Pros and cons of conflicts. Types of conflicts and ways to resolve them

Conflicts often arise between people with radically different interests and views. Their essence is diverse. But always, regardless of the situation, tension arises between the participants and a clearly felt negative they experience in relation to each other.

But we all live and interact in society. The people who are its members are different. And hardly anyone managed to avoid such "collisions". However, from a psychological point of view, such situations are sometimes even useful. So now it's worth talking about the pros and cons of conflicts.

Emotional aspect

It should be said about him first of all. There is nothing pleasant in conflicts, since they are accompanied by negative emotions that have a destructive effect on the participants. Particularly impressionable people, their frequent bursts can even lead to the emergence and development of various diseases that usually affect the central nervous system, cardiovascular and digestive systems, liver, joints, etc. Strange?

Not at all, because everything in our body is interconnected. This is a minus. But there is also a plus! In such situations, you can learn to get the best of emotions - to control them, distance yourself from the epicenter of the conflict. Not everyone knows how to get away from the "boiling point". But under such circumstances, you can try to develop this skill. A popular way is to focus on something else, not emotion. For example, on an account from 1 to 10.

Conflict of Interest

This is what conflicts mean. The pros and cons of conflicting interests are clear. The negative side is that many people forget about the existence of such a thing as "personal opinion". And, having entered into a discussion with a person who has different views on any situation, they begin to cross all possible boundaries. They begin to get personal, throw insults, humiliate the opponent. This is terrible, unacceptable and shows the person from the worst side.

Why do this when you can benefit from a clash of interests? The plus here is the ability to expand your personal boundaries, revise your views on familiar things, try to think differently. This approach often even gives an impetus to building interpersonal relationships in a new way.


Talking about the pros and cons of conflicts, one cannot fail to note that conflicts of interest often lead to hostility. Nothing good about that. But at the same time, the conflict is a reason to sort out the current situation calmly, without scandals. Opponents can simply calm down and find out each other's point of view by listening to the opinion and arguments of the interlocutor without interrupting. This is also not given to everyone, since first you need to get the best of emotions and often over your ego. But it is through a calm conversation that one can understand the reasons and essence of the situation that has arisen, and also find ways to get out of it.


Well, after a quick look at the pros and cons of conflicts, I would like to pay a little attention to their classification. Good typology is distinguished in social psychology. Here are some of the conflicts:

1. Intrapersonal.


3. Intergroup.

4. Between an individual and a group.

At the same time, no matter what type of conflict of interest belongs to, it can be either constructive or destructive. In the first case, the parties to the conflict come to a common opinion regarding its solution.

Disagreements are eliminated and relationships between people are strengthened. In the second case, the parties to the conflict do not come to a solution to the problem. Conventionally, they can, of course, forget about what happened. But if the consequences of disagreements adversely affect their relationship in the future, then the conflict is considered destructive - unresolved.

Types If we take the object of conflicts as a criterion, we will be able to distinguish the following five types:

Economic. They arise on the basis of a clash of economic interests. The characteristic of the conflict is simple - it arises from the fact that the needs of one side are met by the other.

Socio-political. They are based on contradictions affecting state policy and other aspects of this area.

Ideological. They arise from contradictions in views on various problems of the state, society and life.

Socio-psychological. Here the description of the conflict is simple and understandable, since this type of contradiction is most common. They arise due to the psychological incompatibility of people, ideological differences, struggle for leadership, selfishness, etc.

Social and household. These conflicts are associated with different ideas of people about everyday life and life. The simplest example is disharmony in family relationships. The reasons for the occurrence can be both everyday troubles and ideological differences.

This is a rather narrow and generalized classification. It is also worth noting that conflicts are also emotional and rational, long-term and short-term, spiritual and material.

Behavior strategies

It is also worth briefly describing them. In total, five strategies of behavior in a conflict are known. Competition. A person who follows this strategy intends to satisfy his personal interests to the detriment of others. He is sure that only one person can win the conflict. Such a person will insist on his own to the last, without even trying to listen to the opponent.

The device. The opposite strategy. It is followed by people who are ready to sacrifice their personal interests, if only the opponent calms down. They are usually insecure, morally weak, and have low self-esteem. Avoidance. Neutral strategy. It is preferred by people who try to avoid conflicts. They do not belittle their own interests, but they also do not take into account others. Compromise. This strategy implies partial satisfaction of the interests of each party. One person yields to another if he does the same. Cooperation. The smartest strategy. It is followed by people who want everyone to win.

They find out the reason and cause of the conflict, objectively examine it from all sides and find a solution that suits everyone. Following the latter strategy is, of course, the best way to solve the problem. But not easy. Because before establishing "cooperation" between the parties to the conflict, you need to "reach out" to everyone.