Consequences of past innovations- It should be remembered that innovation is not only a specific change, but also a socio-cultural phenomenon in itself. Its essence is to change existing forms and structures. The consequences of the implementation of innovations determine the attitude towards innovations as such, that is, the necessity and admissibility of change. And, accordingly, affects the perception of subsequent innovations in all areas.
Since innovation opens up new prospects for changing flexibility to changes in supply and demand, i.e. the old is being replaced by the new, this objectively gives rise to social contradictions. The fact is that transformations, as a rule, affect the interests of people, their plans and expectations. The more radical and large-scale the ongoing changes, the more often they cause contradictions and conflicts generated by the struggle between the old and the new. Any innovation is associated with the development, "breakthrough", distribution and use of innovations in production. At the same time, a contradiction arises between supporters and opponents of innovation. The reason for this lies in the difference in the results and consequences of innovations for social groups employees on the one hand and the organization as a whole on the other. Objectively, quite contradictory relationships will arise between them. So, situations are possible when an innovation is beneficial to the enterprise (organization as a whole), but does not meet the interests of certain groups of its employees, or vice versa - it is unprofitable for the enterprise, but suits certain groups of employees. Conflicts that arise as a result of innovations in the organization, like all others, can be partly functional and partly dysfunctional. Conflicts can either facilitate or hinder innovation. At the same time, employees who actively resist innovation become participants in the conflict. The innovation conflict can be interpreted as a counteraction between the supporters of innovation (innovators) and opponents (conservatives), which is accompanied by experiences of negative emotions in relation to each other. At present, a deep comprehensive study of innovative processes in economics much attention is given. The issues of the degree of influence of innovations on the duration of innovation processes, the cyclical nature of the emergence of innovation conflicts were considered in the works of S. Kara-Murza, N. Kondratiev, G. Mensch. Since innovations are an inevitable process in matters of increasing the efficiency of activities, the more significant organizational changes in enterprises during their implementation, the stronger the psychological security mechanisms of employees declare themselves. These mechanisms trigger a process opposite to change - resistance, which is the cause of conflict. The likelihood of conflict during the introduction of an innovation increases in proportion to the magnitude of the innovation. Large-scale innovation involves a large number of people with different interests in the innovation process, which increases the frequency of conflicts. The radical nature of innovation increases the likelihood and severity of conflicts. The rapid process of innovation, as a rule, is accompanied by the emergence of conflictogens. In the process of innovation conflict, innovators expect to improve the work of the enterprise and personal life as a result of the introduction of innovation. Conservatives fear that life and work will get worse. The position of each of these parties can be sufficiently justified. In the struggle between innovators and conservatives, both can be right. Most conflicts between innovators and conservatives (66.4%) occur during the implementation of managerial innovations, one in six - pedagogical, and one in ten - logistical innovations. Most often (65.1%), these conflicts arise at the stage of innovation. Technical innovations are the most prosperous in terms of the occurrence of negative consequences of their implementation. In social innovation, the benefits are not as obvious and demonstrative as in the case of technical innovation. For social innovations, there is a difficulty in calculating their effectiveness. Also, for them, the cost of money may be relatively small compared to technical or other types of innovation, but this does not mean that social innovation is truly cheap. One of the key success and failure factors in innovation is speed. Change planning involves determining the timing and budget, the distribution of responsibility. Very often, due to the lack of constant monitoring of key indicators, which allows you to understand how the implementation process is going, innovations are delayed. And the longer an innovation stretches, the less likely it is to be successful.
The topic of innovation is very relevant in modern economy. The problems of innovation attract the attention of researchers, practitioners and, in general, a wide range of people involved in one way or another in the modern transformation of society. Innovations have an impact not only on the behavior of their consumers, but also on the organizational behavior of employees of those enterprises that create and implement these innovations.
For the most part, innovations are controversial because, as a rule, there is no absolute certainty that they will be justified. Sometimes the delayed negative effects of an innovation completely outweigh its positive effects. Therefore, innovation often acts as an object of conflict.
The innovation conflict can be interpreted as a counteraction between the supporters of innovation (innovators) and opponents (conservatives), which is accompanied by experiences of negative emotions in relation to each other.
This publication is devoted to the problem of assessing the essence of these conflicts and possible ways to eliminate them.
At present, much attention is paid to a deep comprehensive study of innovative processes in economic science. The issues of the degree of influence of innovations on the duration of innovation processes, the cyclical nature of the emergence of innovation conflicts were considered in the works of S. Kara-Murza, N. Kondratiev, G. Mensch and others.
Since innovations are an inevitable process in matters of increasing the efficiency of activities, the more significant organizational changes in enterprises during their implementation, the stronger the psychological security mechanisms of employees declare themselves. These mechanisms set in motion the opposite of change—resistance, which is the cause of conflict.
The likelihood of conflict during the introduction of an innovation increases in proportion to the magnitude of the innovation. Large-scale innovation involves a large number of people with different interests in the innovation process, which increases the frequency of conflicts. The radical nature of innovation increases the likelihood and severity of conflicts. The rapid process of innovation, as a rule, is accompanied by the emergence of conflictogens.
In the process of innovation conflict, innovators expect to improve the work of the enterprise and personal life as a result of the introduction of innovation. Conservatives fear that life and work will get worse. The position of each of these parties can be sufficiently justified. In the struggle between innovators and conservatives, both can be right.
Most conflicts between innovators and conservatives (66.4%) occur during the implementation of managerial innovations, one in six - pedagogical, and one in ten - logistical innovations. Most often (65.1%), these conflicts arise at the stage of innovation.
As a rule, only 25% of employees of enterprises positively accept innovations from the very beginning, 50% take a wait-and-see attitude, and the remaining 25% resist the new. To reduce resistance, it is necessary to involve employees in innovation in one role or another early in the process.
There are quite a few classifications of innovations by types. Innovations can be radical and modifying, product, technical, social. Economists pay special attention to organizational and managerial innovations (development and application of new organizational structures and methods of managing the workforce) and socio-economic innovations (social development and application of new mechanisms for the functioning of an enterprise). It is these two types of innovation that cause the greatest number of negative innovation conflicts and consequences and most often end in failure, the reasons for which can be:
the desire of any enterprise for stability;
The unpredictable impact of changes in one structure on changes in another;
The impact of innovations not only on the formal structure of the enterprise, but also on the informal, and, as a result, the negative attitude of employees towards them.
Technical innovations are the most prosperous in terms of the occurrence of negative consequences of their implementation. In social innovation, the benefits are not as obvious and demonstrative as in the case of technical innovation. For social innovations, there is a difficulty in calculating their effectiveness. Also, for them, the cost of money may be relatively small compared to technical or other types of innovation, but this does not mean that social innovation is truly cheap. "Problems" are found in social innovations more often than in technical innovations.
One of the key success and failure factors in innovation is speed. Change planning involves determining the timing and budget, the distribution of responsibility. Very often, due to the lack of constant monitoring of key indicators, which makes it possible to understand how the implementation process is going, innovations are delayed. And the longer an innovation stretches, the less likely it is to be successful.
The main contradictions in the course of implementation of innovations are:
· irrational use of the already created production and financial potential of enterprises;
Lack of effective experience in the field of marketing and advertising in the presence of many high-tech backlogs in various fields;
Relative inadequacy in establishing business links between potential investors and consumers of investments;
· Availability high degree systemic investment risk.
The identified problems determine the priorities of the mechanism for regulating the innovation process on the principles of openness of information, independence and competence, etc. Innovations that are delayed during implementation are dangerous. It is necessary to regularly monitor the progress of innovation processes and maintain a high pace of their implementation. One of the problems that accompany any change is the information vacuum, so keeping employees informed about the progress of change is a key factor in the success of innovation processes in enterprises.
Literature.
1. Kara-Murza S. Where is Russia going. White Book of Reforms / S. Kara-Murza, S. Batikov, S. Glazyev. - M.: Politkniga, 2008. - 448 p.
2. Sirotkin S.V. Improving forecasting methods in innovation activities/ S.V. Sirotkin // Management of public and economic systems, 2006. - №2.
Book: Conflictology / Emelianenko L. M
11.2. Innovations and their impact on relationships in the workforce
AT modern conditions instability of the economy and the transformation of social relations, issues related to the aggravation of conflict in the team during the introduction and use of innovations in economic practice are of particular relevance.
Innovation is the process of creating, distributing and using a new practical means (innovation) for a new or better satisfaction of an already existing social need; it is a process of changes associated with a given innovation in the social and material environment in which its life cycle takes place.
However, innovation is not something new that causes a change in the old in a natural, regular way. Numerous improvements can also be considered innovations, which every person constantly brings into his life, but which do not have significant novelty. A potential innovation is new idea which has not yet been implemented.
Innovations are controversial because, as a rule, there is no absolute certainty that they will be justified. Sometimes the delayed negative consequences of an innovation completely cover its positive effect. Therefore, innovation often acts as an object of conflict.
The likelihood of conflict during the introduction of innovation increases for the following reasons. Large-scale innovations include a large number of people with different interests in the innovation process, which often causes conflicts. Radical innovation increases the likelihood and severity of innovation conflicts. The rapid process of innovation, as a rule, is accompanied by conflictogens. The socio-psychological, informational and other support of the implementation process, the rational organization of which contributes to the prevention of conflicts, significantly affects innovation conflicts.
Innovative conflict - can be interpreted as a counteraction between the supporters of innovation (innovators) and opponents (conservatives), which is accompanied by experiences of negative emotions in relation to each other.
The causes of innovation conflicts are grouped into five groups.
The objective reasons lie in the natural clash of interests between innovators and conservatives. Supporters and opponents of innovations have always been, are and will be independent of any factors. The spirit of innovation and the spirit of conservatism are preliminarily inherent in a person, a social group, and humanity as a whole. In addition, large-scale reforms carried out in society, industries, organizations objectively give rise to many innovative conflicts.
Organizational and managerial reasons lie in the poor debugging of political, social, managerial mechanisms for conflict-free assessment, implementation and dissemination of innovations. In the presence of effective organization procedures for timely detection, objective evaluation and implementation, most innovations would be applied without conflicts. The commitment of managers to a positive perception of the new, their participation in innovative processes would help reduce the number of conflicts.
Innovative causes are related to the characteristics of the innovation itself. Various innovations give rise to conflicts of various numbers and severity.
Personal reasons lie in the individual psychological characteristics of the participants in the innovation process.
Situational reasons lie in the specific features of a single innovation situation. Each innovation is carried out in the conditions of specific socio-economic, social, logistical and other circumstances. These circumstances can give rise to innovation conflicts.
During the introduction of innovations, contradictions arise between its supporters and opponents. Innovators expect to improve organizational and personal performance as a result of innovation. Conservatives fear that life and work will get worse. The position of each of these parties can be sufficiently justified. In the struggle between innovators and conservatives, both can be right.
Most conflicts between innovators and conservatives (66.4%) occur during the implementation of managerial innovations, one in six - pedagogical, and one in ten - logistical innovations. Most often (65.1%), these conflicts arise at the stage of innovation. The probability of conflicts arising when innovations are introduced by their initiators is twice as high as in the case of innovations being introduced by team leaders.
It is proved that the innovative conflict has a political character. The direction of the opponents' motives is different. For an innovator they are more socially oriented, for a conservative they are individually oriented. The main motives for an innovator to enter into a conflict are: the desire to increase the efficiency of the team - 82%; desire to improve relationships in the team - 42%; unwillingness to work in the old way - 53%; the desire to realize their potential - 37%; the desire to increase one's authority - 28% of conflict situations. For a conservative, the following motives for entering into a conflict are typical: unwillingness to work in a new way, to change the style of behavior and activity - 72%; reaction to criticism - 46%; the desire to insist on one's own - 42%; struggle for power - 21%; the desire to preserve material and social benefits - 17%.
The initiator of innovation conflicts is predominantly the innovator (68.7% of the total number of conflicts). As a rule, he is a subordinate of his opponent (59% of situations from the total number of conflicts). An innovator or a supporter of a new idea, or a creator or implementer of an innovation (64% of situations).
In the process of innovative conflict, opponents use more than 30 different methods and techniques of struggle. An innovator more often tries to influence an opponent by persuading (74%), seeking help from others (83%), criticizing (44%), appealing to the positive experience of introducing innovations and informing everyone around about innovations (50%). A conservative more often uses the following methods of influencing an opponent: criticism (49%); rudeness (36%); persuasion (23%); an increase in the workload if he is the boss of the opponent (19%); threats (18%).
If in the process of conflict interaction opponents experience weak negative emotions, then only 25% of conflicts end with an unfavorable result for them and the team. If opponents experience strong negative emotions for each other, then only 30% of such conflicts are resolved constructively.
Innovators receive support in conflicts much more often (95% of situations) than conservatives (58%). The motivation for supporting the innovator is predominantly business in nature, the conservative is supported more often based on a personal plan. Open and unequivocal support of the right opponent in most cases allows to resolve the conflict constructively. In the case of a high level of correctness (80-100%) of the opponent in the conflict and the presence of support from other people, the innovator is 17 times (conservative 3.6 times) more likely to win the conflict than lose. The less the relations between opponents worsen, the more constructively the innovation process develops.
Efficiency individual activities opponents during the innovation conflict is somewhat reduced. After the resolution of the conflict, the quality of the activity of the opponent-innovator in comparison with the pre-conflict period improves in 31.9% of situations, remains unchanged - in 47.6% and worsens in 20.5%. For a conservative opponent, these figures are respectively 26.5%; 54.6% and 19.9%.
Features of the impact of innovations on the relationship and perception of the innovation conflict in the workforce:
The introduction of any innovation is to a large extent not a technical, but a social and psychological process.
Hastily introduced innovations generate more resistance than innovations that are introduced gradually.
The stronger the negative emotions experienced by the opponents towards each other, the less constructive the conflict is.
The conservative is less nervous in innovation conflicts than the innovator.
The more constructive the position of the opponent, the more likely he is to win in the conflict.
If the opponent manages to enlist the support of colleagues, then the likelihood of resolving the conflict in his favor increases.
The better the members of the team are informed about the nature and characteristics of innovation, the less likely and acute innovative conflicts.
An important feature innovation conflicts is their significant impact on the success of the organization. Most noticeably, innovation processes affect organizations that operate in conditions of uncertainty, organizations that are rapidly evolving, developing new products or services. About 90% of all bankruptcies American companies in the 70s was caused bad system management and failures in the implementation of managerial innovations. Therefore, deviations from innovations, their poor thoughtfulness, are not as harmless as they might seem at first glance.
| 1. | Conflictology / Emelianenko L. M. |
| 2. | 1. ESSENCE OF THE CONFLICT AND ITS CHARACTERISTIC FEATURES 1. ESSENCE OF THE CONFLICT AND ITS CHARACTERISTIC FEATURES 1.1. Final and intermediate goals |
| 3. | 1.2 Definition of conflict |
| 4. | 1.3 Conflict situation and incident as prerequisites for the emergence of a conflict |
| 5. | 1.4. Characteristic signs of the manifestation of conflict |
| 6. | 1.5. Objective and subjective components of conflict interaction |
| 7. | 1.6. The limits of the spread of the conflict |
| 8. | 1.7. Types and types of conflicts |
| 9. | 1.8. Conclusions, practical recommendations and tools for the manager to use in a professional situation |
| 10. | 2. CAUSES AND CONSEQUENCES OF CONFLICTS IN THE ORGANIZATION 2. CAUSES AND CONSEQUENCES OF CONFLICTS IN THE ORGANIZATION 2.1. Final and intermediate goals |
| 11. | 2.2. Common Causes of Conflict in an Organization |
| 12. | 2.3. Functions of conflicts and their orientation |
| 13. | 2.4. Impact of the conflict on the social environment and its participants |
| 14. | 2.5. Positive consequences of conflicts |
| 15. | 2.6. Negative Consequences of Conflicts |
| 16. | 2.7. Conclusions, practical recommendations and tools for the manager to use in a professional situation |
| 17. | 3. CONFLICT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM IN THE ORGANIZATION 3. CONFLICT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM IN THE ORGANIZATION 3.1. Final and intermediate goals |
| 18. | 3.2. Rules for dealing with conflicts in the organization |
| 19. | 3.3. The essence of the conflict management system |
| 20. | 3.4. Model of the organizational mechanism of conflict management |
| 21. | 3.5. General principles of conflict management |
| 22. | 3.6. Conflict Management Methods |
| 23. | 3.7. The role of the manager in the conflict management process |
| 24. | 3.8. The objective need to regulate conflicts in the workplace |
| 25. | 3.9. Conclusions, practical recommendations and tools for a manager in a professional situation |
| 26. | 4. PREVENTION AND PREVENTION OF CONFLICTS 4. PREVENTION AND PREVENTION OF CONFLICTS 4.1. Final and intermediate goals |
| 27. | 4.2. The essence and significance of the processes of prevention and prevention of conflicts |
| 28. | 4.3. Prerequisites for success, difficulties in preventing and preventing conflicts |
| 29. | 4.4. Conflict Prevention and Prevention Technology |
| 30. | 4.5. Conflict prevention and prevention tools |
| 31. | 4.6. Emotion management tools in conflict prevention and prevention |
| 32. | 4.7 Conclusions, practical recommendations and tools for the manager to use in a professional situation |
| 33. | 5. DIAGNOSTICS OF THE CONFLICT AND CORRECTION OF THE BEHAVIOR OF ITS PARTICIPANTS 5. DIAGNOSIS OF THE CONFLICT AND CORRECTION OF THE BEHAVIOR OF ITS PARTICIPANTS 5.1. Final and intermediate goals |
| 34. | 5.2. Logic of timely conflict diagnosis |
| 35. | 5.3. Conflict diagnostic technology |
| 36. | 5.4. Conflict Diagnosis Technology Toolkit |
| 37. | 5.5. Positions and styles of behavior of the participants in the conflict |
| 38. | 5.6. Conclusions, practical recommendations and tools for the manager to use in a professional situation |
| 39. | 6. FORECASTING THE DEVELOPMENT OF CONFLICTS 6. FORECASTING THE DEVELOPMENT OF CONFLICTS 6.1. Final and intermediate goals |
| 40. | 6.2. Features of conflict prediction |
| 41. | 6.3. The main periods and stages of the development of the conflict |
| 42. | 6.4. Escalation of the conflict |
| 43. | 6.5. Conflict Reversal |
| 44. | 6.6. Forms, results and criteria for ending conflicts |
| 45. | 6.7. The dynamics of the conflict, taking into account the deformation of the relationship of its participants |
| 46. | 6.8. Conditions and factors for the productive end of conflicts |
| 47. | 6.9. Actions of the leader in the process of conflict development |
| 48. | 6.10. Conclusions, practical recommendations and tools for the manager to use in a professional situation |
| 49. | 7. SETTLEMENT OF CONFLICTS 7. SETTLEMENT OF CONFLICTS 7.1. Final and intermediate goals |
| 50. | 7.2. The essence of the conflict resolution process |
| 51. | 7.4. Common Mistakes in Conflict Resolution |
| 52. | 7.5. conflict resolution technology |
| 53. | 7.6. Constructive tools for conflict resolution |
| 54. | 7.7. Conclusions, practical recommendations and tools for the manager to use in a professional situation |
| 55. | 8. STRESS MANAGEMENT IN A CONFLICT SITUATION 8. STRESS MANAGEMENT IN A CONFLICT SITUATION 8.1. Final and intermediate goals |
| 56. | 8.2. Classification of stressors and their consequences |
| 57. | 8.3. Essence, factors and types of stress |
| 58. | 8.4. The dynamics of the development of internal tension during stress |
| 59. | 8.5. Levels and methods of stress management |
| 60. | 8.6. Conditions for preventing stress |
| 61. | 8.7. Psychological readiness of members of the labor collective to withstand stress |
| 62. | 8.8. Ways out of stressful situations |
| 63. | 8.9. Stress management techniques |
| 64. | 8.10. Conclusions, practical recommendations and tools for the manager to use in a professional situation |
| 65. |
In the short term, the introduction of innovations worsens the performance, does it increase the costs of the prize, requires additional capital investments in R&D, interesting innovations, including new technology and technology violates stability, increases uncertainty and increases the risk of production. activities. Moreover, innovation will not be fully utilized. prod.resources reduce the load prod. power can lead to incomplete. use of personnel, to the masses. layoffs For indicators of rent-ti and fin. Resist pre-I'm new. Tech-ki in more than half of the cases yavl. undesirable In science-intensive progressive. industries, the opposite is true, technologist. innovations dramatically increase the competitiveness of pre-I and lead to max. fished for a long time. period. When introducing the principle. new technologist. resh-th can rise. unprofitable production. activities not only in the short term, but in the long term. period.
Foreign economic activity of the company is one of the areas economic activity associated with entering foreign markets and functioning in foreign markets.
Directions, forms, methods foreign economic activity depend on the type of entrepreneurship of the company - industrial, commercial, financial or a combination of types of entrepreneurship.
Foreign economic activity includes the following main areas:
* access to the foreign market;
*export-import deliveries of goods, services and capital;
*monetary and financial and credit operations;
* creating and participating in activities joint ventures;
*international marketing;
* monitoring of national economic policy and economics of microeconomic relations.
The strategy of foreign economic activity implies a careful consideration of all alternative options in the field of foreign economic activity related to long-term goals and their justification for making certain decisions.
A strategy that establishes a general framework for foreign economic activity is always necessary, even if difficulties arise in its implementation. Success in achieving the long-term goals of a firm's foreign economic activity depends on the influence of both external and internal factors, which must be carefully considered when developing a strategy.
External factors can be represented by three blocks of factors that affect the long-term goals of the firm's foreign economic activity and, therefore, require their consideration when choosing a strategy. They are the following:
1) National foreign economic policy;
2) International economic relations and trends in world economic relations;
3) Factors of the markets of the country - the strategic field of the company's activitiesInternal factors include:
* organizational structure firms;
* flexibility of the foreign economic activity management system;
* organization of international marketing;
* principles of activity of managers in the field of foreign economic activity;
* quality and speed of obtaining information related to foreign economic activity;
* creation of incentive motives for personnel employed in the field of foreign economic activity of the company
Forecasting- the process of developing forecasts. Under forecast refers to a scientifically based judgment about the possible states of an object in the future, about alternative ways and terms of its existence. Forecast in the control system, I yav. pre-planned development of multivariate models for the development of the management object. To the basics. methods of forecasting management decisions include: normative, experimental, parametric, extrapolation, index, expert, evaluation of technical strategies, functional, combined, etc. Forecasting tasks: analysis and identification of foundations. development trends in this area, the choice of indicators that have a significant impact on the value under study; choice of the forecast method and forecast lead time; forecast of object quality indicators; forecast of the parameters of the organizational-but-technical level of production and other elements that affect the forecast-my indicators.
Organization of work on forecasting is a set of interrelated activities aimed at creating conditions for predicting the beneficial effect and elements of the total cost of production in order to prepare information for making operational and strategic decisions. The tasks of organizing work on forecasting are:
Collection and systematization of necessary information for forecasting;
Training of specialists who own the basic techniques and methods of forecasting;
Formation and organization of the functioning of the working bodies of programming, integrated with existing management services
Principles of organizing work on forecasting. A rational organization of forecasting work should provide prompt receipt of options for the development of the quality characteristics of the object under study, the conditions for its production and consumption, the trend in changing the beneficial effect and cost elements by stages life cycle object and reduce the cost of wed-tv and time to conduct a forecast-i. The fulfillment of these requirements is possible if the following principles of organization of forecasting work are observed: targeting, parallelism, continuity, direct flow, automaticity, adequacy, controllability, alternativeness, adaptability, etc.
The principle of targeting consists in the implementation of forecasts for strictly defined. research or design organization, as well as the pre-I-manufacturer of the object.
The principle of parallelism carrying out work on the forecast by various services is used to reduce the time for collecting, processing the outcome. information and fulfillment of the forecast itself.
Continuity principle consists in the systematic collection and processing of incoming additional information after performing the forecast and making the necessary adjustments to the forecast as needed.
Direct flow principle provides for the expedient transfer of information from one performer to others along the shortest path.
The principle of automaticity I'm in. one of the bases. to reduce the time and labor costs for the collection and processing of initial data and the implementation of the forecast.
The principle of adequacy helps to more accurately assess the likelihood of realizing the identified trend in changing the beneficial effect and the costs of obtaining it.
Controllability principle it is necessary to apply quantitative assessments of quality indicators and costs, economic and mathematical methods and management models.
The principle of alternativeness the forecast is associated with the possibility of developing the object, its individual components and the technology of manufacturing the product along different trajectories, with different costs, depending on the use of certain principles embedded in the design or technology.
Principle of adaptability forecasting consists in studying and maximizing the use of the factors of the external and internal environment of an object as a system, in adapting the methods and parameters of forecasting to these factors, to a specific situation.
In the production sphere, the emergence of a new idea often leads to the depreciation of labor, not only individuals but also entire groups. Apart from envy, which appears on a primitive level, or apprehension of a prestigious character, which speaks on a more high level, the cause of the conflict between the innovator and his colleagues and the administration may be adherence to the old values, conservatism.
A possible cause of the conflict can also be such a system of motivation and interest, in which the benefit for the innovator is formed to the detriment (real or imagined) of the interests of the structural unit or the entire organization.
It is precisely because of the traditionally negative perception of conflicts that the social climate does not favor the spread of innovative activity, even if it is unconditionally justified from an economic point of view, and often slows it down.
1.2 The concept of innovation conflict
As mentioned above, conflict is understood as the most acute way of resolving significant contradictions that arise in the process of interaction, which consists in counteracting the subjects of the conflict and is usually accompanied by negative emotions.
Necessary and sufficient conditions for the emergence of a conflict are the presence of oppositely directed motives or judgments in the subjects of social interaction. As well as the state of confrontation between them.
As for innovative conflicts, they can be defined as a separate type of conflict, the cause of which is the issue of introducing certain, hitherto unused, innovations into social relations.
At the same time, an innovative conflict can be both intrapersonal and social (interpersonal, intergroup, between an individual and a group), that is, the allocation of innovative conflicts to a separate group is due not to the subject composition, but to the object of the conflict, its cause, which in any innovative conflict the issue of introducing into life certain innovations relating to various aspects of society.
Since innovation opens up new prospects for changing flexibility to changes in supply and demand, i.e. the old is being replaced by the new; this objectively gives rise to social contradictions. The fact is that transformations, as a rule, affect the interests of people, their plans and expectations. The more radical and large-scale the ongoing changes, the more often they cause contradictions and conflicts generated by the struggle between the old and the new.
Any innovation is associated with the development, "breakthrough", distribution and use of innovations in production. At the same time, a contradiction arises between supporters and opponents of innovation. The reason for this lies in the difference in the results and consequences of innovations for social groups of workers, on the one hand, and the organization as a whole, on the other. Objectively, quite contradictory relationships will arise between them. So, situations are possible when an innovation is beneficial to the enterprise (organization as a whole), but does not meet the interests of certain groups of its employees, or vice versa - it is unprofitable for the enterprise, but suits certain groups of employees. At the same time, the results of innovations may have different content for the enterprise and employees. For example, from the point of view of the interests of the organization (enterprise), the main result may be an increase in production, obtained by creating special conditions in one of the departments (teams) working on a collective contract. In brigades, the results can be expressed, first of all, in the growth of incomes, the expansion of participation in management, and the enrichment of the content of labor. And in the rest of the links that produce the same products, the result of this innovation may be expressed in the deterioration of their position due to the limitation of equipment that was transferred from the department to a contract.
Often, more attention is paid to experimental units, while attention to other teams is reduced. As a result, contradictions may arise, such as:
The social effect may have the opposite "sign" in relation to the economic one;
The consequences of innovation can counteract outcomes;
The same results and consequences of innovations can be assessed differently by members of the organization's team. The ratio of the results of innovation and the costs of them are perceived differently by employees and the organization and can give rise to a conflict situation and even conflict.
Conflicts that arise as a result of innovations in the organization, like all others, can be partly functional and partly dysfunctional.
Conflicts can either facilitate or hinder innovation. At the same time, employees who actively resist innovation become participants in the conflict. At the same time, it is important to note that employees who actively resist innovation become participants in the conflict, but will not necessarily be the wrong side in it.
It should also be borne in mind the fact that the so-called passive workers can have a dangerous influence on the course of introducing innovations and its final result. For they do not openly oppose innovations, therefore it is difficult to identify them and enter into a dialogue with them. There may be quite a lot of these in the team.
Thus, based on the foregoing, it is possible to define an innovation conflict as a contradiction that arises for various reasons between individual members of the team, social groups about innovations undertaken in the team, in society (that is, innovation is the object of conflict).
1.3 Types of innovation conflicts
Innovation conflicts in organizations can be: business and interpersonal.
Business innovation conflicts arise between people connected in one way or another by production and economic relations.
Perestroika gave impetus to many organizational and managerial innovations that changed the organization of production and management. New organizational forms are associated with the creation of cooperatives, rental, family contracts, etc. A feature of many organizational forms is their flexibility and focus on meeting consumer needs. At the same time, new organizational forms give rise to new conflicts and contradictions.
The internal stimulus for innovation is the need of people for creativity, inherent in the very nature of a person, manifested in a constant desire for renewal, improvement of the production environment. The presence and high development of these needs is immanent in innovators who are sensitive to new problems and who are interested in the very process of introducing innovations. They can take part in it without even receiving any rewards for it. But as creative people, they are interested in recognizing their contribution and achievements, for which they are often able to go into conflict.
Interpersonal innovation conflicts. The clash of oppositely directed, incompatible needs, motives, interests, thoughts, feelings gives rise to interpersonal innovative conflicts. They can arise both in the sphere of official and non-official relations between supporters and opponents of innovations. Such conflicts can have a situational and characterological basis.
Situational prerequisites for conflict include:
Feelings of uncertainty and insecurity;
Insufficient or distorted awareness;
Non-recognition of the employee by the team;
Injustice.
Characteristic prerequisites include:
Character traits;
Tendency to aggressive behavior;
Reduced self-criticism;
Intolerance for the shortcomings of others;
Bad manners.
An employee becomes a source of conflict when the direction of his activity, values become incompatible with the interests and values of the team, i.e. when the moment of his "inadequacy" to the goals and objectives of the group comes. For example, an active innovator works in a team where it is “not customary” to innovate, or, conversely, a passive worker finds himself in a team that is intensively updating production.
A person who is obsessed with an idea, ready to achieve his own by any means, also becomes conflictogenic. It is difficult to find people with such personal qualities that would guarantee conflict-free behavior. Almost anyone can be in conflict.
2.1 Causes of innovation conflict
The innovation conflict is, figuratively speaking, Jin, who, once having gained freedom, is in no hurry to return back to the magic lamp. Of course, any innovation requires considerable emotional costs and is accompanied by intrapersonal conflicts of the innovator himself. However, as soon as the innovator submits his “brainchild” for discussion by colleagues or begins to actively develop an innovation, the conflict develops into an interpersonal one. innovators and conservatives. Resistance to change. This is what any innovation faces, especially in the field of information technology and management. It is this situation that is inherently an innovative conflict, the phenomenon that hinders the development of society in favor of its conservative views and values.
The likelihood of innovation conflict increases if:
1. innovation is large-scale;
2. a large number of people are involved in the innovation process;
3. the innovation is radical;
4. the process of innovation is fast;
5. there is no information support for the process, its campaign preparation.
Figuratively speaking, innovation activity, as a rule, is collective, it requires the participation of many people who are members of various professional and job groups. And the more people are involved in the innovation process, the more intense it is, the more opportunities arise for the emergence of conflict situations that are generated by the difficulties that accompany most innovations.
The main causes of innovation conflict include the following:
1) passivity of employees interested in innovation. This is due to the fact that many employees are afraid of salary cuts, more work during implementation, they are afraid of not being able to cope with new responsibilities, they do not have material and moral encouragement during implementation. In other words, workers fear the worsening (as a result of innovations) of their socio-economic situation;
2) shortage of material and technical resources. It should be noted here that sometimes organizations have resources of a lower quality than required, sometimes they have to be obtained on the side, sometimes the required equipment, tools are not produced by the domestic industry;
3) deterioration in the relationship of managers and chief specialists of the organization with managers and specialists of departments;
4) the presence of opposite orientations. Each individual and social group has a certain set of value orientations regarding the most significant aspects of social life. They are all different and usually opposite. At the moment of striving to satisfy needs, in the presence of blocked goals that several individuals or groups are trying to achieve, opposite value orientations come into contact and can cause conflicts. Conflicts due to opposite value orientations are extremely diverse. The most acute conflicts appear where there are differences in culture, perception of the situation, status or prestige, attitude to the need for innovation;
5) ideological reasons. Conflicts that arise on the basis of ideological differences are a special case of a conflict of opposite orientations. The difference between them lies in the fact that the ideological cause of the conflict lies in a different attitude towards the system of ideas that justify and legitimize the relationship of subordination, domination and fundamental worldviews among different groups of society. Here it is appropriate to talk about the lack of proper propaganda preparation for upcoming innovations, the insufficient level of explanatory work;
6) the need to restructure their work for managers and chief specialists. (Today, the problem of employment and retraining is becoming more and more relevant not only for managers, but also for ordinary members of the labor collective).
7) the opposite of the motivations of the participants in the conflict. It is proved that the innovative conflict has a polymotivated character. The orientation of the opponents' motivations is different. For an innovator they are more socially oriented, for a conservative they are more personally oriented. one
Overcoming these and other difficulties, a more rational approach to innovation process reduce conflict in organizations.
