Sources Of Conflicts And Stressful Factors In Modern Organizations

Abstract

The article presents the results of the survey among managers and ordinary employees of state and private Russian organizations on the problem of revealing the sources of conflicts in modern organizations and stressful factors that affect the functioning of companies. It thoroughly analyzes and presents answers of respondents to the survey questions about the frequency of confrontation; about the impact of conflicts on the productivity of the organization's personnel and on the development of adverse mental conditions of employees; about the role of management and ordinary employees in the emergence of conflicts; about the main causes of conflict, the system of conflict and stress management, including measures to prevent and resolve them. The survey results showed that both the company's management and ordinary personnel are involved in conflicts, and according to the majority of respondents, the main source of confrontation is the individual psychological characteristics of employees. At the same time, conflicts are stressful factors themselves, having a direct adverse effect on the effectiveness of activity and causing specific unwanted emotional reactions both in the subjects of confrontation proper and in employees with different status not directly involved in them. The study found that such conflict as mobbing (bullying) is not common in the studied organizations. Among other things, the results of the questionnaire showed that organizations where respondents work do not have a well-functioning conflict management system, so that confrontations either smolder and are constantly repeated, or are resolved by themselves without management's conscious influence on their development.

Keywords: Conflictsmanagersconflict managementpersonnelsourcesstressful factors

Introduction

In modern organizations, conflicts are a natural phenomenon showing the vivid nature of companies' existence, reflecting the complexity of their functioning and the diversity of their relationships. In particular, it may involve contradictions between the interests of company owners and management, manifesting in the decisions made and directly affecting the financial performance (Shevchenko et al., 2019, p. 125; Tarakanov et al., 2019). Among other things, these may include industrial confrontations, also related to the adoption and implementation of decisions in the area of labor protection and resulted from the discrepancy between the tasks of production efficiency and safety (Lisovskiy et al., 2019, p. 214). It also refers to conflicts between different subgroups (age, professional) in the organization generated by the organizational culture (Tomilin et al., 2019, p. 273; Anisimova et al., 2019; Rebrina & Malushko, 2017). The authors, in addition, consider the causes and peculiarities of conflicts in companies operating in different sectors of the economy, including the Russian agro-industrial complex (Danilov, 2020, p. 33; Suzdalova et al., 2017).

Problem Statement

For all the many aspects of conflict studies, we believe that the most important issue is their nature and subjective and objective sources. The effectiveness of the conflict management system, which includes forecasting and prevention measures, as well as the development of effective ways to resolve them, depends on the answer to the question about the motives and reasons for confrontation in modern organizations.

Research Questions

In this regard, the authors raised the following research questions, which subsequently took the form of narrower questions in the survey:

  • What are the sources of conflict in the organization according to managers and subordinates?

  • Are conflicts themselves a stressful factor and what is their impact on productivity and emotional experience of employees with different statuses?

What management tools do ordinary personnel and management of organizations consider particularly preferable for prevention/resolution of confrontation in organizations?

Purpose of the Study

For scientific and practical purposes of studying the sources and stress factors in modern organizations, authors organized a survey in March 2020. The research organizers and the authors of the questionnaire (they are also the authors of the article) are the lecturers of the Personnel Management Department of the State University of Management (Moscow). According to the idea of the survey initiators, its results will serve as a basis for preparing separate topics for lectures and practical classes with students studying in the training direction "Personnel Management" and studying the academic discipline "Conflictology". The data will provide the basis for developing cases and other tasks within active learning methods. Moreover, the results of the survey can be useful in the management consulting performed by the Department of Personnel Management, as well as in the teaching of the "Conflictology" discipline on professional development programs.

Research Methods

Employees of state and private enterprises were the respondents to the survey. They were asked to fill out a questionnaire with 21 questions using the Google Forms.

The survey included 113 participants. Respondents were grouped by gender as follows: 80% were female and 20% male; 17.7% of the survey participants were managers at different levels and 82.3% were from ordinary personnel; 60.2% are employees of private companies and 39.8% work in public organizations.

Findings

First of all, the questionnaire asked respondents to tell about the frequency of conflicts in their organizations and answer the question "How often do conflicts occur in your work team?". 35.4% of respondents were not sure about the number of conflicts developing in their organizations. It was the most popular answer. 33.7% of survey participants claim that conflicts in their companies occur once during the working week. 12.4% of respondents answered that conflicts occur several times in the workplace during the working week. 9.7% of the survey participants chose the judgment "once per work shift". 8.8% of respondents reported that confrontation occurs several times during a work shift.

Now we will highlight the answers of the survey participants on their organizational status. In particular, 15% of managers almost twice as many subordinates (8%) indicated that confrontation in their organizations occurs "once per shift", 5% of managers and 9% of the ordinary employees believe that "several times per shift", 35% of managers and 33% of subordinates say that confrontation in their organizations occurs once during the working week; 15% of managers and 11% of subordinates chose the answer "several times during the working week". 30 % of managers and 36 % of subordinates indicated "not sure".

To the question "Are ordinary employees or managers at different levels involved in conflicts that occur in your organization?" we found the following answers: 36.3% are convinced that the subjects of conflict interaction are "rather ordinary employees"; 10.6% say that "rather managers of different levels", 37.2% saw among the participants of the conflict "both ordinary employees and managers of different levels"; 15.9% of respondents found it difficult to choose any statement from the proposed ones. The management responses were distributed as follows: 45%, 15%, 25%, 15% respectively. Subordinates have responded to the question in the following way: 34.4%, 9.7%, 39.8%, 16.1% respectively.

Further, the authors of the research could not ignore the problem of the collision's impact on the efficiency of the organization's employees and formulated a corresponding question. So, to the question "How do you think conflicts affect the productivity of your team members?" more than half (62.8%) of the respondents expressed the opinion "they distract from work and reduce productivity"; 22.2% are sure that "they distract from work but do not reduce productivity"; "they do not distract from work and do not affect productivity" – 11.5%; 3.5% chose "not sure" as the answer. If we look at the answers of respondents with different statuses in the organization, then more than half of the interviewed managers (60%) and subordinates (63.4%) are convinced of the destructive influence of conflicts both on the attention of employees and on labor productivity. 15% of managers at different levels and 23.7% of the surveyed ordinary employees find an adverse impact only on the attention of labor subjects without a negative role in the efficiency of activities; a quarter of our managers and three times fewer subordinates (8.6%) do not see the destructive impact of conflicts at all. Thus, the answers of the most respondents confirm that the tension caused by the confrontation has a destructive direct effect on the employees' productivity. Thus, conflicts influence on attention of the work subject, create preconditions for industrial mistakes, affect development of premature weariness and formation of stress reactions of the personnel.

Tension caused by conflicts and other stressful factors results in specific emotional manifestations. For this reason, the survey asked the participants to answer the question: "How do conflicts in your organization affect your emotional state and activities if you are involved in a conflict?". The most popular reaction (45.1%) was "I am annoyed". 38.9% of respondents chose the statements "I am worried" and "I can't concentrate on work". 37.2% of respondents say "I am angry" if they are engaged in a confrontation. 31.9% said that they "constantly think about the conflict". "I am depressed" is the statement preferred by 13.3% of respondents. 12.4% of the study participants say "I am calm" if they are involved in a conflict. "I am crying" is the answer chosen by 4.4% of respondents; "I am scared" is the answer chosen by 1.8%. 6.2% of our study participants chose "not sure" as the answer.

Now we will focus on the answers of respondents, highlighted by their status in the organization and gender. Thus, our surveyed managers (25%) showed less anxiety than their subordinates (41.9%); and female respondents (43.3%) showed twice as much anxiety as male respondents (21.7%). 5% of managers and 4.3% of ordinary employees chose the statement "I am crying", as well as none of men and 5.6% of women. 15% of managers and 35.5% of respondents are "constantly thinking about the conflict" and there is approximately equal number of interviewed men (30.4%) and women (32.2%). More subordinates (40.9%) than managers (30%) claim that if they are involved in a conflict, they "cannot focus on the job", with more women (41.1%) choosing this claim than men (30.4%). The confrontation arouses anger among 60% of managers and 30.6% of ordinary employees of organizations; however, male respondents (43.5%) demonstrated this strong negative experience in a greater number of cases than female respondents (35.6%). 10% of the managers surveyed and a little more (14.0%) of the ordinary personnel respondents agreed with the statement "I am depressed"; 0% of the men and 16.7% of the women respondents chose this answer. "I am scared" is the reaction of 5% of managers and 1% of subordinates; none of men and 2.2% of women. The popular emotional reactions to the conflict included irritation. More than half of the managers at various levels (55%) and 43.0% of employees of lower status speak about it; in turn, 34.8% of male respondents and about half (47.8%) of female respondents. 15% of respondents from management staff and 11.8% of ordinary employees remain calm involved in conflicts; 17.4% of respondents are male and 11.1% are female.

"How do conflicts in your organization affect your emotional state and activities if you are not involved in the conflict?" is also an interesting question for the authors. The results were as follows: "I am calm" - 46.9%; "I am annoyed" - 24.8%; "I am worried" - 18.6%; "I am constantly thinking about the conflict" - 12.4%; "I am angry" - 11.5%; "I am depressed" - 6.2%; "I am scared" - 3.5%; "I am crying" - 2.7%. None of the respondents chose the answer "I can't concentrate on work", and 4.4% chose "not sure" as the answer.

To build an effective conflict management system that includes an element of forecasting conflicts, the management of a company must first make efforts to identify sources of conflict and stress (Davis et al., 2017; Prokudina, 2016, p. 194). In this regard, we asked participants to answer the question: "What is the main source of conflict and stress in your organization?". Half (50.4%) of the respondents identified the individual characteristics of labor collective members as the main reason for conflict and stress. About a quarter of respondents (24.8%) singled out the organization of the labor process among the sources of confrontation. 14.2% of participants pointed to the methods of team management. 10.6% did not choose an appropriate judgment in their opinion. If we look at the answers of respondents with different status positions, we can see the following picture: exactly half of respondents in two categories chose the answer "individual characteristics of team members"; 35% of managers and 22% of employees of lower status indicated the judgment of "organization of the labor process"; 10% of managers and 15% of ordinary employees responded with "methods of team management"; 5% of managers and 11% of subordinates chose "not sure" option.

We will now consider in more detail the sources of conflicts and stress in the organization, related to the individual psychological characteristics of employees. We asked the following question (Figure 01 ): "Which of the following features of your colleagues do you think cause conflicts?”

Figure 1: Distribution of answers to the question "Which of the following features of your colleagues do you think cause conflicts?"
Distribution of answers to the question "Which of the following features of your colleagues do you think cause conflicts?"
See Full Size >

40% of the surveyed managers and 30.1% of the ordinary employees chose the answer "lack of communication skills". One quarter of managers and 32.3% of their subordinates consider the recognition of exclusively self-rightness and refusal to accept another's point of view (egocentricity) as a conflict-producing feature. 20% of managers and 15.1% of ordinary employees pointed to careerism in the negative sense of this term; 30% of managers and 17.2% of subordinates pointed to aggressiveness; 15% of managers at various levels and 22.6% of employees of a lower status organization pointed to indifference to other people. Discord can also trigger the personal characteristics of employees, which they show directly in solving production problems. Almost equal numbers of respondents of different statuses (25% of managers and 26.9% of ordinary employees) are convinced that "low professional competence" is a reason for tension (conflict and stress). A quarter of managers and 21.5% of the surveyed ordinary employees named "low stress resistance" as the quality that generates confrontation; 30% of managers and 45.2% of subordinates named "unwillingness to take responsibility"; 25% of managers and 18.3% of ordinary employees named "use of working time for personal interests".

There are interesting gender differences in the perception of qualities that are problematic for constructive communication within an organization. We will give the answers of male respondents: "lack of communication skills" - 34.8%; "egocentricity" - 34.8%; "careerism" - 30.4%; "aggressiveness" - 17.4%; "indifference to other people" - 26.1%; "low professional competence" - 26.1%; "low stress resistance" - 21.7%; "unwillingness to take responsibility" - 26.1%; "use of working time for personal interests" - 13.1%; "not sure" - 4.3%. We now turn to the reactions of female respondents: "lack of communication skills" - 31.1%; "egocentricity" - 30%; "careerism" - 12.2%; "aggressiveness" - 20%; "indifference to other people" - 20%; "low professional competence" - 26.7%; "low stress resistance" - 22.2%; " unwillingness to take responsibility" - 46.7%; "use of working time for personal interests" - 21.1%; "not sure" - 6.7%.

In general, some authors classify the personal characteristics mentioned in our questionnaire as "toxic personnel" features, emphasizing that toxic employees have different behavioral manifestations that make organizational interaction more difficult and adversely affect performance. In addition, they require additional efforts from company management to neutralize their destructive (particularly conflict) potential (Esaulova & Nagibina, 2017, p. 66).

We should note that it is not only the specific features of individual workers and their behaviour that can cause confrontations. Individual manifestations of managerial activity conditioned by the personal characteristics of the manager can also be a source of tension, but only for subordinates. Therefore, we asked our respondents the question (Figure 02 ): "What features of the management style provokes, in your opinion, conflicts in your organization?"

Distribution of answers to the question "What features of the management style provokes, in your opinion, conflicts in your organization? (no more than three answer choices)"

20% of managers and 24.7% of subordinates pointed to such an undesirable quality as "imposing their will on subordinates". 20% of managers and 26.9% of ordinary employees called "indifferent attitude to subordinates" in the list of negative features of management style. 40% of managers and almost the same number of subordinates (37.6%) chose the answer "arrogant attitude to subordinates"; 30% of managers and 29% of respondents among ordinary employees preferred the statement "lack of effective communication skills". A quarter of managers and 33% of subordinates chose "low professional competence of a manager" as a negative feature provoking conflicts and stresses; 25% of managers and almost half of employees of a lower status organization (12%) pointed to "the desire to gain authority from subordinates at any cost". Answers of respondents show that the causes of conflicts, staff anxiety and tension in the organization are mostly the aspects of management style related to interaction with subordinates.

Now we should turn to the answers of the research participants to the question (Figure 03 ): "What of the following features of the labor process organization provoke stressful reactions and conflicts in the team?"

Figure 2: Distribution of answers to the question "What of the following features of the labor process organization provoke stressful reactions and conflicts in the team?"
Distribution of answers to the question "What of the following features of the labor process organization provoke stressful reactions and conflicts in the team?"
See Full Size >

We will give opinions of managers of different levels regarding this problem (in descending order): "lack of an effective incentive system" - 45.5%; "lack of work discipline" - 45.5%; "ineffective recruitment and placement of personnel" - 40%; "lack of clarity in the tasking of production instructions" - 35%; "disproportionate rights and obligations of employees" - 35.5%; "late provision of resources to employees" - 20%; "problems with working and rest conditions for employees" - 10%. And there is how the respondents among the ordinary personnel answered: "problems with working and rest conditions for employees" - 44.1%; "ineffective recruitment and placement of personnel" - 35.5%; "lack of work discipline" - 29%; "lack of an effective incentive system" - 28%; "late provision of resources to employees" - 24.7%; "lack of clarity in the tasking of production instructions" - 18.3%; "disproportionate rights and obligations of employees" - 11.8%.

An interesting and important aspect of conflict management is the reaction of employees to the question: "Who do you think is responsible for the emergence of conflicts and stress in your organization: ordinary employees or managers? We have the following results here. 11.5% answered "rather ordinary employees"; "rather management" - 21.2%; "equally ordinary employees and management" - 61.1%; "not sure" - 6.2%. At the same time, none of the respondents from among managers blamed their subordinates for the confrontation; a quarter of managers indicated that the managers of the organization are responsible for the disputes; 75% blamed both the management of the company and the ordinary staff. Among the ordinary employees, 14% of respondents believed that the managers of their organizations are responsible for the conflicts; 20.4% blamed their subordinates; 58.1% agreed with the statement "both ordinary employees and management are equally responsible"; 7.5% chose "not sure" as the answer.

Disagreements within an organization often result in serious consequences, in particular the dismissals of employees. These can be both "conflict" persons and employees who are incapable of withstanding confrontation. To the question, "Did the conflicts in your organization lead to the dismissal of employees involved in them?" 55.8% of respondents answered "no, I know nothing about such situations"; 36.3% responded "yes, I know such cases"; 7.9% chose "not sure" option. Half of the managers surveyed and 57% of ordinary employees are not aware of dismissals as a result of confrontation; 50% of managers and one third of employees are aware of such situations. Men (52.2%) were more informed than women (32.2%). 43.5 % of our surveyed men and 58.9 % of women surveyed did not know about dismissals caused by conflicts. 4.3% of men and 8.9% of women chose the statement "not sure. The information about such cases in the organization and/or its absence is a factor, on the one hand, contributing to the development of stress in certain categories of employees. On the other hand, it will help personnel to identify and probably prepare for conflict behaviour models.

One form of conflict in modern organizations is psychological pressure (mobbing, bullying). It represents a variety of actions (acts) of unwelcome, and mostly aggressive and hostile behavior in the organization: hazing, communication persecution, gossip, sexual harassment, and so on. An important condition for inclusion of a conflict into the bullying rank is its periodicity which manifests during at least six months and once a week. Since psychological pressure severely affects its victims, distracts employees not directly related to it, requiring serious organizational measures to prevent, the authors were unable to pass by the question about this phenomenon. So, when we asked "Have you or your colleagues encountered this phenomenon?" more than half (58.4%) of respondents answered "no, I know nothing about such situations"; 31.9% of respondents chose the statement "yes, I know such cases"; 9.7% could not choose the answer. Half of the managers and 60.3% of the staff surveyed do not know anything about this phenomenon in their organizations. 40% of managers at various levels and 30% of their subordinates know about this conflict. An approximate equal number of interviewed managers (10%) and ordinary employees (9.7%) chose the answer "not sure". We can state that mobbing is not a common conflict in the organizations where the respondents works.

The system of conflict management in the organization suggests that the management has an arsenal of effective ways to resolve them. Recently, they have used a third party among such tools. The conflict resolution could involve it if the parties are unable to come out of the confrontation on their own, if there is a threat of a full-scale conflict, if it is necessary to closely monitor the implementation of the adopted settlement agreement. Based on the experience of third party participation in conflict resolution, the researchers describe its various forms (mediator, observer, etc.) and assess their effectiveness; present criteria for identifying models of third party involvement in the settlement process; study changes in employees' assessments regarding the effectiveness of third party participation in conflict resolution (Burmistrova, 2012, pp. 229-232; Zhuravlev, & Burmistrova, 2012, p. 239). In addition, they provide research on the perceptions of managers with different experience levels in managing conflict as mediators or arbitrators (Bychkov, 2018, p. 115).

We find the issue of third-party participation important in understanding the conflict situation in modern organizations. To the question "Has a third party (an arbiter, mediator, judge, assistant, observer, organizational psychologist, etc.) been involved in resolving conflicts in your organization or not? 76.1% chose the judgment "no, I know nothing about such situations", including 70% of managers and 77.4% of the ordinary employees surveyed. Only 17.7% of respondents answered "yes, I know such cases", a quarter of which were managers and 16.1% of subordinates. 6.2 % of respondents chose "not sure" as the answer.

Further, the survey asked the participants to reflect on the benefits of third party participation in the confrontation management: "Do you think it would be effective or not to involve a third party (arbitrator, mediator, judge, assistant, observer) to resolve conflicts in your organization?". 28.3% of respondents said "it would be more effective". 35.4% of respondents reacted that "it would rather be ineffective". 36.3% chose "not sure". 35% of managers and 31.2% of subordinates believe in the third-party potential in the confrontation management process. Half of managers and almost a third (32.2%) of ordinary personnel said that this type of practice is ineffective. 15% of managers and 36.6% of our surveyed employees with lower status in the organization were not sure about the answer.

Methods of conflict prevention are of paramount importance in the conflict resolution system. In this regard, the authors asked the question "Do you think your organization's managers are paying or not paying attention to conflict prevention?". We will give respondents' reactions in descending order: "enough attention is paid" -33.7%; "too little attention is paid" - 29.2%; "not enough attention is paid" - 23.9%; "not sure" - 8.8%; "too much attention is paid" - 4.4%. We present the respondents' answers based on the organizational status: "too much attention is paid" - 0% of managers and 5.4% of the employees; "enough attention is paid" - 35% of managers and 33.3% of subordinates; "not enough attention is paid" - 20% of managers and 21.5% of the ordinary personnel; "too little attention is paid" - 10% of managers and 31.2% of subordinates.

To the question "How are the conflicts in your organization resolved?" 30.9% (25% of managers and 32.3% of ordinary employees) answered that they "solve by themselves"; 32.8% (35% of managers and 32.3% of subordinates) reacted "constantly smouldering (repeated), as there are no clear measures for their prevention and resolution"; 31.8% (40% of managers and 30.1% of ordinary employees of the organization) are convinced that "our organization has a well-established system of measures for conflict prevention and resolution"; 4.5% said "not sure".

Below we will consider the respondents' conclusions about possible ways of conflict resolution in organizations. We therefore formulated the question as follows (Figure 04): "How do you think it is necessary to prevent/resolve conflicts in the organization?".

Figure 3: Distribution of answers to the question "How do you think it is necessary to prevent/resolve conflicts in the organization?"
Distribution of answers to the question "How do you think it is necessary to prevent/resolve conflicts in the organization?"
See Full Size >

The majority of answers demonstrate the most respondents tend to apply social-psychological instruments of conflict prevention: "to provide conflict competence training for employees" - 33.6%; "to have individual conversations with conflicting employees" - 61.9%; "to contribute to the formation of favorable socio-psychological climate in the team" - 69.1%. 27.4% are convinced that it is necessary to improve the organization of work for the prevention of confrontation and neutralization of stressful factors. 39.8% of respondents chose the statement "to recruit staff more carefully". Only 6.2% of the respondents chose a radical way of conflict settlement ("to dismiss conflicting employees"), while 7.9% of the survey participants agreed with the statement "to involve a third party" for conflict resolution.

Now we turn to the answers of respondents distinguished by two status categories. As one of the effective methods to prevent discord, 36.6 % of ordinary employees and 20 % of managers mentioned the organization of training to develop skills for constructive behavior in conflict. For a manager these skills, in particular, serve as a part of conflict competence and the most important sign of managerial skill, which allows him to predict confrontation in the organization, effectively resolve it (acting, for example, as a mediator), and in general to minimize the devastating impact of conflicts both on the company as a whole and on individual employees (Nikulina & Solovova, 2018, p. 99; Rebrina & Shamne, 2020). For ordinary employees, conflict behavior training will help ensure that they adequately respond to a tense situation, guarantee minimal emotional losses in the situation, maintain relationships with colleagues and supervisors, and prevent the development of adverse emotional states and reduced efficiency.

Further, 59.1 % of subordinates and 75 % of managers at different levels are convinced that individual conversations with conflicting employees are more suitable than other methods for preventing confrontation. Methods of revealing conflict personalities among subordinates based on the analysis of their speech behavior and neutralization of their destructive potential may be appropriate here (Kupfer, 2013, p. 42; Lizunkov et al., 2020).

A small number of two categories of respondents called for option "to dismiss conflicting employees", it included 5.4% of employees and 10% of managers. Only 9.7 % of the subordinates and none of the managers agreed "to involve a third party" in the conflict resolution. 40% of participants in the two categories of the survey preferred the statement "to recruit staff more carefully". 26.9% of subordinates and 30% of managers voted for option "to improve the organization of employees' work". 72.1% of ordinary employees and 55% of managers of different levels chose the judgment "to contribute to the formation of a favorable socio-psychological climate in the team" for the prevention of conflicts.

Conclusion

The authors are satisfied with the findings and will continue to study this critical issue. But first they made the following conclusions.

  • The research revealed that both company management and ordinary personnel are involved in conflicts, and the main source of confrontation is individual psychological features of employees. In addition, the majority of respondents believe that both managers and employees of lower status are responsible for the emergence of confrontation.

  • We revealed that the main source of tension in the organization, connected with the management style, was the arrogant attitude of managers of different levels to their subordinates, and the leading source of conflicts, caused by the peculiarities of the labor process organization, was the lack of clear distribution of production tasks.

Conflicts themselves are stressful factors, causing a direct negative impact on labour productivity in the opinion of the majority of respondents, regardless of their status. Besides the results of the research showed the negative impact of conflicts on the functioning of cognitive processes of activity subjects, in particular attention which ensures the effectiveness of solving production problems and error-free activity. At the same time, conflicts to varying degrees cause many undesirable emotional reactions (primarily irritation and anxiety) both in the subjects of confrontation proper and employees of different status who are not directly involved in them.

  • The research has shown that such a form of conflict as mobbing (bullying) is a rare phenomenon in the practice of companies where respondents work, and in most cases respondents have not heard anything about the involvement of a third party in resolving conflicts in their companies.

  • The survey found that the majority of survey participants do not see a clear conflict management system in their organizations (prevention and resolution), and contradictions in their organizations are either smoldering and constantly repeated, or resolved by themselves without a conscious impact on their development.

  • Among measures of conflict prevention and resolution, the participants of the survey prefer social and psychological tools (in particular, trainings, individual preventive conversations with conflict employees). In this regard, the management of organizations should pay attention to these methods when building an effective conflict management system.

References

  1. Anisimova, T. V., Prigarina, N. K., & Chubay, S. A. (2019). The System of Rhetorical Argumentation in Discourse of Social Advertising. Science Journal of Volgograd State University. Linguistics, 18(2), 159-173. https://doi.org/10.15688/jvolsu2.2019.2.14
  2. Burmistrova, N. N. (2012). Allocation of the criteria and construction of classification of models of the third party in resolution of the conflict. University Herald, 14, 229-232.
  3. Bychkov, A. V. (2018). Conflict competence of the heads of customs authorities and divisions of the customs service (sociological perspective). Bulletin of Science and Education, 1, 5(41), 112-119.
  4. Danilov, V. A. (2020). Conflict management at agribusiness enterprises using the example of Rostov Champagne Wines Plant LLC. International Agricultural Journal, 2(374), 31-35.
  5. Davis, N., Ergunova, O., Lizunkov, V., & Malushko, E. (2017). Phenomenon of migration and its manifestations in the modern world. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences, 26, 550-556.
  6. Esaulova, I. A., & Nagibina, N. I. (2017). “Toxic” personnel: problems and management methods. Manager, 5, 69, 58-71.
  7. Kupfer, L. V. (2013). Speech methods for predicting and preventing conflicts in the organization. Bulletin of Chelyabinsk State University, 37(328), 86, 41-43.
  8. Lisovskiy, V. V., Kravchuk, I. L., & Denisov, S. E. (2019). Industrial conflict as a cornerstone of production risk management. Mining Informational and Analytical Bulletin, 9, 211-218.
  9. Lizunkov, V., Politsinskaya, E., Malushko, E., & Pavlov, A. (2020). Modelling as the Basis for Building a Competency Model of a Specialist Demanded by Industrial Enterprises in Priority Social and Economic Development Area (PSEDA). International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 15(13), 321-326.
  10. Nikulina, I. V., & Solovova, N. V. (2018). The formation of the conflictological competence of a university teacher. Higher Education in Russia, 2, 95-102.
  11. Prokudina, O. O. (2016). The role of the leader in conflict prevention in a commercial organization. Leadership and Management, 3(3), 189-198.
  12. Rebrina, L. N., & Malushko, E. Yu. (2017). Representation of the mnemic process of "memorization" in German: constant features, Advances in Social Science Education and Humanities Research (ASSEHR), 97, 233-238.
  13. Rebrina, L. N., & Shamne, N. L. (2020). Systemic-communicative dimensions of modern protest (based on German-language online petitions). Nauchnyi Dialog, 3, 151-167. https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2020-3-151-167
  14. Shevchenko, I., Puchkina, T., & Tolstov, N. (2019). Shareholders’ and managers’ interests: Collisions in Russian corporations. Higher School of Economics, 23(1), 118-142.
  15. Suzdalova, M. A., Lizunkov, V. G., Malushko, E. Yu., Sytina, N. A., & Medvedev, V. E. (2017). Innovative Forms of Partnership in Development and Implementation of University-Business Cooperation. The European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences EpSBS, XIX, 450-455.
  16. Tarakanov, V. V., Inshakova, A. O., & Dolinskaya, V. V. (2019). Information society, digital economy and law. Ubiquitous Computing and the Internet of Things: Prerequisites for the Development of ICT, Studies in Computational Intelligence, Cham: Springer Science + Business Media, 826, 3-15.
  17. Tomilin, O. B., Klyuev, A. K., Drugova, E. A., Fadeeva, I. M., & Tomilin, O. O. (2019). Organizational Conflicts During Universities Transformation: Destruam et Aedificabo. Integration of Education, 23(2), 265-283.
  18. Zhuravlev, A. L., & Burmistrova, N. N. (2012). Change in assessments of the effectiveness of conflict resolution in the face of changing perceptions of parties to the conflict about a third party. University Herald, 8, 236-243.

Copyright information

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

About this article

Cite this paper as:

Click here to view the available options for cite this article.

Publisher

European Publisher

First Online

28.12.2020

Doi

10.15405/epsbs.2020.12.04.87

Online ISSN

2357-1330