"A society in which there is no conflict is doomed to degradation." It was this position that Ralph Darendorf, a well-known German-British sociologist, adhered to. He believed that the absence of conflict is a state contrary to the normal development of society, about which he wrote in his article "Elements of the theory of social conflict." As the author assesses the possibility of conflict management, let’s try to find out now.
Conflict
According to the teachings of Darendorf, society is a system that is in a state of constant change due to the relationship of conflicting social groups. In his work “Elements of the theory of social conflict”, the scientist confirms the teachings of Marx that all contradictions arise between classes. With only one amendment: if earlier conflict situations were based on economic postulates, now they relate to property rights and subordination.
According to Darendorf, the emergence of social conflict is preceded by three stages:
- The appearance of a causal background. That is, interests arise that oppose each other. They are still not clearly marked, so they can be called hidden (latent), but at the same time there are small groups that prefer a certain position.
- Awareness. At this point, group members realize that they support different ideals.
- Conflict. Direct clash of warring parties.
The scientist is sure that a conflict will always arise in society, but this process should not be allowed to go on its own. Regulation of social conflicts should take place in every segment of society.
Forms of conflict
Before you learn how the author assesses the possibility of conflict management, you need to stock up on information on what forms they can take.
Darendorf says that the conflict should be considered as a scale of violence, where on the one hand upholding one’s position can pose a threat to life, and on the other, the conflict takes place in the form of negotiations, that is, according to ethical standards. Between these “points” one can observe mixed forms of conflict, such as strikes, ultimatums, competition, etc. The intensity of the conflict is directly proportional to the importance of the subject of discussion for the participants.
For example, if in a football club when choosing a head a dispute arises that smoothly turns into a fight, then it will not be perceived as sharply as lowering the salary at the enterprise.
This cannot be done
Still, how does the author evaluate the possibility of conflict resolution? Before embarking on this issue, it should be noted that Darendorf does not recommend the use of suppression to resolve disputes, noting its inefficiency.
According to how actively they try to suppress the dispute, it becomes so “malignant". And then the emergence of violent methods for resolving the dispute remains only a matter of time. Conflict suppression cannot be used for a long period of time. Otherwise, the results will be unpredictable.
One of the types of conflict suppression is the cancellation technique. That is, when legislative acts are introduced, internal rules of the company, etc. But only social confrontations cannot be completely eradicated.
Conflict management and prevention
Regulation involves monitoring the dynamics of conflict development and its gradual decline. Successful regulation is as follows:
- Awareness. Each of the parties to the conflict, as well as an outside observer, must understand the root cause of the dispute.
- Subject. Having realized the cause of the occurrence, it is necessary to highlight the main subject of the conflict and resolve this problem (in especially severe cases, try to slightly reduce the tension of the confrontation).
- Manifesto. Appeal of special bodies and organizations to the conflicting parties with a request for a truce.
- "Rules of the game". It is necessary to obtain the consent of the participants to establish the "rules of the game", according to which they can solve the problem.
Rules and laws should be equal for everyone. Therefore, using the "rules of the game", Darendorf offers several ways to resolve conflicts:
- Conversation. It implies the creation of a special body or organization where the conflicting parties can meet and defend their positions in a civilized manner. Decisions for and against will be made through a general vote.
- Mediator. The easiest option: engage an uninterested third party that will help resolve the dispute.
- Arbitration. The situation is the same as with the intermediary, only in this case the decision of the third party is binding.
Considering how the author assesses the possibility of regulating conflicts, one can come to the following conclusions: conflict is considered a driving force for change, which should not be in the nature of a natural disaster, so there is a need to resolve it.