Help on Tele2, tariffs, questions

Conflictologists have developed and continue to develop ways to prevent conflicts and methods for their “painless” resolution. Ideally, it is believed that a manager should not eliminate conflict, but manage it and use it effectively. And the first step in managing conflict is to understand its sources. The manager should find out: is this a simple dispute about resources, a misunderstanding on some problem, different approaches to people’s value systems, or is it a conflict that has arisen as a result of mutual intolerance (intolerance), psychological incompatibility. After determining the causes of the conflict, he must minimize the participants in the conflict. It has been established that the fewer people involved in a conflict, the less effort will be required to resolve it.

In the process of conflict analysis, if the manager himself is not able to understand the nature and source of the problem being solved, then he can involve competent persons (experts) for this purpose. The opinion of experts is often more convincing than the opinion of the immediate supervisor. This is due to the fact that each of the conflicting parties may suspect that the manager-arbiter, under certain conditions and for subjective reasons, may take the side of his opponent. In this case, the conflict does not fade, but intensifies, since the “offended” party must already fight against the manager.

A particular challenge for a manager is finding ways to resolve interpersonal conflicts. In this sense, there are several possible strategies of behavior and corresponding options for managerial actions aimed at eliminating the conflict.

The combination of these parameters with varying degrees of severity determines five main ways to resolve interpersonal conflicts.

1. Avoidance , evasion (weak assertiveness is combined with low cooperation). When choosing this strategy, actions are aimed at getting out of the situation without giving in, but also without insisting on one’s own, refraining from entering into disputes and discussions, from expressing one’s position, moving the conversation in response to the demands or accusations made in a different direction, on another topic. This strategy also implies a tendency not to take responsibility for solving problems, not to see controversial issues, not to attach importance to disagreements, to deny the existence of a conflict, and to consider it useless. It is important not to get into situations that provoke conflict.

2. Compulsion (adversarial) – high assertiveness is combined with low cooperation. With this strategy, actions are aimed at insisting on one’s own through open struggle for one’s interests and the use of power. Confrontation involves perceiving the situation as victory or defeat, taking a tough position and showing irreconcilable antagonism in case of resistance from the partner. Force them to accept their point of view at any cost.

3. Smoothing (compliance) – low assertiveness is combined with high cooperativeness. The actions taken with this strategy are aimed at maintaining or restoring favorable relationships, at ensuring the satisfaction of the other by smoothing out differences, with a willingness to give in for this, neglecting one’s own interests. This strategy involves the desire to support another, not to hurt his feelings, and to take into account his arguments. Motto: “There is no need to quarrel, because we are all one happy team, in the same boat, which should not be rocked.”

4. Compromise , cooperation (high assertiveness is combined with high cooperativeness). Here actions are aimed at finding a solution that fully satisfies both one’s own interests and the wishes of the other through an open and frank exchange of views about the problem. Actions are aimed at resolving disagreements, conceding something in exchange for concessions from the other side, at searching and developing during negotiations intermediate “average” solutions that suit both sides, in which no one particularly loses, but no one gains either.

According to management experts, choosing a compromise strategy is the best way to eliminate contradictions. Through collaboration, the most effective, sustainable and reliable results can be achieved.

5. Solution . Involves recognizing differences of opinion and being willing to engage with other points of view in order to understand the causes of the conflict and find a course of action acceptable to all parties. The one who uses this style does not try to achieve his goal at the expense of others, but rather looks for the best solution to a conflict situation.

Here are some suggestions for using this style when resolving conflicts:

· Once the problem is identified, identify solutions that are acceptable to both parties;

· focus on the problem, and not on the personal qualities of the other party;

· create an atmosphere of trust by increasing mutual influence on the exchange of information;

· When communicating, create a positive attitude towards each other by showing sympathy and listening to the other party's opinions, and minimizing expressions of anger and threats.

In addition to the five main ones mentioned, there are other methods of resolving interpersonal conflicts within their framework.

1. Coordination– coordination of tactical subgoals, behavior in the interests of the main goal or solution of a common task. Such coordination can be carried out between organizational units at different levels of the management pyramid (vertical coordination); at organizational levels of the same rank (horizontal coordination) and in the form of a mixed form of both options. If coordination is successful, then conflicts are resolved with less cost and effort.

2. Integrative problem solving. This conflict resolution technique is based on the premise that there can be a solution to a problem that includes and eliminates the conflicting elements of both positions and is acceptable to both parties. It is believed that this is one of the most successful management strategies in conflict, since in this case they come closest to resolving the conditions that initially gave rise to the conflict. However, the problem-solving approach is often difficult to implement. This is due to the fact that it largely depends on the professionalism and management skills of the manager and, in addition, in this case, it takes a lot of time to resolve the conflict. In these conditions, the manager must have a good technology - a model for solving problems.

3. Confrontation as a way to resolve the conflict. The purpose of confrontation is to bring the issue into the public eye. This makes it possible to freely discuss it with the involvement of the maximum number of participants in the conflict (and in fact, this is not a conflict, but a labor dispute), to encourage confrontation with the problem, and not with each other, in order to identify and eliminate obstacles.

Before you take on such an aspect of working with personnel as conflict management, you should determine exactly what needs to be managed.

The phenomenon of conflict

The word “conflict” itself comes from the Latin “clash.” At its core, there is a process of confrontation of interests in the presence of one indivisible goal. Most often, a conflict situation is accompanied by the emergence of a negative attitude towards the opponent, disputes and other manifestations of personal hostility.

However, the conflict has not only a negative manifestation - such an aggravation of relationships in the team is at the same time a mechanism for moving forward. To do this, of course, the conflict itself must be under control from the moment of its formation and directed by HR specialists. A properly managed conflict can reveal a non-trivial point of view and give the organization a completely new, more promising direction.

Of course, it is not always possible to get out of a conflict situation as a launching pad for new ideas and solutions, but an uncontrollable conflict always interferes with moving forward. Because in the end, no matter how ideological the initial goals may be, in the process of its growth everything will come down to personal interests. At this stage, conflict is not only useless, it is simply harmful.

Thus, conflicts can be divided into functional and destructive. And what the conflict will become depends largely on the skillful management of the current situation.

Conflict, being a form of communication, like any other process, can be broken down into components:

• underlying reason)
• belonging to a certain type)
• predictable direction of development.

To successfully manage the situation, all these factors must be taken into account.

Causes of conflicts

No matter how diverse the reasons for the start of a controversial situation, at their core they boil down to a few of the most typical questions:

• disagreement with the distribution of resources)
• mismatch of goals)
• differences in upbringing, education, etc.

Resources and their distribution are a very common cause of conflict. After all, the division of any limited resources will always leave dissatisfied people.

Ambiguity of goals is a cause of conflict that often occurs in large enterprises when the heads of various departments, in the process of achieving the performance goals of their department, cease to present their goals as part of the solution to the overall goals of the organization. As an example: the sales department strives to have the widest possible range of products - this allows increasing sales volumes by expanding the market. The production of the same organization has higher efficiency indicators, the more similar products it produces.

Varieties

Different criteria, values, behavior patterns, life experiences and even incorrect communications - the cause of the conflict can be anything. Whatever the trigger, they will all fall into one of four basic types, or a mixture of them:

• Intrapersonal. A conflict situation arises due to a discrepancy between the requirements for an employee and his own skills and knowledge.

In this case, the individual is characterized by job dissatisfaction, lack of self-confidence and stability of his position in the organization.

• Interpersonal. The most common type. It can manifest itself as confrontation between the heads of different departments when distributing any resources - a prerequisite for confrontation will be everyone’s confidence in their greater right to the subject of division (this could be equipment, personnel, bonuses, etc.).

Or this type of conflict is realized in the event of a clash of personalities - every person is unique in himself, but this uniqueness cannot always be tolerated by those around him. And such different people simply cannot have common goals, views or ethical principles. Managing interpersonal conflicts in a project environment is a matter of concern for professional conflict psychologists.

• Confrontation between the individual and the group. In the case when the position of an individual is opposed to the opinion of a group.

It is precisely such individuals, who perceive the interests of the organization as their own, who bring unexpected solutions to problems for companies, but are themselves a source of conflict.

• A clash of interests between two or more groups. No organization is monolithic and consists of a large number of different groups. Often their interests intersect: an example of a classic intergroup conflict can be considered the clash of interests of trade unions and the administration of an organization.

For various reasons and types, effective conflict management will lead the situation to a functional outcome in which everyone receives a solution acceptable to them. Involvement in solving a common problem creates a situation where the antagonistic parties become even more inclined to cooperate than before the conflict.

We decide and manage

In the event that conflicts that arise are not managed or managed ineffectively, the consequences will be dysfunctional, interfering with the achievement of the organization's goals. These include an increase in personnel turnover, a decrease in productivity, a shift in goals and emphasis - the main thing is winning the confrontation, and not resolving production issues.

All methods of managing conflicts that have arisen can be grouped into two blocks: structural methods and interpersonal methods of resolution.

Regardless of the method chosen, the conflict that has arisen must be analyzed to identify the real reasons, which may have nothing to do with what caused the controversial situation, and only then take adequate measures.

Conflict management methods

Structural methods of managing a conflict situation are varied in terms of the point of application of influence and are effective in results.

The main methods include:

• Detailed explanation of requirements and work results.

An effective method that is guaranteed to prevent even the possibility of a destructive conflict. The methodology boils down to a detailed explanation of exactly what results the organization’s management expects from each employee and the department as a whole. The more detailed and targeted the authorities, duties and responsibilities are, as well as the specific policies, rules and procedures, the more effective the management of such conflicts will be.

• Integration and coordination.

If controversial issues arise between employees, they can propose a decision to their common boss - in this case, hierarchy is successfully used to manage the conflict that has arisen, since subordinates follow the instructions of their leader.

Good results in conflict situations between different departments are obtained by introducing into the structure of the organization an additional area of ​​work designed to coordinate the joint actions of the disputants.

• A single super goal of the organization.

An interesting method of conflict management is the creation of a single supergoal that requires the efforts of all members of the organization. Working together to achieve it unites and brings the team closer together.

• Use of rewards.

Using systematic rewards to reward employees who contribute to the overall goals of the organization helps employees find a positive direction when confronted with conflict.

How to effectively resolve conflict?

A simple way is to completely ignore the situation and deal with the very issue that gave rise to the conflict. In this case, the decision is made according to the following parameters:

1. translate the controversial issue into the category of goals)
2. determine a solution that suits all parties)
3. consider the problem narrowly, the personal qualities of the parties have nothing to do with the matter)
4. ensure intensive exchange of information and mutual influence of conflicting parties)
5. create positive relationships and attention to all opinions.

Management of existing conflicts is carried out through various techniques developed by professionals in this matter. And even they emphasize how many significant factors of conflict that cannot be influenced. This may include the views, motives and needs of both the group and the individual. The aggravating effect is brought by superimposed stereotypes of behavior, biases or prejudices - all of which can greatly slow down the work or completely reduce the results of the work of experienced conflict management professionals.

Alternative dispute resolution methods

Resolving a conflict situation through litigation is far from ideal - the legal system is heavy and cumbersome, expensive and time-consuming. The result does not bring mutual reconciliation and does not take into account the interests of both parties.

That is why an alternative solution is becoming increasingly popular. This is a technique for resolving a situation through negotiations - it includes friendly, arbitration, arbitration and other courts, which are based on mediation.

Mediation as a method of conflict resolution is the settlement of disagreements with the help of a neutral mediator. This technique has proven itself well, since an independent mediator works to find a solution acceptable to all parties to the conflict, and not to clarify the question of who is right and who is wrong.

Conflict management involves the use of knowledge, skills, methods and methods to keep the confrontation of interests that has arisen at a level that is safe for all types of relationships, as well as the subsequent resolution of the problem taking into account the interests of all parties involved.

• Corporate culture

1 -1

All-Russian State Tax Academy

Faculty of Law

Department of Criminal Disciplines

in the course "Conflictology"

Topic: Conflict management methods.

student of the Faculty of Law, correspondence department

Magomadova M. G.

Moscow-2001

1. Conflict management

2. Conflict management methods

2.1. Intrapersonal methods

2.2. Structural methods

2.4. Personal methods

2.5. Negotiation

2.6. Methods for managing personal behavior

2.7. Methods that include aggressive responses

LITERATURE

1. Conflict management

Conflict Management– these are targeted influences:

- to eliminate the causes that gave rise to the conflict;

- to correct the behavior of participants in the conflict;

- to maintain the required level of conflict, not going beyond controlled limits.

Let us first consider a person’s behavior in a conflict situation from the point of view of its compliance with psychological standards. It is believed that constructive conflict resolution depends on the following factors:

Adequacy of the perception of the conflict, that is, a fairly accurate assessment of the actions and intentions of both the enemy and one’s own, not distorted by personal biases;

Openness and effectiveness of communication, readiness for a comprehensive discussion of problems, when participants honestly express their understanding of what is happening and ways out of a conflict situation,

Creating an atmosphere of mutual trust and cooperation.

It is also useful for a manager to know what character traits and behavioral characteristics of a person are characteristic of conflict personality. Summarizing the research of various scientists, we can say that these qualities include the following:

Inadequate self-esteem of one’s capabilities and abilities, which can be either overestimated or underestimated. In both cases, it may contradict the adequate assessment of others - and the ground is ready for a conflict to arise;

The desire to dominate at all costs where it is possible and impossible;

Conservatism of thinking, views, beliefs, unwillingness to overcome outdated traditions;

Excessive adherence to principles and straightforwardness in statements and judgments, the desire to tell the truth at all costs;

A certain set of emotional personality traits: anxiety, aggressiveness, stubbornness, irritability.

How should a leader with a “conflict personality” behave? There is only one way - to “pick up the key”. To do this, try to see in him a friend and the best features (qualities) of his personality, since you will no longer be able to change either his system of views and values, or his psychological characteristics and characteristics of the nervous system. If they were unable to “find the key to him,” then there is only one remedy left - to transfer such a person to the category of spontaneous action.

Thus, in a conflict situation or when dealing with a difficult person, you should use an approach that is more appropriate to the specific circumstances and in which you feel most comfortable. The best advisers in choosing the optimal approach to conflict resolution are life experience and the desire not to complicate the situation and not bring a person to stress. One might, for example, reach a compromise by adapting to the needs of another person (especially a partner or significant other); persistently pursue the realization of one’s true interests in another aspect; avoid discussing a conflict issue if it is not very important to you; use a collaborative style to satisfy the most important interests of both parties. Therefore, the best way to resolve a conflict situation is to consciously choose the optimal behavior strategy.

Before moving on to resolving the conflict, you should try to answer the following questions:

Do you want a favorable outcome;

What you need to do to better control your emotions;

How would you feel if you were the conflicting parties?

Is a mediator needed to resolve the conflict?

In what atmosphere (situation) could people better open up, find common ground and develop their own solutions?

2. Conflict management methods

Conflict Management Techniques are divided into: intrapersonal; structural; interpersonal (behavior styles); personal; negotiation; methods of managing individual behavior and aligning organizational roles and their functions, sometimes leading to manipulation of employees; methods that include retaliatory aggressive actions.

2.1. Intrapersonal methods

Intrapersonal methods conflict management lies in the ability to correctly organize one’s own behavior, express one’s point of view so that it does not cause a negative reaction, a psychological need to defend oneself, from others. For example, when you come to work in the morning, you find that someone has moved everything on your desk. You want to prevent this from happening again, but you also don’t want to ruin your relationship with your employees. You state, “When papers are moved around on my desk, it really annoys me. In the future, I would like to find everything as I left before leaving.” Clearly expressing why others are doing something that irritates you helps them understand you, and when you speak without attacking them, this reaction can encourage others to change their behavior.

2.2. Structural methods

TO structural methods Conflict management includes: clarification of job requirements; formation of coordination and integration mechanisms, general organizational goals; use of reward systems.

2.3. Interpersonal methods (management styles)

Interpersonal methods conflict management are methods in which at least two parties take part and each party chooses a form of behavior to preserve its interests, taking into account further possible interaction with the opponent. K.U. Thomas and R.H. Kilman developed the basic most acceptable strategies for behavior in conflict situations. They point out that there are five basic styles of conflict behavior: accommodation, compromise, cooperation, avoidance, rivalry, or competition. The style of behavior in a particular conflict, they point out, is determined by the extent to which you want to satisfy your own interests, while acting passively or actively, and the interests of the other party, acting jointly or individually.

Style of competition, rivalry can be used by a person who has a strong will, sufficient authority, power, who is not very interested in cooperation with the other party and who strives primarily to satisfy his own interests. It can be used if:

The outcome of the conflict is very important to you, and you place a big bet on your solution to the problem;

You feel like you have no choice and nothing to lose;

You must make an unpopular decision and you have enough power to choose this step;

You interact with subordinates who prefer an authoritarian style.

However, it should be borne in mind that this is not a style that can be used in close personal relationships, since it cannot cause anything other than a feeling of alienation. It is also inappropriate to use it in a situation where you do not have sufficient power, and your point of view on some issue differs from the point of view of your boss.

Collaboration style can be used if, while defending your own interests, you are forced to take into account the needs and desires of the other party. This style is the most difficult as it requires longer work. The purpose of its application is to develop a long-term mutually beneficial solution. This style requires the ability to explain your desires, listen to each other, and restrain your emotions. The absence of one of these factors makes this style ineffective. To resolve conflict, this style can be used in the following situations:

It is necessary to find a common solution if each of the approaches to the problem is important and does not allow compromise solutions;

You have a long-term, strong and interdependent relationship with the other party;

The main goal is to gain joint work experience;

The parties are able to listen to each other and outline the essence of their interests;

It is necessary to integrate points of view and strengthen the personal involvement of employees in activities.

Compromise style. Its essence lies in the fact that the parties seek to resolve differences through mutual concessions. In this regard, it is somewhat reminiscent of the style of cooperation, but it is carried out on a more superficial level, since the parties are inferior to each other in some way. This style is the most effective, both parties want the same thing, but know that it is impossible to achieve at the same time. For example, the desire to occupy the same position or the same work premises. When using this style, 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 fully fulfill our desires, therefore, it is necessary to come to a decision with which each of us could agree.” .

This approach to conflict resolution can be used in the following situations:

Both sides have equally compelling arguments and wield equal power;

The satisfaction of your desire is not of great importance to you;

You may be satisfied with a temporary solution because there is no time to develop another, or other approaches to solving the problem have turned out to be ineffective;

Compromising will allow you to gain something rather than lose everything.

Evasion style is usually implemented when the problem at hand is not that important to you, you do not defend your rights, do not cooperate with anyone to develop a solution, and do not want to waste time and effort on solving it. This style is also recommended in cases where one of the parties has more power or feels that he is in the wrong, or believes that there are no serious reasons for continuing contact.

The source of disagreement is trivial and unimportant to you compared to other more important tasks, and therefore you believe that it is not worth wasting energy on it;

You know that you cannot or even do not want to resolve the issue in your favor;

You have little power to solve the problem in the way you want;

You want to buy time to study the situation and obtain additional information before making any decision;

Trying to solve a problem immediately is dangerous, since opening up and openly discussing the conflict can only worsen the situation;

Subordinates themselves can successfully resolve conflict;

You've had a difficult day, and dealing with the problem may bring further trouble.

You should not think that this style is an escape from a problem or an evasion of responsibility. In fact, leaving or delaying may be an appropriate response to a conflict situation, since in the meantime it may resolve itself, or you can deal with it later when you have sufficient information and a desire to resolve it.

Fixture style means that you act jointly with the other party, but do not try to defend your own interests in order to smooth the atmosphere and restore a normal working atmosphere. Thomas and Kilmann believe that this style is most effective when the outcome of the case is extremely important to the other party and not very significant to you, or when you are sacrificing your own interests in favor of the other party.

The style of adaptation can be applied in the following most typical situations:

The most important task is to restore calm and stability, not to resolve the conflict;

The subject of the disagreement is not important to you or you are not particularly concerned about what happened;

Realize that the truth is not on your side;

You feel like you don't have enough power or a chance to win.

Just as no leadership style can be effective in all situations without exception, none of the conflict resolution styles discussed can be singled out as the best. We must learn to use each of them effectively and consciously make one or another choice, taking into account specific circumstances.

2.4. Personal methods

This group focuses on the leader’s ability to actively resist conflict, meaning the following:

The use of power, rewards and punishment directly in relation to the participants in the conflict;

Changing the conflict motivation of employees by influencing their needs and interests using administrative methods;

Convincing the parties to the conflict;

Changing the composition of participants in the conflict and the system of their interaction by moving people within the organization, dismissal or encouraging voluntary departure;

A leader’s entry into a conflict as an expert or arbiter and the search for agreement through joint negotiations;

2.5. Negotiation

Of all the ways to overcome confrontation between the parties, negotiations between them are the most effective. They are characterized by the fact that the parties are trying to achieve at least part of what they want, to make certain compromises. In order for negotiations to become possible, certain conditions must be met:

The existence of interdependence of the parties involved in the conflict;

Lack of significant differences in power among the subjects of the conflict;

Correspondence of the stage of development of the conflict to the possibilities of negotiations;

Participation in negotiations between parties who can actually make decisions in the current situation.

Properly organized negotiations go through several stages:

1) Preparing for the start of negotiations. Before starting negotiations, you need to diagnose the state of affairs, determine the strengths and weaknesses of the parties to the conflict, predict the balance of power, clearly formulate your goal and possible results of participation in the negotiations, work out procedural issues: where is it better to hold negotiations, what kind of atmosphere is expected, are good things important in the future? relationship with the opponent. According to many researchers, the success of the entire activity depends 50% on the correct organization of this stage, and the lack of information leads to suspicion and distrust of the participants, that is, to a deepening of the conflict;

2) Initial position selection(official statements of negotiators). This stage allows you to show your opponents that you know their interests and you take them into account, determine the area for maneuver and try to leave as much room for yourself in it as possible. There are various possible tactics for starting negotiations:

You can be aggressive in order to put pressure on your opponent, to suppress him;

The successful progress of negotiations is facilitated by the establishment of relaxed personal relationships, the creation of a friendly atmosphere, and the demonstration of interdependence;

Small concessions can be used to achieve a mutually beneficial compromise;

Obtaining a small advantage is facilitated by the provision of new facts and the use of manipulations;

Procedural ease is achieved through joint information search;

3) Search for a mutually acceptable solution, psychological struggle. At this stage, the parties test each other's capabilities and try to seize the initiative in every possible way. Opponents present facts that benefit only them, and declare that they have all sorts of options. The goal of each participant is to maintain balance or a slight advantage. The mediator’s task at this stage is to direct the negotiations towards the search for specific proposals. If negotiations begin to sharply affect one of the parties, the mediator of the new one must find a way out of the current situation;

4) Ending negotiations or breaking a deadlock. By this stage, a significant number of different proposals and options already exist, but agreement on them has not yet been reached. Time begins to run out, tension increases, and some kind of decision needs to be made. A few final concessions by both sides could save the whole thing. But here it is important for the conflicting parties to clearly remember which concessions do not affect the achievement of their main goal, and which nullify all previous work. The mediator, using the power given to him, resolves the final differences and leads the parties to a compromise.

Humanity has accumulated vast experience in negotiations. In recent decades, several rules and procedures for their management have been determined. The parties to the negotiations, direct participants, subject matter, channels of mutual communication, information are identified. It has been noted that there are difficulties in developing criteria for assessing both the progress and results of negotiations. In general, the behavior of the participants largely depends on the current situation, as well as their educational and cultural level, volitional and other personal characteristics.

2.6. Methods for managing personal behavior

Behavior management represents a system of measures for the formation of principles and norms of behavior of people in an organization, which allows you to achieve your goals within a given time frame at a reasonable cost. An organization, in accordance with its goals, strategy, organizational structure, and specific activities, selects specialists for certain roles, to perform specific functions and obtain the required results, for which a certain remuneration is due. An individual, having an idea of ​​himself and his capabilities, taking into account his goals, enters into a relationship with the organization, striving to take a certain place in it, perform a certain job and receive a reward. The individual expects from the organization: a place in the social structure, specific interesting work, the desired reward. The organization expects from the individual: qualifications and personal characteristics to perform the job, required work results, recognition of accepted standards of behavior. When properly managed, the expectations of the individual and the organization come closer to each other. The task of behavior management is to achieve compliance with the mutual expectations of the individual and the organization.

2.7. Methods that include aggressive responses

This group of methods is used in extreme cases when the capabilities of all previous methods have been exhausted.

Literature

1. Brief psychological dictionary/Ed. A.V. Petrovsky, N.G. Yaroshevsky. – M. 1993

2. Krichevsky R.L. If you are a leader...– M.: Delo, 1993.

3. Dmitriev A.V. Conflictology. Tutorial. – M.: Gardariki, 2000

4. Gromova O. N. Conflictology. Lecture course. M.: Ekmos, 2000

Structural methods of conflict management include: clarifying job requirements; formation of coordination and integration mechanisms, general organizational goals; use of reward systems.

• - Clarification of job requirements. One of the best management techniques to prevent dysfunctional conflict is to clarify what results are expected from each employee and department. Parameters such as the level of results to be achieved, who provides and who receives various information, the system of authority and responsibility, and clearly defined policies, procedures and rules should be mentioned here. Moreover, the manager clarifies all these issues not for himself, but so that his subordinates understand well what is expected of them and in what situation.
• - Coordination and integration mechanisms. This is the application of a coordination mechanism. One of the most common mechanisms is the chain of command. Integration tools such as management hierarchy, the use of interfunctional services, cross-functional groups, task forces and interdepartmental meetings are very useful in managing conflict situations. Research has shown that organizations that maintained the level of integration they desired achieved greater performance than those that did not. For example, a company where there was a conflict between interdependent departments - the sales department and the production department - managed to resolve the problem by creating an intermediate service that coordinates the volume of orders and sales. This service liaised between the sales and production departments and resolved issues such as sales requirements, capacity utilization, pricing and delivery schedules.
• - Organizational comprehensive goals. Setting organization-wide integrated goals is another structural method for managing a structural situation. Effective implementation of these goals requires the combined efforts of two or more employees, groups, or departments. The idea that is embedded in these higher goals is to direct the efforts of all participants to achieve a common goal.

For example, if three shifts in a production department are in conflict with each other, you should formulate goals for your department rather than for each shift individually. Likewise, setting clearly defined goals for the entire organization will also encourage department heads to make decisions that benefit the entire organization, not just their own functional area. The statement of the highest principles (values) of the organization reveals the content of complex goals. The company tries to reduce the potential for conflict by setting out organization-wide, integrated goals to achieve greater coherence and performance among all personnel.

Reward system structure. Rewards can be used as a method of managing conflict situations, influencing people's behavior to avoid dysfunctional consequences. People who contribute to the achievement of organization-wide integrated goals, help other groups in the organization and try to approach the problem in a comprehensive manner should be rewarded with gratitude, bonuses, recognition or promotions. It is equally important that the reward system does not reward unconstructive behavior by individuals or groups.

The systematic, coordinated use of rewards and incentives for those who contribute to the achievement of organization-wide goals, helping people understand how they should act in a conflict situation in a manner consistent with the desires of management.

There are several effective conflict management techniques (see Figure 1). They can be divided into two groups: structural and interpersonal.

Structural conflict resolution methods:

• clarification of job requirements— a method that prevents dysfunctional conflict; is to clarify what results management expects from each employee and department (what must be done or achieved; who receives and who provides various information; a system of powers and responsibilities; a clear definition of the procedure and rules of action);
• application of coordination and unification mechanisms, such as management hierarchy; principle of unity of command; services that communicate between functions; creation of cross-functional task forces; holding meetings between departments, etc.;
• establishing company-wide comprehensive goals requiring the joint efforts of two or more employees, groups or departments; this ensures more coordinated work of all personnel and ensures that department heads make decisions in the interests of the entire organization;
• reward system structure- can also be used as a method of managing a conflict situation; people who contribute to the achievement of company-wide integrated goals and try to solve problems from the point of view of the interests of the company should be rewarded for this; It is equally important that the reward system does not reward unconstructive behavior by individuals or groups.

Rice. 1 Conflict management methods

Interpersonal methods of conflict resolution:

1. Evasion involves a person’s avoidance of conflict, the desire not to get into situations that provoke the emergence of contradictions, and not to enter into a discussion of issues that are fraught with disagreement.
2. Smoothing characterized by calls to the conflicting parties to show solidarity and cooperation, to forget about differences. At the same time, the problem underlying the conflict is not resolved.
   As a result, peace and harmony are established between the conflicting parties for some time, but the conflict will certainly arise again in a more acute form.
3. Compulsion involves putting pressure on the opposite side, trying to force them to accept their point of view at any cost. Can be effective in situations where the manager has great power over subordinates. The disadvantage of this method is that it suppresses initiative, which can cause resentment, especially among young and educated subordinates.
4. Compromise characterized by accepting the other party's point of view, but only to some extent. Minimizes hostility and tension, allowing you to quickly resolve conflict. But the use of compromise at an early stage of the conflict prevents a comprehensive consideration and discussion of the problem that has arisen.
5. Solution- the most effective method of conflict resolution. It assumes recognition of differences in the opinions of the parties, a willingness to get acquainted with other points of view and find an option of action acceptable to all parties.