How to smooth out conflict. Exit from a conflict situation and conflict

Understanding the causes of the conflict, the ability to realize what happened earlier and led to the existing conflict is very important. But during a fire, they don’t think about why it started, but simply try to put out the flames. And only then we find out “why this happened and what is better not to do”, and draw conclusions for the future.

And it is very important to behave correctly in a situation that is getting out of control, because it is no secret that in seconds we can harm ourselves and our loved ones in such a way that the consequences will have to be sorted out for years.

Managing yourself during a conflict is quite difficult, but let’s try to consider what can deepen the conflict and what can lead to its resolution. So, when the conflict has already begun and the partner shows aggression:

• try to breathe deeply and think about everything you say
• be attentive to your partner - look in words for the answer to the question of what he really wants
• if your partner speaks very loudly, join his voice a little quieter
• Remember, identifying negative feelings does not mean that close person doesn't love you anymore

How not to intensify the conflict and not provoke aggression from your partner

• Every person has the right to be different and not meet your ideas about him
• It's better to say directly what you want
• don't predict negative opinions others (“I know what you’re thinking...”)
• talk about yourself, and not about others and without generalizations (“All women...”, “You always...” - wrong, better, “I feel...”)
• you shouldn’t look for an answer to the question “Who is to blame?” (it’s better to enthusiastically look for a way out of the situation)
• choose the right time for important conversations (not on an empty stomach or after a hard day at work)
• talk about a specific problem, not about your dissatisfaction with your relationship
• don't use shortcuts
• do not humiliate your partner, do not be sarcastic (this is the same insult) and do not get personal
• listen to your partner
• do not prophesy (“You will never change”), it is better to make efforts to resolve the situation
• choose good rational arguments, because money (“If you earn like me ...”), children (“If only you were with children more ...”) and family relationships(“You’re just like your mom”) is not an argument!
• don’t give advice - look for a way out of the situation together
• Avoid threats and playing the victim
• don’t make “double” standards (don’t say “I want you to listen to me!” if you yourself don’t listen to your partner)

Following these simple rules will help you make communication more effective and conflicts less serious.

11.03.2007 14086 +13

Good day, dear friend!

If you are interested in cargo transportation in Moscow, then visit the website laurtrans.ru

As you know, conflicts arise everywhere: on the street, at work, in the home circle. Knowing how to resolve conflicts and how to cope with them, as well as how to get out of them conflict situation in a good mood will help you improve your quality of life and save your nerves.

How to resolve conflicts?

Three Ways to Resolve Conflicts

When conflict arises

If a conflict situation arises, it must be remembered that two people always take part in the conflict. It doesn’t matter how many participants there are – both sides are equally to blame. Even in the case when you are 100% sure that your opponent is wrong, you will have to believe that the person who wants it on a subconscious level is always drawn into the conflict.

So, if you still couldn’t prevent the conflict situation, then let’s try to resolve it:

1. Be the first to take a step forward

He who is more stubborn is more stupid. Screams, quarrels, negative emotions - all this destroys your interlocutor and you, destroys on a physical level, spoiling nervous system, not to mention the psychological level. If a person screams, it is out of fear; it cannot be stopped unless someone takes the first step towards him. Become that person. This will in no way mean that you have given in or that you are weaker. On the contrary, it will demonstrate that you are a strong person and strive for self-control. A strong, self-confident person cannot be hooked, he cannot be enraged. But confidence is not born out of nowhere; it can be developed precisely in such practical situations.

2. Stop blaming

When you are trying to smooth out a conflict, there is no need to get personal. Even if you have lowered your tone and decided to reconcile, but continue to communicate in a negative way, this will not help resolve the conflict situation. First, focus on your opponent's good qualities. Tell him about this - the negativity will be instantly discarded. We must remember that these should be sincere thoughts about the other person, and not flattery.

You probably have several thoughts about what you like about this person. Share this with him and stop blaming him for all the mortal sins. Best tactic will be the following: lowering the tone - a desire to resolve a conflict situation and a public announcement about this - a compliment to the interlocutor - an explanation of one’s own feelings.

You need to understand the difference between voicing complaints and explaining your feelings. The first ones always come in a negative tone with accusatory notes towards the opponent. When you share your own feelings, you are trying to explain to the other person something that he cannot understand. But in a non-conflict situation, you will be heard. During a conflict situation, everyone hears only themselves, and when opponents meet each other, they are ready to understand each other.

3. Apologize

It happens that you were heard, accepted, understood, and asked for forgiveness for a mistake. You, in turn, felt relieved that you were out of the conflict situation. But to resolve the conflict, you need to take one more step - competently ask for forgiveness.

It doesn’t matter at all who was to blame initially, you took part in the quarrel, and accordingly, you thoroughly ruined your opponent’s nerves. You need to apologize for this. In this case, you will get rid of the negativity and put an end to the problem. Your relationship will benefit from this. If it turns out that you were the culprit of the conflict situation and decided to apologize, and your opponent, in turn, does not respond with a return apology, then you should not worry about it. It's just that not everyone is ready yet.

Don’t forget that our problems stem from self-doubt and our own fears, which, by the way, are not difficult to overcome.

When you are drawn into a conflict, it is quite difficult to control yourself. Emotions can run high, especially if you don’t know how to manage them. Ask yourself: what is more important for you - maintaining the relationship or proving that you are right? There is no need to be a victim and solve the problem by infringing on your own rights, but there is no need to infringe on the rights of your opponent. Come out of a conflict situation with dignity, having learned something new from the current situation. After all, this is exactly what conflicts are for.

In every quarrel in which conflict persists, there must be a (albeit unknown) third party.

For a quarrel to occur, an unknown third party must be active in inciting it between two potential opponents.

Despite the popular belief that two people are enough to start a fight, in fact there must be a third participant who sets the stage for real conflict to occur.

The third participant is usually a “quite reasonable person” and it is difficult to suspect him of anything; he stands aside and denies any personal relationship to the conflict. But it was he who, first of all, did everything to create the conflict and maintain it. The hidden third party may sometimes seem to support only one side of the conflict, but in fact, it is he who is the instigator of the quarrel.

If you trace the history of the conflict, you can get absolutely incredible information. This kind of information is too easy to dismiss. To hide something, you need to make it implausible. To find a third party, you need to ask those involved in the conflict the following types of questions:

1 . Have you been told that someone treats you badly/that someone... bad person/ that someone is doing wrong / that some group is bad? 2. What was said? 3. Who said this?

Introduce a limiter into your questions like: “In this family is ___?”, “In your married life is ___?”, “At your job is ____?” and so on.

If you collect all the names listed and count how many times each appears, you will find that one name is mentioned more often than others. By following this procedure, you will discover exactly who instigated the conflicts, and thus create the possibility of their resolution.

Based on the works of L. Ron Hubbard

Is it possible to avoid conflicts in business or personal relationships? "No!" - anyone will answer professional psychologist. Conflicts, as an extreme form of resolving contradictions, are inevitable, but they can be managed within certain limits. To do this, you need to learn to distinguish between forms of behavior in conflict and the corresponding outcome options. It is also useful to know the basic rules or ethics of behavior in conflict. Behavior in conflict is very diverse. But what rules must be followed to mitigate the conflict or make it constructive? There are several such rules of conduct in a conflict situation that provide the best way out of an acute situation.

Rule 1: have an open mind towards the initiator of the conflict.

The first rule of behavior in conflict is a fair, unbiased attitude towards the initiator of the conflict. Every interpersonal conflict begins with the appearance of a person in a couple or group who is dissatisfied with something - this is the initiator of the conflict. It is he who makes demands, claims, grievances and expects his partner to listen to him and change his behavior. After all, how does a partner usually react to the initiator of a conflict? Purely negative. He accuses him of being “again dissatisfied with something, again starting a quarrel over trifles,” that “he is always missing something,” “everything is always wrong for him.” The role of the accused is always unpleasant, therefore, naturally, every normal person tries to avoid it or “prepares to fight back the initiator.”

It should be remembered that the initiator of the conflict, with rare exceptions when it is simply a capricious, uncooperative, “quarrelsome” person, always has personal reasons for “starting a quarrel.” As a rule, behind his dissatisfaction and claims there is a fairly significant reason or personal interest - some state of affairs that does not suit him, burdens him, torments him, causes anxiety or inconvenience.

Thus, in order for the conflict not to go down the “crooked path” from the very first step, it is necessary to treat the initiator of the conflict fairly and patiently: do not immediately condemn, do not dismiss, do not scold, but carefully and listen to him as kindly as possible.

Rule 2: do not expand the subject of the dispute.

The second rule of behavior in conflict is to identify the subject of the conflict and not expand it. The subject is understood as the reason for the partner’s dissatisfaction: what specifically does not suit him, what does he not like in the behavior of the other? The initiator of the conflict must also observe this rule, i.e. clearly and clearly formulate, first of all, for himself, what does not suit him and irritates him in the other. Then fully and clearly state the reason for your complaints.

Often, quarreling people do not know how to follow this rule. Vague irritation with something is poorly realized and is presented in the form of a spoiled mood. In this case, partners get bogged down in vague accusations, nagging, jabs and even insults, through which the “accused” does not see the essence of the quarrel.

I’ll give an example of a telephone conversation in the office: “Aren’t you talking too loudly on the phone?” And further, “expanding the subject”: “For some reason everyone should work, but you should talk?!” Not only did the initiator expand the subject of the conflict, he actually insulted the “accused.” The assessment of hard work already concerns the area of ​​business and personal qualities of the accused, and if he is in a bad mood and, in addition, has a practical personality type, he will move to a “frontal” defense or to a “frontal attack” on the offender.

In a marital conflict, the wife formulates the subject quite precisely; "I don't want you smoking in the room." But he immediately adds: “And in general, be more careful, you always wrinkle your clothes and stain your chair with ashes.” She expanded the subject of the conflict: she added several more claims, in addition to a personal one: “You have become somehow sloppy.” When several accusations fall on a person at once, it is difficult for him to assimilate them and take note of them. When there are many subjects of conflict, the spouses cannot deal with any of them in detail and meaningfully, a “jam of problems” is created, the quarrel inevitably drags on and “there is no end in sight.”

So, the second rule of behavior in conflict “clarification of the subject of the conflict and not expanding the number of subjects” should include “reducing the number of claims at once.” The danger of expanding the number of claims is that the accused gets the impression of absolute guilt in everything that happens to the initiator of the conflict.

Another consequence of the expansion in the number of claims may be increased irritation of the accused, who does not know how to “please the initiator,” and is it even necessary to do this if “everything is so bad”?! For example, the conflict began over a loud conversation on the phone, then moved on to something else, a report was not given on time, the “idleness” of the accused, etc. was remembered. And then the initiator said everything that had accumulated in his soul,” and the accused, driven to the extreme, also “didn’t remain in debt,” and laid it all out straight “regardless of faces.”

Associated with the second rule of behavior in conflict is the psychological ability of some individuals, who are often non-conflict by nature, to restrain themselves and avoid conflict. Sooner or later, mentally accumulating small grievances form a “snowball” that is difficult to stop. The opportunity that presents itself will reveal so many grievances and omissions that it will be simply impossible to cope with the conflict.

That is why the outcome of the conflict such as “smoothing out” and especially “leaving” is not recommended. They can leave the initiator and the accused with grievances in the form of unresolved contradictions. Various mental associations, gradually accumulating, overgrown with details of other clashes and omissions even with other people, will cause a generalization of the subject of the conflict and, most importantly, the emotional involvement of the accused and the initiator will increase. Here, another danger awaits the participants - partners of the conflict - drawing a hasty conclusion about the appropriateness of these relations in general.

Thus, quite often among young spouses “marriage and divorce” can become commonplace, commonplace. The ease with which young spouses talk about divorce is not so harmless. At first half-jokingly, and then seriously, accumulated grievances and omissions lead to hasty conclusions and decisions. It is well known from various areas of human practical activity that it is easier to destroy than to build, and even more so, to rebuild. The same thing - in interpersonal relationships: one should not rush to conclusions about the meaning of specific relationships - comradely, friendly, friendly and especially marital.

Psychological research shows that only the presence of all types of relationships provides an individual with harmonious development, life satisfaction, and optimism. It is easier for an active person to establish relationships in new circumstances, although he cannot provide himself with all types of relationships in these conditions. An introverted, uncommunicative person also makes it easier to get by with a minimum of contacts and relationships. But it is absolutely impossible to form family, parental, marital and friendly relationships in the same capacity.

Neglect of friendly and comradely relationships affects not only the reputation of the individual, but, ultimately, creates an internal barrier of inability to maintain relationships. As a result, the individual develops a trait such as suspicion in relationships with other people. She focuses her attention on failures in relationships with people, often doubts the sincerity of any relationship, and is overly critical and even negative in assessing the behavior of others. Losing various contacts and relationships due to his suspicion and distrust, such a person isolates himself even more.

Rule 3: strive for a positive solution to the conflict.

The third rule of behavior in conflict is the formulation positive decision acute situation. This will force the initiator, firstly, to mentally weigh all the pros and cons of the accusation; secondly, calculate possible consequences conflict for relationships; and thirdly, to think for the accused himself about his preferred outcome of the conflict. All together this can: reduce the potential for negative tension of the initiator, expand his understanding of the subject and feasibility of the conflict, and feel like he is in the role of the accused. For example: “I have a really bad headache today, and if possible, speak a little lower.” The initiator seems to find an extraneous reason forcing him to make a claim, which weakens the tension of the situation.

An unobtrusive appeal to well-being also helps to mitigate the conflict, for example, this variant of the initiator’s behavior: “You know, while you talk, I’ll go to the next department on business.”

A positive solution to a marital conflict can proceed like this. The wife, dissatisfied with her husband’s smoking in the room, suggests: “I understand that it’s hard for you to quit smoking, but I can’t stand tobacco smoke well, maybe you’ll smoke in the kitchen? Then the room will remain fresh air, and you won’t worsen your comfort.”

To avoid a quarrel in a conflict situation, the accused needs to clarify the subject of the contradictions, localize the causes of discontent and invite the conflict initiator to suggest a positive way out.

Another option for the development of the conflict. In the room, the husband reads or writes, the wife listens to music. “Turn off the radio,” is how he formulates his desired outcome of the situation. This is exactly what he expects and demands; this outcome suits him. But, at the same time, it is unclear whether the music interferes with concentration or is it just a whim of the husband? With the correct tactics of behavior, the “accused” clarifies the subject of a possible conflict: “Does the music bother you at all at the moment or, if it was played quietly, would you be able to continue your activity?”

Rule 4: control your emotions.

The fourth rule of behavior in conflict concerns emotional side conducting a dispute. Often, conflicting partners are able to correctly determine the subject of the conflict, treat fairly the rights of the initiator, express their demands, and outline the outcome of the conflict, but the entire tone of the conversation sometimes nullifies these achievements. As a rule, the conflicting parties experience emotional tension at the time of the conflict. Their statements are categorical, categorical, and demanding.

Often the initiator of the conflict begins the “offensive” in a raised voice, without choosing any expressions. Sometimes, in familiar relations at work, rudeness towards each other becomes the norm. And if men tolerate vulgar expressions more easily, then they simply insult women. A natural reaction to any tactless and rude attack from the initiator may be the response of the accused: “Are you, in fact, talking to me in such a tone?” Moreover, such a mistake by the initiator allows the partner to completely avoid the dispute in the most “honest” way”: “I can’t stand rudeness and shouting, once you cool down, then maybe we’ll talk, but maybe not!” And the accused will be right in his own way.

Therefore the most required condition dispute, collision - the most calm and even tone of statements, accuracy and thoughtfulness of words. It is necessary to speak in such a way that in the voice and words there is not even a hint of irritation, anger, reproach, or insult to the partner. In a word, the form of the dispute should be “a business conversation between business people.”

It is appropriate, in connection with the tone of the debate, to mention the form of address “You”. In the Russian literary language, in business relations it is customary to address people not as “you”, but as “Vy”. Moreover, it is no coincidence that “You” is written with a capital letter, which indicates a respectful and distant attitude. In general, the form of address “You” carries a large regulatory load in interpersonal relationships. The desire to break social, age, and role barriers in relationships is misinterpreted by people in everyday life, when they, neglecting the remote form of “You,” often find themselves in difficulty. Thus, having broken the distance in official and professional relationships, the boss is surprised when a subordinate behaves “too loosely” in a conflict.

There is a certain selectivity in establishing relationships between “you” and “you”. Persons with good self-control and self-regulation easily, depending on the situation, move from one distance to another. But there are also people who strive in every possible way to reduce the distance in relationships, which supposedly gives them the right to behave “like their own people” in an official setting. In these cases, the distance can be increased unilaterally by switching to “You” in any situation. The distance is also increased by avoiding conversations on any personal topics. Of course, the form of addressing “You” is acceptable in business and official relationships, but it will also look pretentious and even funny in personal and family relationships.

Rule 5: Be tactful in an argument.

And finally, the fifth and most important rule: avoid conflicts that affect an individual’s self-esteem. Claims about loud noise should not be allowed telephone conversation turned into personal insult. For example: “You don’t just talk loudly, but you are a talker and don’t want to work. You live by the principle “what would you do to do nothing!” Conflicts over trifles, unfortunately, often flare up in transport, when one, unexpected jolt in a crowded carriage is enough for personal insults to rain down. And then the mood is spoiled for a long time, it is transferred to the work environment, to the house - the circle of insults for everyone and everything closes . Often, even adults retain “childish egocentrism,” when any conflicts with any people are perceived as purely personal.

“Children's egocentrism - infantilism” is especially sensitive to minor troubles. All it takes is a push in transport, a careless word at work or at home - and your pride is hurt, although it may have absolutely nothing to do with it. But the “offended” person is ready to fight back “in full form.” Very easily, each specific offender becomes the embodiment of evil, dissatisfaction with him develops into a generalized assessment of his belonging to a certain gender, age, profession, education, nationality. Thus, an accidental offender - a man - in the eyes of a woman can personify the entire male gender (rude, selfish, “ungentlemanly”). A woman who accidentally hurts a man’s pride embodies all women who only exist to annoy men (“All of you...”).

By subject, conflicts can be divided into “business” and “personal”. Business conflict based on different attitudes towards certain things, third parties, ways of behavior. He is always specific: “I don’t want you... smoking in the room, dating this guy, playing the tape recorder so loudly, throwing your things around, etc.” In the production sector, a business conflict may begin like this: “You must follow safety rules, otherwise an accident is possible, and you will be a victim or guilty of what may happen,” “You must observe labor discipline.” All business conflicts are based on the principle of obligation, the need to comply with certain rules of business relations.

Personal conflicts are always less specific, and the complaint is directed not at specific behavior, but at the partner’s personality as a whole. An example of family and marital conflicts: “I’m tired of your tediousness. You are so uncollected. You always lie to me. You are a very rude person, etc.” In the business sphere of relations, the initiator of the conflict also gives a generalized assessment of the personality of the culprit: “You are a completely lazy person.” “Your stupidity amazes me.” “You are too talkative to do anything serious and necessary.” As you can see, the person as a whole is being reproached here; behind the personal complaints there is the assessment “You (You) are not good.”

Business conflicts are much easier and easier to resolve. But personal ones - only with difficulty. After all, behind personal claims there is a demand that a person completely or partially change his character, temperament, or even needs. Behavioral habits, one way or another, may have a deep, stable foundation. So, if it is possible to partially correct tastes, attachments, habits, then it is impossible to change the basic needs of the individual, his temperament. In a stressful or conflict situation natural features personalities will definitely make themselves known. All this, however, does not mean that a personality, once formed, is no longer capable of changing and improving.

If circumstances do not make it possible to end any relationship, then you can resort to effective way: “talk frankly”, it’s reasonable to argue. Such conditions of difficulty are possible in family relationships and cooperative relationships, when a common cause obliges us to interact “against all odds.”

For a reasonable dispute, certain rules must be followed. An “open conversation” should take place at a certain, agreed upon time, and not “on the go,” “by the way.” The spontaneity and thoughtlessness of a rational dispute “will leave everything in its place,” and “there will be a sediment in the soul.” This is what the surveyed and counseled couples told us. It is very important to determine the location of the dispute. It is not good to argue in front of children or parents, or in the presence of guests. In an industrial setting, a business dispute has the same rule: the choice of a time convenient for both parties and the “absence of interested witnesses.”

Before a dispute, the initiator must clearly formulate “what he wants to say” without asking extraneous questions. It’s better for both sides to go into an argument with a willingness to find the best that the other has in them.

And the main condition is calm tone and self-imposed motivation for the inevitability of cooperation. You can mentally imagine desert island, where, besides the two of you, there is no one and it is not known when there will be. Naturally, for everyone normal person the choice of the alternative “conflict - cooperation” will be obvious. And you cannot think that your partner imagines the situation differently. Moreover, sooner or later he can feel the “background” of cooperation rather than rivalry.

In an interpersonal conflict, especially in the family, household, partner (marital) sphere, there is not only the right side and only the guilty side. Sometimes a conflict arises due to the fact that one party is overexcited for some reason (difficulties at work, a quarrel with a friend, complications in family relationships), and the other party, instead of “going away” or “smoothing out” the tension, chooses tactics confrontation or coercion. Objectively assessing the situation, the positions of the initiator and the accused are clearly visible. And although the initiator is only in a tense state, the conflict has been revealed and is not directly connected with this particular partner, but supposedly the “accused” is already in a hurry to “take the blow,” instead of taking the conversation in a different direction and giving the initiator the opportunity to discharge himself into “ in a different direction." The practical personality type is more categorical in its judgments, therefore it is more often and straightforward in assessing the situation “either he or I.”

You cannot immediately reject any accusation, even one that seems absurd and unfounded. Any claim of an accomplice (partner) has some basis, or perhaps the conflict has a completely different source. It is important to discuss this issue immediately or agree on a conversation (but in no case a “showdown”) later and in a calmer atmosphere. The tactics of initial rejection, even mental, are characteristic of the practical type of personality; the cognitive (thinking) type is more rigid (inflexible), it requires time to think or clarify controversial issues the contradiction that has arisen.

It is necessary to remember that everyone is an individual and therefore it is sometimes difficult for us to resolve contradictions that arise in relationships. He (the other) is just a little different from us, and this may cause disagreement. When we encounter other people, we discover similarities and differences in points of view, emotional states, and behavior. Similarity causes satisfaction, but temporary, then indifference and even boredom may set in. Difference creates tension, but it also allows for interest in individuals different from our own. Collaboration is facilitated by finding similarities between “I” and “he” (or “she”).

It is wrong to believe that life is pure pleasure, without any problems, obstacles, or complications. It is also not true that the other person should always only be pleasant and sympathetic to us. This must be remembered especially when difficulties or difficulties arise in interpersonal relationships. The presence of contradictions and even conflicts is inevitable, but the main thing is not to rush to conclusions about “to be or not to be a relationship.”

It is unacceptable, in conditions of any tension in relations, disagreement, to make generalizations such as: “All men”, “All women”, “Everything that generally interferes with life”. Such generalizations are not limited only to the mentally accepted position, but an assessment of the situation is given and our emotions are included, further strengthening the generalizations, consolidating them in the form of a persistently experienced conflict.

One cannot think that a conflict, once resolved, will not arise again. After all, the formation of optimal relationships is associated with the development of new personality traits, for example, compliance, tolerance for the mistakes of others, etc. It takes patience and time to bring communication abilities “to perfection”, which suits both parties.

It must be remembered that the closer the relationship, for example, marital, the more difficult it becomes in cases of difficulties. Friendly and love relationship They oblige us to little, but they are also more superficial and unreliable, just like friendly relationships that bind us to one common cause. Truth that exists administrative legislation, production discipline regulates relationships, but the problem of personal relationships does not completely disappear. Hidden difficulties remain here too. It is important to resolve them correctly for the good of the common cause.

It is useful to alternate the time of communication with each other and isolation from each other, which is especially important for close family and marital relationships. For each, for example, married couple, there is an optimal ratio of communication and isolation, but it must be there, since it makes it possible to better feel the personal uniqueness and originality of the partner. After all, in order for there to be interest in each other, personality development is necessary. Without internal work on oneself, a person becomes ordinary and uninteresting. Of course, in the early stages of our relationship it is difficult to exhaust spiritual and emotional values ​​in a short time. But constant, day after day, communication reduces the “newness” of relationships. The effect of monotony is also known, which manifests itself not only in monotonous work, but also in human relationships.

We must remember that men and women are differently sensitive to the assessment of their personality. So, if a woman is more sensitive to assessments of her appearance and attractiveness, then men value most of all their business qualities and the ability to solve practical, life problems. By slightly overestimating these qualities, we will not go far from the truth. It is no coincidence that they say that a woman becomes a woman next to a man, and a man becomes next to a woman. It is necessary to accumulate a “baggage” of positive memories about each other, this will play a positive role in conditions of tension and conflict. At such moments, it is better to remember not the worst, but the best moments of past relationships.

The relationships of friendship, partnership and marriage cannot be idealized. Neither the first, nor the second, nor the third can completely solve our internal difficulties. Only the diversity of relationships provides confidence and optimism in life. Also unreasonable is the cynicism and vulgarity of relationships, from which, like a cancerous disease, not only they themselves, but also the personality are destroyed. The principle here is: “What goes around comes around!”

Do not try to completely “remake” or re-educate each other at work, at home, in the family. It’s better to engage in self-education - it will help you personally and will not cause protest or hostility from others. High demands on yourself, first of all, and then on others. This does not mean that you always have to blame only yourself for everything. There is a category of shy, insecure people. For greater confidence, they should, having overcome themselves, believe in their capabilities, find the strength to change others, although this is not easy, since they became insecure due to their upbringing, when they were too often underestimated and their initiative was suppressed.

Shy people need to constantly improve themselves and become more active. community service, which makes it possible to contact different people with different styles of behavior and communication. All this will expand the range of knowledge, skills, and communication skills. The art of communication is born only in the practice of joint work (educational, labor, social).

Trustworthiness and mistrust are one of the most important personality traits that determine one’s interpersonal comfort. Excessive and constant gullibility is a sign of inexperience and vulnerability of the individual. But the worst thing is suspicion of everything. The distrust of one, especially the leader, almost always gives rise to the distrust of subordinates. Without mutual trust, people would never be able to agree on anything. And how we value trust in us!

The last and perhaps most significant point is that relationships require a lot of work to preserve them. But they don’t write about this in textbooks, no one teaches this. Meanwhile, it is easier to destroy than to build again. IN work collective and in the personal, family and everyday spheres, daily work is required to manage relationships. In business relationships, the motto should be cooperation on a principled business basis. In these conditions, disputes are necessary for the sake of a common cause. Without them, a business partnership relationship can turn into a personal friendship relationship. Cooperation will be replaced by community. In personal relationships, the motto will be community, for the sake of preserving the relationship, and not for the sake of business.

If cooperation exists only for business, then commonwealth exists to preserve feelings of personal affection, but regardless of the type of relationship, their labor intensity is the same. In educational labor activity the progress of technology, technology, and labor rationalization is noticeable. In the area of ​​human relations, difficulties do not completely disappear. And the next generation, and each person resolves them in his own way, fights again and again.

It is necessary to distinguish conflict situations and conflicts. A conflict situation is the emergence of disagreements, i.e. a clash of desires, opinions, interests. A conflict situation occurs during a discussion or argument. A dispute is a discussion when its participants do not just discuss a problem, but are “vitally” interested in solving it in their favor if the other side disagrees.

However, a dispute, as well as a discussion, is characterized by both sides respecting each other and showing tact.

Hindu philosophers introduced the following rule of argument. Each of the interlocutors must first state the idea of ​​his opponent in the dispute, and only after receiving confirmation that he understood everything correctly can he refute it. His interlocutor must repeat the essence of these objections and, having received confirmation that they are understood correctly, can present a counter-objection.

IN conflict situation you need to adhere to several rules, to which

relate:

Limitation of the subject of the dispute; uncertainty and the transition from a specific issue to a general one make it difficult to reach agreement;

Taking into account the level of knowledge and competence of the opposite party in this matter; at big difference at the level of competence, an argument or discussion will be unproductive, and if an incompetent arguer is stubborn, it can develop into a conflict;

Taking into account the degree of emotional excitability and restraint of the opposite side; if the participants in the dispute are easily emotionally excitable and stubborn, the dispute will inevitably develop into a conflict;

Monitoring that in the heat of an argument does not proceed to assessing each other’s personal qualities.

If these rules are not followed, the dispute develops into a conflict. Conflict- these are mutual negative relationships that arise when desires and opinions collide; these are burdened emotional stress and “sorting out” disagreements between people.

Thus, any conflict reflects a clash of interests and opinions, but not every clash of positions and confrontation of opinions and desires are a conflict. Despite the emotional charge of discussion and dispute, they may not turn into conflict if both sides, striving to find the truth, consider the essence of the issue, and not finding out “who is who.” Of course, in any discussion there is a hidden “spark” of conflict, but for “the spark to ignite a flame,” certain conditions are needed.

Phases of conflict development

There are two phases of conflict development: constructive and destructive.

For constructive phase of the conflict characterized by dissatisfaction with oneself, the opponent, the conversation, and joint activities. It manifests itself, on the one hand, in the style of conversation - an increased emotional tone of speech, reproaches, excuses, ignoring the partner’s reaction, and on the other hand, in non-speech characteristics of behavior: avoiding conversation, stopping or disrupting joint activities, confusion, sudden increase in distance with a communication partner, acceptance closed pose, looking away, unnatural facial expressions and gestures.

At the same time, the conversation remains within the framework of a business discussion, disagreements do not become irreversible, and opponents control themselves.

Destructive phase of conflict begins when the mutual dissatisfaction of opponents with each other, with the methods of resolving the issue, with the results of joint activities exceeds a certain critical threshold and joint activities or communication become uncontrollable.

This phase can have two stages. The first is psychologically characterized by the desire to overestimate one’s own capabilities and underestimate the opponent’s capabilities, to assert oneself at his expense. It is also associated with the unfoundedness of critical remarks, with disparaging remarks, glances, and gestures towards the opponent. These reactions are perceived by the latter as personal insults and cause opposition, i.e. response conflict behavior.

If those in conflict do not change their relationship tactics, then such clashes become systematic, and the negativism of the subjects becomes more and more persistent. A chronic conflict arises, characterizing the second stage of the destructive phase.

Outcomes of conflict situations

The outcomes of conflict situations can be different: preventing conflict, avoiding conflict, smoothing it out, coming to a compromise, the emergence of confrontation, coercion.

Preventing conflict between a teacher and students depends mainly on himself. First of all, the teacher must, when conflict situation do not allow prerequisites on your part for the development of a conflict: speak calmly with the student and, changing the student’s attitude to something, convince him, and not order. The teacher must take care of the conditions under which his demand can be fulfilled. It is inappropriate to make demands too often, and it is better to replace the order form of their expression with other forms if possible. For example, a requirement in the form of a question (“Did you do at home what I told you last time?”) is perceived by students as a form of control, and not as a teacher’s requirement. The requirement can be expressed in the form of a statement, a belief that the student, of course, did what he was told.

To prevent conflicts, experienced teachers use individual conversations with students, during which they clarify their positions and explain theirs.

In this case, the teacher needs:

1) show attention to the student, respect, sympathy for him, tolerance for his weaknesses, restraint, calm tone;

2) construct phrases so that they evoke a neutral or positive reaction from the student;

3)constantly support the student feedback, look into his eyes, watch for changes in his posture and facial expressions;

4) slightly delay the pace of the conversation if the student is excited or speaks from F

too fast;

5) try to mentally put yourself in the student’s place and understand what

events brought him to this state;

6) let the student speak out, do not interrupt or try to talk over him;

7) reduce the social distance, approach and lean towards him, touch him, smile;

8) emphasize the commonality of goals and interests, show the student interest in solving his problem;

9)emphasize best qualities student who will help him overcome conflict situation, cope with your condition.

However, not in all cases the conflict can be prevented. The teacher's justified dissatisfaction, his resentment towards the students, which he could not restrain, or the student's unwillingness to understand the necessity of the teacher's demands lead to interpersonal conflict. Then the teacher has another task - to extinguish

conflict that has arisen, prevent it from developing into a chronic conflict and being drawn into it by other students or the entire class.

Avoiding conflict as a way to resolve a conflict situation - this is an avoidance of resolving a contradiction that has arisen, citing lack of time, inappropriateness, untimeliness of the dispute, etc. This method should be used to avoid bringing the conversation to a conflict. However, such an outcome is simply postponing the resolution of the conflict situation. The accused party avoids an open confrontation, allows the opposite party to “cool down,” ease mental tension, and think over their claims. Sometimes there is also a hope that over time everything will sort itself out (this is most often observed among young teachers and teachers with extensive experience waiting to retire). However, when a new reason appears, the conflict flares up again.

Smoothing out the conflict - this is agreement with the claims, but “only for this moment.” The “accused” tries in this way to calm the partner down and relieve emotional excitement. He says that he was misunderstood, that there are no special reasons for the conflict, that he did not do something because of unexpectedly new circumstances. However, this does not mean that he accepted the claims and understood the essence of the conflict. It’s just that at the moment he is showing agreement and loyalty.

Smoothing cannot save the situation indefinitely, but, used rarely and not for the same reason, it allows you to relieve tension in relationships at the moment. However, after some time, the maneuver of the “accused” will be revealed and reproaches will fall on him again: “I promised, but again everything is the same...”

Therefore, such tactics are bad because they can undermine the partner’s trust.

Compromise- this is the adoption of the most acceptable decision for both parties through an open discussion of opinions and positions. Compromise excludes unilateral coercion into one single option, as well as postponing the resolution of the conflict. Its advantage lies in the mutual equality of rights and obligations accepted by each party voluntarily, and openness

claims against each other.

Confrontation- this is a tough confrontation between the parties to each other, when neither of them accepts the position of the other. The danger of confrontation is that partners can resort to personal insults when all reasonable arguments are exhausted. Despite the fact that such an outcome of a conflict situation is unfavorable, it allows partners to see the strengths and weak sides each other, to understand the interests of the parties (“this means that not everything is smooth in my position”).

Confrontation makes you think, doubt, and look for new ways out of the deadlock.

Often confrontation occurs when you overestimate yourself and underestimate your communication partner, which is typical for egocentrics: “It seems like you’re saying obvious things, but he doesn’t understand!” - the teacher is indignant. However, he does not take into account a number of points. A thing can only be obvious to him; the student has a different point of view on this matter, and the position expressed by the teacher contradicts his interests, attitudes, habits, and customs.

Compulsion- this is a tactic of straightforwardly imposing on a person the solution option that suits the leader, parent, teacher. Coercion quickly and decisively eliminates the causes of discontent, but at the same time it is the most unfavorable outcome for maintaining good relations.

Admitting your mistake or wrong. If the cause of the conflict was incorrect behavior or an erroneous statement by a leader, parent, or teacher, which caused disagreement on the other side, then the conflict can be resolved by admitting your mistake.

Outcomes considered conflict situations and conflicts have different effects on both the mood of communication partners and the stability of their relationships.

In this sense, the most effective is the prevention of conflicts, but the outcomes of “admitting a mistake,” “smoothing out,” and “compromise” are also favorable.

The article was prepared using the book by Ilyin E. P. “Psychology of communication and interpersonal relationships.”