Journal "Software Engineering"
a journal on theoretical and applied science and technology
ISSN 2220-3397

Issue N12 2024 year

DOI: 10.17587/prin.15.631-647
A Model of Two-Group Conflict in R&D Processes at the Enterprise
E. V. Orlova, Dr. of Sc. (in engineering), Professor, ekorl@mail.ru, Ufa University of Science and Technology, Ufa, 450076, Russian Federation
Corresponding author: Ekaterina V. Orlova, Dr. of Sc. (in engineering), Professor, Ufa University of Science and Technology, Ufa, 450076, Russian Federation, E-mail: ekorl@mail.ru
Received on August 27, 2024
Accepted on October 15, 2024

The purpose of the study is to substantiate the possibility and potential effects of using a new approach and class of models based on sociophysical analogies for modeling and managing conflicts in the business processes of research and development of an organization. A research methodology is proposed, based on the modern post-non-classical paradigm (synthetic picture of the world), formed on the principles of global evolutionism, interdisciplinarity, openness and nonlinearity; sociophysical approach for studying social conflicts and their modeling; historical method of study­ing social phenomena in time and determining the connection between past, present and future, critical-dialectical method of analyzing contradictions of social groups as a source of change, methods of system analysis of conflict as a complex process self-developing over time and system synthesis to resolve social contradictions in the process of development and implementation innovation of the organization. It is shown that employees of an organization can be divided into two groups depending on their attitude to new ideas, technologies and style of behavior when solving new creative problems — innovators and adapters. When developing and implementing innovations, project teams should include workers of both types. The presence of workers in the same team with antagonistic positions can lead to conflict situations. It is substantiated that for the modeling and management of such social conflicts, methods and models of sociophysics can be applied, providing a representation of the conflict as a change in behavioral reactions, and aimed at ensuring the cohesion of group members and their depolarization. The significance of the study is the ability to analyze the contradictions of interests of participants in the process of their interactions when implementing the tasks of developing and implementing innovations based on a sociophysical approach. The developed methodology takes into account the identified features of research and development processes, as well as complex intra-group and inter-group connections of conflicting groups, and allows us to develop requirements for modeling processes of conflict interaction and forecasting the options and nature of its development.

Keywords: social conflict; sociophysical model of conflict; conflict management; research and development (R&D)
pp. 631—647
For citation:
Orlova E. V. A Model of Two-Group Conflict in R&D Processes at the Enterprise, Programmnaya Ingeneria, 2024, vol. 15, no. 12, pp. 631-647. DOI: 10.17587/prin.15.631-647 (in Russian).
References:
  1. Akhremenko A. S. Political Analysis and Forecasting, Moscow, Gardariki, 2006, 243 p.
  2. Simonov P. M., Prudskiy M. V. Statistical Analysis of Temporal Characteristics of Local Conflicts and Military Expenditures (on the Example of Russia and the USA), Bulletin of PSU. Series: Economics, 2017, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 78—90 (in Russian).
  3. Hodge J., Sprague-Williams F., Woelk J. Rank disequilibrium in multiple-criteria evaluation schemes, Involve, a Journal of Mathematics, 2017, no. 10, pp. 165—180. DOI: 10.2140/in-volve.2017.10.165.
  4. Racek D., Thurner P., Kauermann G. Integrating Spatiotemporal Diffusion into Statistical Forecasting Models of Armed Conflict via Non-parametric Smoothing. Preprint, 2024. DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/q59dr.
  5. Wei E., Tan S., Yu P. et al. A video-based decision aid improved knowledge and decreased decisional conflict for asymptomatic persistent endodontic lesions, International endodontic journal, 2017, vol. 57, no. 4, pp. 394—405. DOI: 10.1111/iej.14025.
  6. Petukhov A. Yu., Malkhanov A. O., Sandalov V. M., Petukhov Yu.V. Modeling conflict in a social system using diffusion equations, News of universities. Applied nonlinear dynamics, 2016, vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 65—83. DOI: 10.18500/0869-6632-2016-24-6-65­83 (in Russian).
  7. Kachanov I. A. On the quantum properties of economic systems, Sociophysics and social engineering 2018: Proceedings of the Second All-Russian interdisciplinary conference, Moscow, May 23—25, 2018, Moscow, V. A. Trapeznikov Institute of Control Sciences of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2018, pp. 197—198 (in Russian).
  8. Makarov V. L., Bakhtizin A. R., Beklaryan G. L. et al. Agent-based modeling of the socio-economic consequences of migration under state regulation of employment, Economics and Mathematical Methods, 2022, vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 113—130. DOI: 10.31857/S042473880018960-5 (in Russian).
  9. Malinetsky G. G., Makhov S. A. Dynamics of macroeconomic indicators and mutual trade between the BRICS countries and the USA, Mathematical modeling and numerical methods, 2023, no. 1, pp. 112—123. DOI 10.18698/2309-3684-2023-1-112123 (in Russian).
  10. Coleman P. T., Vallacher R. R., Nowak A., Bui-Wrzosinska L. Intractable conflict as an attractor: A dynamical systems approach to conflict escalation and intractability, American Behavioral Scientist, 2007, vol. 50, no. 11, pp. 1454—1475.
  11. Liebovitch L. S., Naudot V., Vallacher R. et al. Dynamics of two-actor cooperation-competition conflict models, Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 2008, vol. 387, pp. 6360—6378.
  12. Kaufman M., Kaufman S., Diep H. T. Social Depolarization: Blume—Capel Model, Physics, 2024, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 138-147. DOI: 10.3390/physics6010010.
  13. Aleksandrov V. A., Baluta V. I., Varykhanov S. S. et al. Modeling of antagonistic conflicts in the paradigm of third-order cybernetics, Preprints of the Keldysh Institute of Problems of Materials Science, 2018, no. 86, 22 p. DOI: 10.20948/prepr-2018-86 (in Russian).
  14. Orlova E. V. Systems engineering of digital twins of organizational and technical systems using intelligent analysis methods, Programmnaya Ingeneria, 2022, vol. 13, no. 9, pp. 425—439. DOI: 10.17587/prin.13.425-439. (in Russian).
  15. Orlova E. V. Design Technology and AI-Based Decision Making Model for Digital Twin Engineering, Future Internet, 2022, vol. 14, no. 9, article 248. DOI: 10.3390/fi14090248.
  16. Thomas K. W., Kilmann R. H. Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument. TKI Profile & Interpretive Report, 1976. DOI: 10.1037/t02326-000.
  17. Kirton M. J. Adaptors and innovators: a description and measure. Creativity Assessment: Readings and Resources, Buffalo, Creative Education Foundation Press, 1999. 197 p.
  18. Mantegna N. Introduction to econophysics: Correlation and complexity in finance, Moscow, LIBROKOM, 2009, 192 p. (in Russian).
  19. Bernstein S., Lebow R. N., Stein J. G., Weber S. God gave physics the easy problems: adapting social science to an unpredictable world, European Journal of International Relations, 2000, no. 6, pp. 43—76.
  20. Galam S. Sociophysics: a physicist's modeling of psycho-political phenomena, Springer, Science & Business Media, 2012, 492 p.
  21. Diep H. T., Kaufman M., Kaufman S. An Agent-Based Statistical Physics Model for Political Polarization: A Monte Carlo Study, Entropy, 2023, vol. 25, no. 7, article 981. DOI: 10.3390/e25070981.
  22. Galam S. Unanimity, Coexistence, and Rigidity: Three Sides of Polarization, Entropy, 2023, vol. 25, no. 4, article 622. DOI: 10.3390/e25040622.
  23. Epstein J. M. Agent-based computational models and generative social science, Complexity, 1999, no. 4, pp. 41— 60. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0526(199905/06)4:5<41::AID-CPLX9>3.0.CO;2-F.
  24. Lempert R. Agent-based modeling as organizational and public policy simulators, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2002, vol. 99, pp. 7195—7196. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.072079399.
  25. Kaufman M., Diep H. T., Kaufman S. Sociophysics of intractable conflicts: Three-group dynamics, Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 2019, vol. 517, pp. 175—187. DOI: 10.1016/j.physa.2018.
  26. Batty M., Torrens P. M. Modelling complexity: The limits to prediction, CyberGeo: European Journal of Geography, 2001, vol. 201. DOI: 10.4000/cybergeo.1035.
  27. Vallacher R. R., Coleman P. T., Nowak A., Bui-Wrzosinska L. Rethinking intractable conflict: The perspective of dynamical systems, Conflict, Interdependence, and Justice, New York, Springer, 2011, pp. 65—94. DOI: 10.1037/a0019290.
  28. Bercovitch J. Characteristics of Intractable Conflicts, Beyond Intractability / Eds. Guy Burgess, Heidi Burgess. Conflict Information Consortium. University of Colorado, Boulder, 2003, available at: http://www.beyondintractability.org /essay/character-istics-ic (date of access 25.08.2024).
  29. Godoy A., Tabacof P., Von Zuben F. J. The role of the interaction network in the emergence of diversity of behavior, PLoS ONE, 2017, vol. 12, no. 2, article e0172073. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0172073.
  30. Hull D. The philosophy of Biological Science, N. Y., 1974, 168 p.
  31. Biophilosophy / Eds. A. T. Shatalov, Moscow, INFRAN, 1997, 264 p. (in Russian).
  32. Heisenberg W. Physics and Philosophy. Part and Whole, Moscow, Nauka, 1989 (in Russian).
  33. Haken G. Synergetics: Hierarchy of Instabilities in Self-Organizing Systems and Devices, Moscow, Mir, 1985 (in Russian).
  34. Prigogine I. Order from Chaos: New Dialogue between Man and Nature, Moscow, Progress, 1986, 432 p. (in Russian).
  35. Borovik E. S., Eremenko V. V., Milner A. S. Lectures on Magnetism, Moscow, FIZMATLIT, 2005, 512 p. (in Russian).
  36. Glazkov V. N. Magnetism: static and dynamic properties of magnets, Notes to a lecture on general physics, Moscow, MIPT, 2022, 67 p. (in Russian).
  37. Trukhan S. N., Martyanov O. N. Magnetic properties of matter. Part 1. Fundamentals of structure, Novosibirsk, Boreskov Institute of Catalysis SB RAS, 2012, 75 p. (in Russian).
  38. Orlova E. V. Methodology and Statistical Modeling of Social Capital Influence on Employees' Individual Innovativeness in a Company, Mathematics, 2022. vol. 10, no. 11, article 1809. DOI: 10.3390/math10111809.
  39. Orlova E. V. Assessment of enterprise human capital and its management in the context of digital transformation of the economy, Journal of Applied Economic Research, 2021, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 666—700. DOI: 10.15826/vestnik.2021.20.4.026 (in Russian).
  40. Oslo Manual 2018: Guidelines for Collecting, Reporting and Using Data on Innovation, 4th Edition, The Measurement of Scientific, Technological and Innovation Activities, OECD Publishing, Paris/Eurostat, Luxembourg.
  41. Oslo Manual: Guidelines for Collecting, Reporting and Using Data on Innovation: Joint Publication of the OECD and Eurostat / Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Statistical Office of the European Communities. 3rd ed. Tomsk, Center for Research and Statistics of Science, 2011, 205 p.
  42. Harman G. New Directions in Internationalizing Higher Education: Australia's Development As an Exporter of Higher Education Services, Higher Education Policy, 2004, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 101—120.
  43. Larsen T. J., Wetherbe J. C. An Exploratory Field Study of Differences in Information Technology Use between More- and Less-innovative Middle Managers, Information and Management, 1999, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 93—108.
  44. Orlova E. V. Methods and Algorithms of RL for Modeling Individual Trajectories of Professional Development, Programmnaya Ingeneria, 2023, vol. 14, no. 12, pp. 613—625. DOI: 10.17587/ prin.14.613-625 (in Russian).
  45. Orlova E. V. A Hybrid Approach to Modeling Labor Productivity Factors: Synthesis of Randomized Controlled Experiments and Causal Bayesian Networks, Economics and Mathematical Methods, 2024, vol. 60, no. 1, pp. 108—120 (in Russian).