How to avoid conflict and enjoy communication. But what to do if you are already involved in an interpersonal conflict? If you missed a moment, when else could you have avoided it? What if the conflict has already begun without your participation? Is it possible to find a way out of an already existing conflict situation? Is it possible to win a conflict? Essentially speaking, there is no way out of the conflict situation that suits both parties. Conflict has only an entrance. If you have already found yourself involved in an interpersonal conflict and found yourself in its epicenter, any attempts to resolve the conflict in your favor will only lead to its further aggravation. There are simply no win-win outcomes to the conflict. Any apparent victory turns into inevitable losses, the price of which turns out to be no lower than the price of the advantages purchased at their expense. The only way out is to stop, go back and follow a conflict-free path of communication. If you realize that, voluntarily or unwittingly, you find yourself on one of the sides in a conflict with a client, stop the confrontation, stop influencing the client in any way, make attempts to restore contact with him, clarify his problems, and only then get back to the point affairs. How to behave with aggressive clients? However, what should we do if we are attacked, if we are subjected to violent psychological influence? How to help yourself and a client if he shows disrespect for you? American psychotherapist Marshall Rosenberg developed the theory of nonviolent communication. During his practical work in different countries of the world, Rosenberg was involved in providing psychological assistance in resolving conflicts in families, in various companies, in prisons, between city gangs, military-political, national and racial groups. He came to the conclusion that all people want to communicate with respect for each other. Any person feels the need for understanding, recognition, warm and friendly relations. What makes some people communicate hostilely, contrary to their wishes, and what helps other people maintain friendly forms of communication, despite difficult circumstances? Rosenberg believes that in the minds of many people there are psychological stereotypes that interfere with full communication and cooperation. The main obstacle to friendly relations between partners is the language they habitually use, which Rosenberg figuratively called the language of the “wolf.” People who are accustomed to speaking the “wolf” language try to influence the behavior of other people, manipulate them, causing them feelings of fear, shame or guilt, giving them instructions, evaluating and criticizing them, comparing them with other people. What is characterized by " wolf"? “Wolves” know how to analyze a person’s behavior and thoughts, but do not take into account his needs; they are blind to feelings. Under the influence of repressive measures in childhood from other “wolves,” “wolves” do not accept their needs and suppress their feelings. As a result, they cannot say what they need, do not know what they want, and cannot describe their experiences. Instead of expressing their needs or emotions, they criticize a partner who cannot meet them. Instead of saying, “I want,” the “wolf” says, “You must.” Instead of saying, "I'm upset," he says, "You're disgusting." Not noticing the emotional state of other people and their own, “wolves” lose contact with reality. The main psychological problem of the “wolf” is the distance between his needs and their understanding. The “Wolf” spends a lot of time and energy evaluating other people and does not forgive other people’s mistakes and shortcomings. Meanwhile, the “wolf’s” aggression is a cry for help, a manifestation of his need to express his pain and need for a positive relationship. The "wolf" attacks instead ofanalyze what is wrong with him. Aggression against an interlocutor is actually a symptom of a need for help. A hostile person is a person who has not resonated with others and cannot clearly communicate what they need. The task of psychological assistance is to hear, discern, understand the feelings and needs of another person, even if he speaks “like a wolf.” How to do this? Rosenberg believes that besides "wolves" there are people who are capable of establishing positive relationships with others. They speak a different language, which Rosenberg called the "giraffe" language. The language of the "giraffe" is the language of the heart, not the head. After all, the giraffe has the largest heart of all animals on Earth. A person is initially inclined to speak the “giraffe” language until he is taught to speak “wolf-like.” The “giraffe” knows and understands what he wants, he separates his desire from his thoughts about his partner. Only by using the “giraffe” language can you help the “wolf”. Only in the language of the “giraffe” there is a statement “I want” and the question “What do you want?” Helping the “wolf” should consist in returning him to the world of feelings. In the event that we encounter hostility from the “wolf” towards us, we know that this is a defensive reaction to unmet needs. We use the language of the “giraffe” and ask what he wants. If he cannot formulate his desires and feelings and continues to criticize us, we will try to use a more complex behavior pattern consisting of four steps. First, we will describe the current situation as we perceive, see and hear it, without giving no assessment of what is happening. Secondly, we will tell you how we feel in response to this situation. Thirdly, we will say what we would like to do, what to achieve, to achieve. Moreover, our needs should coincide with the needs of our partner, be positive and aimed at rapprochement, unless we want the opposite. These may be needs for help, clarity or trust. Fourth, we will offer a plan, options on how to satisfy these needs. Thus, if the client cannot say what he wants, we can and should say what we want. Imagine sitting and working with a difficult client for a long time. Suddenly another client rushes up to you from the queue and angrily declares: “How much can you mess around? Why are you digging around? There are a lot of you here! You’ve fed the slackers!” - CriticismIn response, you can take both violent and non-violent measures. For example, a typical version of violent influence may be the following words: “Wow? You’re talking nonsense!” - Criticism “Aren’t you ashamed?” - Rhetorical question “First, learn to behave. Stop the disgrace! Free the room!” - Directions. What do you think such actions will lead to? What if we try it differently? For example:1. Description of the situation: “I’m trying to help a person in a rather difficult matter. You entered without a queue, shout and accuse me of not doing anything”2. Description of the state: “I’m upset, I’m offended.” Description of the needs: “I would like us to trust each other. I want to understand your situation and help you." 4. Suggestions: "I suggest you wait here or in the corridor. I'll finish now and we'll move on to your question. Okay?” But if the client is in such an excited state that he does not hear us, does not want to perceive what we are saying about our feelings, we can use a more complex modification of the same technique, without using the pronoun “I”, but describing the situation and feelings through the eyes of the client himself. Firstly, we will retell how the client perceives the situation. Secondly, we will describe the feelings that arise in connection with this situation. Thirdly, we will formulate for him what he would like. Fourthly. , we will describe for him what actions would lead to the satisfaction of his needs. For example, an alternative version of your reaction to the above situation could be the following answer: 1. Description of the situation: “You are in a hurry somewhere, you have little time, but instead to, 1994