Assessing the effectiveness of conflict resolution styles. Resolving interpersonal conflicts

Mediation, as a form of conflict resolution, is a method of intervention by a neutral third party whose purpose is to facilitate the negotiation process between the main parties to the conflict. By taking a neutral position between conflicting parties, the mediator helps them overcome differences and constructively resolve the conflict by establishing and maintaining communication directly between the parties.

Mediation is used when the parties are unable to independently find a solution to the problem and reach an agreement during direct negotiations or overcome a deadlock that arose during negotiations.

It is advisable to use the mediation process in the following cases:

• The relationship between the conflicting parties is strained, but at the same time it is in the interests of the parties to preserve and continue the relationship. In this case, an agreement between the parties as a result of negotiations with the participation of a mediator is preferable to an administrative or judicial decision, so. how the parties retain independence and the right to control the decision made. The mediation process can not only restore the relationship, but also help create new aspects in the relationship between the parties for their success;

• direct communication between the parties is seriously impaired or even stopped, and the participation of a neutral party could help improve it or restore direct dialogue between the opponents, change the dynamics of the relationship between the opponents and support their desire to develop a solution, mainly by facilitating the mutual exchange of proposals and the development of options , meeting the interests of both parties;
• The parties have already made independent attempts to resolve the conflict, for example, through direct negotiations. However, they not only did not produce a positive result, but also led the parties to a dead end and aggravated the situation. In this case, the mediator can help overcome the deadlock;
• the conflicting parties are inclined to reconsider their previous positions towards the opponent and show readiness to solve the problem. Moreover, each of the parties believes that it takes a fairly flexible position and therefore the participation of a mediator in resolving the conflict will be more effective, will take less time and will not require large material costs and moral costs, which are usually associated with going to court, administrative bodies, etc. In this case, the mediator's initiative can help the parties develop an acceptable procedure for negotiations and reaching an agreement;
• the parties are interested in monitoring the results achieved at each new stage of the conflict resolution procedure and the final agreement. In this case, an agreement as a result of negotiations and mediation is preferable to an administrative-command decision;
• Mediation is advisable in cases where such aspects of resolving disagreements as confidentiality, necessary to create an atmosphere of greater sincerity, but which is difficult to count on when going to court, or how time factor;
• Mediation is justified if the matter concerns non-legal issues and does not require legal regulation.

As is known, a conflict can be described using a large number of diverse parameters. From the point of view of mediation, the most important aspects of the conflict and negotiations to resolve it are: the responsibility of the parties, the time factor, and information.

The responsibility of the parties includes understanding and recognizing the extent of their own responsibility for failure in negotiations to resolve the conflict. An important task of the mediator is to emphasize and convince the conflicting

parties is that, despite the participation of a third party, the responsibility for solving the problem lies with the parties involved in the conflict. To understand the degree of responsibility of each of the parties in the negotiations during the mediation process, one should try to determine which of the parties has a stronger position and which has a weaker position. Usually, the party whose negotiating position is weaker than that of its opponent is more interested in opening negotiations and developing the so-called “starting proposal,” without which negotiations cannot begin. The mediator must ensure that the party with the stronger position formulates and puts forward its proposal, reflecting the best solution to the problem from the point of view of its interests, and defends it. Otherwise there is a danger that arguments in favor of the strong aspects of her position will be used to reject the agreement. Besides, Mutual recognition by the parties of the relative strength of the opponent's position determines their interdependence and facilitates agreement between them on the basis that cooperation rather than confrontation becomes a constructive form of relations between parties with more or less strong positions.

Time factor. This is an important aspect of the mediation process that should receive great attention during negotiations. The time factor includes:

• deadlines for completing negotiations. If the parties are aware of their responsibility for the failure of negotiations, the time factor can play a serious role in resolving the conflict. To do this, it is necessary to establish time limits within which the parties must come to an agreement. Fixed time frames are necessary to ensure stable dynamics of the negotiation process, aimed at moving the parties towards resolving the conflict;
• sequence of consideration of issues. The mediator may invite the parties separately or jointly to draw up a list of issues to discuss in order of priority. The mediation process should begin with the simplest issue and gradually move to more complex ones. Discussion of difficult issues at the initiative of the mediator can be temporarily postponed and returned to them again at an appropriate moment. It is recommended to discuss and regulate key issues last, since this technique facilitates a general agreement between the parties on the basis that after several agreements have been reached between them on less significant issues, it is psychologically easier to reach agreement on the key ones. The settlement of key issues gives the parties an idea of ​​the fruitful and constructive nature of the negotiations and decisions made;
• deadlines for the parties to submit their proposals. The mediator may invite the negotiating parties to reconsider their position and put forward a new proposal within a certain time, for example, by the start of a new round of negotiations. This technique can also help maintain the dynamics of negotiations. The mediator can ensure that the parties reduce their demands if the issue is not resolved by a certain date, which, in turn, can help the parties break an impasse if it has arisen;
• deadlines for the parties to fulfill their obligations. The mediator ensures that the final agreement includes specific deadlines for its implementation. You can also invite the parties to establish a “trial” or “control” period, that is, a time during which the parties could evaluate the effectiveness of the agreement reached. Of course, in this case a criterion for assessing such effectiveness must be developed. For example, how many times during the month from the time of adoption of the final agreement between the parties disagreements on settled issues arose again.

Information about the conflict, positions and interests of the parties . Gathering information is one of the key points in the preparation phase for mediation. The information collected should, in particular, relate to the subject of the conflict, its causes and history. Information about the conflict and its participants is preliminary. According to American researchers S. Carpenter and W. Kennedy 22, such information is necessary for the mediator in order to decide how necessary his participation in resolving the conflict is. If the help of a mediator is necessary, then the next step should be to collect complete information about the conflict at the moment. It can be obtained from three sources: direct observation, secondary sources, personal interviews.

Direct observation- this is attending meetings and gatherings of participants (parties) to the conflict, observing their behavior, finding out their opinions on controversial issues and about the opposite side.

Secondary sources represent minutes of meetings, tape and video recordings of events, scientific research on the problem under discussion, newspaper materials, etc.

Personal conversations are most effective when choosing the right respondent and establishing a relationship of trust with him. The latter depends both on the subjective characteristics of the participant in the conversation and on the choice of place and time of the conversation. Initially, it is best to conduct conversations with people not directly involved in the conflict. In this case, the person collecting information develops a more objective point of view on the situation.

The information collected is organized and evaluated using the Conflict Analysis Map, the Conflict Dynamics Continuum, and the Conflict Analysis Summary.

The conflict analysis map includes information:

1. about the parties involved in the conflict;
2. about controversial issues (problems);
3. about the specific interests of the parties;
4. about the degree of importance of controversial issues for each of the parties: high, medium, low (priority);
5. about the sources of power of each side and the possibilities of influencing their opponents;
6. about the positions of the parties and their possible approaches to resolving controversial issues;
7. about interest in cooperation with other parties. The conflict analysis map can be supplemented with notes and presented in the following form (Table 8).

Table 8

Continuum establishes the dynamics of the conflict and includes the following information:

• – the attitude of the parties to the resolution of the conflict;
• – the attitude of the parties to resolving the issue;
• -history of the relationship between the conflicting parties;
• – the relationship between the parties at the time of conflict;
• – values ​​that are significant for the conflicting parties;
• -the degree of involvement of the parties in the conflict:
• – tactics used by conflicting parties.

Summary. Once collected, analyzed and assessed, the information is organized into a summary of conflict information. The purpose of compiling such a summary is to establish:

• – the parties directly in conflict and involved in the conflict;
• -procedures used by the parties to the conflict;
• - the essence of controversial issues. The content of the summary, as a rule, is divided into the following headings: disputing parties, essence of the problem, procedures.

The actual mediation process should begin with a proposal. that the parties describe in detail the nature of their disagreements and the history of their relationship since the conflict began.

Additional questions to the parties will help the mediator better understand the nature of the conflict. At the initial stage of mediation, it is extremely important to obtain as much information as possible regarding those issues that will be the subject of further discussion between the parties and the mediator.

The specificity of the role of the mediator lies, in particular, in the fact that during the mediation process he has the most complete information. The mediator should use this advantage to involve the parties in the process of discussing problems and exchanging proposals.

It should be remembered that a lack of information or its different interpretation by the parties can cause a deadlock in negotiations.

Taking into account the listed interrelated elements of the conflict and negotiations on its regulation, it is possible to formulate The purpose of mediation is to facilitate conflict resolution, taking into account and assisted by the balanced use of the relative power and responsibilities of each party, the factor of time, and information. It is achieved through the maximum possible inclusion of objective criteria and standards in the consideration of the problem and the development of mutually acceptable agreements, the use of a “win-win” strategy and such solution options that can bring mutual benefit, as well as an analysis of the interests of the parties, the satisfaction of which could contribute to a fundamental resolution of the conflict .

In addition to the traditional mediation process, alternative conflict resolution methods have recently included its various modifications, including:

• –consultative mediation;
• –mediation with elements of arbitration;
• – managerial intermediation.

The main difference between mediation models is the role of the mediator as a third party in the negotiations and the extent of his participation in the final agreement.

Consultative mediation. The process of consultative mediation is essentially similar to traditional mediation. A distinctive feature of this model is that the mediator obtains prior consent that if the parties cannot find a solution to the problem, he will express his opinion on it through consultation. The mediator's advisory opinion is not binding on the parties and is heard if negotiations reach a dead end. At the same time, the parties can use the mediator's opinion as a basis for reaching an agreement.

Mediation with elements of arbitration. This model is a version of mediation where the parties agree before the start of the mediation procedure that if negotiations reach a dead end, the mediator will make a binding decision on the disputed issue. This ensures that during mediation an agreement between the parties will be reached in any case.

Managerial Mediation. Can be used as a method of managing intra-organizational conflicts. In this case, the role of mediator is assumed by one of the organization’s managers, who may not be the leader of any of the parties involved in the conflict, or, conversely, may be one. Of course, in this case, the mediator is not a neutral party in the conflict, since he may have his own interests that must be taken into account when developing the final solution.

This mediation model, unlike others, can no longer be defined as conflict resolution itself through mediation, but rather as conflict management using elements of mediation and facilitation.

The implementation of managerial mediation can be justified and effective if:

• the manager or administration does not have a ready solution to the problem;
• the manager or administration is ready to delegate part of the decision-making powers to the parties involved in the conflict;
• the manager or administration is interested in the problem being resolved through negotiations between the conflicting parties, and not through administrative measures;
• the regulatory, organizational and other restrictions that define the framework of an acceptable agreement between the conflicting parties are clearly defined;
• the mediating manager is ready to explain in detail to the conflicting parties how he will make a decision and what his role will be in this process if the parties do not come to an agreement on their own.

Mediation is an important resource for any society. Spreading awareness about mediation and teaching mediation skills helps everyone.

Mediation is not some mysterious process available only to specially trained, highly qualified professionals. It is a natural extension of good conflict resolution skills. Mediation turns opponents into partners in problem resolution 23 .

The ethics of mediation assumes that this method of conflict resolution is regulated by a set of generally accepted ethical norms and rules dictated by morality.

Resolving disputes with the help of a mediator has been practiced for a very long time. In Rus', for example, this mission was carried out by elders - the wisest people of the community. This method of conflict resolution, such as mediation, can be called civilized. It arose only at a certain stage in the development of society. Currently, depending on the type of conflict, different services can be involved in finding solutions: the management of the organization, the personnel management service, the labor inspectorate, the department of psychologist and sociologist, the trade union committee, the strike committee, the police, the courts and others.

In conflictology, it is accepted that human contradictions cannot be viewed only as something destructive. Conflict also has positive functions. One thing is clear - the weight of situations associated with conflicts requires management. So. the mediator enters into negotiations only when it is no longer possible to resolve the conflict independently, without the intervention of a third party. At the same time, its activities are based on the following principles:

1. Independence(this quality of a mediator is emphasized, as a rule, in all definitions of mediation);
2. Objectivity(this principle follows from the first: no independence - no objectivity);
3. Publicity(the points of view and position of all participants in the dispute, as well as the manager himself, must be made public).

An important factor influencing the effectiveness of conflict resolution is mediation. Mediation- this is a special type of activity consisting of optimization with the participation of a third party of the process - the search by conflicting parties for a solution to the problem that would allow the conflict to end.

As a rule, the role of a mediator (third party) in resolving a conflict is one person, less often a group of two or three or more professionals. States can also act as mediators when it comes to political and international conflicts.

Mediation is one of the most ancient methods of conflict resolution. The elders of the clan or tribe acted as a kind of professional mediators, providing conflict-free solutions to problem and conflict situations.

In modern society, an official or unofficial mediator can act as a third party in a conflict. If a mediator has a normative status, it is assumed that he can influence opponents. Informal mediation allows the parties to the conflict to recognize the informal authority of the mediator, while he does not have a normative status.

As official mediators may act as: interstate organizations; individual states; state legal institutions; government or other government commissions; representatives of law enforcement agencies; business managers; public organizations; professional conflictologists-mediators.

Unofficial mediators usually become: famous people who have achieved success in socially significant activities; representatives of religious organizations and denominations; professional psychologists, teachers, social workers; informal leaders of social groups at various levels; seniors; friends, neighbors, simply witnesses to the conflict.

Depending on the degree of control of the mediator over the decision made, there are several roles of the third party in the conflict: arbitrator, arbitrator, mediator, assistant, observer.

The mediator's role in conflict resolution is the most neutral. With his specialized knowledge, he ensures a constructive discussion of the problem. The final decision rests with the opponents.

With the help of a mediator and if opponents have the skills to discuss the problem, the effectiveness of a non-authoritarian style of conflict resolution increases.

The outcome of the conflict depends on the power, authority and role of the mediator. A conflict mediator can provide: assistance in finding a solution; promoting normalization of relations; providing assistance in organizing communication; control over the implementation of the agreement.

The intermediary does not have the right and should not be required to:

• volitional termination of the conflict;
• separation of conflicting parties;
• blocking fight;
• applying sanctions to the parties;
• definitions of right and wrong.

The manager can also act as a mediator. In this case, it is extremely important for him that the socio-psychological climate in the team has a beneficial effect on the quality of people’s joint activities.

The specifics of mediation can be considered using the example of the activities of a practical psychologist. The key to this activity is the creation of a new situation in the relations of the parties, facilitating the resolution of the existing conflict between them. The strategic task of a psychologist is not to influence opponents, but to encourage them to transfer the conflict into a situation of joint search for a solution.

Interaction is carried out according to the type of triad (opponent - psychologist - opponent). This makes the participants in the conflict more compliant, since they tend to consider their concessions as concessions to the psychologist, and not to the opposite side. Thus, the psychologist allows opponents to “save face.”

When a psychologist works with different types of conflicts, some differences in his activity as a mediator may appear. Thus, the process of regulating family conflict includes four stages:

1. warming up At the beginning of the work, the psychologist does everything to make the spouses feel comfortable;
2. removing obstacles. The psychologist identifies doubts and barriers in relation to the upcoming mediation procedure that exist among the conflicting parties, and sets the opponents up for constructive work;
3. conclusion of an agreement. The psychologist helps spouses clearly formulate requirements for each other and find compromise solutions that would suit both parties;
4. clarification of the situation. The psychologist provides the spouses with the opportunity to simply talk frankly. Emotional disclosure of opponents consolidates the results of mediation and creates the preconditions for conflict-free communication in the future.

Based on all of the above, the main ethical principles of mediation activities are:

• neutrality in relation to opponents. The psychologist does not seek to identify the right and wrong sides. He treats the situation as objectively as possible. The psychologist should not depend on the conflicting parties;

• non-judgmental positions. The psychologist does not evaluate the actions or positions of opponents. It encourages them to self-analyze their actions, helps them make decisions;
• confidentiality. Any personal information received from a participant in the conflict cannot be used to his detriment or transferred to other persons without his consent;
• procedural nature of the activity. The psychologist’s task is to organize the discussion procedure, orienting opponents towards cooperation. The content of the process depends on the participants;
• stimulating cooperation. The psychologist encourages the opponents' steps aimed at normalizing relations, encourages them to do so, ensuring a transition from confrontation to cooperation;
• working with progress, not solutions. The psychologist is not responsible for the nature of the decisions made, but only for organizing the movement towards these decisions.

22 See: Carpenter S.L., Kennedy W.J.D. Settlement of disputes in society. - M, 1992.

23 See Korpelius X., Fair S. Everyone can win: How to resolve conflicts. - M 1994.

MANAGEMENT AND ECONOMICS

ASSESSMENT OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF ORGANIZATIONAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY

CONFLICTS

A.A. VORONOV, Doctor of Economics, Professor of the Department of Economics and Management E-mail: [email protected] A.R. MURATOVA, Candidate of Economic Sciences, Senior Lecturer at the Department of Economics and Management E-mail: [email protected] Krasnodar Cooperative Institute

The article presents the author's strategy for managing labor conflicts in an organization and an algorithm for introducing proposals into the management strategy of a specific business unit. An assessment of the effectiveness of the implementation of the strategy for managing labor conflicts at the micro level has been carried out, and an assessment methodology based on the calculation of a number of aggregate indices has been described. Graphs were constructed to illustrate the dynamics of the calculated indicators. Conclusions about the effectiveness of the strategy are formulated and ways to improve it are outlined.

Key words: strategy, labor conflict, protest activity, contradictions, level of corporate culture, negotiation practice.

The transitional stage of development of the Russian economy is accompanied by intense economic, social, political and spiritual transformations that change the nature of social relations. In the context of globalization in Russia, there is an aggravation of social contradictions and an increase in conflicts.

In a market economic system, the interests of employers and employees are inherently different. The hired worker is the owner of his labor power, which he sells on the labor market and receives payment for labor from the entrepreneur who has the right of ownership of the means of production. The reproductive function of wages is manifested in ensuring normal conditions for the reproduction of the labor force. In addition, wages are the main source of income for the worker and his family, so the worker is interested in increasing it. For an employer, wages of employees are one of the items of its costs, the reduction of which allows it to increase its profits.

Conflict is a real and objective manifestation of contradictions that constantly exist in people’s lives, since without them the development of neither an individual, nor groups of people, nor society as a whole is possible. However, we must not forget the destructive consequences of the development of labor conflicts. Often a conflict or conflict situation is the cause of

stressful situations during work.

The subject of social conflict is those contradictions that arise between the parties to the conflict and which they try to resolve through confrontation. In a market economy, the difference in goals constitutes the nature of the relationship between the owners of capital and labor. As a result of contradictions in the social and labor sphere, disagreements arise, which form the subject of labor disputes. Unlike the subject of the conflict, which is expressed in the contradictions between the parties to the conflict, which they try to resolve through confrontation, the object of the conflict is a part of reality in which its subjects are involved.

A labor conflict differs from other types of conflicts in an organization not only by its specific subject matter, but also by its subject composition. The parties to this type of conflict are always an employee or a group of employees, on the one hand, and the administration, on the other. In labor conflicts, the state acts as an employer, and trade unions and other public organizations act as representatives of an employee or group of employees. Sometimes an interpersonal conflict in an organization, the participants of which are an employee and a representative of the administration, is presented as a labor conflict. It is necessary to carefully identify and analyze the causes of the conflict.

The social partnership system is aimed at combating systemic causes and allows reducing the intensity and scale of mixed causes. The use of social partnership tools in conflict management makes it possible to resolve not only a specific conflict, but also creates conditions for reducing the risk of resumption or the emergence of preconditions for the development of new conflicts in an organization, economic sphere, region, or country. The basic principles of forming social partnership at the present stage are borrowed from the practice of developed countries. However, there is no single model of social partnership. The institution of socio-economic partnership is currently in its infancy in Russia, but it is it that should act as a consolidating factor in relations between business and the state.

The factors hindering the strengthening of social partnership in Russia include:

sufficient institutional design of its subjects, weak social responsibility of the parties to partnership relations, underdeveloped system of corporate ethics and culture of most economic entities, legal nihilism and inaction of trade unions regarding informing workers about their labor rights, dependence of some trade unions on the employer, etc.

Accelerating the process of establishing a social state and constructive regulation of social and labor relations will entail strengthening the national economy and political system.

Of course, the system of social partnership is not limited to the fight against labor conflicts; it is a system of relations and activities that ensure the achievement of a balance of interests of employers, employees and the state. However, we must not forget that the prerequisites for the formation of a system of social partnership in the West arose as a result of pressure from the working masses, and achieving a balance of goals and maintaining it is possible only if labor conflicts are prevented or their negative consequences are minimized. Social partnership reflects a historically conditioned compromise of the interests of the main subjects of economic processes.

In the coming years, the Russian economy will operate in a more difficult environment of stabilizing oil prices and moderate capital flows to emerging markets. Taking this into account, in Russia it is necessary to develop and implement a new development model that involves relying not on expanding demand from external sources, but on intensifying the investment process, improving business conditions, modernizing the economy and preparing the transition to innovative development. Consequently, a prerequisite for further economic development is a radical improvement of institutions.

The use of social partnership tools in managing the development of labor conflicts, especially in the early stages of development, to eliminate the systemic causes of their occurrence will allow:

1) resolve contradictions in the social and labor sphere;

2) eliminate the possibility of resumption of conflicts by eliminating systemic causes;

3) ensure further interaction between participants in social and labor relations on the basis of constructive cooperation;

4) create conditions for the further development of the social partnership system itself;

5) increase the competitiveness of the national economy by developing human potential and creating conditions for long-term business development based on the principle of social justice.

To effectively manage labor conflicts, a comprehensive strategy for developing the organization's management system, developing social partnership at all levels and improving the legal framework in matters of regulating labor relations is necessary. The scientific literature notes that in understanding strategic planning, it is necessary to avoid two extremes: on the one hand, understanding the strategic plan as an ordinary short-term plan, all the features of which are associated exclusively with a long time period (i.e., an ordinary long-term plan), and on the other hand , reducing the strategic plan to a set of vaguely, only qualitatively characterized areas of socio-economic development without indicating any specific measures to ensure the achievement of the goals.

As a result of a research search to improve the personnel management system of a commercial organization, proposals were formulated for the formation of a strategy for managing social and labor conflicts at the corporate level using social partnership tools. The proposals have been successfully implemented and are used in the management process of the organization MAGIK LLC in Krasnodar.

The process of forming and implementing a strategy includes solving interrelated problems: analyzing a conflict situation, defining goals, developing strategies to achieve goals, implementing and implementing strategies, and evaluating results. Applying a strategic approach to the process of managing labor conflicts requires certain conditions. For example, D.P. Zerkin refers to these as:

Objective understanding of the conflict as reality;

Recognition of the possibility of actively influencing the conflict and turning it into a factor of self-regulation and self-correction of the system;

Availability of material, political and spiritual resources, as well as the legal basis for management, the ability of social actors to coordinate their positions and interests, views and orientations.

To this list I would like to add a certain share of the organization’s internal social responsibility. In companies that do not comply with the standards established by law, specified in labor and collective agreements, uncontrollable labor conflicts will constantly occur. Therefore, the social responsibility of an organization is a necessary condition for the implementation of labor conflict management strategies at the micro level, and the greater the share of social responsibility, the more productive the implementation of this strategy will be. To increase the level of social responsibility of business, in 2010 it was decided to hold a regional competition “The Best Collective Agreement of the Krasnodar Territory” once every two years. The regional stage of the All-Russian competition “Russian Organization of High Social Efficiency”1 is also being held.

At the regional level, in the system of social partnership, industry agreements are of great importance, the parties to which, as a rule, are associations of employers, regional territorial bodies of trade unions and, in some cases, regional departments. For example, one of the parties to the Industry Agreement on the construction and construction materials industry of the Krasnodar Territory for 2013-2016 is the Construction Department of the Krasnodar Territory.

Resolution of existing contradictions,

Formation of a favorable microclimate in the team,

Prevention of labor conflicts.

Accordingly, development, implementation and

its effectiveness will be assessed in these areas. The development of measures to manage labor conflicts and the selection of appropriate tools were carried out in accordance with the goals set (Table 1).

"Analytical information on the development of social partnership in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation based on the results of 2010. URL: ohranatruda.ru/news/files/informatciya1.pdf.

Table 1

Goals Objectives Tools Activities

Strategic (long-term) Reducing the level of protest activity among staff. Formation of partnerships in a team Collective negotiations. Collective agreement Corporate social responsibility. Investments in human capital Project preparation and conclusion of a collective agreement. Development of training and professional development programs for employees. Preparation of a draft “Code of Corporate Culture”. Monitoring the fulfillment of contractual obligations

Medium-term Reducing the intensity and scale of labor conflicts. Assessing the effectiveness of conflict resolution measures Collective bargaining. Corporate social responsibility. Questionnaires, surveys and training to identify protest sentiments and conflict situations. Personnel development programs Negotiating on the settlement and prevention of labor disputes. Preparation and implementation of programs to improve professional ethics and corporate culture. Implementation of training and professional development programs for employees

Short-term Conflict resolution (settlement). Elimination of situational causes of labor conflicts. Elimination of the consequences of labor conflicts Collective negotiations. Personnel development programs. Programs to reduce social and labor contradictions Negotiating on the settlement and prevention of labor disputes. Organization of events to form and develop corporate culture. Involving business coaches to create a favorable microclimate in the team

To assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the implementation of the proposed strategy, several indicators were selected, measured at a quantitative level. Among them is the aggregate index “Level of Protest Activity”, calculated on the basis of data obtained during a monthly survey of company employees during the evaluation stage of the proposals’ implementation.

Methodology for calculating the “Level of Protest Activity” index. The index is measured in points from 0 to 100. An index value of less than 50 points indicates a predominance of positive answers or positive assessments, an index value of less than 50 points indicates a predominance of negative answers and negative assessments in respondents' responses. A score of 50 points is achieved when there is a balance between positive and negative responses and a 50% response rate to the third question.

This index is aggregate, as it is based on several indicators, namely respondents’ answers to five questions:

1) Have you noticed protest moods in the team over the past month?

2) Do you think your colleagues’ willingness to enter into conflict with the administration has been increasing or decreasing over the past month?

3) Do you personally experience dissatisfaction and are prone to conflict?

4) If there is a protest next week, will you take part in it?

5) What percentage of employees do you think today is ready to enter into conflict with the administration (for example, express dissatisfaction)?

For each of the first 4 questions, a diffusion index is constructed. For each positive answer, 100 points are assigned, for each negative answer, 0 points. For the 5th question, a number of points equal to the stated percentage is assigned. The result is averaged for all respondents, and the final index “Level of protest activity” is determined by adding the indices of all questions and dividing by 5.

Elements of the strategy for managing social and labor conflicts began to be implemented on June 1, 2012 to evaluate the effectiveness of the implementation of proposals. The first survey to collect data for calculating the estimated indicators was conducted before the start of the strategy on May 25 with a sample of 86 people. Subsequently, the surveys were repeated monthly from the 25th to the 26th from May to October 2012 inclusive. As a result, the authors composed

The dynamics of the level of protest activity in the organization is shown in Fig. 1.

The rise in the level of protest activity in the team, observed in the first months of the implementation of the strategy for managing labor conflicts with a peak in August 2012, is a normal reaction of the work collective to the introduction of innovations, which is based on psychophysiological characteristics, however, when developing a theoretical model of strategies, this fact was not noted by the authors was taken into account. Therefore, some adjustment is necessary, namely: the introduction of adaptation measures at the initial stage of strategy implementation. Among such events are:

1) wide dissemination of necessary information about upcoming changes;

2) involving a wide range of employees in the process of introducing changes, this will create a sense of responsibility for each participant for the result;

3) carrying out personnel changes if necessary.

Administrative pressure as a result of innovations is one of the methods of adapting the team to changes. However, the authors consider this method destructive, lying outside the scope of partnerships, and therefore unacceptable for effective personnel management.

A decrease in the level of protest activity after the end of the period of adaptation of company employees to the ongoing changes indicates a positive trend in management processes and proves the effectiveness of the proposed changes. The authors believe that in the future the rate of decline in the level of protest activity will decrease and stabilize at a certain level, for

Rice. 1. Dynamics of the level of protest activity in the team of MAGIK LLC in 2012

maintaining which it is necessary to monitor the state of the “Level of Protest Mood” index and, if necessary, adjust short- and medium-term activities in accordance with the identified goals and assigned tasks.

To assess changes in the level of corporate culture, the aggregate index “Level of Corporate Culture” was calculated based on data obtained during monthly surveys of the team.

Methodology for calculating the “Level of Corporate Culture” index. The index is measured in points from 0 to 100. An index value of less than 50 points indicates a predominance of positive assessments, a value of less than 50 points indicates a predominance of negative assessments in respondents’ responses. This index is aggregate, as it is based on several indicators, namely respondents’ answers to three questions:

1) Do you consider the level of corporate culture in the organization high or low?

2) Do you think that intra-company relations have improved or worsened in the last month?

For each of the first two questions, a diffusion index is constructed. For the answers “high” and “improved” 100 points are assigned each, for the answers “low” and “worsened” - 0 points, for the answers “average” and “have not changed” - 50 points. For the third question, a number of points is assigned equal to the number of points indicated by the respondents, multiplied by 10. The result is averaged over all respondents, and the final index “Level of corporate culture” is determined by adding the indices of all questions and dividing by 3.

The survey of employees to collect data and calculate the numerical indicator was carried out similarly to the survey on the level of protest activity with a sample of 86 people. As a result, the authors compiled the dynamics of the level of corporate culture in the organization, presented in Fig. 2.

The high growth rate of the “Level of Corporate Culture” index indicates the effectiveness of ongoing measures to

September October

o k i k n y l o s

formation and development of the corporate culture of the enterprise, as well as their positive assessment by the organization’s personnel and the team’s readiness to actively participate in the development of corporate norms and rules.

To supplement the obtained numerical indicators with qualitative characteristics, we present the results of a survey of employees regarding their attitude to changes in the organization’s management system (Table 2). The employee survey was carried out in 2 stages - before the start of the implementation of strategic actions and after 5 months. project implementation. The questionnaire included 5 questions with closed answer options.

An analysis of the data obtained during a staff survey before the implementation of changes in management and at the time of assessing their effectiveness shows that the majority of employees felt the effectiveness of the measures taken. The number of people who positively assess the relationship between the workforce and management increased from 24.4% to 36.1%, as did the number of employees who consider it possible to conduct a dialogue between the workforce and management representatives (from 40.7% to 55.8% ). It should be noted that the percentage of those wishing to change jobs remains at an almost consistently high level. The authors propose to implement programs

June July August September October

Rice. 2. Dynamics of the level of corporate culture in the team of MAGIK LLC in 2012.

additional social guarantees, which will help ensure staff stability and prevent the turnover of qualified employees. In order to clarify the reasons for employee dissatisfaction with work in the organization, an additional question was asked: “What does not satisfy you about the work of the company?” The possibility of answering the question posed was limited to choosing only one answer option (Fig. 3). 13.3% of respondents noted an uncomfortable psychological climate, 17.3% of employees were not satisfied with the high intensity of work, other answers included a lack of career prospects (26.3%), low wages (25.6%), inconsistency of work conditions and rest (17.5%).

The primary reasons respondents cite are the level of wages and the lack of

table 2

Attitude of employees to changes in the management system in 2012 as a percentage of the total number of respondents

Question Rather yes Rather no Difficult to answer Rather yes Rather no Difficult to answer

1. Do you feel changes in 17.5 55.8 26.7 80.2 3.5 16.3

control system?

2. Do you consider relationships 24.4 40.7 34.9 36.1 30.2 33.7

between your administration

favorable company and workforce?

3. Do you think 12.7 73.3 14 16.2 55.8 28 is participating?

team in making management

ical solutions?

4. In your opinion, it is possible 40.7 17.4 41.9 55.8 12.8 31.4

is there a dialogue between administrations and

work collective?

5. If the opportunity is favorable - 39.5 8.2 52.3 34.9 9.3 55.8

Would you change your place of work?

prospects for career growth, in connection with which we can conclude that the desire to change jobs if an opportunity arises is caused more by external factors than by elements of the management system. Despite this, attention should be paid to dissatisfaction with the high intensity of work and the discrepancy between work and rest regimes.

Despite the readiness of the management of MAGIK LLC to develop negotiation practices, the low percentage of employees who note participation in management decision-making indicates the ineffectiveness of this area of ​​the strategy and requires additional measures.

In general, the implementation of a strategy for managing social and labor conflicts at an enterprise, which is based on the proposals formulated during the study, is considered to be successfully implemented, however, it is necessary to evaluate its effectiveness even after a longer period of time, since its main goals and objectives are strategically oriented.

To form an effective system for managing social and labor conflicts, the proposed methods for developing a system of social partnership at the corporate level are an addition to the system for developing social partnership at the regional level developed and presented by the authors in a previous publication on the topic of regulating social and labor relations.

A strategic approach to managing the organization’s personnel and labor conflicts, as well as the development of partnerships, will allow Russian companies to reach a higher and more civilized level of the personnel management system and management of the organization as a whole. Ignoring the situational reasons that form social and labor contradictions will entail the development of conflict situations, the destruction of partnerships between the administration and the team, which will undoubtedly lead to a decrease in labor productivity, disruptions in the work of the company and a decrease in its competitiveness.

Bibliography

1. Bambaeva N.Ya. Methodology for developing and implementing a strategic plan for social

Rice. 3. Reasons for staff dissatisfaction with work in the organization:

1 - high labor intensity; 2 - uncomfortable psychological climate; 3 - lack of career prospects; 4 - low wages; 5 - discrepancy between work and rest regimes

economic development of the territory // Regional economics: theory and practice. 2006. No. 7. P. 20-24.

2. Voronov A.A., Muratova A.R. Directions for the development of social partnership as a mechanism for resolving labor conflicts // National interests: priorities and security. 2013. No. 14. P.2-9.

3. Zerkin D.P. Fundamentals of conflictology: a course of lectures. Rostov-on-Don: Phoenix. 1998. 480 p.

4. Kudrin A. Consequences of the crisis and prospects for the socio-economic development of Russia // Questions of Economics. 2011. No. 3. P. 4-18.

5. Lazarenko A.L., Kuznetsova I.V. Socio-economic partnership in Russia and prospects for its development // Regional economics: theory and practice. 2008. No. 20. P. 2-7.

6. Muratova A.R. Resolution of social and labor contradictions through the system of social partnership // Regional Economics: Theory and Practice. 2012. No. 42. P. 8-13.

7. Nekhoda E.V. Social development of man and changing ideas about the subject of labor in the system of labor relations // Bulletin of Tomsk State University. 2008. No. 3. P.23-45.

8. Panina E.S. Labor conflicts at enterprises // Fundamentals of economics, management and law. 2012. No. 6. P. 132-135.

9. Cherepkova N.V., Chugunkin S.A. Social and psychological climate as an integral part of the labor process in a team. Bulletin of Medical Internet Conferences. 2011. Volume 1. No. 1. P. 45-48.

Management and economics

ASSESSMENT OF STRATEGY EFFECTIVENESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICTS MANAGEMENT

Aleksandr A. VORONOV, Adeliia R. MURATOVA

The article reveals the content of the authors" labor-conflict strategy in an organization. It submits the algorithm of introduction of suggestions in the strategy of an economic unit"s management. The authors estimate the labor-conflicts efficiency at a micro-level of strategy implementation. The submitted diagrams show the dynamics of the estimated figures. The authors make certain conclusions on the effectiveness of a strategy, and they outline the ways of improving.

Keywords: strategy, labor conflict, protest activity, contradiction, corporate culture level, negotiations practice

1. Bambaeva N. Ia. Regional economics: theory and practice, 2006, no. 7, pp. 20-24.

2. Voronov A.A., Muratova A.R. Napravleniia razvitiia sotsial"nogo partnerstva kak mekhanizma razresheniia trudovykh konfliktov. National"nye interesy:pri-oritety i bezopasnost" - National interests: priorities and security, 2013, no. 14, pp. 2-9.

3. Zerkin D. P. Osnovy konfliktologii: kurs lektsii. Rostov-on-Don, Feniks Publ., 1998, 480 p.

4 . Kudrin A. Posledstviia krizisa i perspektivy sotsial "no-ekonomicheskogo razvitiia Rossii. Voprosy ekonomiki - Problems of economics, 2011, no. 3, pp. 4-18.

5. Lazarenko A.L., Kuznetsova I.V. Sotsial"no-ekonomicheskoe partnerstvo v Rossii i perspektivy ego

development. Regional "naia ekonomika: theory and praktika - Regional economics: theory and practice, 2008, no. 20, pp. 2-7.

6. Muratova A. R. Razreshenie sotsial"no-tru-dovykh protivorechii cherez sistemu sotsial"nogo partnerstva. Regional "naia ekonomika: theory and praktika - Regional economics: theory and practice, 2012, no. 42, pp. 8-13.

7. Nekhoda E.V. Sotsial"noe razvitie cheloveka i izmenenie predstavlenii o sub"ekte truda v sisteme trudovykh otnoshenii. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta-Bulletin of Tomsk State University, 2008, no. 3, pp. 23-45.

8. Panina E.S. Trudovye konflikty na predpriiati-iakh. Osnovy ekonomiki, upravleniia i prava - Principles of economics, management and law, 2012, no. 6, pp. 132-135.

9. Cherepkova N.V., Chugunkin S.A. Sotsial"no-psikhologicheskii klimat kak neot"emlemaia chast"trudovogo protsessa v kollektive. Biulleten"med-itsinskikh internet-conferentsii - Bulletin of medical Internet-conferences, 2011, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 45-48.

Alexander A. VORONOV

Krasnodar Cooperative Institute, Krasnodar, Krasnodar region, Russian Federation voronov. a@mail. ru Adeliia R. MURATOVA Krasnodar Cooperative Institute, Krasnodar, Krasnodar region, Russian Federation muratova . adeliya@mail. ru

This area where agreement can be reached is called negotiation space. Any agreements can be reached only within its framework. R. Fischer and U. Ury give a striking example to confirm this. If you go to an antique store to buy an antique silver set worth thousands of dollars and you only have a hundred dollar bill, don't expect skillful negotiation to make up the difference. Bargaining is inappropriate here.

Graphically, the simplest version of the negotiation space can be represented in Fig. 18.2.
Rice. 18.2

The limits of acceptable decisions for each of the parties may be very far from the initially stated positions. Therefore, reaching an agreement is more likely in the central zone of the negotiation space, relatively equally distant from the boundaries of what is permissible. In this case, the decision made is perceived by opponents as quite satisfactory. The further the selected partner m is from the central zone, the more the agreement reached corresponds to the goals of one party and is of a forced nature for the other. The latter is inclined to evaluate this development of events rather as a defeat, although the decision made is in the area of ​​negotiation space.

1 Fischer R., Yuri U. Uka:1. Op. P. 109.

The graphical representation of the negotiation space is more reminiscent of a bargaining space. But even if this strategy is implemented, the possible interaction of the parties to exchange concessions does not always fit into such a simple scheme. If we talk about negotiations based on interests, then they can be carried out without concessions at all. Therefore, in reality, the negotiation space is more complex and, in the words of M. M. Lebedeva, multidimensional.

Reaching an agreement is possible on the basis three types of solutions:

Middle:

Asymmetrical:

A fundamentally new solution.

A typical solution in negotiations is middle, or compromise, solution. In this case, the conflicting parties make mutual concessions. In this case, the concessions should be approximately equal. It is better if the equality of steps towards each other can be expressed in numerical values, then determining the “middle” will not be difficult. The easiest way to do this is in a “buy and sell” situation. The seller asks for the maximum price for his product, and the buyer offers the minimum. If the parties are interested in concluding a deal, then “ negotiation minuet": seller and buyer. without losing sight of their own benefit, they make consistent concessions.

However, more often than not, negotiators find themselves in a situation where it is difficult to determine the equivalence of concessions. The exchange of concessions can be carried out in accordance with their different significance for the conflicting parties: by conceding to the opponent on one issue - less important for himself, the negotiator receives in return an advantage in another issue - more significant for him. An indispensable condition for such a search for a compromise is that concessions do not cross the boundaries of the minimum values ​​of the interests of both parties (Fig. 18.3). Otherwise, the decision made will be outside the scope of the negotiation space. This condition is called Pareto principle, named after the famous Italian sociologist and economist V. Pareto (1848-1923), who developed this principle in 1904. 1 In the diagram explaining the Pareto principle, point C denotes the minimum value reflecting the degree of satisfaction of the interests of party A: point D - party B The shaded sector represents the negotiation space, in the zone of which opponents can make mutual concessions (see Fig. 18.3).

R



is 18.3

A similar solution was found in the conflict that unfolded around the Panama Capal. Since 1903, the zone of this drap was controlled by the United States, which invested huge sums in its construction. For decades, the Panamanians have demanded that the canal be taken over by them. By the mid-70s, the conflict had escalated so much that the parties were forced to enter into negotiations. In 1977, an agreement was concluded to transfer the canal (which has generated more than one billion dollars in revenue over the past 20 years alone) to Panama by 2000.

The second type of solutions is asymmetric solution, in which the concessions of one of the parties to the conflict significantly exceed the concessions of the other. An agreement based on such a decision is most often adopted in situations where:

There is a significant difference in the balance of power between the conflicting parties;

One of the negotiators considers further confrontation risky and threatening even greater losses;

1 Antsupov A. Ya., Shipilov A. I. Conflictology. – M.: UNITY. 1999. - From 501 – 502.

The problem that needs to be solved is much less important for one of the opponents in comparison with the prospects for further relationships.

All these factors can take place, for example, in a conflict between parents and their teenage son, who ultimately agrees to make an asymmetrical decision, clearly receiving less than the conventional half.

The degree of asymmetry may vary. Its extreme expression is almost complete neglect of the interests of one of the conflicting parties. This is precisely the nature of the Versailles Treaty of 1919, concluded after the end of the First World War, in relation to Germany. And if an asymmetric solution is generally the least stable, then with significant asymmetry it is often perceived as a temporary concession to the opponent. In this case, the losing side has a desire to take revenge as soon as the opportunity arises. The development of historical events after the conclusion of the Treaty of Versailles until the outbreak of World War II is a vivid and tragic illustration of the consequences of an asymmetrical solution.

The third type of solution is a fundamentally new solution, in which the contradiction is completely resolved or becomes insignificant, and the relations of the conflicting parties change radically. Finding such a solution is the most difficult and requires painstaking work by negotiators focused on the complete end of the conflict.

A fundamentally new solution can be found based on a thorough analysis of the balance of interests of the parties. This makes it possible to identify non-overlapping interests and thereby resolve the conflict to the mutual satisfaction of opponents. The effectiveness of this approach can be seen in the classic example of two sisters who quarreled over an orange. In the end, they compromised and split the orange in half. After which one sister squeezed the juice out of her half, discarding the peel, and the other used the peel for a cake, discarding the fruit itself. If one sister got all the fruit and the other got all the peel, they would eat both, avoiding mutual losses.

Another path to a fundamentally new solution is possible through a change in interests or their revaluation. In this case, the problem being discussed is included in a broader context. This happens, for example, when opponents unite in the face of a general, more serious danger and their private contradictions are perceived differently. For example, in the era of Republican Rome, during a period of complex internal political struggle, an agreement was concluded - the famous Triumvirate (60 BC) - between the powerful figures of Rome - Caesar. Pompey and Crassus, who united their efforts in opposing the Senate.

When characterizing a fundamentally new solution, it should be noted that in practice it often includes, to one degree or another, elements of a compromise.

^ Working on an agreement can be carried out in two versions. The first involves first concluding an agreement in general terms, and then agreeing on the details on each controversial issue. Another way is also possible. In this case, negotiators resort to sequential agreement on each controversial issue, which creates a series of detailed agreements. The combination of these private decisions constitutes the final agreement. Whatever option is chosen, working on an agreement involves a number of sequential actions.

First of all, negotiators must develop objective criteria, allowing you to evaluate the developed options for solving the problem. 1 Such criteria can be used:

Common values, moral principles;

Customs and traditions respected by both sides;

Laws, instructions, professional standards;

Expert assessments;

Precedents;

1 Fischer R., Yura U. Decree. Op. pp. 95 – 108.

The criteria used must be independent of the wishes of the parties, otherwise they will not be perceived as fair. The criteria must be practical and acceptable to all negotiators. Neglecting these characteristics can lead to an unreasonable agreement and have dire consequences. Take a look at the geographical map of the world and pay attention to the outline of Israel's borders. In many areas it is a straight line. One of these lines appeared after the First World War and cut the Golan Heights into two parts so that the Lake of Galilee (the main reservoir of drinking water in the region) ended up in one territory (later - in Israel), and the sources of many rivers flowing into this lake - on another territory (later - near Syria). Such an ill-conceived decision is still making itself felt in the Middle East conflict.

The next step for negotiators when working on an agreement is to in choosing, using objective criteria, the most acceptable solution. Whether we are talking about positional bargaining or negotiations based on interests, you can count on the strength of agreements when they are based on a solution that suits both parties.

And finally, the last thing - approval of the decision based on the chosen method. In bilateral negotiations, the decision-making procedure is quite simple. If opponents are guided by a bargaining strategy, then a decision is made whether both sides agree with it or one side simply capitulates. In a situation of negotiations based on interests, not only is there mutual agreement of the parties, but there is also no forced nature of such a step. In multilateral negotiations, the following decision-making methods are used; 1) consensus, 2) majority of votes.

The consensus method (from the Latin consensus - agreement, unanimity) presupposes the agreement of all participants in the negotiations with the developed solution. The method is based on “recognition of other people’s interests as a condition for the implementation of one’s own interests.” Agreements developed on the basis of consensus are the most durable, since this method is incompatible with the negative position of at least one of the opponents. However, consensus has not only advantages, but also disadvantages;

If at least one of the opponents objects, the decision will not be approved and the negotiations will reach a dead end;

The need for multiple approvals can be used to delay the negotiation process;

The danger of negotiations breaking down almost at the finish line may force the conflicting parties to adopt vaguely worded decisions.

1 Conflicts in modern Russia / Ed. E. I. Stepanova. - M: Editorial URSS. 1999 – P. 196.

If negotiators use the majority method to approve a decision, then they have a greater chance of reaching agreement. However, in this case, the problem of fulfilling agreements becomes urgent. An example is the conflict in the whaling business that began in the 80s. The threat of extermination of whales and pressure from the world community forced the International Whaling Commission to adopt a decision on a moratorium on commercial harvesting of these animals, approved by a majority vote. However, four members of this organization, which accounted for about 80% of the world's fisheries, refused to comply with the majority decision, which almost turned the moratorium into a fiction. True, this method of decision-making allows one to declare the position of the majority.

If the negotiations are successful, they are completed fixing the decision in the final documents or limited to oral agreements- depending on the formality of the situation. It is clear that putting agreements in writing reduces the possibility of their arbitrary interpretation in the future. However, in situations of interpersonal conflicts, such a practice is virtually absent. This allows the parties, if they wish, to more easily violate the terms of the contract or even cancel it.

It should be borne in mind that negotiations are not always conducted in strict accordance with the outlined scheme. As the negotiations move towards the outcome, the conflicting parties may return to clarify issues discussed earlier. But the general logic of the sequence of stages of negotiations must be preserved. Its violation can lead to a delay in the negotiation process or its breakdown.

^ Analysis of results

negotiations and implementation

agreements reached

The period of direct interaction between the parties has ended, but it would be premature to talk about the end of the negotiations. Opponents leave the “negotiating table”, and the negotiation process itself enters the final stage of analyzing the results of negotiations and implementing the agreements reached.

First of all, each of the parties needs to analyze the past negotiations, regardless of whether they were successful or not. and solve:

How well were the preparations for the negotiations carried out?

Was the planned program of negotiations followed;

What was the nature of the relationship with opponents;

Which arguments were convincing for opponents, and which ones they rejected and why:

Did you have to make concessions and what would be their consequences?

What difficulties arose during the negotiation process;

What are the prospects for further relationships;

What negotiation experience can be used in the future;

What are the main reasons for the results achieved?

A visible criterion for the effectiveness of negotiations is the agreement reached, but its existence should not be interpreted as an unconditional success. For assessing the success of negotiations a number of criteria can be used.

1) The most important indicator of success is the degree to which the problem is solved. The agreement reached during the negotiation process is evidence of one or another solution to the problem. However, depending on the nature of the agreements the outcome of the confrontation between the parties is different:

The end of the conflict within the framework of the “win-win” model finally removes the problem from the agenda;

Ending a conflict according to a “win-lose” or “lose-lose” scenario does not exclude conflictual interaction in the future.

2) Another important criterion for success is subjective assessments of negotiations and their results. Negotiations are successful if both parties are satisfied with their results and regard the agreement reached as a fair solution to the problem. However, it is possible that these estimates will subsequently change.

3) The success of negotiations can be assessed by such a criterion as fulfillment of the terms of the agreement. Even the most brilliant result of negotiations will noticeably fade if problems arise with the fulfillment of the obligations undertaken by the parties. Therefore, the best way to ensure the long-term effect of negotiations is to include in the agreement a plan for its implementation. 1 It is important that it clearly states what needs to be done, by when, by whom.

A system for monitoring the implementation of the agreement must also be provided. It was this function that was assigned to the writer and diplomat A. S. Griboyedov, who ensured that Persia fulfilled the conditions of the Turkmanchay Peace (1828). He had to collect indemnity and return Russian citizens to their homeland. Let us remember that while carrying out this mission, he died in Tehran at the hands of fanatics.

1 Conflicts in modern Russia / Ed. E.I. Stepanova.- M.: Editorial URSS. 1999 - P. 303.

In addition, the final document can also stipulate the procedure for possible revision of the agreement or its parts. An illustration of this can again be found in the history of Russian-Persian relations. Such a procedure was provided for at the conclusion of the Peace of Gulistan (1813) between Russia and Persia. This treaty contained a separate act stipulating the right of Persia to turn to Russia with a request to revise the terms of the peace. It must be said that the struggle for its revision went on for four years, until finally this agreement was recognized by Persia, and the separate act was cancelled.

To summarize, it should be noted that negotiators should begin to fulfill their obligations as soon as possible. Since delay in execution may cause doubts and mistrust of the parties to each other.

^ 18.4. Negotiation tactics

In studies devoted to the negotiation process, we pay special attention influence on the opponent and the use of various techniques. 1 Let us briefly discuss the characteristics of the main tactics used within the framework of a particular negotiation strategy.

^ Tactical techniques for positional bargaining

Techniques related to negotiations of this type are the most well-known and diverse.

1 « Overstatement of demand" Its essence is that opponents begin negotiations by putting forward significantly exaggerated demands, the fulfillment of which they do not expect. Opponents then retreat to more realistic demands through a series of apparent concessions. However, in the end they achieve real concessions from the opposite side. If the initial demand is excessively high, it will be regarded as unlawful and will not cause reciprocal concessions.

2 « ^ Placing false accents in one’s own position " The idea is to demonstrate extreme interest in resolving some minor issue, and then remove the requirements for this item. Such actions look like a concession, which causes a reciprocal concession from the opponent.

1 See Antsupov A. Ya.. Shipilov A. I. Conflictology. – M.: UNITY. 1999; Lebedeva M. M. You have negotiations ahead. – M.: Economics. 1993; Fischer R., Yuri U. The path to agreement, or negotiations without defeat. – M.: Science. 1992.

3" Waiting" is used to force the opponent to express his opinion first, and then, depending on the information received, formulate his own point of view.

4 " Salami” is expressed in providing information to the opponent in very small portions. This trick is used to obtain as much information as possible from the opponent or to delay negotiations.

5 " ^ Stick arguments“are used in cases where one of the negotiators has difficulty with counter-argumentation or wants to psychologically suppress the opponent. The essence of this technique is that, as an argument, they appeal to higher values ​​and interests, starting with statements like: “Do you understand what you are trying to do?!”

6" ^ Deliberate deception » is used either to achieve or to avoid any consequences and constitutes: misrepresentation of information; communication of knowingly false information; lack of authority to make decisions on certain issues; lack of intention to fulfill the terms of the agreement.

7" ^ Putting forward increasing demands " If one of the negotiators agrees with the proposals being made, the other participant may resort to putting forward more and more new demands.

8 " ^ Making demands at the last minute " Used at the end of negotiations, when all that remains is to conclude an agreement. In this situation, one of the participants puts forward new demands, hoping that his opponent will make concessions in order to maintain what has been achieved.

9 " ^ Double interpretation “is that when developing the final document, one of the parties “puts” into it wording with double meaning. Subsequently, such a trick allows you to interpret the agreement in your own interests.

10 " ^ Putting pressure on your opponent " is used with the aim of obtaining concessions from him and forcing him to agree to the proposed solution. It can be implemented through: an indication of the possibility of terminating negotiations; show of force; presentation of an ultimatum; warning of consequences unpleasant for the opponent.

^ Tactics

during negotiations

based on interests

If the use of the first group of techniques demonstrates an attitude towards the opponent as an adversary, then the second group of techniques is focused on a partner approach.

1 « ^ Gradual increase in the complexity of the issues discussed " The essence of this technique is to start the discussion with those issues that cause the least disagreement. And then the negotiators move on to more complex issues. Using this technique allows you to avoid active opposition from the parties from the very beginning of negotiations and create a favorable atmosphere.

2 « ^ Dividing the problem into individual components “consists of not trying to solve the entire problem at once, but, highlighting individual aspects in it, and gradually reaching mutual agreement.

3 « ^ Blanketing controversial issues »» is used if difficulties arise in reaching an agreement on the entire range of problems. The technique is as follows: controversial issues are not considered, which allows partial agreements to be reached.

4 " ^ One cuts, the other chooses " The technique is based on the principle of fairness of division: one is given the right to divide (pie, powers, territory, functions, etc.), and the other is given the right to choose one from two parts. The meaning of this technique is as follows: the first, fearing to receive a smaller share, will strive to divide as accurately as possible.

5 " ^ Emphasizing commonality " The technique is to point out those aspects that unite opponents: interest in a positive outcome of negotiations; interdependence of opponents; desire to avoid further material and moral losses; the existence of a long-term relationship between the parties before the conflict arose.

^ Tactical techniques

dual in nature

It is possible to distinguish a third group of techniques that are similar in their manifestation, but have different meanings depending on the strategy within which they are used.

1 Grachev G.V., Melnik I.K. Manipulation of personality: organization, methods and technologies of informational and psychological influence. – M.: IF RAS. 1999. – P. 189.

1 « ^ Getting ahead of objections " 1 The technique comes down to the fact that the negotiator who begins the discussion points out his weaknesses without waiting for his opponent to do so. The use of this technique within the framework of bargaining to a certain extent cuts the ground from under the opponent’s feet and makes it necessary to adjust the arguments “on the fly.” When striving to negotiate on the basis of interests, the method signals a desire to avoid acute confrontation and recognition of a certain legitimacy of the opponent’s claims.

2 " ^ Economy of Arguments » 1 is that all available arguments are not expressed immediately, but gradually. If negotiators are guided by positional bargaining, then this technique allows them to “hold back” some of the arguments in order to use them in a difficult situation. In interest-based negotiations, another version of this technique occurs. “Economy of arguments” makes it easier to perceive information and allows you to avoid ignoring one or another argument by your opponent.

3" ^ Return to the discussion " The technique boils down to the fact that issues that have already been discussed are put back on the agenda. In a bargaining situation, this technique is used to delay the negotiation process and avoid accepting an agreement. Negotiators focusing on a partnership approach use this technique if for some of them the issue really remains unclear.

4 " Bagging" It consists in the fact that several issues are linked and proposed for consideration together (in the form of a “package”). The “package” within the framework of the bargaining includes proposals that are both attractive and also unacceptable for the opponent. This “package deal” is called a “load sale.” The party offering the “package” assumes that the opponent, interested in several proposals, will accept the rest. In interest-based negotiations, this technique has a different meaning. Here the “package” is focused on linking interests with possible gains for all participants.

5 " ^ Block tactics " It is used in multilateral negotiations and consists of coordinating one’s actions with other participants acting as a single bloc. If opponents are guided by a partnership approach, then this technique allows you to first find a solution for a group of participants and thereby facilitate the search for the final solution. In positional bargaining, the technique of “blocking tactics” is used to combine efforts that block the realization of the interests of the opposite side.

1 Grachev G.V., Melnik I.K. Decree. Op. P. 187.
6" Care"(avoidance tactics) can be expressed in transferring the discussion to another topic or another issue, in a request to postpone consideration of the problem. Within the framework of positional trading, it is used with the goal of;

Do not give your opponent accurate information;

Do not enter into a discussion if, for example, the position on this issue is poorly developed;

Reject an undesirable offer indirectly;

Delay negotiations.

Interest-based negotiators use “withdrawal” in cases where it is necessary to: 1) think about a proposal: 2) agree on an issue with other parties.

The characteristics of tactical techniques used at various stages of negotiations allow us to draw attention to an important aspect that distinguishes some techniques from others. This criterion is the goal to achieve which one or another technique is used. And these goals consist of either 1) the desire to facilitate the achievement of a mutually beneficial result. 2) in the pursuit of a one-sided gain.

In the first case, the actions of the negotiators are characterized by sincerity and openness, and the tactics used are correct. If opponents are focused on obtaining unilateral advantages, then their actions are often hidden. The methods that are used are called differently: unacceptable, speculative, impermissible. But most accurately their essence is reflected by the term “ manipulative" Manipulation can be defined as a type of psychological influence used to achieve a unilateral gain through the hidden inducement of another to perform certain actions. 1 In order to neutralize manipulative influence, first of all, it is necessary to know the techniques of such influence and their timely detection.

1 Quote by: Grachev G.V., Melnik I.K. Decree. Op. P. 67.

^ 18.5. Mediation in the negotiation process

In situations where the possibilities for unilateral actions by the parties to the conflict are practically exhausted or the cost of continuing the conflict becomes too high, opponents still have a chance to resolve the problem through negotiations. However, the situation does not always develop in such a way that countries are ready to conduct direct negotiations. In this case, a solution can be found by involving a neutral third party in the interaction. Its participation is also advisable when direct negotiations between the conflicting parties have reached a dead end.

^ Forms of participation

third party

The term "third party" is broad and collective. There are three main forms of third party participation in the settlement and resolution of the conflict.

1) Court- it is distinguished by a clearly developed, legally enshrined procedure for the proceedings, as well as the obligation for the parties to the conflict to comply with decisions made by a third party. In this case, the participation of a third party is characterized by the maximum degree of intervention in the conflict.

2) Arbitration- characterized by the absence of strict norms regulating the process of discussing the problem; the right to choose a third party by the conflict participants themselves; the binding nature of decisions made by a third party.

3) Mediation- this is a special form of third party participation in the settlement and resolution of the conflict in order to assist in the process of negotiations between the parties to the conflict. While promoting a constructive discussion and finding a solution to the problem, the mediator cannot at the same time determine the choice of the final solution, which is the prerogative of the conflicting parties. Therefore, the mediator must immediately emphasize the fact that responsibility for the failure of the negotiations and the further escalation of the conflict lies not with the third party, but with the parties to the conflict themselves.

It is important to pay attention to the fact that among the above forms of third party participation in the settlement and resolution of the conflict, only the latter is focused on using a negotiation approach.

The intervention of a mediator is advisable in the following cases:

The conflicting parties show a willingness to jointly search for a solution to the problem, but cannot find common ground;

Direct communication between the parties to the conflict is seriously complicated or stopped, and the participation of a third party can help change this situation;

For the conflicting parties, it is important to maintain and continue the relationship;

Participants in the conflict are interested in control over decisions made;

For opponents, an important aspect of overcoming disagreements is confidentiality.

^ Selecting an intermediary

The choice of a mediator by the conflicting parties is carried out in accordance with a number of requirements for the third party.

1 A necessary condition for the consent of opponents to the intervention of a mediator is his competence, which presupposes, first of all, the ability to thoroughly analyze a conflict situation and mastery of mediation skills. This requirement also largely determines the effectiveness of the mediator’s efforts to resolve the conflict. Insufficient competence of the mediator, on the contrary, can lead to the breakdown of negotiations and increased confrontation between the parties.

2 Another important requirement for an intermediary is his impartiality, which is that the mediator must take a neutral position, without providing support to any of the parties to the conflict. It should be noted that the mediator’s disinterest is still relative, since he is, at a minimum, interested in the success of his activities. Therefore, in this case, the main thing is not the actual impartiality of the third party, but the perception of it as such by the parties to the conflict. It was this aspect that played a decisive role in the choice of a mediator in the peaceful settlement of the Yugoslav conflict (1999). This was Martti Ahtisaari, the president of Finland, a non-NATO country.

3 Of no small importance is such a requirement as having authority. The involvement of public organizations or individuals in mediation is largely due to this. For example, the participation of representatives of the Catholic Church in negotiations between the ruling party in Poland and the opposition movement Solidarity in 1989 was determined, first of all, by the fact that in this country the authority and influence of the Church is very strong. The authority that a mediator has in the eyes of the conflicting parties determines his ability to influence the parties to the conflict. It is only important that he, in turn, does not become influenced by any of them and thereby question his neutrality.

^ Intermediary influence

to the negotiation room

process

The extent to which the mediator meets these requirements directly determines his ability to influence the negotiation process, and therefore, ultimately, the results of his mediation activities. The main aspects of this influence include the following.

1 By facilitating the start of negotiations between the parties to the conflict or their continuation, the mediator offers certain options for a meeting place for the parties. In this case, the territory of a mediator is often selected for negotiations. Repeatedly carrying out a mediation mission in the Middle East conflict, the United States provided its territory, for example, in 1978 for negotiations between Egypt and Israel or in 1999 for negotiations between Syria and Israel.

2 The mediator takes an active part in setting the agenda. Together with the conflicting parties, he forms the range of issues for discussion and the order of their consideration. In this case, the mediator’s task is to convince opponents to start negotiations with simpler issues, and move on to considering the most complex ones last. The mediator’s task is to regulate the order and duration of speeches, preventing priority from one side or the other.

3 It is no secret that the relations between the parties to the conflict are characterized by hostility, mistrust, and suspicion. Therefore, the mediator’s significant contribution to the success of the negotiation process is creating a working atmosphere during negotiations. In many ways, the very fact of the presence of a third party can keep opponents from showing hostility towards each other. However, the mediator should not limit himself to this and must make every effort to reduce the level of negative emotions of the conflicting parties. A noticeable impact on the atmosphere during negotiations is exerted by the mediator’s emphasized respect for opponents and understanding of their problems, encouragement of certain steps by opponents to normalize relations and a positive attitude towards joint work. The mediator also helps the conflicting parties overcome negative stereotypes in relation to each other and the negative impact of various perceptual phenomena.

4 Providing assistance in finding a solution is a key aspect of the mediator's influence on the negotiation process. By optimizing this search, the intermediary performs the following actions:

Provides assistance to participants in studying the situation, analyzing disagreements, and evaluating proposals;

Draws the attention of the parties to the existence of a commonality in their interests, or creates such a commonality by including the issue in a broader context, say, the prospect of large-scale economic cooperation;

Helps to identify non-overlapping interests and thereby increases the negotiation space, in the zone of which a solution can be found;

Acts as an additional source of ideas and options for solving the problem;

Provides assistance to opponents in finding and selecting objective criteria for evaluating developed options for solving the problem;

Offers a general formula for a possible agreement.

The effectiveness of these efforts by the mediator largely depends on how complete the information is about the parties to the conflict, controversial issues, the balance of power of the parties, their interests and positions, possible approaches to solving the problem, the degree of their involvement in the conflict, etc. is located by the intermediary.

5 Determining deadlines for completing negotiations can play a certain role in stimulating the mediator to find a mutually acceptable solution. If the conflicting parties, realizing their responsibility for the failure of negotiations, strive to reach an agreement, then a fixed time frame will ensure stable dynamics of the negotiation process.

1 Conflicts in modern Russia / Ed. E.I. Stepanova. - M.: Editorial URSS, 1999 - P 317.

6 If the negotiations are successful, the mediator takes control of the implementation of the agreement. As noted above, the success of the negotiation process is determined not only by the achievement of an agreement, but also by the fulfillment of its terms. Therefore, the mediator needs to ensure that the final agreement includes deadlines for the parties to fulfill their obligations. It is also possible to establish something like a probationary period, i.e. time during which the parties could evaluate the effectiveness of the agreement reached. 1 In addition, the intermediary can act as a guarantor of the implementation of agreements. Such a mission is quite within the capabilities of, say, a manager in resolving a conflict between subordinates.

^ Intermediation models

The components of the mediator’s influence on the negotiation process described above characterize, first of all, traditional mediation, without focusing on the specific features of its various modifications. Such features distinguish the following models of intermediary activity: 2

Facilitation;

Advisory Mediation;

Mediation with elements of arbitration.

The main difference between them is the role of the third party in the negotiations and the degree of its participation in the development of the final decision. From this angle we will characterize the identified types of mediation.

1 Facilitation. The role of the third party comes down mainly to the fact that the facilitator (from English, facilitate) assists the conflict participants in organizing negotiations and holding meetings. The facilitator's role in conflict resolution is to help the conflicting parties prepare for the meeting; ensure their equal participation in the discussion; Ensure strict adherence to the negotiation agenda and procedure. In this case, the facilitator does not take part in the debate between the parties and the development of solutions.

2 ^ Advisory Mediation . The specificity of this type of mediation is as follows: the conflicting parties receive the preliminary consent of the mediator that if they cannot independently find a solution to the problem, he will express his point of view through consultation. This opinion of the mediator is not binding on the parties and is heard only if the negotiations have reached a dead end. However, parties to the conflict can use the opinion of the mediator to reach an agreement.

1 Conflicts in modern Russia / Ed. E.I. Stepanova.- M.: Editorial URSS. 1999 – P. 317.

2 Ibid. P. 315. P. 319.
3 Mediation with elements of arbitration. Within this model, the influence of the mediator on the negotiation process is maximum. This is due to the fact that the parties to the conflict agree before the start of negotiations that if the negotiations reach a dead end, the mediator will make a binding decision on the controversial issue. This agreement encourages conflicting parties interested in controlling the achieved results to make every effort to independently find a solution. In any case, this procedure ensures that an agreement between the parties will be reached. Whatever option of mediation is implemented in the negotiation process, the main thing is that it be successful. Of course, the best result of mediation is conflict resolution. For example, the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (USA) has more than 500 thousand resolved conflicts over 50 years of work. 1 However, much depends not only on the mediator himself, but also on the stage of development of the conflict, the nature of the relationship between the parties, the availability of alternatives to the negotiated agreement, the balance of power between the parties to the conflict, the influence of the environment in which the conflict takes place, etc. In the presence of such a large number of diverse factors, the involvement of an intermediary may not bring the desired result. But in such cases it is not always right to talk about failure.

^ Efficiency mark

mediation

activities

When assessing the effectiveness of mediation activities, several criteria should be used.

1) Objective criteria allowing

consider the mediator's intervention as successful:

Ending the conflict;

Reducing the severity of conflict interaction;

The transition from unilateral actions of the parties to the conflict to attempts to jointly find a solution to the problem;

Normalization of relations between opponents.

1 See: Rostiashvili K.D. Federal Service for Mediation and Reconciliation. // USA: economics, politics, ideology. 1991. - No. 4. - P. 109-110.

2) It is also important to focus on subjective indicators that reflect the degree of satisfaction of the conflict participants with mediation. To do this, it is necessary to determine whether the conflicting parties believe that

While assisting the negotiation process, the mediator was objective in relation to the opponents;

It would be difficult for the parties to manage without his efforts;

The results achieved with the help of an intermediary are not imposed, but, on the contrary, represent a mutually acceptable outcome.

When assessing the degree of success of mediation, it is also necessary to take into account the assessments of the mediator himself and external observers.

The various aspects of mediation discussed above allow us to draw the following conclusion. The activity of a mediator is associated with a number of problems, difficulties, and obstacles that he must overcome. At the same time, the success of the mediator’s efforts is not always obvious; his activity in itself does not guarantee the resolution of the conflict, and sometimes can cause an escalation of conflict confrontation. However, the very fact of involving a mediator in the settlement and resolution of the conflict means the parties’ desire to find a way out using the path of negotiations, and gives hope for a successful outcome.

Concluding our consideration of negotiations in conditions of conflict, let us recall the point of view of modern researchers already known to you, according to which conflict is recognized as an integral property of social relations. This means that each of us became a participant in one conflict or another, maintaining this perspective in the future. Negotiations (direct or with the participation of a third party) can be considered the most preferable and often optimal way to resolve and resolve conflicts. Therefore, the study of the diverse aspects of the negotiation process is not only a promising area of ​​scientific research, but also relevant for any of us. It should be borne in mind that knowledge about negotiations alone is not a sufficient basis for success. An equally important role is played by the formation and development of negotiation skills. And the ability to negotiate is acquired only by putting existing knowledge into practice. And finally, do not forget that negotiations can achieve their goal only if their participants are sincere in their desire to jointly find a solution to the problem. Otherwise, the conflicting parties demonstrate determination rather than strive to find a solution.

Chapter 18. Negotiations as a way to resolve conflicts

18.5. Mediation in the negotiation process

In situations where the possibilities for unilateral actions by the parties to the conflict are practically exhausted or the cost of continuing the conflict becomes too high, opponents still have a chance to resolve the problem through negotiations. However, the situation does not always develop in such a way that countries are ready to conduct direct negotiations. In this case, a solution can be found by involving a neutral third party in the interaction. Its participation is also advisable when direct negotiations between the conflicting parties have reached a dead end.

Forms of third party participation

The term “third party” is broad and collective. There are three main forms of third party participation in the settlement and resolution of the conflict.

1) Court- it is distinguished by a clearly developed, legally enshrined procedure for the proceedings, as well as the obligation for the parties to the conflict to comply with decisions made by a third party. In this case, the participation of a third party is characterized by the maximum degree of intervention in the conflict.

2) Arbitration- characterized by the absence of strict norms regulating the process of discussing the problem; the right to choose a third party by the conflict participants themselves; the binding nature of decisions made by a third party.

3) Mediation- this is a special form of third party participation in the settlement and resolution of the conflict in order to assist in the process of negotiations between the parties to the conflict. While promoting a constructive discussion and finding a solution to the problem, the mediator cannot at the same time determine the choice of the final solution, which is the prerogative of the conflicting parties. Therefore, the mediator must immediately emphasize the fact that responsibility for the failure of the negotiations and the further escalation of the conflict lies not with the third party, but with the parties to the conflict themselves.

It is important to pay attention to the fact that among the above forms of third party participation in the settlement and resolution of the conflict, only the latter is focused on using a negotiation approach.

The intervention of a mediator is advisable in the following cases:

• the conflicting parties show readiness to jointly search for a solution to the problem, but cannot find common ground;
• direct communication between the parties to the conflict is seriously complicated or stopped, and the participation of a third party can help change this situation;
• for the conflicting parties, it is important to maintain and continue the relationship;
• parties to the conflict are interested in control over decisions made;
• It is important for the conflicting parties to “save face,” i.e. make sure that the end of the conflict does not look like a defeat for either of them, and the help of a mediator in this can be significant;
• For opponents, such an aspect of overcoming disagreements as confidentiality is important.

Selecting an intermediary

The choice of a mediator by the conflicting parties is carried out in accordance with a number of requirements for the third party.

1 A necessary condition for the opponents’ consent to the mediator’s intervention is his competence, which presupposes, first of all, the ability to thoroughly analyze a conflict situation and mastery of mediation skills. This requirement also largely determines the effectiveness of the mediator’s efforts to resolve the conflict. Insufficient competence of the mediator, on the contrary, can lead to the breakdown of negotiations and increased confrontation between the parties.

2 Another important requirement for an intermediary is his impartiality, which is that the mediator must take a neutral position, without providing support to any of the parties to the conflict. It should be noted that the mediator’s disinterest is still relative, since he is, at a minimum, interested in the success of his activities. Therefore, in this case, the main thing is not the actual impartiality of the third party, but the perception of it as such by the parties to the conflict. It was this aspect that played a decisive role in the choice of a mediator in the peaceful settlement of the Yugoslav conflict (1999). This was Martti Ahtisaari, the president of Finland, a non-NATO country.

3 Of no small importance is such a requirement as having authority. The involvement of public organizations or individuals in mediation is largely due to this. For example, the participation of representatives of the Catholic Church in negotiations between the ruling party in Poland and the opposition movement “Solidarity” in 1989 was determined, first of all, by the fact that in this country the authority and influence of the Church is very strong. The authority that a mediator has in the eyes of the conflicting parties determines his ability to influence the parties to the conflict. It is only important that he, in turn, does not become influenced by any of them and thereby question his neutrality.

The influence of the mediator on the negotiation process

The extent to which the mediator meets these requirements directly determines his ability to influence the negotiation process, and therefore, ultimately, the results of his mediation activities. The main aspects of this influence include the following.

1 By facilitating the start of negotiations between the parties to the conflict or their continuation, the mediator offers certain options for a meeting place for the parties. In this case, the territory of a mediator is often selected for negotiations. Repeatedly carrying out a mediation mission in the Middle East conflict, the United States provided its territory, for example, in 1978 for negotiations between Egypt and Israel or in 1999 for negotiations between Syria and Israel.

2 The mediator takes an active part in setting the agenda. Together with the conflicting parties, he forms the range of issues for discussion and the order of their consideration. In this case, the mediator’s task is to convince opponents to start negotiations with simpler issues, and move on to considering the most complex ones last. The mediator’s task is to regulate the order and duration of speeches, preventing priority from one side or the other.

3 It is no secret that the relations between the parties to the conflict are characterized by hostility, mistrust, and suspicion. Therefore, the mediator’s significant contribution to the success of the negotiation process is creating a working atmosphere during negotiations. In many ways, the very fact of the presence of a third party can keep opponents from showing hostility towards each other. However, the mediator should not limit himself to this and must make every effort to reduce the level of negative emotions of the conflicting parties. A noticeable impact on the atmosphere during negotiations is exerted by the mediator’s emphasized respect for opponents and understanding of their problems, encouragement of certain steps by opponents to normalize relations and a positive attitude towards joint work. The mediator also helps the conflicting parties overcome negative stereotypes in relation to each other and the negative impact of various perceptual phenomena.

4 Providing assistance in finding a solution is a key aspect of the mediator's influence on the negotiation process. By optimizing this search, the intermediary performs the following actions:

• assists participants in studying the situation, analyzing disagreements, and evaluating proposals;
• draws the attention of the parties to the presence of a commonality in their interests or creates such a commonality by including the problem in a broader context, say, the prospect of large-scale economic cooperation;
• helps to identify non-overlapping interests and thereby increases the negotiation space, in the zone of which a solution can be found;
• acts as an additional source of ideas and options for solving the problem;
• assists opponents in searching and selecting objective criteria for evaluating developed options for solving the problem;
• offers a general formula for a possible agreement.

The effectiveness of these efforts by the mediator largely depends on how complete the information is about the parties to the conflict, controversial issues, the balance of power of the parties, their interests and positions, possible approaches to solving the problem, the degree of their involvement in the conflict, etc. is located by the intermediary.

5 Setting deadlines for completing negotiations can play a certain role in stimulating the mediator to find a mutually acceptable solution. If the conflicting parties, realizing their responsibility for the failure of negotiations, strive to reach an agreement, then a fixed time frame will ensure stable dynamics of the negotiation process.

6 If the negotiations are successful, the mediator takes control of the implementation of the agreement. As noted above, the success of the negotiation process is determined not only by the achievement of an agreement, but also by the fulfillment of its terms. Therefore, the mediator needs to ensure that the final agreement includes deadlines for the parties to fulfill their obligations. It is also possible to establish something like a probationary period, i.e. time during which the parties could evaluate the effectiveness of the agreement reached. In addition, the intermediary can act as a guarantor of the implementation of agreements. Such a mission is quite within the capabilities of, say, a manager in resolving a conflict between subordinates.

Intermediation models

The components of the mediator’s influence on the negotiation process described above characterize, first of all, traditional mediation, without focusing on the specific features of its various modifications. Such features distinguish the following models of intermediary activity:

• facilitation;
• advisory mediation;
• mediation with elements of arbitration.

The main difference between them is the role of the third party in the negotiations and the degree of its participation in the development of the final decision. From this angle we will characterize the identified types of mediation.

1 Facilitation. The role of the third party comes down mainly to the fact that the facilitator (from English, facilitate) assists the conflict participants in organizing negotiations and holding meetings. The facilitator's role in conflict resolution is to help the conflicting parties prepare for the meeting; ensure their equal participation in the discussion; Ensure strict adherence to the negotiation agenda and procedure. In this case, the facilitator does not take part in the debate between the parties and the development of solutions.

2 Advisory Mediation. The specificity of this type of mediation is as follows: the conflicting parties receive the preliminary consent of the mediator that if they cannot independently find a solution to the problem, he will express his point of view through consultation. This opinion of the mediator is not binding on the parties and is heard only if the negotiations have reached a dead end. However, parties to the conflict can use the opinion of the mediator to reach an agreement.

3 Mediation with elements of arbitration. Within this model, the influence of the mediator on the negotiation process is maximum. This is due to the fact that the parties to the conflict agree before the start of negotiations that if the negotiations reach a dead end, the mediator will make a binding decision on the controversial issue. This agreement encourages conflicting parties interested in controlling the achieved results to make every effort to independently find a solution. In any case, this procedure ensures that an agreement between the parties will be reached. Whatever option of mediation is implemented in the negotiation process, the main thing is that it be successful. Of course, the best result of mediation is conflict resolution. For example, the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (USA) has more than 500 thousand resolved conflicts over 50 years of work. However, much depends not only on the mediator himself, but also on the stage of development of the conflict, the nature of the relationship between the parties, the availability of alternatives to the negotiated agreement, the balance of power between the parties to the conflict, the influence of the environment in which the conflict takes place, etc. In the presence of such a large number of diverse factors, the involvement of an intermediary may not bring the desired result. But in such cases it is not always right to talk about failure.

Assessing the effectiveness of mediation activities

When assessing the effectiveness of mediation activities, several criteria should be used.

1) Objective criteria allowing

consider the mediator's intervention as successful:

• ending the conflict;
• reducing the severity of conflict interaction;
• transition from unilateral actions of the parties to the conflict to attempts to jointly find a solution to the problem;
• normalization of relations between opponents.

2) It is also important to focus on subjective indicators that reflect the degree of satisfaction of the conflict participants with mediation. To do this, it is necessary to determine whether the conflicting parties believe that

• while assisting the negotiation process, the mediator was objective in relation to the opponents;
• it would be difficult for the parties to cope without his efforts;
• The results achieved with the help of an intermediary are not imposed, but, on the contrary, represent a mutually acceptable outcome.

When assessing the degree of success of mediation, it is also necessary to take into account the assessments of the mediator himself and external observers.

The various aspects of mediation discussed above allow us to draw the following conclusion. The activity of a mediator is associated with a number of problems, difficulties, and obstacles that he must overcome. At the same time, the success of the mediator’s efforts is not always obvious; his activity in itself does not guarantee the resolution of the conflict, and sometimes can cause an escalation of conflict confrontation. However, the very fact of involving a mediator in the settlement and resolution of the conflict means the parties’ desire to find a way out using the path of negotiations, and gives hope for a successful outcome.

Concluding our consideration of negotiations in conditions of conflict, let us recall the point of view of modern researchers already known to you, according to which conflict is recognized as an integral property of social relations. This means that each of us became a participant in one conflict or another, maintaining this perspective in the future. Negotiations (direct or with the participation of a third party) can be considered the most preferable and often optimal way to resolve and resolve conflicts. Therefore, the study of the diverse aspects of the negotiation process is not only a promising area of ​​scientific research, but also relevant for any of us. It should be borne in mind that knowledge about negotiations alone is not a sufficient basis for success. An equally important role is played by the formation and development of negotiation skills. And the ability to negotiate is acquired only by putting existing knowledge into practice. And finally, do not forget that negotiations can achieve their goal only if their participants are sincere in their desire to jointly find a solution to the problem. Otherwise, the conflicting parties demonstrate determination rather than strive to find a solution.

This area where agreement can be reached is called negotiation space. Any agreements can be reached only within its framework. R. Fischer and U. Ury give a striking example to confirm this. If you go to an antique store to buy an antique silver set worth thousands of dollars and you only have a hundred dollar bill, don't expect skillful negotiation to make up the difference. Bargaining is inappropriate here.

Graphically, the simplest version of the negotiation space can be represented in Fig. 18.2.
Rice. 18.2

The limits of acceptable decisions for each of the parties may be very far from the initially stated positions. Therefore, reaching an agreement is more likely in the central zone of the negotiation space, relatively equally distant from the boundaries of what is permissible. In this case, the decision made is perceived by opponents as quite satisfactory. The further the selected partner m is from the central zone, the more the agreement reached corresponds to the goals of one party and is of a forced nature for the other. The latter is inclined to evaluate this development of events rather as a defeat, although the decision made is in the area of ​​negotiation space.

1 Fischer R., Yuri U. Uka:1. Op. P. 109.

The graphical representation of the negotiation space is more reminiscent of a bargaining space. But even if this strategy is implemented, the possible interaction of the parties to exchange concessions does not always fit into such a simple scheme. If we talk about negotiations based on interests, then they can be carried out without concessions at all. Therefore, in reality, the negotiation space is more complex and, in the words of M. M. Lebedeva, multidimensional.

Reaching an agreement is possible on the basis three types of solutions:

Middle:

Asymmetrical:

A fundamentally new solution.

A typical solution in negotiations is middle, or compromise, solution. In this case, the conflicting parties make mutual concessions. In this case, the concessions should be approximately equal. It is better if the equality of steps towards each other can be expressed in numerical values, then determining the “middle” will not be difficult. The easiest way to do this is in a “buy and sell” situation. The seller asks for the maximum price for his product, and the buyer offers the minimum. If the parties are interested in concluding a deal, then “ negotiation minuet": seller and buyer. without losing sight of their own benefit, they make consistent concessions.

However, more often than not, negotiators find themselves in a situation where it is difficult to determine the equivalence of concessions. The exchange of concessions can be carried out in accordance with their different significance for the conflicting parties: by conceding to the opponent on one issue - less important for himself, the negotiator receives in return an advantage in another issue - more significant for him. An indispensable condition for such a search for a compromise is that concessions do not cross the boundaries of the minimum values ​​of the interests of both parties (Fig. 18.3). Otherwise, the decision made will be outside the scope of the negotiation space. This condition is called Pareto principle, named after the famous Italian sociologist and economist V. Pareto (1848-1923), who developed this principle in 1904. 1 In the diagram explaining the Pareto principle, point C denotes the minimum value reflecting the degree of satisfaction of the interests of party A: point D - party B The shaded sector represents the negotiation space, in the zone of which opponents can make mutual concessions (see Fig. 18.3).

R



is 18.3

A similar solution was found in the conflict that unfolded around the Panama Capal. Since 1903, the zone of this drap was controlled by the United States, which invested huge sums in its construction. For decades, the Panamanians have demanded that the canal be taken over by them. By the mid-70s, the conflict had escalated so much that the parties were forced to enter into negotiations. In 1977, an agreement was concluded to transfer the canal (which has generated more than one billion dollars in revenue over the past 20 years alone) to Panama by 2000.

The second type of solutions is asymmetric solution, in which the concessions of one of the parties to the conflict significantly exceed the concessions of the other. An agreement based on such a decision is most often adopted in situations where:

There is a significant difference in the balance of power between the conflicting parties;

One of the negotiators considers further confrontation risky and threatening even greater losses;

1 Antsupov A. Ya., Shipilov A. I. Conflictology. – M.: UNITY. 1999. - From 501 – 502.

The problem that needs to be solved is much less important for one of the opponents in comparison with the prospects for further relationships.

All these factors can take place, for example, in a conflict between parents and their teenage son, who ultimately agrees to make an asymmetrical decision, clearly receiving less than the conventional half.

The degree of asymmetry may vary. Its extreme expression is almost complete neglect of the interests of one of the conflicting parties. This is precisely the nature of the Versailles Treaty of 1919, concluded after the end of the First World War, in relation to Germany. And if an asymmetric solution is generally the least stable, then with significant asymmetry it is often perceived as a temporary concession to the opponent. In this case, the losing side has a desire to take revenge as soon as the opportunity arises. The development of historical events after the conclusion of the Treaty of Versailles until the outbreak of World War II is a vivid and tragic illustration of the consequences of an asymmetrical solution.

The third type of solution is a fundamentally new solution, in which the contradiction is completely resolved or becomes insignificant, and the relations of the conflicting parties change radically. Finding such a solution is the most difficult and requires painstaking work by negotiators focused on the complete end of the conflict.

A fundamentally new solution can be found based on a thorough analysis of the balance of interests of the parties. This makes it possible to identify non-overlapping interests and thereby resolve the conflict to the mutual satisfaction of opponents. The effectiveness of this approach can be seen in the classic example of two sisters who quarreled over an orange. In the end, they compromised and split the orange in half. After which one sister squeezed the juice out of her half, discarding the peel, and the other used the peel for a cake, discarding the fruit itself. If one sister got all the fruit and the other got all the peel, they would eat both, avoiding mutual losses.

Another path to a fundamentally new solution is possible through a change in interests or their revaluation. In this case, the problem being discussed is included in a broader context. This happens, for example, when opponents unite in the face of a general, more serious danger and their private contradictions are perceived differently. For example, in the era of Republican Rome, during a period of complex internal political struggle, an agreement was concluded - the famous Triumvirate (60 BC) - between the powerful figures of Rome - Caesar. Pompey and Crassus, who united their efforts in opposing the Senate.

When characterizing a fundamentally new solution, it should be noted that in practice it often includes, to one degree or another, elements of a compromise.

Working on an agreement can be carried out in two versions. The first involves first concluding an agreement in general terms, and then agreeing on the details on each controversial issue. Another way is also possible. In this case, negotiators resort to sequential agreement on each controversial issue, which creates a series of detailed agreements. The combination of these private decisions constitutes the final agreement. Whatever option is chosen, working on an agreement involves a number of sequential actions.

First of all, negotiators must develop objective criteria, allowing you to evaluate the developed options for solving the problem. 1 Such criteria can be used:

Common values, moral principles;

Customs and traditions respected by both sides;

Laws, instructions, professional standards;

Expert assessments;

Precedents;

1 Fischer R., Yura U. Decree. Op. pp. 95 – 108.

The criteria used must be independent of the wishes of the parties, otherwise they will not be perceived as fair. The criteria must be practical and acceptable to all negotiators. Neglecting these characteristics can lead to an unreasonable agreement and have dire consequences. Take a look at the geographical map of the world and pay attention to the outline of Israel's borders. In many areas it is a straight line. One of these lines appeared after the First World War and cut the Golan Heights into two parts so that the Lake of Galilee (the main reservoir of drinking water in the region) ended up in one territory (later - in Israel), and the sources of many rivers flowing into this lake - on another territory (later - near Syria). Such an ill-conceived decision is still making itself felt in the Middle East conflict.

The next step for negotiators when working on an agreement is to in choosing, using objective criteria, the most acceptable solution. Whether we are talking about positional bargaining or negotiations based on interests, you can count on the strength of agreements when they are based on a solution that suits both parties.

And finally, the last thing - approval of the decision based on the chosen method. In bilateral negotiations, the decision-making procedure is quite simple. If opponents are guided by a bargaining strategy, then a decision is made whether both sides agree with it or one side simply capitulates. In a situation of negotiations based on interests, not only is there mutual agreement of the parties, but there is also no forced nature of such a step. In multilateral negotiations, the following decision-making methods are used; 1) consensus, 2) majority of votes.

The consensus method (from the Latin consensus - agreement, unanimity) presupposes the agreement of all participants in the negotiations with the developed solution. The method is based on “recognition of other people’s interests as a condition for the implementation of one’s own interests.” Agreements developed on the basis of consensus are the most durable, since this method is incompatible with the negative position of at least one of the opponents. However, consensus has not only advantages, but also disadvantages;

If at least one of the opponents objects, the decision will not be approved and the negotiations will reach a dead end;

The need for multiple approvals can be used to delay the negotiation process;

The danger of negotiations breaking down almost at the finish line may force the conflicting parties to adopt vaguely worded decisions.

1 Conflicts in modern Russia / Ed. E. I. Stepanova. - M: Editorial URSS. 1999 – P. 196.

If negotiators use the majority method to approve a decision, then they have a greater chance of reaching agreement. However, in this case, the problem of fulfilling agreements becomes urgent. An example is the conflict in the whaling business that began in the 80s. The threat of extermination of whales and pressure from the world community forced the International Whaling Commission to adopt a decision on a moratorium on commercial harvesting of these animals, approved by a majority vote. However, four members of this organization, which accounted for about 80% of the world's fisheries, refused to comply with the majority decision, which almost turned the moratorium into a fiction. True, this method of decision-making allows one to declare the position of the majority.

If the negotiations are successful, they are completed fixing the decision in the final documents or limited to oral agreements- depending on the formality of the situation. It is clear that putting agreements in writing reduces the possibility of their arbitrary interpretation in the future. However, in situations of interpersonal conflicts, such a practice is virtually absent. This allows the parties, if they wish, to more easily violate the terms of the contract or even cancel it.

It should be borne in mind that negotiations are not always conducted in strict accordance with the outlined scheme. As the negotiations move towards the outcome, the conflicting parties may return to clarify issues discussed earlier. But the general logic of the sequence of stages of negotiations must be preserved. Its violation can lead to a delay in the negotiation process or its breakdown.

Analysis of results

negotiations and implementation

agreements reached

The period of direct interaction between the parties has ended, but it would be premature to talk about the end of the negotiations. Opponents leave the “negotiating table”, and the negotiation process itself enters the final stage of analyzing the results of negotiations and implementing the agreements reached.

First of all, each of the parties needs to analyze the past negotiations, regardless of whether they were successful or not. and solve:

Was the planned program of negotiations followed;

What was the nature of the relationship with opponents;

Which arguments were convincing for opponents, and which ones they rejected and why:

Did you have to make concessions and what would be their consequences?

What difficulties arose during the negotiation process;

What are the prospects for further relationships;

What negotiation experience can be used in the future;

What are the main reasons for the results achieved?

A visible criterion for the effectiveness of negotiations is the agreement reached, but its existence should not be interpreted as an unconditional success. For assessing the success of negotiations a number of criteria can be used.

1) The most important indicator of success is the degree to which the problem is solved. The agreement reached during the negotiation process is evidence of one or another solution to the problem. However, depending on the nature of the agreements the outcome of the confrontation between the parties is different:

The end of the conflict within the framework of the “win-win” model finally removes the problem from the agenda;

Ending a conflict according to a “win-lose” or “lose-lose” scenario does not exclude conflictual interaction in the future.

2) Another important criterion for success is subjective assessments of negotiations and their results. Negotiations are successful if both parties are satisfied with their results and regard the agreement reached as a fair solution to the problem. However, it is possible that these estimates will subsequently change.

3) The success of negotiations can be assessed by such a criterion as fulfillment of the terms of the agreement. Even the most brilliant result of negotiations will noticeably fade if problems arise with the fulfillment of the obligations undertaken by the parties. Therefore, the best way to ensure the long-term effect of negotiations is to include in the agreement a plan for its implementation. 1 It is important that it clearly states what needs to be done, by when, by whom.

A system for monitoring the implementation of the agreement must also be provided. It was this function that was assigned to the writer and diplomat A. S. Griboyedov, who ensured that Persia fulfilled the conditions of the Turkmanchay Peace (1828). He had to collect indemnity and return Russian citizens to their homeland. Let us remember that while carrying out this mission, he died in Tehran at the hands of fanatics.

1 Conflicts in modern Russia / Ed. E.I. Stepanova.- M.: Editorial URSS. 1999 - P. 303.

In addition, the final document can also stipulate the procedure for possible revision of the agreement or its parts. An illustration of this can again be found in the history of Russian-Persian relations. Such a procedure was provided for at the conclusion of the Peace of Gulistan (1813) between Russia and Persia. This treaty contained a separate act stipulating the right of Persia to turn to Russia with a request to revise the terms of the peace. It must be said that the struggle for its revision went on for four years, until finally this agreement was recognized by Persia, and the separate act was cancelled.

To summarize, it should be noted that negotiators should begin to fulfill their obligations as soon as possible. Since delay in execution may cause doubts and mistrust of the parties to each other.

18.4. Negotiation tactics

In studies devoted to the negotiation process, we pay special attention influence on the opponent and the use of various techniques. 1 Let us briefly discuss the characteristics of the main tactics used within the framework of a particular negotiation strategy.

Tactical techniques for positional bargaining

Techniques related to negotiations of this type are the most well-known and diverse.

1 « Overstatement of demand" Its essence is that opponents begin negotiations by putting forward significantly exaggerated demands, the fulfillment of which they do not expect. Opponents then retreat to more realistic demands through a series of apparent concessions. However, in the end they achieve real concessions from the opposite side. If the initial demand is excessively high, it will be regarded as unlawful and will not cause reciprocal concessions.

2 « Placing false accents in one’s own position" The idea is to demonstrate extreme interest in resolving some minor issue, and then remove the requirements for this item. Such actions look like a concession, which causes a reciprocal concession from the opponent.

1 See Antsupov A. Ya.. Shipilov A. I. Conflictology. – M.: UNITY. 1999; Lebedeva M. M. You have negotiations ahead. – M.: Economics. 1993; Fischer R., Yuri U. The path to agreement, or negotiations without defeat. – M.: Science. 1992.

3" Waiting" is used to force the opponent to express his opinion first, and then, depending on the information received, formulate his own point of view.

4 " Salami” is expressed in providing information to the opponent in very small portions. This trick is used to obtain as much information as possible from the opponent or to delay negotiations.

5 " Stick arguments“are used in cases where one of the negotiators has difficulty with counterargumentation or wants to psychologically suppress the opponent. The essence of this technique is that, as an argument, they appeal to higher values ​​and interests, starting with statements like: “Do you understand what you are trying to do?!”

6" Deliberate deception» is used either to achieve or to avoid any consequences and constitutes: misrepresentation of information; communication of knowingly false information; lack of authority to make decisions on certain issues; lack of intention to fulfill the terms of the agreement.

7" Putting forward increasing demands" If one of the negotiators agrees with the proposals being made, the other participant may resort to putting forward more and more new demands.

8 " Making demands at the last minute" Used at the end of negotiations, when all that remains is to conclude an agreement. In this situation, one of the participants puts forward new demands, hoping that his opponent will make concessions in order to maintain what has been achieved.

9 " Double interpretation“is that when developing the final document, one of the parties “puts” into it wording with double meaning. Subsequently, such a trick allows you to interpret the agreement in your own interests.

10 " Putting pressure on your opponent" is used with the aim of obtaining concessions from him and forcing him to agree to the proposed solution. It can be implemented through: an indication of the possibility of terminating negotiations; show of force; presentation of an ultimatum; warning of consequences unpleasant for the opponent.

Tactics

during negotiations

based on interests

If the use of the first group of techniques demonstrates an attitude towards the opponent as an adversary, then the second group of techniques is focused on a partner approach.

1 « Gradual increase in the complexity of the issues discussed" The essence of this technique is to start the discussion with those issues that cause the least disagreement. And then the negotiators move on to more complex issues. Using this technique allows you to avoid active opposition from the parties from the very beginning of negotiations and create a favorable atmosphere.

2 « Dividing the problem into individual components“consists of not trying to solve the entire problem at once, but, highlighting individual aspects in it, and gradually reaching mutual agreement.

3 « Blanketing controversial issues»» is used if difficulties arise in reaching an agreement on the entire range of problems. The technique is as follows: controversial issues are not considered, which allows partial agreements to be reached.

4 " One cuts, the other chooses" The technique is based on the principle of fairness of division: one is given the right to divide (pie, powers, territory, functions, etc.), and the other is given the right to choose one from two parts. The meaning of this technique is as follows: the first, fearing to receive a smaller share, will strive to divide as accurately as possible.

5 " Emphasizing commonality" The technique is to point out those aspects that unite opponents: interest in a positive outcome of negotiations; interdependence of opponents; desire to avoid further material and moral losses; the existence of a long-term relationship between the parties before the conflict arose.

Tactical techniques

dual in nature

It is possible to distinguish a third group of techniques that are similar in their manifestation, but have different meanings depending on the strategy within which they are used.

1 Grachev G.V., Melnik I.K. Manipulation of personality: organization, methods and technologies of informational and psychological influence. – M.: IF RAS. 1999. – P. 189.

1 « Getting ahead of objections" 1 The technique comes down to the fact that the negotiator who begins the discussion points out his weaknesses without waiting for his opponent to do so. The use of this technique within the framework of bargaining to a certain extent cuts the ground from under the opponent’s feet and makes it necessary to adjust the arguments “on the fly.” When striving to negotiate on the basis of interests, the method signals a desire to avoid acute confrontation and recognition of a certain legitimacy of the opponent’s claims.

2 " Economy of Arguments» 1 is that all available arguments are not expressed immediately, but gradually. If negotiators are guided by positional bargaining, then this technique allows them to “hold back” some of the arguments in order to use them in a difficult situation. In interest-based negotiations, another version of this technique occurs. “Economy of arguments” makes it easier to perceive information and allows you to avoid ignoring one or another argument by your opponent.

3" Return to the discussion" The technique boils down to the fact that issues that have already been discussed are put back on the agenda. In a bargaining situation, this technique is used to delay the negotiation process and avoid accepting an agreement. Negotiators focusing on a partnership approach use this technique if for some of them the issue really remains unclear.

4 " Bagging" It consists in the fact that several issues are linked and proposed for consideration together (in the form of a “package”). The “package” within the framework of the bargaining includes proposals that are both attractive and also unacceptable for the opponent. This “package deal” is called a “load sale.” The party offering the “package” assumes that the opponent, interested in several proposals, will accept the rest. In interest-based negotiations, this technique has a different meaning. Here the “package” is focused on linking interests with possible gains for all participants.

5 " Block tactics" It is used in multilateral negotiations and consists of coordinating one’s actions with other participants acting as a single bloc. If opponents are guided by a partnership approach, then this technique allows you to first find a solution for a group of participants and thereby facilitate the search for the final solution. In positional bargaining, the technique of “blocking tactics” is used to combine efforts that block the realization of the interests of the opposite side.

1 Grachev G.V., Melnik I.K. Decree. Op. P. 187.
6" Care"(avoidance tactics) can be expressed in transferring the discussion to another topic or another issue, in a request to postpone consideration of the problem. Within the framework of positional trading, it is used with the goal of;

Do not give your opponent accurate information;

Do not enter into a discussion if, for example, the position on this issue is poorly developed;

Reject an undesirable offer indirectly;

Delay negotiations.

Interest-based negotiators use “withdrawal” in cases where it is necessary to: 1) think about a proposal: 2) agree on an issue with other parties.

The characteristics of tactical techniques used at various stages of negotiations allow us to draw attention to an important aspect that distinguishes some techniques from others. This criterion is the goal to achieve which one or another technique is used. And these goals consist of either 1) the desire to facilitate the achievement of a mutually beneficial result. 2) in the pursuit of a one-sided gain.

In the first case, the actions of the negotiators are characterized by sincerity and openness, and the tactics used are correct. If opponents are focused on obtaining unilateral advantages, then their actions are often hidden. The methods that are used are called differently: unacceptable, speculative, impermissible. But most accurately their essence is reflected by the term “ manipulative" Manipulation can be defined as a type of psychological influence used to achieve a unilateral gain through the hidden inducement of another to perform certain actions. 1 In order to neutralize manipulative influence, first of all, it is necessary to know the techniques of such influence and their timely detection.

1 Quote by: Grachev G.V., Melnik I.K. Decree. Op. P. 67.

18.5. Mediation in the negotiation process

In situations where the possibilities for unilateral actions by the parties to the conflict are practically exhausted or the cost of continuing the conflict becomes too high, opponents still have a chance to resolve the problem through negotiations. However, the situation does not always develop in such a way that countries are ready to conduct direct negotiations. In this case, a solution can be found by involving a neutral third party in the interaction. Its participation is also advisable when direct negotiations between the conflicting parties have reached a dead end.

Forms of participation

third party

The term "third party" is broad and collective. There are three main forms of third party participation in the settlement and resolution of the conflict.

1) Court- it is distinguished by a clearly developed, legally enshrined procedure for the proceedings, as well as the obligation for the parties to the conflict to comply with decisions made by a third party. In this case, the participation of a third party is characterized by the maximum degree of intervention in the conflict.

2) Arbitration- characterized by the absence of strict norms regulating the process of discussing the problem; the right to choose a third party by the conflict participants themselves; the binding nature of decisions made by a third party.

3) Mediation- this is a special form of third party participation in the settlement and resolution of the conflict in order to assist in the process of negotiations between the parties to the conflict. While facilitating a constructive discussion and finding a solution to the problem, the mediator cannot at the same time determine the choice of the final solution, which is the prerogative of the conflicting parties. Therefore, the mediator must immediately emphasize the fact that responsibility for the failure of the negotiations and the further escalation of the conflict lies not with the third party, but with the parties to the conflict themselves.

It is important to pay attention to the fact that among the above forms of third party participation in the settlement and resolution of the conflict, only the latter is focused on using a negotiation approach.

The intervention of a mediator is advisable in the following cases:

The conflicting parties show a willingness to jointly search for a solution to the problem, but cannot find common ground;

Direct communication between the parties to the conflict is seriously complicated or stopped, and the participation of a third party can help change this situation;

For the conflicting parties, it is important to maintain and continue the relationship;

Participants in the conflict are interested in control over decisions made;

For opponents, an important aspect of overcoming disagreements is confidentiality.

Selecting an intermediary

The choice of a mediator by the conflicting parties is carried out in accordance with a number of requirements for the third party.

1 A necessary condition for the consent of opponents to the intervention of a mediator is his competence, which presupposes, first of all, the ability to thoroughly analyze a conflict situation and mastery of mediation skills. This requirement also largely determines the effectiveness of the mediator’s efforts to resolve the conflict. Insufficient competence of the mediator, on the contrary, can lead to the breakdown of negotiations and increased confrontation between the parties.

2 Another important requirement for an intermediary is his impartiality, which is that the mediator must take a neutral position, without providing support to any of the parties to the conflict. It should be noted that the mediator’s disinterest is still relative, since he is, at a minimum, interested in the success of his activities. Therefore, in this case, the main thing is not the actual impartiality of the third party, but the perception of it as such by the parties to the conflict. It was this aspect that played a decisive role in the choice of a mediator in the peaceful settlement of the Yugoslav conflict (1999). This was Martti Ahtisaari, the president of Finland, a non-NATO country.

3 Of no small importance is such a requirement as having authority. The involvement of public organizations or individuals in mediation is largely due to this. For example, the participation of representatives of the Catholic Church in negotiations between the ruling party in Poland and the opposition movement Solidarity in 1989 was determined, first of all, by the fact that in this country the authority and influence of the Church is very strong. The authority that a mediator has in the eyes of the conflicting parties determines his ability to influence the parties to the conflict. It is only important that he, in turn, does not become influenced by any of them and thereby question his neutrality.

Intermediary influence

to the negotiation room

process

The extent to which the mediator meets these requirements directly determines his ability to influence the negotiation process, and therefore, ultimately, the results of his mediation activities. The main aspects of this influence include the following.

1 By facilitating the start of negotiations between the parties to the conflict or their continuation, the mediator offers certain options for a meeting place for the parties. In this case, the territory of a mediator is often selected for negotiations. Repeatedly carrying out a mediation mission in the Middle East conflict, the United States provided its territory, for example, in 1978 for negotiations between Egypt and Israel or in 1999 for negotiations between Syria and Israel.

2 The mediator takes an active part in setting the agenda. Together with the conflicting parties, he forms the range of issues for discussion and the order of their consideration. In this case, the mediator’s task is to convince opponents to start negotiations with simpler issues, and move on to considering the most complex ones last. The mediator’s task is to regulate the order and duration of speeches, preventing priority from one side or the other.

3 It is no secret that the relations between the parties to the conflict are characterized by hostility, mistrust, and suspicion. Therefore, the mediator’s significant contribution to the success of the negotiation process is creating a working atmosphere during negotiations. In many ways, the very fact of the presence of a third party can keep opponents from showing hostility towards each other. However, the mediator should not limit himself to this and must make every effort to reduce the level of negative emotions of the conflicting parties. A noticeable impact on the atmosphere during negotiations is exerted by the mediator’s emphasized respect for opponents and understanding of their problems, encouragement of certain steps by opponents to normalize relations and a positive attitude towards joint work. The mediator also helps the conflicting parties overcome negative stereotypes in relation to each other and the negative impact of various perceptual phenomena.

4 Providing assistance in finding a solution is a key aspect of the mediator's influence on the negotiation process. By optimizing this search, the intermediary performs the following actions:

Provides assistance to participants in studying the situation, analyzing disagreements, and evaluating proposals;

Draws the attention of the parties to the existence of a commonality in their interests or creates such a commonality by including the problem in a broader context, say, the prospect of large-scale economic cooperation;

Helps to identify non-overlapping interests and thereby increases the negotiation space, in the zone of which a solution can be found;

Acts as an additional source of ideas and options for solving the problem;

Provides assistance to opponents in finding and selecting objective criteria for evaluating developed options for solving the problem;

Offers a general formula for a possible agreement.

The effectiveness of these efforts by the mediator largely depends on how complete the information is about the parties to the conflict, controversial issues, the balance of power of the parties, their interests and positions, possible approaches to solving the problem, the degree of their involvement in the conflict, etc. is located by the intermediary.

5 Determining deadlines for completing negotiations can play a certain role in stimulating the mediator to find a mutually acceptable solution. If the conflicting parties, realizing their responsibility for the failure of negotiations, strive to reach an agreement, then a fixed time frame will ensure stable dynamics of the negotiation process.

1 Conflicts in modern Russia / Ed. E.I. Stepanova. - M.: Editorial URSS, 1999 - P 317.

6 If the negotiations are successful, the mediator takes control of the implementation of the agreement. As noted above, the success of the negotiation process is determined not only by the achievement of an agreement, but also by the fulfillment of its terms. Therefore, the mediator needs to ensure that the final agreement includes deadlines for the parties to fulfill their obligations. It is also possible to establish something like a probationary period, i.e. time during which the parties could evaluate the effectiveness of the agreement reached. 1 In addition, the intermediary can act as a guarantor of the implementation of agreements. Such a mission is quite within the capabilities of, say, a manager in resolving a conflict between subordinates.

Intermediation models

The components of the mediator’s influence on the negotiation process described above characterize, first of all, traditional mediation, without focusing on the specific features of its various modifications. Such features distinguish the following models of intermediary activity: 2

Facilitation;

Advisory Mediation;

Mediation with elements of arbitration.

The main difference between them is the role of the third party in the negotiations and the degree of its participation in the development of the final decision. From this angle we will characterize the identified types of mediation.

1 Facilitation. The role of the third party comes down mainly to the fact that the facilitator (from English, facilitate) assists the conflict participants in organizing negotiations and holding meetings. The facilitator's role in conflict resolution is to help the conflicting parties prepare for the meeting; ensure their equal participation in the discussion; Ensure strict adherence to the negotiation agenda and procedure. In this case, the facilitator does not take part in the debate between the parties and the development of solutions.

2 Advisory Mediation. The specificity of this type of mediation is as follows: the conflicting parties receive the preliminary consent of the mediator that if they cannot independently find a solution to the problem, he will express his point of view through consultation. This opinion of the mediator is not binding on the parties and is heard only if the negotiations have reached a dead end. However, parties to the conflict can use the opinion of the mediator to reach an agreement.

1 Conflicts in modern Russia / Ed. E.I. Stepanova.- M.: Editorial URSS. 1999 – P. 317.

2 Ibid. P. 315. P. 319.
3 Mediation with elements of arbitration. Within this model, the influence of the mediator on the negotiation process is maximum. This is due to the fact that the parties to the conflict agree before the start of negotiations that if the negotiations reach a dead end, the mediator will make a binding decision on the controversial issue. This agreement encourages conflicting parties interested in controlling the achieved results to make every effort to independently find a solution. In any case, this procedure ensures that an agreement between the parties will be reached. Whatever option of mediation is implemented in the negotiation process, the main thing is that it be successful. Of course, the best result of mediation is conflict resolution. For example, the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (USA) has more than 500 thousand resolved conflicts over 50 years of work. 1 However, much depends not only on the mediator himself, but also on the stage of development of the conflict, the nature of the relationship between the parties, the availability of alternatives to the negotiated agreement, the balance of power between the parties to the conflict, the influence of the environment in which the conflict takes place, etc. In the presence of such a large number of diverse factors, the involvement of an intermediary may not bring the desired result. But in such cases it is not always right to talk about failure.

Efficiency mark

mediation

activities

When assessing the effectiveness of mediation activities, several criteria should be used.

1) Objective criteria allowing

consider the mediator's intervention as successful:

Ending the conflict;

Reducing the severity of conflict interaction;

The transition from unilateral actions of the parties to the conflict to attempts to jointly find a solution to the problem;

Normalization of relations between opponents.

1 See: Rostiashvili K.D. Federal Service for Mediation and Reconciliation. // USA: economics, politics, ideology. 1991. - No. 4. - P. 109-110.

2) It is also important to focus on subjective indicators that reflect the degree of satisfaction of the conflict participants with mediation. To do this, it is necessary to determine whether the conflicting parties believe that

While assisting the negotiation process, the mediator was objective in relation to the opponents;

It would be difficult for the parties to manage without his efforts;

The results achieved with the help of an intermediary are not imposed, but, on the contrary, represent a mutually acceptable outcome.

When assessing the degree of success of mediation, it is also necessary to take into account the assessments of the mediator himself and external observers.

The various aspects of mediation discussed above allow us to draw the following conclusion. The activity of a mediator is associated with a number of problems, difficulties, and obstacles that he must overcome. At the same time, the success of the mediator’s efforts is not always obvious; his activity in itself does not guarantee the resolution of the conflict, and sometimes can cause an escalation of conflict confrontation. However, the very fact of involving a mediator in the settlement and resolution of the conflict means the parties’ desire to find a way out using the path of negotiations, and gives hope for a successful outcome.

Concluding our consideration of negotiations in conditions of conflict, let us recall the point of view of modern researchers already known to you, according to which conflict is recognized as an integral property of social relations. This means that each of us became a participant in one conflict or another, maintaining this perspective in the future. Negotiations (direct or with the participation of a third party) can be considered the most preferable and often optimal way to resolve and resolve conflicts. Therefore, the study of the diverse aspects of the negotiation process is not only a promising area of ​​scientific research, but also relevant for any of us. It should be borne in mind that knowledge about negotiations alone is not a sufficient basis for success. An equally important role is played by the formation and development of negotiation skills. And the ability to negotiate is acquired only by putting existing knowledge into practice. And finally, do not forget that negotiations can achieve their goal only if their participants are sincere in their desire to jointly find a solution to the problem. Otherwise, the conflicting parties demonstrate determination rather than strive to find a solution.