Positive functions of conflicts. Abstract: Causes, functions and subjects of social conflicts

Modern understanding of conflicts in social sciences comes from the idea of ​​the positive functions of conflict.

It's easy to accept when we're talking about about the theoretical reasoning of sociologists about the processes occurring in social systems. But the psychologist deals with living people and sees in front of him a suffering person who is having a hard time experiencing life’s difficulties, which can be emotionally difficult to combine with reasoning about the benefits of conflicts.

However, for modern psychology characterized by recognition of the dual nature of the conflict, including its positive role.

Conflict is a source of development. The most important positive function of conflict is that, being a form of contradiction, conflict is a source of development. The more significant the conflict is for the participants in the situation, the potentially stronger its impact on their intellectual development. The thesis about contradictions as a source of group development, including possible competitive processes, can also be considered generally accepted. Thus, B.F. Lomov believes that in joint activities “rivalry (cooperation) plays the role of a kind of “catalyst” for the development of abilities.” Competition plays a similar function in stimulating activity and development in a group.

Conflict is a signal for change. Of the other positive functions of conflict, the most obvious is signaling function. Discussing types critical situations, F. E. Vasilyuk emphasizes the positive role, “need” internal conflicts for life: “They signal the objective contradictions of life’s relationships and provide a chance to resolve them before a real collision of these relationships, fraught with disastrous consequences.”

Conflicts perform a similar signaling function in interpersonal relationships. Let’s take the relationship between parents and child as an example. If parents perceive the child’s disagreement, his new claims and attempts to discuss them with parents solely as disobedience, then they will fight his disobedience, insist on their own, and thereby most likely worsen, and perhaps even destroy, their relationship with the child. The gradually accumulating tension is like steam, the pressure of which bursts a tightly closed boiler.

A constructive response would be to perceive what is happening not as disobedience, but as signal about the need for change. Perhaps an analogy with pain would be appropriate here. The pain is unpleasant, but any doctor will tell you that it performs an important and useful function. Pain is a signal that something is wrong in the body. Ignoring or drowning out the pain calming tablets, we remain with the disease. Conflict, like pain, serves as a signal, telling us that something is wrong in our relationships or in ourselves. And if we, in response to this signal, try to make changes in our interaction, we come to a new state of adaptation in the relationship. If we reach a new level of adaptation at each stage of our relationships, this ensures the preservation, “survival” of our relationships.

Conflict is an opportunity for rapprochement. Examples can be found on psychological material that illustrate other positive functions of conflict, for example, “communicative-informational” and “connective” (in Coser’s terminology).

As an example, here is the story of one young woman. She got married very early, she was not yet nineteen years old. Her chosen one was several years older than her, and although he was also young, it seemed to her that he was wiser and more experienced. Perhaps this is what led to the fact that, despite her good relationship with him, she felt some kind of constraint in her soul, felt the distance separating them. After the birth of the child, their relationship began to deteriorate and finally approached that dangerous point, after which, perhaps, separation awaited them. However, there was that often unexpected breakthrough for which there is always hope. They began to sort out their relationship and during this frank conversation they understood each other. Having told this rather banal story, the woman added at the end: “I am so glad that this conflict was between us then. Because since then my husband and I have become absolutely close people to each other. I can tell him anything and everything that’s on my soul.”

She associates this new level of relations between them with the conflict that occurred. The moment of breakthrough, when people have nothing to lose when they try to break through to each other, can be their last opportunity for mutual understanding. No wonder sociologists of the Chicago school said: “Conflict is an opportunity to talk openly.”

Positive functions of intragroup conflicts. The traditional point of view not only of sociologists, but also of psychologists who worked with groups was that conflicts are a negative phenomenon for the group and the task is to eliminate them. The tendency to seek social harmony in groups dates back to the “human relations” school: avoiding conflict, seen as a “social disease”, and promoting “equilibrium” or a “state of cooperation”. However, thanks to the conflict, it becomes possible to initially establish unity or restore it if it was previously broken. Of course, not every type of conflict will contribute to the strengthening of the group, just as not in all groups the conflict can realize similar functions. The presence of these positive conflict potentials is determined by its type, as well as by the characteristics of the group.

Every group contains the potential for conflict due to the periodic rivalry between the demands of individuals. The nature of the group will significantly influence the characteristics of these conflicts, in particular their functions. Thus, Coser believes that the closer the group, the more intense the conflict. If, nevertheless, a conflict arises in such a close-knit group, then it will proceed with particular intensity due to the “accumulated” discontent and complete personal involvement characteristic of a group with close ties. Conflict in groups of this type will threaten their very foundations and therefore be destructive.

Significant importance for intragroup conflict will also be the nature of the group's relationship with external environment . Thus, groups that are in a state of more or less constant confrontation with other groups will tend to more fully personally involve their members in general activities and to the suppression of deviations from group unity and dissent. Greater tolerance to intragroup conflicts will be characteristic of groups whose relations with the external environment are more balanced.

Internal conflict also serves as a means of identifying conflicting interests among group members and thereby contributes to the possibility of a new agreement, ensuring the restoration of the necessary balance.

Conflicts often lead to the creation of associations and coalitions within groups, which ensures interaction between members of the entire association, reduces isolation, and creates the ground for individual activity of group members.

In general, pointing out the positive possibilities of conflict in flexible social structures, L. Coser calls it the most important stabilizing mechanism, a mechanism for adapting norms to new conditions.

Conflict is an opportunity to relieve tension and improve relationships. The function of relieving tension, “improving” relationships, which the conflict potentially contains, can be purposefully used in pedagogical practice. For example, A. S. Makarenko considered conflict as a pedagogical means of influencing people’s relationships.

It is interesting that R. May considers it possible to use the same technique of intensifying experiences to initiate a beneficial crisis in psychotherapeutic practice. He writes about how he once received an extremely emotional letter from young man, who asked him for help: “In my response letter, I set out to extremely aggravate his experiences and cause a crisis. I wrote that he had become accustomed to his position as a spoiled child, who was always carried around, and now in his suffering there is nothing but self-pity and a complete lack of courage to cope with the current situation. I deliberately did not leave any loophole to save the prestige of his “I.” May believes, judging by the response, that his goal has been achieved and has led to constructive steps.

Emphasizing the potential positive possibilities of conflict should not make us forget about its likely destructive role in the life of an individual. It can be considered generally accepted that not only positive meaning effective resolution and overcoming by a person of emerging intrapersonal crises, conflicts, contradictions, but also about the negative and even destructive impact that their failure to overcome can have on the development of a healthy personality. We can evaluate a person's recovery from a conflict or crisis as productive if, as a result, he is truly “freed” from the problem that gave rise to it in such a way that the experience makes him more mature, psychologically adequate and integrated.

The emotional experience of a crisis situation, no matter how strong it may be, does not in itself lead to overcoming it. In the same way, analyzing a situation and thinking about it only leads to a better understanding of it. The real problem is creating new meaning, in “meaning generation”, “meaning construction”, when the result internal work for an individual to overcome and experience critical life situations, changes in his inner subjective world become the finding of a new meaning, a new value attitude, restoration peace of mind etc.

On the contrary, those strategies that, in essence, are psychologically ineffective, no matter how the individual himself evaluates them, actually turn out to be aimed at weakening, mitigating the severity of the crisis being experienced and the accompanying emotional states. If we recall the previously used medical analogy, we can say that in the first case, a person, having felt pain, tries to find out its cause and cope with it by curing the disease, and in the second case, he simply takes pills, trying to drown out the unpleasant sensations.

The general practical position can be expressed in the already quoted words of R. May: “...Our task is to transform destructive conflicts into constructive ones.”

Plan

1. Characteristics of the concepts of social conflict.

2. Main stages of analysis of social conflict.

3. Common reasons social conflicts. Typology of conflicts.

4. Functions of social conflicts.

1. Characteristics of the concepts of social conflict

Describing the basic concepts of social conflict, it should be noted that today in the conflictology literature there are a variety of definitions of conflict.

Thus, the American sociologist L. Coser believes that conflict is a struggle for values ​​and claims to a certain status, power and resources, in which the enemy’s goals are to neutralize, cause damage or eliminate the opponent. The well-known domestic conflictologist A. Zdravomyslov defines conflict as a form of relationship between potential or actual subjects of social action, the motivation of which is determined by opposing values ​​and norms, interests and needs. Yu. Zaprudsky sees conflict as an obvious or hidden state of confrontation between objectively divergent interests, goals and development trends social facilities; direct and indirect clash of social forces based on opposition to the existing social order special shape historical movement towards a new social unity. A. Dmitriev is convinced that social conflict is a confrontation in which the parties seek to seize territory or resources, threaten opposition individuals or groups, their property or culture in such a way that the struggle takes the form of attack or defense.

There are currently two general approach to understanding social conflict. The first approach defines conflict as a clash of parties, opinions, and forces. The definition of the conflict in this case is broad. From this point of view, conflicts are also possible in inanimate nature. The second approach to conflict defines it as a collision of opposing positions, goals, interests, opinions of opponents or subjects of interaction. In this case, the subject of interaction can be either an individual person or a group of people. Since the second approach treats conflict as a social phenomenon and assumes that conflicts arise only in the presence of social interaction, it can be considered more relevant.

The social nature of the conflict was first pointed out by the outstanding Scottish economist and philosopher A. Smith in his 1776 work “Inquiries into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations.” He expressed the idea that the basis of the conflict lies in the division of society into classes, which, according to A. Smith, is driving force development of society.

Today, there are many views and points of view in the theory of social conflict. We can distinguish five main concepts of the nature of conflict: socio-biological, socio-psychological, class, functionalism, and dialectical.

Socio-biological concept comes from the belief that conflict is inherent in humans, like all animals. Theory natural selection Darwin's theory was transferred to the human community, and the conclusion was made about the natural aggressiveness of man. This view was called “social Darwinism,” whose proponents explained the evolution of society biological laws natural selection.

Based on the principle of the struggle for existence, he developed his sociological concept of conflict in the second half of the 19th century. English philosopher and sociologist G. Spencer. He argued that the state of confrontation is universal. Conflict is a universal law. Confrontation ensures balance both in society and in the relationship between society and nature. Until complete balance is achieved between peoples and races, conflicts are mandatory.

The American sociologist W. Sumner also considered the conflict from the standpoint of social Darwinism. He argued that in the struggle for existence, the weak, the worst representatives of humanity die. The best people- these are the winners, the true creators of value. By such winners, W. Sumner meant, first of all, successful American industrialists and bankers.

Today, the ideas of social Darwinism are used by individual researchers mainly when describing various types of aggressive behavior of people: sexual aggression, aggression of a robber, aggression of a victim, aggression of parents, children, etc.

The explanation of conflict using tension theory characterizes socio-psychological concept. The basis of this concept is the belief that modern society is the cause of the state of tension in most people. There is a constant imbalance between the individual and the social environment. This disruption comes from unstable relationships, impersonality, overcrowding and overcrowding. The result is a state of frustration - disorganization internal state personality, which can manifest itself in a reaction of withdrawal, a reaction of regression or a reaction of aggression. When talking about this concept, it should be borne in mind that tension indicators are very individual, and they cannot be used to analyze the collective manifestation of conflicts.

Proponents are convinced that social conflict is reproduced by societies with a certain social structure class concept. In the study of social conflict, they start from the class theory of Marxism. Thus, K. Marx believed that the cause of the conflict lies in the division of people into classes, which are determined by their position in the economic system. There is constant hostility between the main classes of modern society - the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. These antagonistic conflicts lead to revolutions, which, according to K. Marx, are the locomotives of history. Therefore, from the point of view of Marxism, conflict is an inevitable collision. In order to accelerate the development of society, this conflict must be properly organized.

K. Marx’s views on the nature of social conflict were developed by both his followers F. Engels, V. Ulyanov, Mao Zedong, and representatives of neo-Marxism - the American sociologist G. Marcuse, representatives of the Italian school of political sociology, the creators of the theory of elites V. Pareto, G. Mosca , as well as the American left-wing sociologist C.R. Mills.

It should be noted that the class concept of the nature of conflict cannot be applied to the analysis of ethnic conflicts, corporate conflicts, interpersonal conflicts, intrapersonal conflicts, etc.

Concept of functionalism views conflict as a distortion or dysfunctional process in social systems.

From the point of view of the leading representative of this trend, American sociologist T. Parsons, conflict is a social anomaly, it is a disaster. T. Parsons paid special attention to overcoming conflict and achieving stability of the social system. This requires a number of prerequisites, namely, it is necessary to achieve a coincidence of individual motivations with social attitudes, satisfaction of the basic needs, both biological and psychological, of the majority of society. In addition, the effective activities of social control bodies are also important. Only in a well-functioning, well-functioning social system is consensus possible. There is no ground for conflict in it.

The concept of functionalism should include representatives of the school of “human relations”. Thus, one of the founders of the public relations school, E. Mayo, considered it necessary to pay primary attention to improving industrial relations: establishing peace in industry, a democratic leadership style, replacing individual rewards with group ones, economic rewards with socio-psychological ones, and job satisfaction.

Currently the most successfully developed dialectical concepts, which are united by the belief that conflict is functional for social systems.

These concepts include, first of all, positive functional conflict theory , developed by L. Coser. In his work “Functions of Social Conflict,” he argued that the more conflicts in a society that are independent of each other, the better for the unity of this society. L. Coser was convinced: the more different conflicts intersect in society, the more difficult it is to create a united front that will divide society into two hostile camps.

In the book of the German-British sociologist and public figure R. Dahrendorf's “Modern Social Conflict” sets out a theory called "conflict model of society" . R. Dahrendorf believed that in every society there is a certain disintegration. In his opinion, conflict is permanent state any social organism. Any society is subject to change at every moment. Therefore, any society experiences social conflict at every moment.

Within the framework of the dialectical concept, a theory was developed called "general theory of conflict" . Its author is an American sociologist and economist K. Boulding - in his work “Conflict and Defense. General theory"applied conflict in the analysis of not only social phenomena, but also physical and biological phenomena. In his opinion, nature, both living and inanimate, is filled with conflicts. K. Boulding is convinced that conflict is inseparable from social life. Its basis is in human nature. This is a person’s desire for constant hostility with his own kind. The main concept of conflict in K. Boulding is competition between people. In a real conflict, there is awareness of the parties, as well as the incompatibility of their desires. All conflicts have common samples development. Since it is impossible to avoid conflicts, the main task is to overcome or limit them.

In general, it should be noted that in modern foreign conflitological literature the dialectical concept of social conflict prevails, namely, the theories of L. Coser, R. Dahrendorf and K. Boulding. Their supporters emphasize the positive role of conflict. It is seen in the fact that conflicts can strengthen morality, enrich relationships between people, conflicts make life more interesting, awaken curiosity, and stimulate development. Conflicts help clarify the problem, they strengthen the organization's ability to change, improve the quality of decisions made, contribute to the production of new creative ideas, etc.

2. Main stages of analysis of social conflict

It should be noted that conflicts do not arise out of nowhere. Their causes accumulate and can sometimes mature for quite a long time. Therefore, the period of gestation of the conflict can be divided into four stages.

First stage the maturation of the conflict is latent stage. It is usually associated with the unequal position of groups of individuals in the spheres of “have” and “can”. People constantly strive to improve their status, strive for superiority. This is the main reason for the development of the first stage. Degree second stage - tension - depends on the position of the opposing side, which has great power or superiority. Third stage antagonism manifests itself as a consequence of high tension. Fourth stage is the stage of incompatibility. This is already a consequence of high tension, a conflict itself. Moreover, the emergence of the conflict itself does not exclude the continuation of the previous stages.

To successfully resolve a conflict, it must be studied well. The first stage analysis can be considered the development of the conflict from the moment it begins to the beginning of observation of it. This time can be significant. At this stage of the analysis, several issues need to be examined.

First, it is necessary to clarify the subject and object of the conflict. Under p subject of conflict one should understand an objectively existing or imaginary problem that is the cause of discord between the parties. This could be a problem of power, the possession of any values, a problem of primacy or incompatibility. It must be borne in mind that in complex, large conflicts, the subject of the conflict may not have clear boundaries. Under object of conflict is understood as a material, social, political or spiritual value, over which there is a confrontation between parties seeking to possess or use this value. To become an object of conflict, this value must be at the intersection of the interests of social actors who seek to control it. Such a value can be a resource, power, idea, norm, principle, etc.

Secondly, at the first stage it is important analysis of the participants in the conflict To do this, it is advisable to identify the direct participants in the conflict and their allies. It is also necessary to identify those who are indirectly interested in supporting the parties to the conflict.

Analysis of the composition of the parties to the conflict involves identifying their resources, the forces that the parties to the conflict have. So, for example, when analyzing an international conflict, it is necessary to calculate material resources (level of production, mineral reserves), ideological resources (moral and political unity of the nation); military resources (composition of armed forces, weapons); political resources (type of state, political regime, its stability, qualities of a leader); foreign policy resources (alignment of forces in warring coalitions).

In addition, to analyze the composition of the participants in the conflict, it is necessary to determine the level of their claims. In this case, the goals of the parties should be considered from the point of view of the possibilities of achieving them by any of the conflicting parties.

Thirdly, at the first stage of conflict analysis, it should be determined occasion, i.e. find out the specific events that led to the conflict. The reason for the conflict is the incident, circumstances or pretext that were used to start the conflict. The reasons for the conflict can be very different: the adoption of an administrative act that infringes on the rights of one of the groups; planned provocations; acceptance of customs restrictions, etc.

Fourthly, it is necessary to determine tension level or stability in the relationship between the parties at the initial point of the conflict. For example, this level can be represented in the form of the degree of satisfaction of various social groups with government policies, the level of organization of social groups, and the possibility of their putting pressure on government policies. Social tension is an indicator of conflict, psychological condition significant social groups, group emotions.

On second stage analysis of the conflict is the study of its course. The main attention here is focused on identifying events that bring a fundamentally new quality to the development of the conflict, promoting it to a new stage of escalation. They accumulate some quality for a leap or artificially delay its progress. For example, such events may be rallies, strikes, decisions of informal bodies, etc. It is especially important to determine the transition of a conflict into a crisis, i.e. in a situation of sudden exacerbation that requires prompt decisions or intervention.

Third stage Conflict analysis should be devoted to its prediction. A forecast is a scientifically based judgment about the possible states of a particular phenomenon in the future and (or) about alternative ways and timing for the implementation of these states. In other words, based on the available data, it is necessary to make a prediction about the development and outcome of the conflict. The main task of the forecast is to obtain an answer to the question: what will happen if certain events take place.

In conclusion, we note that fourth stage conflict analysis is its resolution. It represents the process of solving a problem. The goal of the process is to resolve the conflict in its very essence, to get to its real causes. It is necessary to find out, recognize those needs and values ​​that cannot be agreed upon, and achieve agreement.

3. General causes of social conflicts. Typology of conflicts

The main condition for successfully influencing conflicts is knowledge of the causes of their occurrence. As domestic conflictologists A. Antsupov and A. Shipilov point out, the causes of conflicts are objective-subjective in nature. They can be combined into four groups: objective, organizational and managerial, socio-psychological and personal.

Objective reasons the emergence of conflicts are: the natural clash of interests of people in the process of their life; poor development and use of normative procedures for resolving social contradictions; lack or unfair distribution of material and spiritual benefits that are significant for people’s life; a lifestyle associated with material instability and radical changes; stereotypes conflict resolution social contradictions.

Basic organizational and managerial reasons conflicts: structural-organizational, functional-organizational, personal-functional and situational-managerial reasons; unequal position of people in imperatively coordinated associations, when some control, others obey.

Typical socio-psychological reasons conflicts are: loss or distortion of information during interpersonal and intergroup communication; imbalance of role interaction between people; different way performance evaluation; different assessments of the same complex events; competition and competition, etc.

Among the main personal reasons conflicts should be highlighted: subjective assessment of the partner’s behavior as unacceptable; inadequate level of aspirations; weak developed ability resist conflicts, different or completely opposite perceptions of people's goals, values, interests; imperfection human psyche, discrepancy between reality and ideas about it, etc.

To successfully regulate the process of conflicts, it is important to know their typology. The importance of the typology of social conflicts is due to the need to regulate the process of their occurrence.

The emergence of conflicts is inextricably linked with various aspects of the activities of people and organizations, which explains their fairly large diversity. The ambiguity of the criteria used in the description and classification of many conflicts gives rise to the creation of a number of typologies. Currently, depending on the criterion used, there are the most different classifications conflicts.

In accordance with the organization of society, conflicts are formed at different levels. Conflicts can be identified at the level of individuals and between them; at the level of groups of individuals; at the level of large systems (subsystems); at the level of social class division of society; at the level of society as a whole; conflicts at the global (regional) level.

It is worth mentioning the multivariate typology proposed social psychology, according to which four types of conflicts can be classified: intrapersonal, interpersonal, between an individual and the organization to which he belongs, between organizations or groups of the same or different status.

Depending on the direction of conflict interaction, horizontal, vertical and mixed conflicts are distinguished. Horizontal conflict occurs between people who are not subordinate to each other. Vertical conflict develops between people in imperatively coordinated associations. In a mixed conflict, both horizontal and vertical connections between people are represented.

It is generally accepted to divide conflicts into constructive and destructive. There is a certain norm within which the conflict has a constructive content. Going beyond this framework leads to a pathological degeneration of a constructive conflict into a destructive one.

The author's typologies of conflicts may be of particular interest. Thus, according to the American researcher M. Deutsch, the determining role in a conflict is played by the adequacy of its perception by opponents. On this basis, M. Deutsch identifies six types of conflicts.

1. Genuine conflict - the conflict exists objectively and is perceived adequately.

2. Random conflict, the existence of which depends on easily changeable circumstances. But this is not realized by opponents.

3. A displaced conflict is an “overt” conflict, behind which some other latent conflict is hidden, which is at the basis of the “overt” one. The real problem that caused the conflict is veiled by other problems.

4. Misattributed conflict is a conflict between misunderstood parties and, as a result, about a misinterpreted problem. The real problem exists, but its initiator is not the person who is accused of it.

5. A latent conflict is a conflict that should have occurred, but which is not obvious, since for one reason or another it is not realized by the parties.

6. False conflict, the objective basis of which is absent and it exists only due to errors of perception.

The typology of the German-American psychologist, a representative of Gestalt psychology, became famous. experimental research will and affect of K. Levin. He identified four types of conflict situations depending on the influences that direct the subject’s behavior.

1. “Striving-Striving” conflict, in which two objects or goals are considered that have positive and approximately equal valence.

2. “Striving-avoidance” conflict, when the same thing simultaneously attracts and repels.

3. Avoidance-avoidance conflict, when you have to choose one of two equally unattractive solutions.

4. The conflict of “double aspirations-avoidance”, or double ambivalence, when the choice is made from two objects, each of which has its own positive and negative sides.

Based on the doctrine of motivation, K. Levin identified three types of conflicts:

choice between positive and positive;

choice between positive and negative;

choice between negative and negative.

Conflictologist G. Bisno identified six types of conflicts:

1) conflicts of interest, which are characterized by a real interweaving of interests or obligations;

2) forced conflicts - deliberately created conflicts to achieve goals other than the declared ones;

3) falsely correlated - these are conflicts confused by the discrepancy between the characteristics of the participants’ behavior, content and reasons;

4) illusory conflicts that are based on misperception or misunderstanding;

5) displaced conflicts, where the antagonism is directed at a person or considerations other than the actual offended participants or the real issues;

6) expressive conflicts, characterized by the desire to express hostility and antagonism.

American researcher J. Himes proposed his typology of social conflicts, the criterion of which was the breadth of the masses involved and the degree of impact on society. Firstly, these are private conflicts where the state or government does not play the main roles: gang wars, interreligious, interethnic, interclan, intertribal, interregional clashes, conflict between employee and manager. Secondly, there is civil disobedience: riots (actions directed against the government), collusion, internal war (insurrection, riot, civil war, revolution), etc.

In addition, J. Himes identified simple and complex forms of pathological conflict. Simple pathological forms of conflict: boycott, sabotage, bullying (persecution), verbal and physical aggression. Complex pathological forms of conflict: protest, riot, revolution, war.

According to the American scientist R. Fisher, three types of conflict can be distinguished. Economic conflict is based on the motives of possessing limited resources, including territory. A conflict of values ​​is formed around incompatible preferences, principles that people believe in and which correlate with group cultural, religious and ideological identification. A power conflict that occurs when one party seeks to maximize its influence over the other party through force.

As we can see, the typology of conflicts is complex. This is due to a number of circumstances. Firstly, conflicts belong to the category of social phenomena, the boundaries of which are not clearly visible. Secondly, any conflict has many sides, aspects and possible facets, which makes it impossible to create unified classification and clearly distinguish one type of conflict from another. Thirdly, the essence of the conflict is often impossible to determine even after the passage of time: the latency of the true sources, causes and motives of the participants. In addition, such circumstances include the subjectivity of the researcher.

4. Functions of social conflicts

In general, all functions of social conflicts can be divided into two groups: constructive(positive) and destructive(negative). In relation to the participants in the conflict, it can play both a positive and negative role.

Talking about first group of functions, the following should be noted.

Conflict eliminates completely (or partially) contradictions that arise due to imperfections in the organization, management errors, fulfillment of duties, etc. When resolving conflicts, in most cases it is possible to completely or partially resolve the contradictions underlying them.

Conflict allows us to more fully assess the individual psychological characteristics of the people participating in it. Conflict highlights a person’s value orientations, the relative strength of his motives, and reveals psychological stability to the stress factors of a difficult situation. It helps to reveal not only negative, but also positive aspects in man.

Conflict allows you to ease psychological tension, which is the reaction of participants to a conflict situation. Conflict interaction, accompanied by violent emotions, relieves a person’s emotional tension and leads to a subsequent decrease in intensity negative emotions. One of the final feelings of conflict may be catharsis, i.e. a release of accumulated energy that has been weighing on a person for a long time.

Conflict serves as a source personality development, interpersonal relationships. If resolved constructively, conflict allows a person to rise to new heights, expand the scope and methods of interaction with others. The individual gains social experience in solving difficult situations.

Conflict can improve quality individual activities. When defending just goals, the authority of one of the participants increases, and the attitude of the people around him noticeably improves. Regardless of the outcome of the conflict, this happens more often than in relation to an opponent who defends dubious goals. In addition, it must be borne in mind that interpersonal conflicts serve as a means of human socialization and contribute to the self-affirmation of the individual.

Conflict acts as a means of activating the social life of a group or society (innovative conflict). It highlights unresolved problems. Interpersonal conflicts in organizations more often have a positive effect on the effectiveness of joint activities than a negative one. Conflict sometimes contributes to the creation of new, more favorable conditions for human activity. It can serve as group cohesion. The end of a conflict is often accompanied by an increase in the discipline of employees, a faster response to each other’s comments and wishes, and the establishment of a more friendly environment.

Concerning second group of functions, it is advisable to note the obvious negative impact most conflicts in mental condition its participants. After the end of the conflict, mood generally worsens and almost never improves immediately after the end of the conflict. Conflict is accompanied by stress. With frequent, emotionally intense conflicts, the likelihood of cardiovascular and other diseases increases sharply.

Conflict forms a negative image of the other, which is easily restored in the event of even minor complications in the relationship and often leads to the emergence of a new conflict. Defeat in a conflict negatively affects a person's self-esteem.

Unsuccessful conflicts can be accompanied by psychological and physical violence. According to statistics, most intentional killings are committed as a result of escalation of conflict. If victory in a conflict is achieved through violence, there is a high probability that subsequently a person, without sufficient grounds, will resort to the same method of solving the problem in a similar situation.

Moreover, conflict affects more than just the parties involved. It often affects the macroenvironment and microenvironment of the participants. The degree of influence of a conflict on a group is directly proportional to the degree of connection between the parties and the environment in which this conflict occurs. It is directly proportional to the rank of the participants and the intensity of the confrontation.

Conflict is always accompanied by a temporary disruption of the communication system and relationships in the team. If the conflict ends with the adoption of a destructive decision, relationships in the team deteriorate. Frequent conflicts lead to decreased group cohesion. Sometimes the quality of joint activities deteriorates during conflict. If the conflict is not resolved, but slowly fades away or the advantage is on the side of the one who, from the point of view of the group, is wrong, the quality of joint activity decreases even after the end of the conflict.

So, when assessing the constructiveness and destructiveness of the functions of conflict, it is necessary to keep in mind that they have a dual nature. There are no clear criteria for distinguishing between constructive and destructive conflicts. The line between them becomes less clear when it comes to assessing the consequences of the conflict. The vast majority of conflicts have both constructive and destructive functions. The same conflict can play a positive and negative role in the relations of the conflicting parties. The degree of constructiveness and destructiveness of a particular conflict may change at different stages. It can be constructive and destructive at different moments of its development. It is necessary to consider for which of the participants this conflict is constructive and for whom it is destructive. It is not the warring parties themselves who may be interested in the conflict, but other participants: instigators, accomplices, organizers.

Questions and tasks

1. Which concept of social conflict, in your opinion, most fully reveals its nature? Why?

2. What is the subject of the conflict and its object? Give examples.

3. Conduct an analysis of social conflicts known to you from history.

4. Describe the main groups of causes of social conflicts. Give examples.

5. Give an example of a conflict and characterize it from the point of view of various typologies of social conflicts.

6. Describe the constructive and destructive functions of social conflicts using examples known to you.

Function (lat. function) - execution, purpose, implementation. Social function - this is the role that this or that element performs social system(social institution, social process, social actions, etc.) in society or a social community. For example, the function of the family institution is to regulate marriage and family relations in society; application function sociological research- identify and resolve specific social problems. In relation to the social system we can talk about functional And dysfunctional conflicts. The former will contribute to improving the functioning of the system and its development, while the latter, on the contrary, will contribute to its destabilization and destruction.

From the point of view of resolving specific contradictions, we can talk about constructive And destructive functions (dysfunctions) of the conflict. The first are aimed at resolving the contradictions that have arisen, the second - at deepening them.

There are also positive (positive) And negative (negative) functions of conflict. To a greater extent, they reflect a subjective-objective assessment of the development and consequences of social conflict. Thus, the October 1917 revolution divided not only Russian society, but also the world community on those who assess this event as positive, and on those who give it a negative assessment.

In addition, there are objective and subjective assessments of the conflict in terms of its consequences for specific people. For example, the reconstruction of an enterprise, which became possible as a result of an industrial (social-labor) conflict, is an objectively positive phenomenon, but from the point of view of a certain part of workers dismissed from the enterprise as a result of staff reductions, this conflict will be assessed as negative.

The positive or negative impact of the conflict is also largely determined by the social system in which it arose and is developing. In loosely structured groups and open societies, where conflict is accepted as the norm and a variety of mechanisms exist for its resolution, it tends to promote greater vitality, dynamism and receptivity to progress. In a totalitarian society, the only mechanism for resolving social conflict is its suppression by force. Such a conflict becomes dysfunctional, leading to the disintegration of society, the exacerbation of old and the emergence of new contradictions. Unresolved contradictions accumulate, and if they manifest themselves in the form of conflict, they lead to serious social upheaval.

It is also necessary to keep in mind that managers at all levels (the ruling elite) in any field of activity (economic, political, social) in most cases are not interested in the emergence and development of conflict in the structures they manage, since it also reveals management shortcomings. Therefore, instead of constructively solving the problems that have arisen, they often strive by any means to extinguish the conflict in its bud, hide the severity and scale of the contradictions from the public, and distort information about its true causes and consequences. For example, an attempt to hide from the public the scale and possible consequences Chernobyl disaster (1986) resulted in millions of people receiving increased dose radiation exposure. In the city of Blagoveshchensk (Republic of Bashkortostan) in the spring of 2005, hundreds of civilians were beaten by law enforcement officers. The leaders of the Ministry of Internal Affairs tried to hide this crime, and when information about it became public, the authorities did everything possible to ensure that the main culprits of the tragedy avoided responsibility. As a result, the conflict that arose did not find its constructive solution, and the contradictions that existed for a long time between civil society And security forces worsened even more.

The ruling elites are objectively interested in maintaining and strengthening their dominant position in society or

organizations. Therefore, any conflict, if it affects their interests, is assessed by them as negative, and they seek to impose such an assessment on others.

A positive or negative assessment of a conflict largely depends on the methods of its resolution. Even if inadequate means and methods are used to resolve an objectively urgent conflict, it can turn from constructive into destructive and will be assessed as negative. A clear example of such a situation is the first Chechen war (1994-1996). The essence of the conflict was that after the collapse of the USSR in 1991, the contradictions between the Chechen Republic and the federal center sharply intensified. These contradictions had both subjective and objective grounds and required their constructive resolution. However, the Russian elite that ruled at that time, with its incompetent decisions and inept actions, plunged the country into a long, bloody war. Thus, a potentially constructive conflict was transformed into a destructive one.

So, we can name a number of basic criteria according to which the functions and consequences of a particular conflict can be assessed as positive or negative.

Positive conflict can be:

• functional, promoting the development of the social system (organization, society);
• constructive, as a result of which the contradictions that have arisen are resolved;
• subjectively positive, when it is assessed as positive only by the party that received a certain benefit as a result of the conflict or achieved the intended goal; When positive assessment the conflict of some people does not coincide with the opinions of others on the principle of ambivalence (duality) in the perception of the same phenomena;
• value-positive, when it is assessed not from the point of view of benefit (disadvantage) or victory (defeat), but from the point of view of the significance of the conflict action itself;
• emotionally positive, when he helps remove mental stress(get out of frustration) to the subjects and participants of the conflict.

In a similar way, only with the prefix “not”, you can list options for assessing the conflict as negative (for example, dysfunctional - not conducive to the development of the social system, etc.).

Let us consider some positive functions of conflict that are most characteristic of open social structures.

• 1. Conflict reveals and resolves contradictions that arise in relations between people and thereby contributes to social development. Timely identified and resolved conflict can prevent more serious conflicts leading to serious consequences.
• 2. B open society conflict performs the functions of stabilization and integration of intragroup and intergroup relations, reduces social tension.
• 3. Conflict greatly increases the intensity of connections and relationships, stimulates social processes, gives society dynamism, encourages creativity and innovation, and promotes social progress.
• 4. In a state of conflict, people are more clearly aware of both their own and opposing interests.
• 5. Conflict contributes to obtaining information about the surrounding social environment, about the relationship between the power potential of competing formations.
• 6. Social conflict contributes to the development and adoption of urgent management decisions and monitoring their implementation, forms among the participants in the conflict a sense of belonging in solving public problems, develops skills and abilities to protect their interests.
• 7. External conflict promotes intra-group integration and identification, strengthens the unity of the group, nation, society, and mobilizes internal resources. It also helps to find friends and allies, identifies enemies and ill-wishers.

Internal conflicts (in a group of organizations, societies) are characterized by following functions:

• creating and maintaining a balance of power (including power);
• exercising social control over compliance with generally accepted norms, rules, and values;
• creating new social norms and institutions and updating existing ones;
• adaptation and socialization of individuals and groups;
• group formation, establishing and maintaining normative and physical boundaries of groups;
• establishing and maintaining a relatively stable structure of intragroup and intergroup relations;
• establishing an informal hierarchy in a group and society, including identifying informal leaders;
• the elimination of some and the emergence of other leaders.
• 8. Conflict reveals the positions, interests and goals of participants and thereby contributes to a balanced solution to emerging problems, establishes and maintains a balance of power between opponents.
• 9. Conflict acts as a “safety valve,” promptly identifying emerging contradictions and preserving the social structure as a whole.
• 10. Many multidirectional conflicts neutralize each other and thus prevent the collapse of the social system.

Conflict performs negative functions and gives rise to negative consequences if:

• it leads to disorder and instability;
• society is unable to ensure peace and order;
• the struggle is carried out using violent methods;
• the consequence of the conflict is great material and moral losses;
• there is a threat to the life and health of people.

Most emotional conflicts and, in particular, conflicts arising as a result of socio-psychological incompatibility of people can be classified as negative.

Conflicts that make it difficult to make necessary decisions are also considered negative. A protracted positive conflict can also have negative consequences.

Control questions

• 1. What is social tension, what is its nature?
• 2. Name the main stages of conflict development.
• 3. What stages can the pre-conflict stage be divided into?
• 4. What is an incident and what is its role in the development of the conflict?
• 5. What are the dynamics of the conflict at the second stage?
• 6. What is “revaluation of values” in a conflict and when does it happen?
• 7. What is the peculiarity of the development of the conflict at the third stage?
• 8. Name the main ways to resolve conflict.
• 9. What is the sequence of procedures in conducting negotiations?
• 10. Name the main functions of social conflict.
• 11. What can be the consequences of social conflict?

Conflict performs both positive and negative social functions. There are objective subjective assessments of the consequences of the conflict. The positive or negative impact of conflict is largely determined by the social system. In loosely structured groups, where conflict is the norm and a variety of conflict resolution mechanisms exist, conflict tends to promote greater vitality, dynamism, and receptivity to progress. In a totalitarian organized social group, conflict is not recognized in principle, and the only mechanism for resolving it is suppression by force. A suppressed conflict becomes dysfunctional, leading people to disintegration, exacerbation of old and the emergence of new contradictions. Unresolved contradictions accumulate, and if they manifest themselves in the form of conflict, they lead to serious social upheavals (Fig. 1).

Let's look at some of the positive functions of conflict that are characteristic of open social structures:

conflict reveals and resolves contradictions and thereby contributes to social development. Timely identified and resolved conflict can prevent more serious conflicts leading to serious consequences;

V open group conflict performs the functions of stabilization and integration of intragroup and intergroup relations, reduces social tension;

conflict greatly increases the intensity of connections and relationships, stimulates social processes, gives dynamism to society, encourages creativity and innovation, and promotes social progress;

in a state of conflict, people are more clearly aware of both their own and opposing interests, and more fully identify the existence of objective problems and contradictions of social development;

conflicts contribute to obtaining information about the surrounding social environment, the relationship between the power potential of competing formations;

external conflict promotes intra-group integration and identification, strengthens the unity of the group, mobilizes internal resources, it also helps to find friends and allies, identify enemies and ill-wishers;

internal conflicts perform the following functions:

creating and maintaining a balance of power;

social control over compliance with generally accepted norms, rules, values;

creating new social norms and institutions, updating existing ones;

adaptation and socialization of individuals and groups

group formation, establishing and maintaining normative and physical boundaries of groups;

establishing and maintaining a relatively stable structure of intragroup and intergroup relations;

establishing an informal hierarchy in a group and society, including identifying informal leaders;

conflict clarifies the positions, interests and goals of the participants and thereby contributes to a balanced solution to emerging problems. In an open social system, conflict plays the role of a “safety valve,” promptly identifying emerging contradictions and preserving the social structure as a whole.

Conflict has negative functions when:

leads to disorder and instability;

society is unable to ensure peace and order;

the struggle is carried out using violent methods;

the consequence of the conflict is great material and moral losses;

there is a threat to people's lives and health.

Most emotional conflicts and, in particular, conflicts arising as a result of socio-psychological incompatibility of people can be classified as negative. Conflicts that make it difficult to make negative decisions are considered negative. A protracted positive conflict can also have negative consequences.

Among the positive functions of conflict in relation to the main participants are the following:

the conflict completely or partially eliminates the contradiction that arises due to the imperfection of many factors; it highlights bottlenecks and unresolved issues. When conflicts are completed, in more than 5% of cases it is possible to completely, basically, or partially resolve the contradictions underlying them;

conflict makes it possible to more deeply evaluate the individual psychological characteristics of the people participating in it. Conflict tests a person’s value orientations, the relative strength of his motives aimed at activity, at himself or at relationships, and reveals psychological resistance to the stress factors of a difficult situation. It promotes deeper knowledge of each other, revealing not only unattractive character traits, but also what is valuable in a person;

conflict allows you to ease psychological tension, which is the reaction of participants to a conflict situation. Conflict interaction, especially accompanied by violent emotional reactions, in addition to possible negative consequences, relieves emotional tension in a person, leading to a subsequent decrease in the intensity of negative emotions;

conflict serves as a source of personality development and interpersonal relationships. If resolved constructively, conflict allows a person to rise to new heights and expand the methods and scope of interaction with others. The individual gains social experience in solving difficult situations;

conflict can improve the quality of individual performance;

when defending just goals in a conflict, the opponent increases his authority among others;

interpersonal conflicts, being a reflection of the socialization process, serve as one of the means of self-affirmation of the individual, the formation of his active position in interaction with others and can be defined as conflicts of formation, self-affirmation, and socialization.

In addition to constructive functions, conflict, as a rule, also has destructive consequences (we talked about this above, but now we will clarify the negative functions of interpersonal conflicts):

most conflicts have a pronounced negative impact on the mental state of its participants;

conflicts that develop unfavorably can be accompanied by psychological and physical violence, and, therefore, injury to opponents;

conflict as difficult situation always accompanied by stress. With frequent and emotionally intense conflicts, the likelihood of cardiovascular diseases, as well as chronic disorders of the functioning of the gastrointestinal tract, increases sharply;

conflicts are the destruction of the system of interpersonal relationships that have developed between the subjects of interaction before it begins. Emerging hostility toward the other side, hostility, and hatred disrupt the mutual ties that had developed before the conflict. Sometimes, as a result of conflict, the relationship between the participants ends altogether;

the conflict forms a negative image of the other - the “image of the enemy”, which contributes to the formation of a negative attitude towards the opponent. This is expressed in a biased attitude towards him and a readiness to act to his detriment;

conflicts can negatively affect the effectiveness of individual activities of opponents. Participants in the conflict pay less attention to the quality of work and study. But even after a conflict, opponents cannot always work with the same productivity as before the conflict;

Conflict reinforces violent ways of solving problems in an individual’s social experience. Having once won through violence, a person reproduces this experience in other similar situations of social interaction;

Conflicts often have a negative impact on personal development. They can contribute to the formation in a person of disbelief in the triumph of justice, the conviction that the other is always right, etc.

Thus, the impact of the conflict on its participants and the social environment has a dual, contradictory nature. This is due to the fact that there are no clear criteria for distinguishing between constructive and destructive conflicts; it is difficult to give a generalized assessment of the results of the conflict. In addition, the degree to which a conflict is constructive may change as it develops. It is also necessary to consider for which of the participants it is constructive and for whom it is destructive.

AND NEGATIVE MANIFESTATIONS

AND THEIR POSITIVE

FUNCTIONS OF CONFLICT

4.1 . Functions of social conflict.

4.2 . Positive manifestations of conflict functions.

4.3 . Negative manifestations of conflict functions.

What is commonly understood as the function of conflict? To explain the functions of social conflict, one should first of all turn to the concept of “function”. In social sciences function in general (from Lat. - commission, execution) - but the role that a certain social institution or private entity performs.

Conflict function— expression of the social (positive or negative) purpose of a conflict encounter, the dependence between the conflict and other phenomena of social life; this is the role that conflict plays in relation to society and (or) its structural formations: social groups, organizations and individuals. And in the first case, the consequences of the conflict are taken into account, in the second - the direction of the relations of the conflicting subjects of social ties.

The question of the place and role of conflicts is relevant in the life of not only an individual or social group, but also an organization and society as a whole. Most of those scientists who laid the foundation for conflictology pointed to conflicts as a means of resolving social contradictions and maintaining balance in the social order. At the present stage, both the condemnation of hostile confrontations at any level and the recognition important role peacefully resolved conflicts, in establishing mutual understanding and cooperation between people within the framework of conflict interaction.

It should be especially emphasized that the assessment of conflict functions as positive or negative always carries personalized character. From the point of view of one subject of the conflict, the latter can be considered as positive, while another - as negative. In other words, there is subjective relativity in assessing the nature of the conflict function. In addition, the same conflict in different personal relationships and in different time can be assessed from opposite positions. This indicates the relativistic nature of the conflict functions.

The above confirms the conclusion that that conflict is a functionally contradictory phenomenon, and the relationship between its positive and negative functions should be considered specifically.

They often mean and some objective criterion assessment of conflict functions. If a social conflict contributes to the development of a broader social system, it has a functional character, and vice versa, if a social conflict limits and inhibits the development of a broader social system, it is dysfunctional character. Often we have to deal with the functional inconsistency of the conflict - not everything that benefits the development of the broader social system is functional for its constituent elements.

By its very nature conflict can be a carrier of both creative and destructive tendencies, be good and evil at the same time, bring both benefit and harm to the parties involved, therefore its functions are characterized taking into account both positive and negative consequences.

According to their content, the functions of conflict cover both the material sphere (related to economic interests, benefits or losses) and the spiritual and moral sphere (the ability to increase or decrease social activity, encourage or suppress optimism, inspiration of people), which affects the effectiveness of joint activities.

Life represents countless the number of facts confirming the functional diversity of conflicts in terms of their effective orientation, i.e., beneficial and harmful consequences.

A number of functions can be identified that have the most significant significance within the framework of the existence of society as a whole, or an organization in particular, or in the management of personnel behavior.

Integrative (unifying) function - one of the main functions of conflict, thanks to which an integrating effect is achieved, which affects the sustainability and stability of the social system, the formation and consolidation of groups, the relationship between individual and collective interests, and the re-adjustment of the management mechanism. Integration wins in those specific situations when the conflict leads to the unification of joint efforts based on the coordination of mutual interests, and loses if the conflict clash causes difficult to repair damage to the organization and unity of the team. In addition, the very task of solving problems that have arisen brings people together. In search of a way out of the conflict, mutual understanding and a sense of involvement in solving a common problem are developed.

Social Activation Feature— making the interaction of people and their relationships more dynamic and mobile, which affects the pace of socio-economic development both in society and within a separate organization.

Function of signaling about hotbeds of social tension. A conflict encounter not only reveals unresolved problems and serious omissions within the social process, but also provides an opportunity for open expression of people's needs, interests and aspirations, their dissatisfaction or protest.

Innovative feature. Conflict is significant as a means innovation, promoting creative initiative. In conflict conditions, people are more clearly aware of both their own and those alien to them interests, objective trends and contradictions of social development, the need to overcome obstacles to progress and achieve maximum benefit.

Transformation (conversion) function interpersonal and intergroup relations. Conflict, polarizing and pushing opposing forces together, simultaneously contributes to both the deformation or destruction of old and the emergence of new interpersonal or intergroup relations.

Information function. Conflict, as a rule, expands the possibilities of obtaining information about the state of the organization and the relationships of its members engaged in joint activities. It enriches the horizons of the parties to the conflict and increases their level of awareness of each other, and can serve as a source life experience, a means of training and education, as well as probing the mood in a particular team.

Preventive function. Conflict helps prevent more destructive confrontations and prevent collisions with potentially significant material damage and moral losses.

Function of social change. Conflict can contribute to changing or updating intragroup or individual norms and relationships in accordance with the urgent needs of individuals, subgroups or the social system as a whole.

Adaptive function. Conflict can be a way of adequately adapting social and individual norms to changed circumstances.

Function of the collapse of social structure. A conflict can carry the danger of a collapse of the social structure if the conflicting parties no longer share the values ​​on which the social group was based, and as a result of the conflict it is not possible to consolidate social groups on the basis of new norms and values.