Bayonets can do anything you want, you can not just sit on them.
Napoleon
Can I control the wind?
Wind - is it good or bad?
Draft - a small wind or wind - this is a great draft?
It is useful if the wind?
Can I split winds on the constructive and destructive? And can it be a breeze and constructive and destructive at the same time?
Typhoon - is a terrible wind or the wind - a phenomenon that always accompanies a typhoon?
Is it possible to ensure the development of the wind?
And anyway, if the winds - the natural state of the natural air environment in which man lives and then not do a curb wind is more expensive (the sad experience of the conquest of nature we have in abundance)?
Imagine the scene: the wind blows across the sea a few sailboats, trying to communicate with each other. Can we control other ships being on his own, barely resisting the stormy wind, the ship? In general, if someone can manage the interaction of other ships without the consent of the captain and the crew? If consent is, whether we say that govern the interaction of or control the wind?
But if you can not control the wind, then what can?
• have the right clothes;
• harden not to be afraid of the wind;
• Have a solid house, built with the laws of nature, including the laws of the formation of winds and their actions;
• understand what the laws are universal and which depend on certain features (in the hot desert winds, the sea on a sunny beach in winter in frosty Arctic in something similar, but somewhat different);
• learn about the wind all that is possible;
• create a service that will monitor the winds and the time
communicate the necessary information.
Now replace the word "wind" in the word "conflict" and ask yourself the same questions.
Historical background to Conflict
Paragraph that can not be included in the chapter, but not necessarily read.
But best of all, when all stray into a close bunch and let the guessing riddles or just bear chatter. Oh my God! Why not just tell! Location of antiquity did not dig! Will not cause any fear!
Nikolai Gogol. Evenings on a Farm near Dikanki
Everyday interpretation of the conflict can be found in many books, such as dictionaries of Russian language - quarrel, dispute, fight. Professional approach requires complete the definition of such a mundane understanding.
"Social Conflict" - the so-called one of his works of the German philosopher and sociologist Georg Simmel (1858-1918). In contemporary social psychology and sociology, the concept of "conflict management" is used as a collective term to refer to a particular field of research.
The degree of interest in the study of conflict have changed - the recognition of the importance and the positive value of the conflict in the late XIX - early XX centuries. (Simmel) to a minimum of attention to it by social analysts, on the one hand, and the attempt to create a special present discipline of conflict - conflict resolution, on the other.
Which declined in the 20-ies of XX century. interest in the problem of the conflict increased again since the 40's. Attempt to revive the theory of conflicts associated with the name Parsons.
The problem of conflict is studied within the framework of various schools: sotsialdarvinizma, psychoanalysis, Gestalt psychology, symbolic interactionism, cognitivism, mathematical modeling, etc.
Best known concept of positive-functional conflict L. Coser, the conflict model of society Ralf Dahrendorf, the general theory of conflict K. Boulding.
Permanence of the conflict has become widely recognized in the last century. According to Mr. Spencer, conflict is inevitable, and stimulates the development of the society. By G. Simmel, conflict is defined as a form of disagreement, uniting the warring sides and at the same time interconnected. Marx developed the theory of the class struggle, built on the principle global conflict, which leads to a split in society as a pre-condition of harmony. The positive role of conflict, Simmel, - to encourage dynamism and adaptability.
The conflict is considered substantively in political science, in which it adopted two basic models: the liberal or pluralistic, and elitist, or authoritarian.
According to the pluralistic (liberal) model of conflict are ubiquitous, inevitable, since society is composed of different interest groups. Well-known American sociologist R. Park (1864-1944) called the conflict the main type of interaction. According to the German sociologist Dahrendorf, the conflict has a creative core and the call is for the existence of human freedom, along with the market, openness, transparency. Conflicts are not perceived as a good in itself, but as a way of overcoming the inevitable contradictions in the course of reforming the structures and the community at large. The abundance of conflict rather than one. Contemporary Sociology conflict sees conflict reduction in the multiplicity of opportunities for the development of one, which leads to a split. The variety of different directions reduces the risk of collisions unidirectional his division, much of the potential for conflict - the energy of public discontent - and squandered cancel themselves in numerous local collisions. According to Dahrendorf, the suppression of conflict leads to exacerbate them.
The conflict does not end the war. For the military phase of the conflict must be political, which is always progress in its development. It is no accident Duverger defined politics as war continued by other means and in other forms. The essence of the other tools and forms to streamline the conflict - to minimize the destructive effect.
Authoritarian (elite) model of conflict that exists in political science, examines the conflict as reflecting the contradictions not only between groups, but between the elite and the masses. According to this model, the struggle occurs when power is concentrated in the hands of small groups of people. This model is similar to the conflict with Lenin's theory of the revolutionary situation. However, conceptually, the two approaches are opposite.
The main thing in the elite model - upper criticism in the name of stability. Therefore, it is sometimes called a conservative. The appointment of the Leninist theory - in favorable conditions justifying the seizure of power.
Interested in the problem of conflict 3. Freud, Jung, E. Bern. But as a separate term in the psychology of conflict appeared later than in sociology and other sciences (such as mathematics).
In recent years, published many theoretical papers and empirical studies that psychologists have offered different interpretations of the term. Despite the dissimilarity approaches to conflict, they clearly stand out common essential features:
• a contradiction in any case the differences between the interests, values, goals, motivations, roles, actors;
• resistance, confrontation subjects of conflict, the desire to damage your opponent;
• negative emotions and feelings towards each other as background characteristics of the conflict interaction.
The main content of the theory of conflict are the following categories: the concept and the structure of the conflict, its dynamics, stages of development, functions, and typology.
To date, it seems necessary to combine in almost all of the unrelated studies of conflict, which are conducted within the framework of history, mathematics, psychology, sociology, philosophy, political science, law, military, science, art, pedagogy, sociobiology, and some others (such as psychiatry, economics). Its creation is not only possible, but also imperative, because the study of conflict, only one of the existing science inevitably leads to a loss of holistic understanding of it, the loss of some of its essential features. After all, in life we have to deal with the integrity of real conflict, not their individual psychological, legal, philosophical, sociological and other aspects.
What is a conflict?
Who does not know where he was going, very surprised, hitting the wrong place.
Mark Twain
The problem of concepts
It is believed that prevent conflict, stop it is not only possible but even necessary. It is best to lead without conflict - not by accident and is named as the popular book by Siegert and L. Lang (constantly putting the lists of recommended literature conflictological). But if you take a closer look at the work of German psychologists, you will find there is just the opposite. They argue that the conflict - is not necessarily something bad. Bad, negative, and thus can be destructive behavior in a conflict situation. [1]
On the atmosphere of heightened conflict say government officials and managers of commercial banks, the workers are employed and unemployed professionals, old and young. The press and television remind the public about the contradictions between the real possibilities of subjects of the Russian Federation, Russian citizens and desirable forms of realization of their interests. Politicians propose urgent measures to resolve the conflict devastating nationwide. And managers are most relevant are increasingly considered possession technologies working in conflict situations. And everyone wants to manage conflicts.
But when the question of their settlement, the choice of forms of work in a conflict situation, optimizing action to overcome it, then first of all, there is the problem of understanding of the concepts themselves, "a way out of the conflict" and "care of him", "prevention", "settlement", "regulation", "resolution", "solution" and "overcome." The difficulty is compounded by the absence of the choice of the absolute unity of theoretical approaches and the lack of success of a subject directly related to the conflict in one step from success on the other.
Confusing and old habit or, more precisely, the tradition of sharing conflicts in the destructive and constructive. And how to know in advance what is it?
The problem of choosing an approach
It is necessary to distinguish between two theoretical approaches to the concept of conflict.
1. Conflict - a clash ... contradiction ... and fight.,. Opposition ... (Individuals, forces and interests, attitudes, opinions) due to the opposition .., .. incompatibility, conflict ... - Up to the formulation of various authors.
That's what says in the preface to his book, "Conflict" VI Andreev, "... without the ability to stand up for themselves, to emerge victorious from the conflict situation of the dispute, without the ability to negotiate a person simply can not survive, survive in this world. "
Because of this approach, VI Andreev and determines:
• conflict as a process of a sharp aggravation of the contradictions and struggle of participants in solving the problem, which has significance for each of the participants.
The antagonistic nature of the conflict can be regarded as the characteristic feature of the other models;
• conflict - a clash of opposing interests, opinions and aspirations;
• Social conflict - an attempt to achieve compensation by submission, imposing their will, delete, or even the destruction of the enemy, seeking to achieve the same reward. Conflict is different from the competition a clear direction, the presence of incidents stringent conduct of warfare;
• conflict - an open confrontation as a result of conflicting interests and positions.
Proponents of the first approach described the conflict as a negative phenomenon. They share the conflicts in the destructive and constructive (many of them believe that the design - a rarity that the conflict is almost always bad, and certainly, at least, the worst conflict-free coexistence). Most of the work on the technology of the conflict within the framework of this approach give advice on handling, which is called "conflict management", "conflict management." The main purpose of this control is to eliminate the conflict with the maximum benefit for themselves.
2. Conflict - a system of relations ..., the development process of interaction ... defined by differences of actors involved in it (the same interests, values and activities).
Proponents of the second approach is considered a natural condition of the existence of a conflict of interacting people, organization development tool, any community, though having destructive effects, but in general and the long period of no less destructive as the effects of the elimination of conflicts, their communication and social blockade. A similar approach was always in the mathematical theory of games (so named for historical reasons, attempts to study the occurrence of the Games, it is the theory of mathematical models of optimal decision making in situations of conflict, and both the term "game" and "conflict" refers to the same concept and are essentially "mathematical synonyms"). It is typical for modern sociology of conflict (AG sanity, E. Stepanov, TS Sulimova), social psychology (AY Antsupov, NV Grishin, AI Dontcov, Y. Zhukov, L. Peter), the theory of organizational development and, of course, the general theory of conflict. With this approach, all of these disciplines is quite correlated with each other (basic definitions, postulates), which allows one to apply the findings to the theoretical constructs in the other, keeping the scientific rigor, completeness and consistency. Correlated especially important when you consider that game theory developed actively in the XVIII and XIX centuries. earlier than in most sciences, dealing with conflicts of today (and its emergence as a mathematical discipline belongs to the same letter to Pascal's Farm on July 29, 1654, which is considered the beginning and probability theory), but that is the definition of the conflict by game theory is in conflict with all theoretical models of the first approach.
The second approach involves the inability to manage conflict and optimizing interactions, theoretically justifying the development of the conflict as a self-regulating mechanism. Instead of "solutions", "resolution" and other similar terms are used, the term "bridging", implying that the conflict is not eliminated, but ensures the development, strengthening the organization differentiation, especially professional, and in a society - social stratification that underlies social and institutional stability. It is transformed into other conflicts, less destructive, in other areas, other social dimensions. This approach does not deny the possibility and even constructive political and administrative manipulations (not all) in the initial phases of the conflict, but is based primarily on ensuring the completeness of the information interaction between subjects and the required risk assessment provides an opportunity to move its final phase:
The general trend in recent years is this: more and more scholars and practitioners of social psychology tend to the second approach, with some maintaining the orientation of the psychological manipulation, psychological mitigating the destructive manifestations of conflict. The base for this choice is that the first approach is based on subject-object communication, while the second - on the subject-subject.
The second approach is lean and political practitioners and technologists orgkonsultanty, based upon this very conflictology in modeling the processes going in the organization and to ensure the future success of the firm and its managers. They replace "traditional" techniques (including the study of public opinion in the organization) for Conflict research staff. The approach allows us to calculate the group of supporters and opponents, and not only real, but above all the potential (especially among undecided in his professional career, social preferences, and organizational inactive), and the most appropriate ways of working with them.
Choosing a manager of one of the two approaches and identifies their choice as a result of the first selection, forms of work and recommendations of their team, business units for action in conflict situations.
With him and must begin now managing for long-term success and future.
References
For preparation of this work were used materials from the site http://www.iu.ru/
---------------------------
[1]
Siegert W., Lang L. Steer without conflict. - Moscow: Economics, 1990.
No comments:
Post a Comment