressed in the words: "We cannot both fully fulfill our desires, therefore, it is necessary to come to a solution that each of us can accept." In such situations, cooperation may even be impossible. It is possible that neither of you has the time or energy needed for it, or your interests are mutually exclusive. And then only compromise can help you.
So, partial satisfaction of the desires of both parties. You want the same thing, but it's not feasible. And you know it. Minor concessions: “Okay, we will spend part of the vacation by the sea, and part of it with my mother,” you say.
Typical cases in which the compromise style is most effective: both parties have the same power and mutually exclusive interests; you want to get a solution quickly because it is more economical and efficient way; you may be satisfied with a temporary solution; you can take advantage of short-term benefits; other approaches to solving the problem were not effective; satisfaction of your desire is not too important for you and you can slightly change the goal; Compromise allows you to save the relationship and you prefer to gain at least something than to lose everything.
Ways to resolve the conflict in the style of a compromise: you should start by clarifying the interests and desires of both parties; after that, it is necessary to outline the area of coincidence of interests; then you have to put forward proposals, listen to the proposals of the other side; readiness for concessions and exchange of services, etc. Negotiations continue until an acceptable formula for mutual concessions is worked out.
Conclusion: a compromise is a successful retreat or even the last opportunity to come to some kind of solution. But you can choose this approach from the very beginning if: you do not have enough power to get what you want, if cooperation is impossible, no one wants unilateral concessions.
6. General approach to conflict management.
To solve the probable pedagogical tasks When choosing and applying conflict management styles, it is useful to be guided by the following principles. In a pedagogical conflict situation, one should always see a contradiction that can lead to the development of a student, the relationship between him and the teacher. If the goal of the teacher is the mental health of the pupil and his human happiness, then he needs to take care of how the student will get out of the situation, what he will learn from communication with the teacher. Being in a conflict situation, the teacher must remember the need to perform professional actions.
To successfully resolve conflict situations, the following provisions must be taken into account:
The teacher should understand and accept the inevitability of meeting with conflict situations in his work;
Try to isolate the most likely conflict situations and learn in advance how to solve them;
Realize the real causes of such situations, see the difficulties of their resolution and the need to master ways to prevent them;
When resolving conflicts, professional responsibility lies with the teacher for the pedagogically correct resolution of the situation;
Participants in conflicts have a different rank, which determines their different behavior in the conflict;
The difference in age and life experience of the participants separates their positions in the conflict;
Different understanding of events and their causes by the participants, therefore it is not always easy for the teacher to understand the depth of the child's experiences, and for the student to cope with his emotions, to subordinate them to reason;
The presence of other schoolchildren during the conflict makes them participants from witnesses, and the conflict acquires a collective character. It spills over into discussion. personal qualities child by the whole team, which can naturally injure the child. Therefore, you should not involve other children in the conflict, do not bring everything up for discussion by the team; the professional position of the teacher in the conflict obliges him to take the initiative in resolving it and put the interests of the student in the first place; any mistake of the teacher in resolving the conflict gives rise to new situations and conflicts in which other students are included; conflict in pedagogical activity is easier to prevent than to successfully resolve.
Bibliography
For the preparation of this work, materials from the site were used.
Evasion Style is realized when a person does not defend his rights, does not cooperate with anyone to develop a solution to the problem, or simply evades conflict resolution. This style is used when they do not consider the problem too important and do not want to spend time and effort on solving it; when they realize the hopelessness of the situation or feel they are wrong; when they do not want to continue communicating with an opponent or do not know what to do. The avoidance style is considered by many to be an escape from problems, but it is not. In fact, withdrawal can be a very appropriate and constructive response to a conflict situation.
Forms of manifestation of the evasion style: silence, defiant removal, offended withdrawal, hidden anger, depression, ignoring the offenders, caustic remarks about them behind their backs, switching to a purely business relationship, an indifferent attitude, a complete rejection of friendly or business relations with the offending party.
Fixture Style implies that when you act in concert with another person, you are not trying to defend your own interests. This style is useful when you cannot win because the other person has more power, your contribution is not very great, and you are not betting on a positive solution to the problem for you. You feel that by yielding a little, you lose little, or that under the given conditions you need to soften the situation a little.
How is accommodation different from conflict avoidance style? What is attractive about a fixture style? It allows you to feel comfortable in relation to another person, his desires.
The accommodating style is recommended if you don't care too much about what happened; you want to maintain peace and good relations with other people; if you feel that it is more important to maintain a good relationship with someone than to defend your interests; if you understand that for another person the result is much more important than for you.
By yielding or agreeing, sacrificing your interests, you can mitigate the conflict situation and restore harmony.
The third style is the fixture style. It means that you act together with another person, without trying to defend your own interests. You can use this approach when the outcome of a case is extremely important to the other person and not very important to you. This style is also useful in situations where you cannot prevail because the other person has more power; thus, you concede and resign yourself to what your opponent wants. Thomas and Kilmann say that you act in this style, when you sacrifice your interests in favor of another person, giving in to him and pitying him. Since you put your own interests aside by using this approach, it is better to do so when your contribution in this case is not too large or when you are not betting too much on a positive solution to the problem for you. This allows you to feel comfortable with the other person's desires. But you don't want to fit in with someone if you feel offended. If you feel that you are inferior in something important to you, and feel dissatisfied in this regard, then the style of accommodation in this case is probably unacceptable. It may also be unacceptable in a situation where you feel that the other person is not going to give up something in turn, or that this person will not appreciate what you have done. This style should be used when you feel that by giving in a little, you are losing little. Or you can resort to such a strategy if at the moment you need to soften the situation a little, and then you intend to return to this issue and defend your position.
The accommodating style can be a bit like the evasive style, as you can use it to gain a reprieve in solving a problem. However, the main difference is that you are acting together with another person; You participate in the situation and agree to do what the other wants. When you use the avoidance style, you are not doing anything to serve the interests of the other person. You are simply pushing the problem away.
Here are the most typical situations in which the fixture style is recommended:
You don't particularly care what happened;
You understand that the result is much more important for the other person than for you;
You understand that the truth is not on your side;
You have little power or little chance of winning;
You believe that the other person can learn a useful lesson from this situation if you give in to his desires, even if you do not agree with what he is doing, or consider that he is making a mistake.
By yielding, agreeing or sacrificing your interests in favor of another person, you can mitigate the conflict situation and restore harmony. You can also
continue to be content with the result, if you consider it acceptable to yourself. Or you can use this quiet period to gain time so that you can then reach the final decision you want.
Collaboration style
The fourth is the collaborative style. Following this style, you actively participate in resolving the conflict and defend your interests, but at the same time try to cooperate with the other person. This style requires more work than most other approaches to conflict, as you first "put on the table" the needs, concerns and interests of both parties, and then discuss them. However, if you have time and the solution of the problem is important enough for you, then this is a good way to find a mutually beneficial result and satisfy the interests of all parties.
This style is especially effective when the parties have different hidden needs. In such cases, it is difficult to determine the source of dissatisfaction. At first it may seem that both want the same thing or have opposite goals for the distant future, which is an immediate source of conflict. However, there is a difference between external declarations or positions in a dispute and underlying interests or needs that serve as the true causes of a conflict situation.
For example, the apparent cause of conflict at work may be the slowness of an employee. But this slowness may mask a deeper conflict, which is caused by job dissatisfaction (lack of respect, recognition, or lack of responsibility that alienates a person from his job). If only superficial manifestations are affected, then it will be like just an external cosmetic repair, the low effectiveness of which will manifest itself over time, since the roots of the problem remain. A person may stop being slow, but then he will resort to unconscious sabotage, arranging additional breaks in work or using work equipment for personal purposes, convincing himself that he has the right to do so, because his work is appreciated and paid insufficiently. And that will be his way of getting some compensation. The collaborative style encourages each person to openly discuss their needs and desires. An employee in the situation described above may state directly that he needs recognition, in more highly appreciated and responsibility. If his boss understands this, then he will meet this person halfway, and as a result, the employee will devote himself to work to a greater extent, and thus the problem of procrastination will be solved with additional positive effects.
In other words, in order to successfully use the collaborative style, it is necessary to spend some time looking for hidden interests and needs in order to develop a way to satisfy the true desires of both parties. Once you both understand what the cause of the conflict is, you have the opportunity to work together to look for new alternatives or work out acceptable compromises.
Solving the problem is very important for both parties, and no one wants to get rid of it completely;
You have a close, long-term and interdependent relationship with the other party;
You have time to work on the problem that has arisen (this is a good approach to resolving conflicts based on long-term projects);
Both you and the other person are aware of the issue and the desires of both parties are known;
You and your opponent want to put some ideas on the table and work hard to come up with a solution;
Both of you are able to state the essence of your interests and listen to each other;
Both parties involved in the conflict have equal power or are willing to ignore the difference in position in order to seek a solution to the problem on an equal footing.
Cooperation is a friendly, wise approach to the task of identifying and meeting the interests of both parties. However, this requires certain
efforts. Both parties should set aside some time for this, and they should be able to explain their desires, express their needs, listen to each other, and then work out alternatives and solutions to the problem. The absence of one of these elements makes this approach ineffective. Collaboration among other styles is the most difficult, but it allows you to work out the most satisfying solution for both parties in complex and important conflict situations.
Compromise style
In the middle of the grid is the compromise style. You give in a little in your interests to satisfy them in the rest, the other side does the same. In other words, you converge on the partial satisfaction of your desire and the partial fulfillment of the desire of another person. You do this by trading concessions and haggling to work out a compromise solution.
Such actions may to some extent resemble cooperation. However, compromise is reached at a more superficial level than cooperation; You are inferior in some way, the other person is also inferior in some way, and as a result you can come to a joint decision. You are not looking for hidden needs and interests, as with the collaborative style. You only consider what you say to each other about your desires.
The compromise style is most effective when you and the other person want the same thing, but know that it's impossible for you to do it at the same time. For example, you both want to take the same position or, being on vacation as two, you want to spend it differently. Therefore, you work out some compromise based on minor mutual concessions. For example, in the case of a joint vacation, you can agree as follows: "Okay, we will spend part of the vacation in the mountains, and part - on the seashore."
The collaborative style is different in that using it, you would try to find hidden interests and work out a solution based on them. For example, if you both claim to perform some kind of functional duty, then, after discussing this issue comprehensively, you may come to the conclusion that in reality your interest is not
associated with a particular function in the service; you just want to achieve recognition associated with the fact that you are trusted to carry it out; however, you can achieve it in another way. You can get more support from the secretariat and more office space. When using the collaborative style, you focus on meeting hidden needs and desires; in the style of compromise, you take the conflict situation for granted and look for a way to influence or change it by giving or exchanging concessions. The purpose of cooperation is to develop a long-term mutually beneficial solution; in case of a compromise, this may be a momentary suitable option. As a result of a successful compromise, a person can express his agreement in the following way: "I can deal with this." The emphasis is not on a solution that satisfies the interests of both parties, but on an option that can be expressed in words: "We cannot both fully fulfill our desires, therefore, it is necessary to come to a solution that each of us can accept."
In such situations, cooperation may even be impossible. It is possible that neither of you has the time or energy needed for it, or your interests are mutually exclusive. And then only compromise can help you.
The following are typical cases in which the compromise style is most effective:
Both parties have equal power and mutually exclusive interests;
You want to get a decision quickly because you don't have time or because it's more economical and efficient way;
You may be satisfied with a temporary solution;
You can take advantage of short-term benefits;
Other approaches to solving the problem proved to be ineffective;
Satisfaction of your desire is not very important for you, and you can slightly change the goal set at the beginning;
Compromise is often a happy retreat, or even a last chance to reach a solution. You can choose this approach from the start if you don't have enough power to get what you want, if cooperation is impossible, and if no one wants unilateral concessions. Thus, you partially satisfy your interests, and the other person partially satisfies theirs, while you can always try to use a different approach to resolving the conflict in the future if the initial compromise, as you think, eliminates the problem for a while.
When you are trying to find a compromise with someone, you should start by clarifying the interests and desires of both parties. After that, it is necessary to outline the area of coincidence of interests. You must put forward proposals, listen to the proposals of the other side, be ready for concessions, exchange of favors, etc. Continue negotiations until you are able to work out a formula of mutual concessions acceptable to both parties. Ideally, a compromise will suit both of you.
Defining your own style
It is important to understand that each of these styles is effective only in certain conditions and none of them can be singled out as the best. In principle, you must be able to use each of them effectively and consciously make one or another choice, given specific circumstances. The best approach will depend on the specific situation and your personality. Preferring one style over another is natural, but a rigid preference can limit your options. Thus, it is important to determine for yourself your priorities, as well as possible alternatives. This will allow you to be more free to choose when faced with specific conflict situations.
If you note that you prefer not to use a certain style, or that you feel uncomfortable using it, then you can develop the ability to use it. For example, if you feel that you are trying more to accommodate others than to defend your own position, then you should work on increasing assertiveness and strengthening your will. Then, in appropriate situations, you will be able to apply the style of competition. Or if you feel like you compromise too often, being a very impatient person, then maybe you can learn patience in serious conflict situations, after which calm cooperation will help you find a better solution.
The first step is to identify your typical conflict resolution style. It is likely that you use one or two styles most often, as a performer who usually has his own repertoire. In some cases, you may have one preferred style (your primary approach to conflict resolution) and other styles that you don't use as often (your secondary or tertiary approaches). Or you can have two equivalent preferred styles, such as accommodating and evasive, if you are, say, doing nothing to prevent conflict, and then you can be considered "bimodal" in this respect. If you have three characteristic styles, such as fight, retreat and compromise, you can be classified as a "trimodal" person.
Thomas and Kilmenn developed a test called the Conflict Resolution Style Test that gives each person a score that reflects their response to a conflict situation. They created this test by conducting surveys among managers. Their responses were used to: define a certain level against which any other person is judged; when you take this test, your responses are scored according to how close they are to the managers' responses for each style or variation.
This test can be very helpful for you to better understand yourself. You may already have an idea of what styles you prefer, but this test will help you look at your characteristic approach objectively by analyzing your response to a wide range of conflict situations.
When I first took this test with a group of nonprofit managers, most of the test takers were fairly accurate in their preferred conflict resolution styles. The test results confirmed these primary estimates and provided additional information on the characteristic form of the reaction. The results I got showed that I occupy relatively high level in competition, evasion and compromise, but clearly low in cooperation and accommodation. I thought that I could have come to these conclusions without the test, because I like to make decisions quickly, concentrate on getting what I really want, and since I don’t consider most conflicts so important to me that I spend my energy on defending my positions. However, the test helped me realize how much I could gain by learning to cooperate and represent myself in discussions. Others also received confirmation of their initial self-assessments, but found that the test helped them to better understand the forms of reactions that appear in their daily lives. When I was later subjected to this test again, feeling more aggressive and assertive, I even found myself on the level to compete and compromise. The results of the test reflected the changes that have taken place in me over time.
Now you can take this test yourself or quickly rate yourself based on questions and answers regarding the application of each of the mentioned styles. Then you can determine for yourself which one you use most often, which one is the best, which one is the least, which one is most convenient for you. Table 1 will help you organize your answers.
As you do this, write down the first answer that comes to mind; as a rule, it is more correct, since it corresponds to the most immediate and intuitive reaction.
When answering, do not try to remember your reaction to the last conflict or the largest conflict in which you participated. Better imagine your usual behavior in conflict situations over the past few years. And do not try to think about which of the approaches would be more correct to apply - there is no right or wrong approach, since everything depends on the specific situation.
In the future, you can always expand your repertoire of styles depending on your attitude towards the test results. But now it is necessary to fix your initial reaction to this or that conflict situation. The table will give you a general picture of what you prefer to a greater or lesser extent and how comfortable you are with certain styles.
In each column, rate conflict resolution styles from 1 (high) to 5 (low) depending on how much you think you use this style in most conflict situations. If you feel insecure, give equal marks. Then jump to the next suitable number for further evaluation.
For example, if two styles are tied for first place in a category, then the third style will get the number 3 for the third one.
As an example of what a scoring system for the Most Used category might look like, the following result can be given: competition - 2, avoidance - 5, accommodation - 3, cooperation - 4, compromise - 1.
How do I usually respond to conflict situations?
Method of use and relation to use
Table 1
Conflict resolution style |
I use most often |
I prefer to use |
I use the least |
Feel the least comfortable when using |
Competition (I actively defend my own position) |
||||
Evasion (I try to avoid participating in the conflict) |
||||
fixture (I try to come up with a solution that satisfies both sides) |
||||
Cooperation (I am looking for ways to solve the problem together, satisfying both parties) |
Assessing your approach to conflict
Now that you have a clearer picture of how you usually act in a conflict situation, you can determine how comfortable you feel with your preferred approach and what you can gain by developing the ability to use other styles. To this end, remember the specific situations you have been involved in and the styles you have used. In some cases, you may have taken different approaches.
Then consider the totals for each of these situations. Was your approach to conflict resolution effective? Have you achieved what you wanted? And the other side? Do you think that the approach you used contributed to a favorable outcome? Or do you think that this approach has not justified itself? If so, what approach do you think should be taken?
For example, if in the approach to conflict resolution you prefer competition, rivalry, then this means that you usually defend your position and prefer a quick solution to the problem. When you have the power to do so, this approach can be effective. You can force the other person to agree with you and do what you want.
But sometimes, even after achieving external agreement, you may notice that this approach gives negative results. Perhaps in this way you offended another person and he is trying to recoup in a different way, for example, through gossip or sabotage.
In some cases, you may find that this approach does not work right from the start. Perhaps other assertive and strong-willed people are involved in the conflict, who resist your will and defend their own position, h
Likewise, if you prefer the dodge style, evaluate how well that style suits you. Do you feel more comfortable when conflict issues are openly discussed or when they are ignored? Or do you regret that you did not solve this or that problem?
If you prefer the accommodation style, then ask yourself, do you generally feel good about making concessions? Do you feel good about supporting what the other person wants to do? Or do you feel some irritation or resentment when your interests remain unsatisfied?
If you prefer compromise or collaboration, then ask yourself similar questions to determine whether the style you have chosen is generally effective or if a different approach might produce better results.
The purpose of this exercise is to understand that there are several approaches to conflict resolution, all of which can be helpful to you. You can already use all of these styles, even if you don't consciously plan where, when, and how best to apply them. In many cases, your usual approaches can give positive results. However, in other cases, a different approach may be preferred. Reviewing past conflicts can help you establish how effective your preferred styles (and the styles of those around you) have been. You may find that you should use more different approaches. If so, then you need to develop your ability to apply them so that, depending on the nature of the conflict that you may encounter in the future, you can consciously choose the appropriate style that will give the best results.
The table below will help to outline the areas in which you should develop your abilities. In addition, it will help you make more conscious choices and respond to conflict situations, which will allow you to more easily deal with conflicts in the future. Knowing this, will you be able to determine if this is really the answer you want to give? In addition, you will develop a sense of objectivity so that when you are in a conflict situation, you can manage yourself and rationally choose what you want to do.
Write in table 2 some of the most important conflict situations for you that you have encountered;
Specify the style or styles that you used;
Note what, in your opinion, was the result of using this or that style - positive or negative.
Finally, note which other style(s) you could use with more success.
Logic for identifying an alternative approach: what would you say? How would others and yourself react to this? What would your relationship be like now?
table 2
Conflict situation |
Used Style |
Overall efficiency (-3 to +3) |
The result of applying this style (describe a positive or negative outcome) |
Alternative approach |
Why it would be better to use an alternative approach |
| | | | |