Conflict as a Special Form of Interaction

In psychological terms, conflict can be viewed as a special form of interaction and is defined as the presence of opposing tendencies among the subjects of interaction, manifested in their actions.

Let us note the important points of this definition:

• • conflict-related interactions and relationships are understood as those underpinned by incompatible interests, needs, or values;
• • intrapersonal, interpersonal, and intergroup conflicts can be distinguished, depending on the sphere in which the objective contradictions arise and develop;
• • for its participants, conflict is accompanied by negative emotional states that complicate an already difficult situation of objective contradiction.

Conflict — a clash of divergent goals, interests, positions, opinions, or views of the parties to an interaction, fixed by them in a rigid form

Four main characteristics of conflict can be distinguished: structure, dynamics, function, and typology . The psychological structure of conflict can be described using two key concepts: the conflict situation and the incident.

Conflict situation — the objective basis of a conflict, marking the emergence of a real contradiction in the interests and needs of the parties. In effect, this is not yet the conflict itself, since the existing objective contradiction may go unrecognized by the participants in the interaction for a certain time.

An objective conflict situation includes the objects of the conflict — a real or ideal item that is the cause of the dispute — and the parties to the conflict, or its participants, who may be individual people or groups of people. The parties are characterized by having both an external and an internal position in the conflict. The external position is the motivation for participating in the conflict that the parties openly present to their opponents (as the participants in a conflict interaction are most often called). It may or may not coincide with the internal position, which represents the set of true interests, motives, and values that compel a person or group to become involved in the conflict. Note that the internal position is often hidden not only from opponents and observers but also from the subject himself, since it is unconscious. Looking ahead, we may say that becoming aware of one's internal motivation is an important step toward productively resolving the conflict.

An example of such a mismatch between the internal and external positions is the typical conflict between an adolescent and an adult, in which behind the child's outwardly aggressive stance there usually lies a need for recognition and respect, and a need to support the significance of his own "self," which he himself does not recognize.

Conflict becomes a psychological reality for the participants from the moment the incident occurs. An incident is a situation of interaction that allows its participants to become aware of the objective contradiction in their interests and goals — that is, an incident is the recognition of the conflict situation. It can take various forms:

• • a covert incident unfolds at the level of the participants' awareness of the conflictual nature of what is happening but may not manifest itself in any way in their actual relations and reactions;
• • an overt incident takes the form of a series of conflictual actions by the participants toward one another.

The dynamics of a conflict — the patterns governing its development — fully correspond to its structure. Four main stages in the development of a conflict can be distinguished (Diagram 5).

Diagram 5. Main stages in the development of a conflict1

Thus, a conflict arises with the emergence of an objective contradiction in the goals and interests of the participants, becomes a psychological reality for them once the contradiction is recognized, passes through a stage of conflictual actions, and arrives at some resolution. The two intermediate stages are not obligatory.

At the stage of conflictual actions, further development of all the structures of the conflict takes place. The object of the conflict, as a rule, expands through the "drawing in" of adja-

-cent zones of relationships (thus, a conflict from the business sphere shifts into the personal sphere, and the area of disagreement seems to the participants much wider than at the outset). The parties to the conflict also change. In particular, they change their status in relation to their opponent (attempts to exert pressure through official channels, through lawyers, the courts, or the public) and draw sympathizers to their side, as a result of which an interpersonal conflict very often turns into an intergroup one.

Conflict can perform both a destructive and a constructive function.

A conflict is destructive if it:

• 1) diverts attention from resolving more important problems and matters;
• 2) reinforces low self-esteem and causes stress;
• 3) polarizes differences in value orientations;
• 4) provokes irresponsible, regrettable behavior.

A conflict is constructive if it:

• 1) brings an important problem to light;
• 2) involves individuals in solving the problem;
• 3) provides an outlet for accumulated negative emotions;
• 4) helps individuals improve themselves and make use of the knowledge and experience gained.

Thus, conflicts represent a complex socio-psychological phenomenon. They are marked by great diversity. Analyzing and evaluating conflicts requires grouping and systematizing them and classifying them according to essential features, types, and kinds.

Studying conflict from a wide variety of standpoints, researchers (F. N. Borodkin, N. M. Koryak, A. G. Zdravomyslov, V. N. Kudryavtsev, V. A. Yadov) identify various bases for classifying its types (Table 6).

The classification proposed is not exhaustive. From a practical standpoint, however, classifying conflicts is important, since it makes it possible to get one's bearings amid their specific manifestations and, consequently, helps in assessing possible ways of resolving them.

Many conflicts can be resolved even at the stage of their objective emergence, through constant and thorough

Table 6. Classification of conflicts

analysis of the entire system of relationships among the people in a given group or team, forecasting the conflict-inducing effects of all changes being made, and careful consideration by the interested parties of their own actions and statements.

If you find yourself a party to a conflict, it is better to follow the path of its constructive resolution. The conditions for the constructive resolution of conflicts include:

• • ending the conflictual interaction;
• • searching for common ground in the interests of the parties;
• • reducing the intensity of negative emotions;
• • identifying and acknowledging one's own mistakes;
• • objectively discussing the problem;
• • taking each other's status (official position) into account;
• • choosing the optimal strategy for resolution.

To analyze and search for ways out of a conflict situation, we can apply the following algorithm.

• 1. Assessing information on the following issues:
  • • the object of the conflict (material, social, or ideal; divisible or indivisible; whether it can be removed or replaced; how accessible it is to each of the parties);

• • the opponent (general information about him, his psychological characteristics; goals, interests, position; the legal and moral grounds for his demands; his previous actions in the conflict and mistakes made; what the interests have in common and where they diverge, etc.);
• • one's own position (goals, values, interests, actions in the conflict; the legal and moral grounds for one's own demands, how well-argued and substantiated they are; mistakes made and the possibility of acknowledging them to the opponent, etc.);
• • the causes and immediate occasion that gave rise to the conflict;
• • secondary reflection (the subject's idea of how his opponent perceives the conflict situation — "how he perceives me," "my picture of the conflict").
• 2. Forecasting possible ways of resolving the conflict:
  • • the most favorable course of events;
  • • the least favorable course of events;
  • • the most realistic course of events;
  • • how the contradiction will be resolved if active actions in the conflict are simply stopped.
• 3. Measures to implement the plan drawn up are carried out in accordance with the chosen method of resolving the conflict. If necessary, the previously drawn-up plan is corrected (returning to discussion; putting forward alternatives and new arguments; turning to third parties; discussing additional concessions).
• 4. Monitoring the effectiveness of one's own actions involves critically answering the following questions for oneself:
  • • Why am I doing this?
  • • What do I want to achieve?
  • • What is hindering the implementation of the plan?
  • • Are my actions fair?
  • • What actions need to be taken to remove obstacles to resolving the conflict?
• 5. Upon the conclusion of the conflict, it is advisable to:
  • • analyze the mistakes in one's own behavior;
  • • generalize the knowledge and experience gained in solving the problem;

• • try to normalize relations with one's recent opponent;
• • relieve any discomfort (if it has arisen) in relations with others;
• • minimize the negative consequences of the conflict for one's own state, activity, and behavior.

The choice of a strategy for resolving the conflict is of great importance. The most effective are compromise and collaboration.

Compromise consists in the opponents' willingness to end the conflict through partial concessions. It is characterized by relinquishing part of the demands previously put forward, and by a readiness to acknowledge the other side's claims as partly justified and to forgive. Compromise is effective in cases involving:

• • the opponent's understanding that he and his rival have equal capabilities;
• • the presence of mutually exclusive interests;
• • satisfaction with a temporary solution;
• • the threat of losing everything.

Today, compromise is the most frequently used strategy for ending conflicts. To achieve it, the technique of open conversation may be recommended, which consists in:

• • stating that the conflict is disadvantageous to both conflicting parties;
• • proposing to end the conflict;
• • acknowledging one's own mistakes already made in the conflict (they surely exist, and acknowledging them costs you almost nothing);
• • making concessions to the opponent, where possible, on matters that are not the main thing for you in the conflict. In any conflict, several minor points can be found on which concessions are possible. One can also concede on serious but non-fundamental matters;
• • expressing wishes regarding the concessions needed from the opponent (these, as a rule, concern your main interests in the conflict);
• • calmly, without negative emotions, discussing mutual concessions and, if necessary and possible, adjusting them;
• • if agreement is reached, recording in some way that the conflict has been settled.

Collaboration is considered the most effective conflict-handling strategy. It presupposes that the opponents are oriented toward a constructive discussion of the problem and regard the other side not as an adversary but as an ally in the search for a solution. It is most effective in situations involving: strong interdependence between the opponents; a tendency on both sides to disregard differences in power; the importance of the decision for both parties; and open-mindedness on the part of the participants. It is advisable to carry out collaboration using the method of "principled negotiation." It comes down to the following:

• • separating the people from the problem, distinguish your relationship with the opponent from the problem itself; put yourself in his place; do not be led by your own fears; show a readiness to work through the problem; be firm on the problem and gentle with the people;
• • focusing on interests, not positions: ask "why?" and "why not?"; identify the underlying interests and their full range; look for shared interests; explain the vital importance of your interests; recognize the opponent's interests as part of the problem;
• • propose mutually beneficial options, do not look for a single answer to the problem; separate the search for options from their evaluation; broaden the range of possible solutions; look for mutual benefit; find out what the other side prefers;
• • use objective criteria: be open to the other side's arguments; yield only to principle, not to pressure; for each part of the problem, use objective and fair criteria.