Potential negative consequences of innovations are. Negative consequences of the impact of innovations, their manifestations and ways to eliminate them

Book: Conflictology / Emelianenko L. M

11.2. Innovations and their impact on relationships in work collective

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 it takes place. life cycle.

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 significantly affects innovation conflicts. rational organization which contributes to the prevention of 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, management arrangements conflict-free evaluation, 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%; desire to increase their authority - 28% 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 innovation conflict, opponents use more than 30 various ways and fighting techniques. 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 to support the innovator is predominantly business character, a 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 of innovation conflicts is their significant impact on the success of the organization. Most noticeable innovation processes influence 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 by a poor management system 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.

The process of renewal (transformation) of an organization, based on the introduction of innovations in organizational processes, is understood. The relevance of changes and innovations is due to the need to adapt the organization to the requirements of the external and internal environment, to master new knowledge and technologies, which is especially important in a market economy. The amount of knowledge possessed by humanity doubles approximately every five to seven years, and accordingly, the number of new situations that require an adequate solution doubles. This leads to an increase in the importance of change management tasks. Minor adjustments of the main parameters of the organizational environment (structure, tasks, processes, personnel, etc.) are recommended to be carried out in the organization regularly, large ones - once every four to five years. The goal of change is to bring about progressive change to move the organization into a high-performing state.

The reasons for organizational changes and innovations can be economic, ideological, organizational, informational, personnel, etc. The most common are changes in external working conditions (the actions of competitors), the emergence of progressive technologies for solving managerial tasks(automation and computerization), bureaucratization of the administrative apparatus (increase in administrative expenses).

Diagnostic signs that determine the need for changes can be direct and indirect: deterioration or stabilization of the organization's performance indicators, losses in competition, staff passivity, unreasoned protest against any innovations, lack of a procedure for canceling inefficient ones. management decisions, the gap between the formal duties of the staff and their specific work, the high frequency of punishments in the absence of incentives, etc.

Innovations can be divided into 3 groups:

• technical and technological (new equipment, devices, technological schemes etc.);
• product (transition to the production of new products, materials);
• social, which includes:
  • economic (new material incentives, indicators of the wage system)
  • organizational and managerial (new organizational structures, forms of labor organization, decision-making, control over their implementation, etc.)
  • actually social, that is, purposeful changes in intra-collective relations (election of foremen, foremen, new forms of publicity, educational work, such as mentorship, the creation of new public bodies, etc.)
  • legal, mainly acting as changes in labor and economic legislation.

Sometimes economic, organizational, legal innovations are united by the concept of "management".

Classification of changes and innovations:

organization of the event:

• planned
• unplanned;

by deadline:

• short-term
• long-term;

in relation to staff:

• increasing the efficiency of the work of the staff;
• improving the skills of employees;
• aimed at improving the climate, increasing job satisfaction, etc.

According to the method of implementation, innovations should be distinguished:

• experimental, that is, passing the stage of approbation, verification;
• direct, realizable without experiments.

By volume:

• point (rules);
• systemic (technological and organizational systems);
• strategic (principles of production and management).

By appointment:

• aimed at: production efficiency;
• improvement of working conditions;
• enrichment of the content of labor;
• increasing the manageability of the organization;
• improving product quality.

Possible positive impacts of innovations:

• cost reduction;
• reduction of harmfulness of work;
• advanced training, etc.

Possible negative impacts of innovations:

• financial costs for their implementation;
• decrease in work efficiency at the initial stage;
• social tension, etc.

For the successful implementation of the transformation, it is necessary to analyze their causes, objects, positive and negative sides, clearly formulate goals, and only then carry out changes.

Any innovations as certain changes in the labor process are inevitable, since they are mainly due to objective factors. At the same time, it must be emphasized that reorganization is not an end in itself, but a means of realizing new tasks and areas of activity.

The reorganization of an enterprise can be carried out in various forms: merger, accession, separation, separation, transformation, reduction, reprofiling. With each of these types, a corresponding restructuring of the management system takes place, which entails changes in the structure, technologies, personnel, organizational culture and other essential parameters of the functioning of the organization.

The priority goal of changes and innovations should be considered to be the achievement of better results, the development of advanced means and methods of labor, the elimination of routine operations, and the implementation of progressive changes in the management system.

Change policy of the organization

Change management should be considered in two aspects: tactical and strategic. From a tactical point of view, change management means the ability to carry them out in adequate time, achieve the goals set, reduce resistance to change, and increase the adaptation of employees to them. In a strategic context, change management means incorporating permanent changes into management practices so that they become habitual and expected for all personnel in the organization, and their temporary absence would cause alarm and anxiety. It is the provision strategic management changes can lead to a significant increase in the competitiveness of the organization.

Change management can be implemented based on two principal approaches:

Reactive approach- allows you to respond to ongoing events, adapt to changes, mitigate their consequences. At the same time, there is a time interval for lagging internal changes in response to external influences, which can lead to a loss of the organization's competitive position.

Proactive (preventive) approach- makes it possible to anticipate events in external environment, get ahead of them and initiate change ourselves. In this case, the manager's role is to bring about constant organizational change to control the very "destiny" of the organization. This approach allows you to radically manage change.

Changes in frequency are divided into one-time and multi-stage; in relation to the staff - positively perceived by the majority of staff and negatively perceived.

The main objects of organizational changes and innovations are:

• the goals of the activities of the personnel and the organization as a whole;
• organization management structure;
• technology and tasks labor activity personnel;
• composition of the staff.

One of the components of the introduction of innovations is the development of a new idea by the organization. The author of the idea must:

• identify the interest of the group in this idea, including the consequences of the innovation for the group, the size of the group, the spread of opinions within the group, etc.;
• develop a strategy for achieving the goal;
• identify alternative strategies;
• finally choose a strategy of action;
• draw up a detailed action plan.

People tend to have a wary-negative attitude towards all changes, since an innovation usually poses a potential threat to habits, ways of thinking, status, etc. There are three types of potential threats in the implementation of innovations:

• economic (decrease in the level of income or its decrease in the future);
• psychological (feeling of uncertainty when changing requirements, duties, methods of work);
• socio-psychological (loss of prestige, loss of status, etc.).

With the innovation, the organization of work with people is carried out in accordance with the principles:

• informing about the essence of the problem;
• preliminary assessment (informing at the preparatory stage about the necessary efforts, predicted difficulties, problems);
• initiatives from below (it is necessary to distribute responsibility for the success of implementation at all levels);
• individual compensation (retraining, psychological training etc.).

The following types of people are distinguished according to their attitude to innovation:

Innovators are people who are constantly looking for opportunities to improve something. Enthusiasts are people who accept the new, regardless of the degree of its development and validity. Rationalists - accept new ideas only after a thorough analysis of their usefulness, an assessment of the difficulty and possibility of using innovations.

Neutrals are people who are not inclined to take the word of a useful proposal.

Skeptics are people who can become good controllers of projects and proposals, but slow down innovation.

Conservatives are people who are critical of everything that is not tested by experience.

Retrogrades are people who automatically reject everything new.

Options for the policy of introducing innovations in the team

directive policy. Its essence boils down to the fact that innovations are carried out by the manager without the involvement of team members. The goal of such a policy is rapid change in a crisis situation, and team members will have to put up with changes because of their inevitability.

Negotiation policy. The manager is the initiator of innovation; he negotiates with the team, in which partial concessions and mutual agreements are possible. Team members can express their opinion and understanding of the essence of innovations.

Policy for achieving common goals. Its essence lies in the fact that managers, involving consultants - specialists in the field of management, not only receive the consent of the team to introduce innovations, but also set goals for the introduction of innovations for each member of the organization, determining their responsibility for achieving goals, both personal and all organizations.

Analytical policy. The manager attracts specialist experts who study the problem, collect information, analyze it and develop optimal solutions without involving a team of workers and without taking into account their personal problems.

Trial and error policy. The manager cannot define the problem clearly enough. Groups of workers are involved in the implementation of innovations, who try approaches to solving the problem and learn from their mistakes.

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 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. 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, 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. Since innovations are an inevitable process in matters of improving the efficiency of activities, the more significant they are during their implementation organizational changes at enterprises, 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 into 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 costs 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 key factors success and failure 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.

AT short term the introduction of innovations worsens the economic performance, does it increase the costs of the call, it requires additional capital investments in the development of R&D 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 of foreign economic activity depend on the type of business of the company - industrial, commercial, financial, or a combination of types of business.
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;
*creation and participation in the activities of joint ventures;
*international marketing;
* monitoring of the 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 influence 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 country's markets - the strategic field of the company's activity internal factors relate:
* 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 for predicting management decisions include: normative, experimental, parametric, extrapolation, index, expert, estimates 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 work on forecasting should ensure the 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 of changing the beneficial effect and cost elements by stages of the life cycle of the object and reducing the cost of media and time to carry out 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.

11.2. Innovations and their impact
on relationships within the workforce

In modern conditions of economic instability 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 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 the replacement of the old in a natural, regular way. Numerous improvements that every person constantly brings into his life, but which do not have significant novelty, cannot be considered innovations. A potential innovation is a new idea that 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. The radical nature of 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.

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 previously inherent in a person, a social group, 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 are the poor debugging of political, social, managerial mechanisms for conflict-free assessment, implementation and dissemination of innovations. If there was an effective organization of the procedure for timely detection, objective assessment and implementation, most of the 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 consist in the specific features of a single innovative 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 the performance of the organization 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 introducing innovations. The probability of conflicts arising during the implementation of innovations by their initiators is twice as high as in the case of the introduction of innovations by team leaders.

It is proved that the innovative conflict has a political character. The direction of the opponents' motives is different. In an innovator they are more socially oriented, in 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 is either 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.

The effectiveness of the individual activity of 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 of 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 develop rapidly, developing new products or services. About 90% of all bankruptcies of American companies in the 70s were caused by poor management system and failures in the introduction of managerial innovations. Therefore, deviations from innovations, their poor thoughtfulness, are not as harmless as they might seem at first glance.