Negative consequences of unemployment Unemployment is an extremely negative socio-economic phenomenon that has a negative impact on the state of the economy as a whole. As a result: the budget does not receive tax payments, a decrease in GDP, an increase in crime

How can you eliminate the negative consequences caused by anger? Every time you lose your temper while arguing with someone, you are hitting them. If this person is more psychologically mature than you, he will treat this correctly. But more often than not, the pain is hard to forget, and you

The concept of social conflict.Functions of conflict.

Generally conflict can be defined as a collision of individuals, social groups, societies associated with

the presence of contradictions or opposing interests and goals.

The conflict attracted sociologists of the late 19th and early XX V. Karl Marx proposed a dichotomous model of conflict. According to her, the conflict is always bob-. two sides are treated: one of them represents labor, the other - capital. Conflict is an expression of this

confrontation and ultimately leads to the transformation of society.

In the sociological theory of G. Simmel, conflict was presented as a social process that has not only negative functions and does not necessarily lead to a change in society. Simmel believed that conflict consolidates society, as it maintains the stability of groups and layers of society.

However, in the middle of the last century, the interest of scientists in the conflict noticeably decreased. In particular, the reason for this was such a feature of the functionalist concept as the consideration of culture and society as unifying and harmonizing mechanisms. Naturally, from the point of view of this approach the conflict could not be described.

Only in the second half XX century, or rather, starting around the 1960s, the conflict began to gradually restore its rights as a sociological object. During this period, scientists, based on the ideas of G. Simmel and K. Marx, tried to revive the consideration of society from the point of view of conflict. Among them we should mention, first of all, R. Dahrendorf, L. Coser and D. Lockwood.

There are two main approaches to understanding conflict.

The Marxist tradition views conflict as a phenomenon whose causes lie in society itself, primarily in the confrontation between classes and their ideologies. As a consequence, all history in the works of Marxist-oriented sociologists appears as the history of the struggle of oppressors and oppressed.

Representatives of the non-Marxist tradition (L. Coser, R. Dahrendorf, etc.) consider conflict as a part of the life of society, which must be managed. Naturally, there are substantive differences in their approaches, but it is fundamentally important that sociologists of non-Marxist orientation view conflict as a social process that does not always lead to a change in the social structure of society (although, of course, such an outcome is possible, especially if the conflict was subject to conservation and was not resolved in a timely manner).

Elements of a conflict situation. In any conflict situation, the participants in the conflict and the object of the conflict are identified. Among participants in the conflict differentiate opponents(i.e. those people who are interested in the object of the conflict), involved groups and interest groups. As for the involved and interested groups, their participation in the conflict is caused by two reasons or a combination of them: 1) they are able to influence the outcome of the conflict, or 2) the outcome of the conflict affects their interests.

Object of conflict- this is the resource to which the interests of the parties extend. The object of the conflict is indivisible, because either its essence excludes division, or it is presented within the conflict as indivisible (one or both parties refuse division). Physical indivisibility is not a necessary condition for conflict, since often an object can be used by both parties (for example, one party prohibits the other from using a certain parking space without having the right to do so).

All of the above criteria relate to a static consideration of the conflict. As for its dynamics, the following are usually distinguished: stages of the conflict:

1. Hidden stage. At this stage, the contradictions are not recognized by the parties to the conflict. Conflict manifests itself only in explicit or implicit dissatisfaction with the situation. The discrepancy between values, interests, goals, and means of achieving them does not always result in conflict: the opposite side sometimes either resigns itself to injustice, or waits in the wings, harboring a grudge. The conflict itself begins with certain actions that are directed against the interests of the other side.

2. Formation of conflict. At this stage, contradictions are formed, claims that can be expressed to the opposite side & in the form of demands are clearly understood. Groups taking part in the conflict are formed, and leaders are nominated. There is a demonstration of one's arguments and criticism of the opponent's arguments. At this stage, it is not uncommon for parties to hide their plans or arguments. Provocation is also used, that is, actions that are aimed at creating a public opinion favorable to one side, that is, favorable about one side and unfavorable about the other.

3. Incident. At this stage, an event occurs that moves the conflict into the stage of active action, that is, the parties decide to engage in open struggle.

4. Active actions of the parties. Conflict requires a lot of energy, so it quickly reaches a maximum of conflicting actions - a critical point, and then quickly declines.

5. End of the conflict. At this stage, the conflict ends, which, however, does not mean that the claims of the parties are satisfied. In reality, there may be several outcomes to a conflict.

In general, we can say that each side either wins or loses, and the victory of one of them does not mean that the other has lost. At a more specific level, it is fair to say that there are three outcomes: “win-lose”, “win-win”, “lose-lose”.

However, this representation of the outcome of the conflict is quite inaccurate. The fact is that there are options that do not fully fit into the original scheme. As for the “win-win” case, for example, a compromise cannot always be considered a victory for both parties; a party often achieves a compromise only so that its opponent cannot consider himself a winner, and this happens even if a compromise is as unprofitable for it as a loss.

As for the “lose-lose” scheme, it does not fully accommodate cases when both parties become victims of some third party that takes advantage of their discord to obtain benefits. In addition, the presence of a conflict may cause an uninterested or little interested third party to transfer value to a person or group that was not involved in the conflict in the first place. For example, it is not difficult to imagine a situation in which the head of an enterprise denies two employees a disputed position and gives it to a third party only because, in his opinion, these duties can only be performed by a person who does not enter into conflicts.

According to L. Coser, the main functions of conflict are:

1) formation of groups and maintaining their integrity and boundaries;

2) establishing and maintaining relative stability of intragroup and intergroup relations;

3) creating and maintaining a balance between warring parties;

4) stimulating the creation of new forms of social control;

5) creation of new social institutions;

6) obtaining information about the environment (or rather, about social reality, its disadvantages and advantages);

7) socialization and adaptation of specific individuals. Although conflict usually brings only disorganization and harm, the following can be distinguished: positive functions of conflict:

1) communicative function: in a situation of conflict, people or other subjects of social life are better aware of both their aspirations, desires, goals, and the desires and goals of the opposite side. Thanks to this, the position of each side can both be strengthened and transformed;

2) Tension relief function: expressing one’s position and defending it in confrontation with an enemy is an important means of channeling emotions, which can also lead to finding a compromise, since the “emotional fuel” of the conflict disappears;

3) consolidating function: conflict can consolidate society, since open conflict allows the parties to the conflict to better know the opinions and claims of the opposite side.

Factors influencing the formation, course and resolution of conflict associated with the state of the social systems in which it unfolds (family stability, etc.). There are a number of such conditions:

1) features of the organization of conflict groups;

2) the degree of identification of the conflict: the more identified the conflict, the less intense it is;

3) social mobility: the higher the level of mobility, the less intense the conflict; the stronger the connection with social position, the stronger the conflict. Indeed, renunciation of claims, change of place of work, the ability to obtain the same benefit in another place are the conditions for the fact that the conflict will be ended at the cost of exiting it;

4) the presence or absence of information about the real resources of the parties to the conflict.

The question of the essence of the conflict causes a lot of disagreement. Here are the opinions of several modern Russian scientists.
A. G. Zdravomyslov. “This is 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.”
E. M. Babosov. “A social conflict is an extreme case of social contradictions, expressed in diverse forms of struggle between individuals and various social communities, aimed at achieving economic, social, political, spiritual interests and goals, neutralizing or eliminating an imaginary rival and not allowing him to achieve the realization of his interests.”
Yu. G. Zaprudsky. " Social conflict“is an explicit or hidden state of confrontation between objectively divergent interests, goals and development trends of social subjects... a special form of historical movement towards a new social unity.”
What unites these opinions?
As a rule, one side has certain material and intangible (primarily power, prestige, authority, information, etc.) values, while the other is either completely deprived of them or has insufficient values. It is not excluded that the dominance may be imaginary, existing only in the imagination of one of the parties. But if any of the partners feels disadvantaged in possessing any of the above, then a conflict state arises.
We can say that social conflict is a special interaction between individuals, groups and associations when their incompatible views, positions and interests collide; confrontation social groups regarding the diverse life support resources.
Two points of view are expressed in the literature: one is about the harm of social conflict, the other is about its benefits. In fact, we're talking about about the positive and negative functions of conflicts. Social conflicts can lead to both disintegrative and integrative consequences. The first of these consequences increases bitterness, destroys normal partnerships, and distracts people from solving pressing problems. The latter help solve problems, find a way out of the current situation, strengthen the cohesion of people, and allow them to more clearly understand their interests. It is almost impossible to avoid conflict situations, but it is quite possible to ensure that they are resolved in a civilized manner.
There are many different social conflicts going on in society. They differ in their scale, type, composition of participants, causes, goals and consequences. The problem of typology arises in all sciences that deal with many heterogeneous objects. The simplest and most easily explained typology is based on identifying areas of manifestation of conflict. According to this criterion, economic, political, interethnic, everyday, cultural and social (in the narrow sense) conflicts are distinguished. Let us explain that the latter include conflicts arising from conflicting interests in the sphere of labor, healthcare, social security, and education; for all their independence, they are closely related to such types of conflicts as economic and political.
Changes public relations V modern Russia are accompanied by an expansion of the scope of conflicts, since they involve not only large social groups, but also territories that are both nationally homogeneous and inhabited by different ethnic groups. In turn, interethnic conflicts (you will learn about them later) give rise to territorial, religious, migration and other problems. Most modern researchers believe that in the social relations of modern Russian society there are two types of hidden conflicts that have not yet clearly manifested themselves. The first is the conflict between hired workers and the owners of the means of production. This is largely due to the fact that workers, after half a century of social security and all the rights in the field of social policy and labor relations that they were endowed with in Soviet society, find it difficult to understand and accept their new status as a hired worker forced to work in market conditions. The other is the conflict between the country's poor majority and the rich minority, which accompanies the accelerated process of social stratification.
The development of social conflict is influenced by many conditions. These include the intentions of the parties to the conflict (to achieve a compromise or completely eliminate the opponent); attitude towards means of physical (including armed) violence; level of trust between the parties (how willing they are to follow certain rules of interaction); adequacy of the conflicting parties' assessments of the true state of affairs.
All social conflicts go through three stages: pre-conflict, immediate conflict and post-conflict.
Let's consider specific example. At one enterprise, due to the real threat of bankruptcy, the workforce had to be reduced by a quarter. This prospect worried almost everyone: employees feared layoffs, and management had to decide who to fire. When it was no longer possible to postpone the decision, the administration announced a list of those who were to be fired first. There were legitimate demands from candidates for dismissal to explain why they were being fired; applications began to be submitted to the labor dispute commission, and some decided to go to court. Resolving the conflict took several months, and the company continued to operate with fewer employees. The pre-conflict stage is a period during which contradictions accumulate (in this case, caused by the need to reduce staff). The immediate conflict stage is a set of certain actions. It is characterized by a clash of opposing sides (administration - candidates for dismissal).
The most open form of expression of social conflicts can be various kinds of mass actions: presentation of demands to the authorities by disgruntled social groups; usage public opinion in support of their claims or alternative programs; direct social protests.
Forms of expression of protest can be rallies, demonstrations, picketing, civil disobedience campaigns, strikes, hunger strikes, etc. Organizers of social protests must be clearly aware of what specific problems can be solved with the help of a particular action and what kind of public support they can rely on -read. Thus, a slogan that is sufficient to organize a picket can hardly be used to organize a campaign of civil disobedience. (What historical examples of such actions do you know?)
To successfully resolve a social conflict, it is necessary to timely determine its true causes. The opposing sides should be interested in jointly searching for ways to eliminate the causes that gave rise to their rivalry. At the post-conflict stage, measures are taken to finally eliminate contradictions (in the example under consideration - dismissal of employees,, if possible, removal of socio-psychological tension in the relationship between the administration and the remaining employees, search for optimal ways to avoid such a situation in the future).
Conflict resolution can be partial or complete. Complete resolution means the end of the conflict, a radical change in the entire conflict situation. In this case, a kind of psychological restructuring occurs: the “image of the enemy” is transformed into the “image of the partner”, the attitude towards struggle is replaced by an attitude toward cooperation. The main disadvantage of partial conflict resolution is that only its external shape, but the reasons that gave rise to the confrontation remain.
Let's look at some of the most common conflict resolution methods.

The method of avoiding conflicts means leaving or threatening to leave, and consists in avoiding meetings with the enemy. But avoiding conflict does not mean eliminating it, because its cause remains. The negotiation method involves the parties exchanging opinions. This will help reduce the severity of the conflict, understand the opponent’s arguments, and objectively assess both the true balance of power and the very possibility of reconciliation. Negotiations allow you to consider alternative situations, achieve mutual understanding, reach agreement, consensus, and open the way to cooperation. The method of using mediation is expressed as follows: the warring parties resort to the services of intermediaries ( public organizations, individuals, etc.). What conditions are necessary for successful conflict resolution? First of all, it is necessary to timely and accurately determine its causes; identify objectively existing contradictions, interests, goals. The parties to the conflict must free themselves from mistrust of each other and thereby become participants in negotiations in order to publicly and convincingly defend their positions and consciously create an atmosphere of public exchange of opinions. Without such mutual interest of the parties in overcoming contradictions, mutual recognition of the interests of each of them, a joint search for ways to overcome the conflict is practically impossible. All negotiators must show a tendency towards consensus, that is, towards agreement.