The main characteristics of interaction manifest themselves differently based on the conditions and situations in which the interaction of participants in the pedagogical process takes place, which allows us to talk about many types of interaction. There are various bases for classification.
· Interactions are highlighted above all by subject And object - subject:
– personality – personality (student – student, teacher – student, teacher – teacher, teacher – parent, etc.);
- team - team (team of juniors - team of seniors, class - class, student team - teaching team, etc.).
Each of these types has its own characteristics based on age: same-age and multi-age interaction, interaction in a team of junior and senior schoolchildren, etc.
· Celebrate direct And indirect interaction.
Direct interaction characterized by direct influence on each other, indirect same directed not at the individual himself, but at the circumstances of his life, its microenvironment. For example, a teacher, organizing collective cognitive activities, interacts directly with consultants, on whose activities the participation of other schoolchildren in the work depends. Consulting his assistants, the teacher directs their attention and actions to each student and gives advice on how to include their comrades in the work. Through consultants, the teacher adjusts the activities of other children with whom interaction is carried out indirectly.
· The basis for classifying types of interaction may also be:
– the presence of a goal or its absence - a special goal can be set in the interaction, then it is usually called goal-oriented; or the goal may be absent, and then they talk about spontaneous interaction;
– degree of controllability – controlled, semi-controlled, uncontrollable; controlled – purposeful interaction, accompanied by systematic information about its results, allowing you to make the necessary adjustments to subsequent interaction; semi-controlled - also goal-directed interaction, but feedback is used on a case-by-case basis; uncontrollable - spontaneous interaction;
– type of relationship – “equal” or “leadership”; interaction “on equal terms” is characterized by a subject – subject relations, activity on both interacting sides; with “leadership” – activity on one side.
· In practical work, interaction is characterized according to optimality, efficiency, frequency And sustainability. Different approaches to classifying types of interaction do not exclude each other, but once again emphasize the multidimensionality and versatility of this process.
· We took the nature of interaction as the basis for the classification, highlighting the following three characteristics:
– the attitude of the interacting parties to each other’s interests,
– the presence of a perceived common goal of joint activity,
– subjectivity of position in relation to each other in interaction.
· Various combinations of these characteristics give rise to certain types of interaction: cooperation, dialogue, agreement, guardianship, suppression, indifference, confrontation.
This typology is applicable to the characteristics of the interaction of participants in the educational process at all levels: teacher - student, student - student, teacher - teacher, etc. The most effective for the development of the team and the individual is the collaborative type of interaction, which is characterized by:
– objective knowledge, reliance on each other’s best sides, the adequacy of their assessments and self-esteem;
– humane, friendly and trusting, democratic relationships;
– the activity of both parties, jointly realized and accepted actions, positive mutual influence on each other, in other words, a high level of development of all its components.
Cooperation participants in the educational process - joint determination of the goals of the activity, joint planning of upcoming work, joint distribution of forces, means, subject of activity in time in accordance with the capabilities of each participant, joint control and evaluation of work results, and then forecasting new ones goals and objectives.
Each situation dictates its own style of behavior and action: in each of them, a person “presents” himself differently, and if this self-presentation is not adequate, interaction is difficult. If a style is formed on the basis of actions in a specific situation, and then mechanically transferred to another situation, then, naturally, success cannot be guaranteed. There are four main styles of action: ritual, imperative, manipulative and humanistic.
1. Ritual style of action. Using the example of the use of ritual style, it is especially easy to show the need to correlate the style with the situation. The ritual style is usually determined by some culture. For example, the style of greetings, questions asked during a meeting, the nature of the expected answers. Thus, in American culture it is customary to answer the question: “How are you?” answer “Wonderful!”, no matter how things really are. It is typical for our culture to answer “to the point,” and not to be ashamed of the negative characteristics of one’s own existence (“Oh, there is no life, prices are rising, transport is not working,” etc.). A person accustomed to a different ritual, having received such a response, will be puzzled as to how to interact further (Petrovskaya, 1983).
2. Imperative style is an authoritarian, directive form of interaction with a communication partner in order to achieve control over his behavior, attitudes and thoughts, forcing him to certain actions or decisions. The partner in this case acts as a passive party. The ultimate unveiled goal of imperative communication is coercion of a partner. Orders, regulations and demands are used as means of exerting influence. Areas where imperative communication is used quite effectively: superior-subordinate relationships, military regulations, work in extreme conditions, in emergency circumstances.
3. Manipulative style is a form of interpersonal interaction in which influence on a communication partner in order to achieve one’s intentions is carried out covertly. At the same time, manipulation presupposes an objective perception of the communication partner, while the hidden desire is to achieve control over the behavior and thoughts of another person.
In manipulative communication, the partner is perceived not as a holistic, unique personality, but as a bearer of certain properties and qualities “needed” by the manipulator. However, a person who chooses this type of relationship with others as his main one often ends up becoming a victim of his own manipulations. He also begins to perceive himself in fragments, switching to stereotypical forms of behavior, guided by false motives and goals, losing the core of his own life. Manipulation is used by dishonest people in business and other business relationships, as well as in the media, when it
the whole concept of “black” and “gray” propaganda. At the same time, the possession and use of means of manipulative influence on other people in the business sphere, as a rule, ends for a person with the transfer of such skills to other areas of relationships. Relationships built on the principles of decency, love, friendship and mutual affection are the most damaged by manipulation.
4. Humanistic style of interaction. We can also highlight those interpersonal relationships where the use of the imperative is inappropriate. These are intimate-personal and marital relationships, child-parent contacts, as well as the entire system of pedagogical relations. Such relationships are called dialogic communication. Dialogical communication within the framework of the humanistic style is an equal subject-subject interaction aimed at mutual knowledge and self-knowledge of communication partners. It allows you to achieve deep mutual understanding, self-disclosure of partners, and creates conditions for mutual development.
It is important to draw a general conclusion that the division of a single act of interaction into components such as the positions of the participants, the situation and the style of action also contributes to a more thorough psychological analysis of this side of communication, making a certain attempt to connect it with the content of the activity.
S.L. Bratchenko under style understands interactions individual model of interpersonal communication preferred by a particular person.
Criteria for identifying styles: the relationship between the interlocutor’s positions (freedom, power, subordination); degree of mutual understanding; results, consequences and opportunities for interaction.
Table 2. Styles of interpersonal interaction (according to S.L. Bratchenko)
|
Position ratio |
Degree of mutual understanding |
Possibilities |
|
|
Dialogic |
Complete equality, mutual freedom, trust, respect |
High level of mutual understanding |
Maximum opportunities for self-discovery and self-development of both partners |
|
Reluctance to understand and empathize, the demand to be understood |
Lack of opportunities for one with maximum opportunities for the other |
||
|
Manipulative |
Inequality in relationships, power of one over the other |
The desire to hide one's position and the desire to reveal the vulnerabilities of a partner |
Development at the expense of others |
|
Altruistic |
Inequality to your detriment |
The desire for understanding, empathy; ignoring your problems |
Opportunities for developing your interlocutor at your own expense |
|
Conformal |
Lack of own position, joining the opinion of a partner or group |
Striving for uncritical agreement |
Lack of opportunities for self-development |
|
Indifferent |
Pragmatic position |
Ignoring psychological problems of interaction |
Lack of opportunities for the development of others |
Types of interactions
The most common is the dichotomous division of all possible types of interactions into two opposite types: cooperation and competition.
Cooperation, or cooperative interaction,means coordination of individual forces of participants (ordering, combining, summing up these forces). An important indicator of cooperative interaction is the inclusion of all participants in joint activities.
Highlight three types of cooperative interaction:
combining individual efforts (for example, teachers in one school);
sequential collaborative activities (e.g., assembly line);
actual joint activity (for example, actors playing in the same play)
Competition is about competition. The most striking form of competition is conflict.
Conflict – this is a contradiction that arises between people on aspects of interaction that are significant to them and disrupts their normal interaction, and therefore causes certain actions on the part of the participants in the conflict to resolve the problem in their own interests.
To the main characteristics of conflicts The following can be included:
Conflict is a common feature of social systems, it is inevitable and inescapable, and therefore should be considered as a natural part of human life. Conflict must be accepted as one of the forms normal human interaction.
Conflict does not always and does not necessarily lead to destruction. On the contrary, it is one of the main processes serving to preserve the whole. Conflict is not always bad.
Conflict contains potential positive opportunities: Conflict-change-adaptation-survival
If we stop seeing conflict as a threat and start seeing it as a signal that something needs to change, we will take a more constructive stance.
Conflict can be managed, and managed in such a way that its negative, destructive consequences can be minimized, and constructive ones possibly enhanced. Conflict is an area that can and should be addressed.
There are constructive and destructive functions of conflict.
Constructive functions of conflict:developmental function – it acts as a source of development and improvement of the interaction process; cognitive function – detects the contradiction that has arisen; instrumental function – designed to resolve the contradiction; restructuring function – has objective consequences associated with changes in circumstances.
Destructive functions of conflict:
in a conflict situation, almost all people experience psychological discomfort, tension, depression or excessive excitement;
the system of relationships is disrupted;
the effectiveness of joint activities decreases.
N.V. Grishina highlights the following types of conflicts.
Social(processes that occur at the level of macrostructures) is a social process or situation in which one social group is in conscious opposition to one or more other groups because these groups pursue incompatible goals.
Socio-psychological(at the level of intergroup and interpersonal interaction). We are talking about small groups - those in direct interaction or at the level of interaction of individuals, their interests, etc.
Psychological(intrapersonal level) The collision of various personal formations (motives, goals, interests), represented in the mind of the individual by corresponding experiences. The main condition of psychological conflict is the subjective intractability of the situation.
»
MINISTRY OF EDUCATION OF THE RF CHEREPOVETS STATE UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF PEDAGOGY AND PSYCHOLOGY DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY Abstract on the psychology of communication on the topic Styles of conflict interaction COMPLETED BY: STUDENT of group 4ps-22 Sapozhnikova E. S. Checked by: Ph.D., Associate Professor V. V. Khromov REPOVETS 2004 CONTENT. Introduction 3 General concept of conflict 4 Styles of conflict interaction 6 Conclusion 12 List of references 13 Introduction. No area of human life is free from conflict. Conflict is a clash, a serious disagreement, during which a person is overwhelmed by unpleasant feelings or experiences. Conflicts are ineradicable, they appear in any life circumstances and accompany us from birth to death. Conflicts can be external (conflict with other people) and internal (conflict with oneself). In internal conflicts, there is no external opponent. However, this does not mean that internal conflicts are trivial or that they are not important for decision making. Internal conflicts determine our value system, often the verdict “right” or “wrong” is the result of internal conflict. These conflicts are the basis of ethics and morality. If people in certain situations did not feel internal conflict, they would never think about moral issues. The concept of “internal conflict” is very close to the concept of “conscience”. Not to mention the fact that most people do not enjoy conflicts, modern medical scientists note the disastrous consequences of stress, most of which are caused by conflict. Resolving conflicts is solving human problems. Resolving a conflict almost certainly means saving the relationship. If this were not so, people would not try to resolve conflicts. Of course, a recognized, serious, deeply felt conflict takes its toll, but if there is an intention to resolve it, the likelihood that it will be possible to preserve the relationship in its internal, deep manifestation is very high. It is very important that the parties evaluate each other objectively and make every effort to recognize the value and importance of their relationship, even in their current conflict. This step is equally suitable for disputes between teacher and student, mother and children, between husband and wife. General concept of conflict There is no shortage of different definitions of conflict. We will present several of them, each of which reveals and emphasizes one or another aspect of this dynamic group process: * Conflict is usually viewed as a state of disagreement over the ability to dispose of limited resources; * Conflict is a state of relations between people when at least one of them is angry, irritated, hostile towards the other, criticizes his actions, which leads to a stop in productive work and a violation of moral balance; * Conflict is a function of the degree or amount of interdependence and interaction between people: the greater our dependence on others, or the more we expect from them, the more likely conflict is and that it will be severe; * Conflict is an interactive state manifested in disagreement, differences or incompatibility within or between social units: individuals, groups, organizations, etc. Conflict arises at different intra- and interpersonal levels: a) intra-individual conflict arises when a person must perform certain actions, roles that do not correspond to his skills, interests, goals or values; b) intragroup conflict refers to conflict between group members; c) intergroup conflict - a conflict between representatives of two or more groups. Despite the ambiguity, the term “conflict” has a very specific meaning, one way or another manifested in many definitions. First, the conflict must be perceived by its participants. Many situations that could be regarded as conflict are in fact not so, because people involved in them do not perceive their relationships as conflicting. Secondly, for a conflict to arise, there must be contradictions in the motives, interests, values, and positions of at least two parties. The exception, as it may seem, is intrapersonal conflict, however, even here there are discrepancies between the actual and the desired situation for the individual. Thirdly, conflict is always a struggle for the possession of resources - money, work, prestige, power, time - which are limited and which have to be distributed between parties interested in obtaining them. The main difference between definitions of conflict concerns in most cases two points. A conflict can be viewed either as a deliberate opposition of the interests of the parties, or as a result of a combination of circumstances. On the other hand, the divergence of points of view concerns whether open confrontation is a mandatory criterion for the existence of a conflict or whether it can occur in a hidden form. Styles of conflict interaction. The following are possible styles of behavior in conflict. There are two dimensions used here. Assertiveness i.e. the degree of orientation towards one’s own interests and cooperation, i.e. the degree of orientation towards the interests of the opposite party involved in the conflict. Accordingly, five behavioral orientations are distinguished: confrontation, cooperation, avoidance, accommodation and compromise. Confrontation. Confrontation tactics involve actively and stubbornly confronting your opponents, despite their attempts to reach a compromise or reconcile. It involves: - Insisting on your position, point of view without clearly indicating them; - Incontinence, irritability, when a partner tries to oppose his opinion, position, opinion or position of a given subject; - Weak variability of goals, even with high dynamism and variability of the situation and interaction; - General conservatism of interests; - Intolerance of other people’s opinions and will of others; - The short-term nature of the stage of a conflict situation, the use of minor reasons to transfer it to the stage of an incident; - The protracted nature of the incidents, their severity and emotional intensity; - Assessing your interaction partners as persons who have prejudices against them. The main tasks solved during a conflict when using confrontation techniques are the following: - Defending one’s interests or the interests of third parties, seeking truth; - The desire to convince, to impose one’s opinion, decision, point of view; - Attempts to belittle their opponents, to prove the illegality of their position. People who adhere to this tactic believe that there is “their point of view” and a wrong one. For them, the number of their supporters and opponents does not matter: even when left alone, they defend their positions. This tactic is fraught with irreconcilable hostility, especially if both sides adhere to it. Teenagers often choose it. For example, imagine the following situation. Dima and Seryozha are brothers the same age, they are 17 and 16 years old. The mother, leaving for work, instructed them to vacuum the rooms. As soon as the door slammed behind her, Dima began to pull on his shoes. Seryozha took out a vacuum cleaner: - Eh, where did you run off to? One room is mine, the other is yours! - Fuck off, kid. - No, Dimon, seriously, this is not the point! I won't clean up for you! - Yeah, how will you do! If I tell my mother that you smoke, you’ll end up vacuuming for six months. Seven days a week! Sergei is angrily silent. Dima smiles one last time: “Ciao, brother!” Clean up my place! This can be most clearly illustrated by the example of a conflict between a teenager and a parent. When I was 14, my conflicts with my mother had no end. Every morning began with a cry: “Elena!” What have you put on yourself??? It's cold outside, and she's wearing caprons! - So what. - What? You understand that you will catch a cold! That your health is poor! - Well, I don’t care! My health! - Yes? And then you will go and infect me? Thank you! - I will wear what I want! I'm not little anymore! Don't you dare tell me! - Don't you dare be rude to me!!! We didn't talk in the evening. Confrontation is acceptable when: * quick decisive action is needed * it is necessary to make an unpopular decision on important issues * there is confidence in the correctness of the chosen important decision * people manipulatively take advantage of their own position Cooperation. Cooperation tactics are the desire to resolve a contradiction through active interaction with one’s partner. Its use dramatically increases the likelihood of a positive outcome of the conflict. Thus, not only the cause of discontent and tension is eliminated, but also greater mutual understanding, trust, and respect are achieved. Distinctive features of cooperation: - Respectful attitude towards the partner, willingness to listen and understand their feelings and desires; - Assessing your position as important, but not the only possible one; - The desire to regulate one’s behavior towards greater correctness; - Concern for maintaining relationships, despite existing disagreements; - Focusing on the conflict resolution stage; - Willingness to apologize; - The desire to act wisely and consciously; - Step-by-step, consistency in achieving goals. Of all the styles, collaboration is the most universal. It is suitable for both single-level (horizontal) communication and for resolving conflicts in vertical structures (between managers and subordinates, students and teachers), however, its use can be opposed by a number of personal qualities and attitudes (arrogance and self-conceit, suspicion, leadership mindset) . Personal maturity, respectful attitude towards people, and responsibility contribute to the application of this style in practice. Let's give an example. A conflict occurred between the head of a private enterprise and one of his subordinates regarding the latter’s delay in reporting. Let's listen to them: - So, Ivan Petrovich, take the trouble to explain the reason for the delay in the report. I have already warned you ten times that I need it today at ten! - Lev Karlovich, excuse me, but... - I will allow you to lose your prize! And work if this happens again! - Please, listen to me. - …Fine. - Lev Karlovich. You are, of course, aware that we live in the age of computer technology. - YES! - And that I have repeatedly contacted you with complaints about our software. - Yes. - So here it is. An unknown virus entered my office computer and destroyed all my files, including the report. - Hmmm... Why didn't they inform you on time? However, you are right... I'll figure it out. What kind of virus? - “Byasha”... There... A sheep is running around... and, excuse me, crap on the files. - HA-HA-HA! It must be admitted that Ivan Petrovich came out of the conflict situation with honor, having concluded an agreement with the boss that he would henceforth notify him in a timely manner about problems. Collaboration is acceptable when: *it is necessary to find a solution to a problem, and different positions are so important that compromise is unacceptable *the full creative potential of employees must be fully utilized *it is necessary to ensure commitment to a common goal *it is necessary to overcome negative emotions that have arisen in the communication experience Compromise . This style consists in the desire to overcome a contradiction through partial concessions from one side in response to mutual concessions from the other. The behavior of people resorting to his help is characterized by the following features: - The meaningfulness of the steps taken during the outcome of the conflict; - Willingness to change the decision many times if the other party does not agree with it; - Taking care that the concessions of each side are of equal value; - The calling of intermediaries; - Using persuasion to find common solution points and develop a common position; - Willingness to listen to the claims of the opposing party; - Caring for the safety of relationships with a partner in the future. A compromise does not completely relieve tension, since the original contradiction remains, but it creates the opportunity to resolve relations in the future. Particularly effective in resolving complex social conflicts. It is used much less frequently in the interpersonal sphere and almost never by children. The compromise can be illustrated by the example of a famous lawsuit in the United States, when an association of the visually impaired (blind) sued that their rights were being infringed in favor of wheelchair-bound people. And they are disadvantaged in the following way: on the sidewalks of the streets of glorious America, they are sure to make descents so that they do not have to jump from the curb with a wheelchair. And for the blind, by the way, this curb is the main landmark when crossing the street. And when the blind man moves the stick in front of him, the stick does not hit the curb and the blind man thinks that there is a straight path there. (Or a pit. Or whatever it seems.) The case was sorted out for a very long time, for a very long time the mediators-lawyers were looking for a compromise so as not to infringe on the rights of either one or another citizen of a free country. And they found it - now they make special notches on these slopes so that you can hit them with a stick and understand what it is. (Only now, they say, people in wheelchairs have begun to shake on these slopes...) Compromise is acceptable when *the goals are important, but still not worth resorting to harsh measures to achieve them *opponents have equal strength, but strive to achieve important goals *come to a temporary agreement on important issues *make an acceptable decision when there is not enough time *when you need to take a “step back” if cooperation and competition do not help achieve goals Adaptation. Adaptation presupposes that one of the conflicting parties is completely dependent on the other. For the sake of maintaining existing relationships, a person is ready to sacrifice his interests, hush up existing problems, and constantly make concessions. The dominance of the accommodation style leads to the fact that a person allows others to “ride on him.” Conflicts using this style can be characterized by: - Low dynamism; - Absence of external confrontation, attempts to protect one’s interests; - An attitude toward unconditional admission of guilt; - Fear of losing favor, love, friendship; - Social or economic dependence; - Using blackmail techniques on the part of one partner and fear of being exposed by the other. Let's consider this style using the example of a young couple: Ilya (19 years old) and Lika (16 years old. ) They are not married. Ilya sought Lika’s favor for a very long time and, finally, having achieved his goal, he was very happy. Four whole days. Then Lika began to be capricious, picky and look at other young people. Ilya: - Lika, let's be alone today. - Don't want. I want to go on a picnic with the guys. - Please stop being capricious. - I can actually leave. Slavka will take me to a picnic. - Which Slavka? - Back off. - How do you treat me? - As I want. If you don't like it, good bye! - Okay... Let's go to your picnic. Accommodation is acceptable when *there is a need to listen to another point of view, to show flexibility *the subject of disagreement is more important to others *it is necessary to gain trust and ensure a strong position for the future *it is advisable to minimize losses in a weak position *harmony and stability of relationships are important Avoidance, or withdrawal. We can talk about avoidance if a person diligently avoids any aggravation of relationships, disputes, while changing the topic under discussion or removing himself from the situation. He does not give in to any provocations and shows ingenuity in defusing tense relationships. Thus, the problem remains unresolved, and the possibility of renewed conflict remains. Leaving presupposes the presence of: - Dissonant views and aspirations of the participants, their different emotional mood; - Opposites of interests and goals; - Actions aimed at quickly ending the conflict; - Desire to relieve tension; - Weak emotional involvement in the problem of one of the parties. Example. Mother and son are having breakfast. Mother: - Alyosha, yesterday I saw you walking through the window again with a cigarette... Well, you promised to quit! - Ma, not now, okay? - Well, when will I see you again? You're still walking. You promised me three months ago that you would leave. - Yes, I’ll give it up, I’ll give it up. All. - Yes, you promise again, but just over the threshold you’ll start smoking. Son (quietly): - Damn, what is this habit of driving around your ears in the morning? - What? - I say, bye, mom, I’m off to college! Avoidance is acceptable when the *subject of disagreement is unimportant. and there are other more important matters *there is no opportunity to satisfy one’s own interests *the likelihood of destroying relationships is greater than improving them *you need to let people calm down, move away from their worries *others can resolve the conflict more effectively *before taking specific actions, it is necessary to collect information Conclusion. So, we looked at five styles of interaction in conflict. Each person uses different styles, which does not exclude the presence of favorite, preferred, dominant ones. Knowing the characteristics of each of them allows you to make the right choice, rise above the situation and manage it. List of used literature 1. Agrashenkov A. V. Psychology for every day. Tips, recommendations, tests. - M.: Veche, 1997. 2. Borodkin F. M., Koryak N. M. Attention: conflict. – Novosibirsk: Science. Sib. department, 1989. 3. Korneeva E.N. If there is a conflict in the family... - Yaroslavl: Development Academy: Academy Holding, 2001. 4. Stolyarenko L. D. Fundamentals of Psychology. – Rostov-on-Don. Phoenix Publishing House, 1996.
Business communication is a type of interaction between people regarding professional activities. Business communication always has a specific goal that the interlocutors are trying to achieve during the conversation. In addition, during such communication, information, knowledge, and experience are exchanged.
Examples of business communication include relationships between colleagues, a manager and subordinates, business partners, competitors, the head of an organization and representatives of regulatory authorities, the manager and owner of a company. Moreover, any business communication has a certain stylistic overtones, which determines the choice of methods and means of communication to achieve the goal of the conversation.
What it is?
Business communication styles are certain stable sets of communication methods or actions that are aimed at obtaining results. The style of business communication is a kind of mask or a developed model of behavior, thanks to which the participant in communication not only tries to achieve the intended goals, but also reinforce the idea of himself as a good leader or a highly qualified specialist.
This is a kind of ritual, the rules of which are known to all participants in advance. These guidelines must be adhered to.
Factors influencing the formation of style:
- personal characteristics;
- business communication skills;
- a specific communication situation (communication with colleagues, manager, subordinate, partners).
Style classification
Let us briefly consider the main typologies of business communication styles.
Classification by K. Levin
The typology was created on the basis of research and experiments conducted in the 30s of the twentieth century by psychologist Kurt Lewin and his students, aimed at identifying management styles. According to this typology, three styles of business communications are distinguished.
Authoritarian
The main characteristic of this style is the sole decision-making of one participant in communications. Moreover, these decisions relate not only to issues of the activity of this subject, but also to issues common to other participants in the activity. With this type of communicative interaction, one participant acts as a subject of interaction (determines the goals of communication and independently predicts its results), and the other acts as an object (authoritarian influence is directed towards him).
This style is distinguished by autocratic communication, when all actions are dictated by only one person, other parties do not take part in the discussion even on issues that concern them, and initiative is not encouraged. The authoritarian style is implemented through dictatorship and constant control. When the objects of influence show disagreement, long-term conflicts arise.
Adherents of this style suppress the manifestation of initiative, creativity, and independence in other people. They evaluate other people only on the basis of their own subjective opinion.
Democratic
This type of interpersonal business communication involves the orientation of the subject of communication towards the communication partner. Characteristic features of the style are the desire for mutual understanding, acceptance of a partner, joint discussion of problems and finding ways to solve them, trust, stimulation of initiative and creativity, creation of conditions favorable for self-realization. The main methods of influencing a partner in such interaction are a request, motivation to complete a task, and a recommendation.
People who implement a democratic style of business communication usually experience satisfaction from their professional activities, have a positive attitude towards partners, adequately evaluate them and strive to understand their goals, and have the ability to foresee the results of interaction.
Liberal
The liberal style of communication occupies an intermediate position between the previous two. The subject of communication in this case is extremely minimally involved in dialogues and joint activities with other participants, but only in order to shift responsibility from himself to other people. He communicates quite formally, without trying to understand the essence of the issue. The basis of this style is non-interference, due to a lack of interest in general problems.
People who implement this style of business communication constantly hesitate, show indecisiveness, and try to shift decision-making to others. Unclear goals, lack of control, passivity and disinterest make business communication in this style unmanageable.
The socio-psychological climate in the team when implementing such a pattern of communication will most likely be unstable with periodically arising latent or overt conflicts.
Classification of styles according to S. Bratchenko
- Authoritarian– the subject of business communication strives for constant dominance and suppression of partners. This style is characterized by: lack of desire to understand partners, “communicative attack”, lack of respect for other people’s opinions, demand for agreement from other participants, stereotyping of communication.
- Dialogic style presupposes communication on equal terms, which is based on trust, mutual understanding and respect, openness and cooperation, emotional manifestation and self-expression of all participants in communication.
- Alterocentric. It is focused on the subject’s systematic concentration of attention on other participants in business interaction, sacrificing their interests in order to satisfy the aspirations of partners.
- Manipulative involves the use of communication partners for one’s own benefit, that is, other participants in communication act only as a means of achieving the goals of the subject of business relations. With this style of business communication, the desire to understand a partner may have a specific goal - to obtain information about his intentions and use it to his advantage.
- Conformal style presupposes that the subject of communication is focused on imitation, submission, adjustment to the partner, and unwillingness to be understood.
- Indifferent style is an almost complete rejection of productive and diverse business communication and an attempt to replace it with a quick solution only to business problems.
Classification according to L. Petrovskaya
If the two previous classifications used the individual psychological characteristics of the subject of communication as a guideline, then for L. Petrovskaya the main factor determining the types of styles is the communication situation itself. According to this classification, there are the following styles of business communications.
- Ritual style, which is based on general intergroup communication. The task of the partners of such communication is to satisfy the need to belong to a group, sphere of relationships, and maintain social connections. With this style of interaction, the partner acts as a necessary element for performing the ritual, and his problems, interests and personal characteristics are not taken into account. Ritual communication is most common in organizations with a stable team, whose members have known each other for a long time.
When they meet at work, they discuss the same problems every day. Sometimes you can even predict who will say what in the next moment. And this state of affairs suits everyone quite well, and many at the end of the working day feel a sense of satisfaction from the fact that they are members of a certain team.
- Manipulative the genre of communication involves partners using each other as a way to solve certain problems. At the same time, partners try to demonstrate to each other the advantages and attractiveness of their goals so that the partner will help him achieve them. The winner in such an interaction is the one who is better at mastering the art of manipulation. A manipulative style is not always bad. This is how many problems are solved.
