What is communicative competence definition. Communicative competence

Question #92 . concept communicative competence. Ways to improve communicative competence.

Communicative competence (according to Petrovsky) - a system of internal resources necessary to build effective communication in a certain range of situations of personal interaction.

Communicative competence- the ability to establish and maintain the necessary contacts with other people. The composition includes a set of knowledge and skills that ensure the effective flow of the communicative process. Communicative competence consists of the ability to:

1. to give a socio-psychological forecast of the communicative situation in which to communicate; The forecast is formed in the process of analyzing the communicative situation at the level of communicative attitudes (the level of attitude of people (i.e. partners) to communication in general). The communicative attitude of a partner is a kind of program of personality behavior in the process of communication. The level of installation can be predicted in the course of identifying the subject-thematic interests of a partner, emotional and evaluative attitudes to various events, attitudes to the form of communication; inclusion of partners in the system of communicative interaction. This is determined in the course of studying the frequency of communicative contacts, the type of partner's temperament, his subject-practical preferences; emotional assessments of forms of communication. Generalized emotional reactions such as "interesting - uninteresting", "satisfied - not satisfied" characterize emotional judgments about public communication.

2. socio-psychologically program the process of communication, based on the uniqueness of the communicative situation;

3. to carry out socio-psychological management of communication processes in a communicative situation.

It is of particular importance for the performance of managerial functions.

In communication, the leader needs the ability to find the right word, tone, the right attachment to a partner in a business communication situation. The experience of communication occupies a special place in the structure of the communicative competence of the individual. It is social on the one hand and includes internalized norms and values ​​of culture. On the other hand, it is individual because it is based on individual communication skills and psychological characteristics associated with communication in the life of a person.

In communication, mastering the social roles of the organizer and participant in communication plays a special role. The experience of perceiving art is important here, since art reproduces various models of human communication. Acquaintance with these models lays the foundation for the communicative erudition of the individual - a system of knowledge, stories and culture of human communication, involves the integration of all sources of communicative competence.

Possessing a certain level of communicative competence, a person enters into communication with a certain level of self-awareness and self-respect. The personality becomes a personified subject of communication - not only the art of adapting to the situation, but also the ability to organize a personal communicative space and choose a communicative individual distance. The analysis of the constituent components of communicative competence is considered at three levels: - socio-normative; - significatory (a system of symbols and normative prescriptions for their use in communication); - action.

With this approach to the characterization of communicative competence, it is advisable to consider communication as a system-integrating process that has the following components:

a) communicative-diagnostic (diagnosis of the socio-psychological situation and conditions of future communicative activity, identification of possible social, socio-psychological and other contradictions that a person may have to face in communication);

b) communicative and prognostic (assessment of the positive and negative aspects of the upcoming communication);

c) communicative-programming (preparation of a communication program, development of texts for communication, choice of style, position and distance of communication);

d) communicative-organizational (organizing the attention of communication partners, stimulating their communicative activity, managing the communication process, etc.);

e) communicative-executive (diagnosis of a communicative situation in which communication of a person unfolds, a forecast of the development of this situation, carried out according to a previously meaningful individual program of communication).

The main sources of acquiring communicative competence are :

1) socio-normative experience of folk culture;

2) knowledge of the languages ​​of communication used folk culture;

3) experience of interpersonal communication in the non-holiday sphere;

4) the experience of perceiving art.

Socio-normative experience - this is the basis of the cognitive component of the communicative competence of the individual as a subject of communication. At the same time, the actual existence of various forms of communication, which are most often based on a socio-normative conglomerate (an arbitrary mixture of communication norms borrowed from different national cultures), introduces a person into a state of cognitive dissonance. And this gives rise to a contradiction between the knowledge of the norms of communication in different forms of communication and the way that the situation of a particular interaction offers. Dissonance is a source of individual psychological inhibition of the activity of a person in communication. The personality is "turned off" from the field of communication. There is a field of internal psychological stress. And this creates barriers to human understanding.

Possession of the socio-normative culture of communication also implies the mastery of the signification culture of society by the individual. Signification is a system of symbols and normative prescriptions for their use in communication. According to A.F. Losev, a symbol is a signification (designation) of reality. As a kind of sign, a symbol is used in different capacities: both as a way of organizing actions, and as a way of expressing attitudes towards a communication partner, and, of course, as a means of organizing the text of messages exchanged between participants in communication.

Communicative competence does not arise from scratch, it is formed. The basis of its formation is the experience of communication, on the one hand, it is social (because it includes internalized norms and values ​​of culture), on the other hand, it is individual (because it is based on individual communicative abilities and psychological events associated with communication in a person’s life) .

The concept of socio-psychological training

Psychological training - this is a special form of group work, with its own possibilities, limitations, rules and problems. At its core, it is a form of learning, acquiring new skills, mastering other psychological capabilities. The peculiarity of this form of education is that the student takes an active position in it, and the acquisition of skills occurs in the process of living, personal experience of behavior, feeling, doing.

SPT - a form of active learning that allows a person to self-form the skills of building productive social interpersonal relationships, analyzing socio-psychological situations from their own point of view and the position of a partner, as well as developing the ability to know themselves and others in the process of communication.

Beginning of work

The effective work of the SPT group implies a certain level of personal development, a willingness to get involved in training situations, master skills, and cooperate with other people. In fact, a person should see the world freely, as a new opportunity, and not as a reflection of his problem. It is very difficult to work on mastering socio-psychological skills when participants begin to take the position of a client and, in fact, request psychotherapeutic assistance from the leader and the group even during warm-up, walk-through exercises; when they cannot give good feedback to other participants, because, in fact, they do not see them, but a reflection in their behavior of their personal, unreacted experiences. It is important to remember this at the stage of work planning, selection of participants. The best thing is to precede the work of the SPT group with a special client group that allows participants to work out their actual personal problems in one form or another. Such a group can be replaced by a series of individual meetings with future participants. Group work is undoubtedly preferable, as it gives a person the primary experience of communication, building relationships, mutual understanding.

1. The principle of voluntariness

Participation in the training can only be voluntary. If we transfer this thesis to work in an educational institution, this means that there can be no SPT that is included in the curriculum of adolescents or is a mandatory methodological event for a teacher. The schedule may include a lesson in psychology using elements role play, skill development. The teacher may be forced by the administration to attend a psychology seminar.

But you can not force a person to enter into communication with other people, give feedback, develop certain skills and abilities. It's not ethically possible, it's ineffective, and it could be dangerous to his mental health.

People who respond to the invitation of a psychologist to take part in the training should receive all the necessary information in advance in order to make an informed decision. It is good to have a preliminary conversation with everyone, talking about the meaning and forms of training work, about the need to take active position, open your inner world, experiences, thoughts to other participants, change, appropriating new experience. A person must determine whether he needs it? Is he ready for this now?

2. Timing and frequency

The optimal amount of SPT in academic hours is from 24 to 40. The optimal length of the working day is from 8 to 10 academic hours (6 in the most extreme case). It is clear that this can only be realized when classes are held on days specially allotted for this, which are not busy with anything else for the participants: vacations, weekends, on days freed from other work. In order for the training to be effective, it is only on such days that it is worth conducting training sessions, and not combining them with lessons or work affairs, especially since a session lasting less than 4 hours has nothing to do with training at all. Active learning involves immersion in the training reality, living a full experience.

The foregoing does not mean that it is impossible to conduct small practical seminars, classes with elements of group work, short games, and exercises.

How often should the group meet? If classes are short - 4-5 hours, then preferably every day or several times a week. If the classes are long, 9-hour, you can meet once a week, although it is desirable to hold the first two classes in a row. The fact is that if the trainer releases the group for a week, he is obliged to “close” the participants of the training, let them go with a general positive feeling so that they can work and live normally, remembering the training only at will, and not because of an unresolved problem there. .

3. Training program

Training is not only exercises, atmosphere, a special state of mind of each participant, but first of all it is a certain concept of human relations, personally perceived and technologically embodied by the leader.

So, the first step is the awareness by the participants of the training of that view of the world of human relations, which the trainer wants to implement in his work. The second step is the choice of the general logic of the training process. The proposed scheme is based on a very simple logic based on the idea of ​​the phases of communication: establishing contact, meaningful exchange (of information, feelings, meanings), completion of contact. In accordance with them, the work of the SPT group is built.

Psychological training (according to Petrovskaya) is a means of influence aimed at expanding knowledge, social attitudes, skills and experience in the field of interpersonal communication. It is supposed to teach knowledge, skills, skills in improving interpersonal relationships. The formation of such skills will help group members to increase their own competence in relation to the motives of social behavior, will improve understanding of other people, comprehend communication obstacles and try out ways to overcome these obstacles. The peculiarity of this form of education is that the student takes an active position in it, and the acquisition of skills occurs in the process of living, personal experience of behavior, feeling, doing. Participation in the training can only be voluntary.

The form of holding is discussion groups, where the subject of discussion is the real relationship of the participants. An analysis of one's own dynamics takes place, particular tasks are solved, such as establishing valid communication, i.e. group members must freely and accurately inform about their feelings, adequately perceive their place in the system of intragroup relations. Another task is being solved - feedback is being established, there must be a climate of psychological safety, participants must use not their usual behaviors, but those that they do not use in real life.

T-group is a group that has a limited number of participants (from 7 to 15 people). It is desirable that these are people who do not know each other. Terms of carrying out from 2 days to 2 months. The obligatory position is the position of the coach. The role of a coach is to:

1. Provide an atmosphere of trust and openness in the group;

2. Demonstrating to the group members a model of the desired behavior involves tolerance, openness and support for sincerity in others, the principle of "here and now" - not only the impossibility of discussing outside the group what is happening here, but only those events that take place in the present are discussed.

The purpose of T-groups is to improve the socio-psychological competence of the participants.

Principles of work of the training group

1. The principle of activity - in training people are involved in specially designed actions, it can be playing a particular situation, doing exercises or observing others according to a special scheme. This principle is the key to SPT. Therefore, training is referred to as interactive forms of education.

2. The principle of the research position - participants during the training discover for themselves some patterns that are already known in psychology, and most importantly, they discover their personal characteristics, they research, they are not given a psychological pattern in a ready-made form, they have the opportunity to feel it on your own, to let it through yourself, revealing your personal characteristics;

3. The principle of objectification of behavior - the principle of awareness. A universal means of objectification is feedback. As feedback, not only the statements of other participants are used, but also technical means (video and audio recordings).

4. The principle of partnership communication - such communication, which takes into account the interests of all participants in the interaction, as well as their feelings, emotions, experiences. The implementation of this principle creates an atmosphere of security, trust and frankness in the group.

The training program is based on a logic based on the idea of ​​the phases of communication: establishing contact, meaningful exchange (of information, feelings, meanings), completion of contact.

Communicative competence is usually understood as the ability to establish and maintain the necessary contacts with other people. The composition of competence includes a set of knowledge, skills and abilities that provide effective communication. This kind of competence involves the ability to change the depth and circle of communication, to understand and be understood by communication partners. Communicative competence is a developing and largely conscious experience of communication between people, which is formed in conditions of direct interaction. The process of improving communicative competence is associated with the development of personality. The means of regulation of communicative acts are part of human culture, and their appropriation and enrichment occurs according to the same laws as the development and multiplication of cultural heritage as a whole. In many ways, the acquisition of communicative experience occurs not only in the course of direct interaction. From literature, theater, cinema, a person also receives information about the nature of communicative situations, problems of interpersonal interaction and ways to solve them. In the process of mastering the communicative sphere, a person borrows from the cultural environment the means of analyzing communicative situations in the form of verbal and visual forms.

Communicative competence is directly related to the characteristics of the social roles performed by a person.

Communicative competence implies adaptability and freedom of possession of verbal and non-verbal means of communication and can be considered as a category that regulates the system of a person's relationship to himself, the natural and social world.

Thus, both individual and personal qualities, and socio-cultural and historical experience contribute to the formation of competence in communication.

One of the tasks of communicative competence is the assessment of cognitive resources that provide an adequate analysis and interpretation of situations. To diagnose this assessment, there is currently a large block of techniques based on the analysis of "free descriptions" of various communicative situations. Another method of studying communicative competence is observation in natural or specially organized game situations with the involvement of technical means and meaningful analysis of the information received. Depending on the objectives of the study, one can take into account the pace of speech, intonation, pauses, non-verbal techniques, facial expressions and pantomime, and the organization of the communicative space. One of the diagnostic parameters may be the number of techniques used, the other - the adequacy of their application. Of course, such a diagnostic system is quite laborious and its high-quality implementation requires a lot of time and a high qualification of the observer. The difficulty in assessing communicative competence lies also in the fact that people in the process of communication are guided by a complex system of rules for regulating joint actions. And if the situation of interaction can be analyzed, then the rules by which people enter this situation are not always realized.

One of the means of developing communicative competence is socio-psychological training (SPT). This relatively new scientific and practical area of ​​psychology is currently being intensively developed as an integral and important part of the psychological service system. With all the variety of specific forms of SPT, they all have a common feature - it is a means of influence aimed at developing certain knowledge, skills and experience in the field of interpersonal communication. We can say that in psychological terms, this means the following:

- development of a system of communication skills and abilities;

– correction of the existing system of interpersonal communication;

– creation of personal prerequisites for successful communication.

An analysis of the possible impacts of socio-psychological training reveals that in the process of group work, the deep personal formations of the participants in the training are also affected. After all, a person receives new specific information about himself. And this information affects such personal variables as values, motives, attitudes. All this speaks in favor of the fact that SPT can be associated with the process of personality development, or rather, with the beginning of this process. Indeed, the new information about oneself and others received in the training, as a rule, is acutely emotionally mediated, prompting to rethink the existing self-concept and the concept of the “other”.

Mastering deep communication is both a means and a result of exposure within the TBT.

The development of personality consists not only in the construction of the highest levels of its structure, but in the weakening of existing and ineffective ones.

Thus, we can say that the development of competence in communication involves an adequate choice and use of the entire set of tools focused on the development of personal subject-subject aspects of communication and the subject-object components of this process.

In the broadest sense, a person's competence in communication can be defined as his competence in interpersonal perception, interpersonal communication and interpersonal interaction.

Communication in interpersonal communication is not identical to just the exchange of information, because:

- between people there are certain interpersonal relationships;

- these relationships are changeable;

- Thought is not equal direct meaning the words".

A special specificity of human communication is the presence of barriers that prevent the penetration of information. The appearance of barriers, however, is quite logical, because communication is an impact. In the case of a successful impact, a person may experience any changes in his perception of the world. Not everyone is ready for this and wants this, because such changes violate his stability, opinion about himself, other people, so a person will defend himself from exposure.

It is quite clear that not every impact in communication is threatening. On the contrary, there are a large number of situations in which the information received is positive, strengthening the position of a person, giving him emotional satisfaction. Thus, a person must be able to recognize useful and harmful information. How can this be done?

Let's look at the barriers. Speech in human communication is the main method of influence. If the listener trusts the speaker as much as possible, then he completely accepts the speaker's thoughts, while defending himself from the speaker's influences, the listener “lets go” of his trust very carefully. Consequently, not every speaker inspires and influences, faced with counter psychological activity, which is the basis for the emergence of barriers to communication. These barriers include: avoidance, authority, misunderstanding. Thus, the methods of protection against exposure are:

– avoidance of contact with sources of exposure;

- orientation to one's own culture, logic, style, language and misunderstanding of a foreign language, semantic field, style and logic.

Accordingly, to overcome barriers it is necessary:

- to attract and hold the attention of a communication partner;

- use a universal feedback mechanism in order to clarify the understanding of the situation, words, feelings and logic of the interlocutor;

Considering the interactive side, researchers study various types of interaction situations in the course of communication. In the very general view one can single out the dichotomous division into competition and cooperation proposed by Deutsch. Various types of interactions can be captured through observation. In one of the most famous observation schemes developed by R. Bales, the following categories are distinguished, with the help of which interaction can be described: the area of ​​problem statement, the area of ​​problem solving, the area positive emotions, area of ​​negative emotions. Considering the interactive side of communication, it is necessary to take into account the parameters and characteristics of the situation in which the interaction takes place. At present, the situational approach, in which the parameters of the situation are the starting point for the analysis of communication, is gaining more and more development.

§ 18.6. CHOICE OF A SUBJECTIVE-OPTIMAL LIFE WAY

A person's awareness of his subjective optimal life path is an important element of his personal maturity. This is clearly stated in the definitions that indicate the absence of such awareness - "unlucky" or even "dissolute" person. The social experience of many generations of people, reflected in these expressions, shows that each person, with all the variety of possible directions of movement in life, has one direction intended specifically for him, that is, “his own” path.

A person is born with an individual set of intellectual and emotional inclinations, which are subsequently transformed into abilities, interests, motives for behavior and activity. By engaging precisely in those spheres of life for which he has the necessary inclinations, a person turns out to be the most trainable. It develops faster and demonstrates success, obviously exceeding the average level. We will designate this hypothetical set of inclinations as development potential.

At the pragmatic level, a life path that, according to its conditions and requirements for a person, fully corresponds to its development potential, can be interpreted as subjectively optimal. At the metaphorical level, it is nothing more than a deep-psychological readiness for some purely individual mission, for the realization of which this person came to this world for the benefit of others and for his own pleasure.

The predestination of the life path, unfortunately, does not mean its obvious predestination. The path is chosen by a person based on rational grounds or by the will of circumstances, that is, for reasons that have practically nothing to do with his real inclinations. Therefore, selection errors are highly probable. In youth, they are inevitable, since the experience of testing oneself in various activities is still small, and the accuracy of self-understanding is minimal. The flexibility of the developing psyche, in principle, allows young people to adapt to any, even the most unsuitable type of occupation.

The fallacy of the chosen direction of life becomes expressed in adulthood. Prolonged following the "not one's own" path leads to a gap between conscious behavior and the needs inherent in the development potential. This gap is subjectively expressed in the appearance of dysphoric experiences and increased neuropsychic tension.

The most striking manifestations of adult “nonsense” are the so-called “burnout syndrome” in professions related to public activities, as well as the “mid-life crisis”, attributed by various authors to the age range from 35 to 45 years. The peculiarity of this crisis is that it gradually forms in socially and psychologically well-off people. The psychological discomfort that grows as the crisis develops has no logical basis for them for a long time: in the subjective sense, individually everything in life is good, but in general it is bad. The disguise of the internal cause of discomfort makes it impossible to purposefully combat it and ultimately leads to extraordinary actions and behavior.

In the evolution of the animal world, some differences have developed in the mental makeup of the male and female individuals, which are significant for the problem we are discussing. In particular, we are talking about the lower average pliability to learning, the rigidity of the ways of mental activity and behavior, the narrow orientation of the inclinations of the development potential in the male individual. Because of this, men are much more likely to not discover "their" path and are not able to fully adapt to the path they have already embarked on.

The first step out of the crisis towards "one's own" path is the awareness of the dysphoric states experienced as a consequence of the systemic crisis of one's life as such, and not as a situationally formed set of particular difficulties. With all the relativity of subjective self-assessment, we can recommend for self-diagnosis several sensory (i.e., formed by the subconscious) indicators that reveal the fact of following a life “not one’s own” path:

1. Feeling of persistent bad luck, "everything goes against ...". The experience of failure is due to the fact that the “not one’s own” goal, the goal that lies outside the “own” path, does not trigger the work of subconscious thinking. Thus, the results of the work of conscious thinking are not supplemented by generalized data (for the entire amount of information available in a person's experience on the problem being solved) in the form of intuition. Limiting the information basis of the decision being made to only its conscious part sharply reduces the adequacy of planning and causes the resulting low success of the action.

2. Tiredness of achievements, unpleasant fatigue as a constant experience. The tediousness of “not one’s own” action is explained by the fact that the subconscious mind denies it a direct interest as the most effective stimulator of working capacity, and the activity performed mainly due to volitional tension is extremely energy-consuming and therefore tiring.

3. Lack of full satisfaction (joy, pride, jubilation) upon achieving success, joylessness of long-awaited events or victories. The subjective bleakness of success can be considered the most accurate indication of the fallacy of the actions taken. It can be understood as a message from the subconscious that the goal achieved was not truly “yours”. Therefore, there is no achievement in the sense of moving along the individual life path, and therefore the emotional reinforcement of the work done is not included.

The deep meaning of these indicators lies in the fact that they unobtrusively create such subjective conditions that push a person to abandon activities that, according to their requirements and likely results, are “not their own”.

The mechanism of the crisis is the loss of dynamism in the development of personality. The uncertainty of one's own "I" and one's future is the leading problem of youth. She decides by testing herself in various cases and situations (hence the teenage “I want to know everything”, “I have to try everything in life”). As a result of such efforts, the young man is gradually determined by what he is. And thus falls into psychological trap with far-reaching consequences. His subjective “I” becomes a very local territory, reliably cut off from the “not-I” (from uncertainty) by prohibitions and self-prohibitions. The overdetermination of the present is precisely what becomes, over time, the leading problem of adulthood. The cessation of changes in oneself and in the world is the end of life.

Part of the general loss of psychological dynamism is the ossification of the picture of the surrounding world. In fact, as many people as there are in some way different pictures of the world, including those that are directly opposite in their fundamental positions, and ideas about each other's personality. However, for any adult it seems self-evident and does not need any justification that his ideas about himself and the world around him are quite accurate and, most importantly, objective, and any deviations from them in a life partner are evidence of his poor knowledge of the “real” world. life, weakness of mind or dishonesty.

Under these circumstances, the situation of a person experiencing a mid-life crisis is truly dramatic. All his attempts to logically correct his bleak life are fundamentally doomed to failure. The diffuse experience that “everything is not as it should”, the feeling of “loss of the meaning of life” arises because, with these ideas about one’s capabilities in this subjective world, the desire for a “correct” life (energetic, efficient and joyful) in principle cannot be satisfied.

The specific forms in which an adult finds "his" way of life can be infinitely varied. Therefore, we outline at least the main stages of such an acquisition. It seems that, in an expanded form, the search for a path consists of three successive stages: awareness of the crisis, self-identification, reorientation.

The realization that life has come to a standstill and that further existence in its former form is impossible requires considerable courage from a person. Moreover, the subconscious, performing its protective function, exposes to consciousness a set of “obvious” minor problems (I am such an anxious person ... relations with employees do not add up ... children do not obey me ... etc.). It is much easier for a consciousness that has ceased to change to delve into any set of petty pseudo-problems for an infinitely long time than to understand that it is impossible to live like this any longer. At the peak of experiencing the meaninglessness of their existence, every adult has a choice of three solutions:

1. Fear the inevitable upheavals of the old way of life, "pull yourself together" and pretend that everything is in order. Frantically do something: work, fishing, order in the house, reading, etc. In fact, this is the path of a good degradation of the soul, its necrosis, after which the destruction of the body (high blood pressure, heart attack, stroke, ulcer, hormonal disorders) wait won't force itself for a very long time.

2. “Knock out a wedge with a wedge”, drown out the sense of the meaninglessness of life with more intense experiences. The wretchedness of the goal itself gives rise to the wretchedness of the means used in this: alcohol, the desire for risk as such, a riotous lifestyle, less often drug use. Suicide is the most radical of the means of this kind.

3. Start consistently destroying your former world. In the shell of familiar ideas, of course, it’s bad - it’s stuffy, and musty, and cramped. But, on the other hand, it protects against the unknown and the dangers and hardships associated with it. Therefore, anyone who decides to free himself from it must be prepared for the fact that at first “freedom” he will be met mainly only by new difficulties and problems. True, they will be qualitatively different than in his past world.

Self-identification consists in a complete, active and, accordingly, not distorted expression outside and awareness of one's "I". Everyone is probably familiar with bittersweet thoughts like: "Oh, if I could only ... (some subjectively attractive action), but ... (motivation why this should not be done)." Until everything attractive is really tried, illusions cannot be separated from truth. Only by fully expressing yourself outside can you fully see if it is you.

Communication with a professional psychologist (consultant, psychotherapist) can significantly help speed up self-identification. Not "voiced" judgments about oneself and the world can remain inconsistent and contradictory for an arbitrarily long time - the person himself does not notice this. As for solving many other problems, for accurate self-understanding, an external action (story) directed to the outside world (at the consultant) is necessary. The task of the consultant in this case is to serve as a smart mirror in which the client can see himself without the usual distortions, retouching and “white spots”.

Reorientation is understood as a search (discovery for oneself) of a new orienting basis in the perception and assessment of the circumstances and situations of the world. As long as a person looks around him with “old” eyes, he will be able to see only what he saw before: the old world, the old problems, the old inability to somehow solve them. A person trying to get out of a life crisis is sure to ask a consultant: “So what should I do?”. But the complexity of the answer lies precisely in the fact that the entire set of actions available to this person at the moment is an organic element of his former life, and their use can only lead to its temporary resuscitation. The only adequate action in a crisis is the rejection of stereotypical for oneself, "obvious" and "objectively determined" expectations, attitudes and reactions.

Mistakes in the choice and subsequent correction of a subjectively optimal life path are inevitable and, in this sense, normal. Overcoming a life crisis (with the help of its awareness, self-identification, reorientation) leads to a more complete and accurate understanding of "one's" path, experiencing the meaningfulness of one's life and satisfaction with it.

§ 18.7. CONDITIONALLY-COMPENSATORY WAYS IN SELF-REALIZATION

One of the most important is self-realization in the field of professional activity. For various reasons, self-realization can take the path of conditional compensation for the subjective complexity of professional activity.

In this area, the phenomenon of "emotional burnout" among psychotherapists involved in conducting socio-psychological training is known. It consists in the gradual loss by the therapist of the ability to be steadily and diversely included by his emotions in the training process. Experienced doctors have a specific "detachment" from the experiences and suffering of the patient when they perform the necessary, but painful medical procedures. The same "detachment" can be characteristic of law enforcement officials who perform some standard actions against violators.

We have described the most complete professional-specific mechanisms of psychological defense for major political figures, high-ranking civil servants. As a result of observing their behavior and public speaking, at least three specific types were identified. defense mechanisms. The following conditional names were used to designate them: “I am exceptional”, “Life is a game” and “Everything is bad with you”.

Defense mechanism "I – exceptional". The difficulty of moving up the career ladder pushes people who have achieved certain success along this path to perceive themselves as not quite ordinary, in some way especially gifted, different from ordinary people. The higher the rank occupied by a person in any hierarchical system, the less he is inclined to identify himself with the "people", with the "masses". Senior officials in a large organization, as a rule, stop listening to advice "from below", completely relying on their own personal experience and intuition.

The reason for the appearance of this kind of experience is the mismatch between the enormous difficulty of achieving a high status and the real possibility of losing it at once.

The emerging experience of one's own exclusivity and therefore fundamental indispensability at the helm of power serves to reduce this kind of anxiety. A private, but quite indicative example of the operation of the mechanism under consideration is the excessive attention that is currently being paid by the supreme power to the fate of the remains of the last Russian emperor and his family: only he, as the supreme leader, alone (out of hundreds of thousands of people who died without a trace in that period) is recognized as capable of becoming "a symbol of repentance and reconciliation."

The defense mechanism "You're doing badly." Its action is closely connected with the very essence of the phenomenon of leadership. A leader is a figure that emerges in a difficult environment for the sake of overcoming a problem that is significant for them by a group of people. Therefore, it is much easier to lead when the group, the population is clearly bad, when anxiety and confusion dominate in the socio-psychological climate, but there is still hope for a favorable outcome. A striking example of this may be some Russian leaders who act decisively and effectively in public only in extreme situations type of putsch, election campaign. Such situations are their element. It is here, on the verge of life and death, that they acquire justified popularity among the masses. When ordinary, “sluggish” life comes, these leaders disappear from television screens, become socially passive, from time to time attracting the attention of society with unexpected and not always adequate actions.

A significant part of the people in power are not psychologically true leaders. They “went into power” and ended up in it, in a sense, situationally - such is the troubled time. It is for such leaders that an involuntary desire to create for themselves more comfortable conditions for activity is characteristic by strengthening, forcing, and in part provoking neuropsychic tension among others. AT public speaking As a leader, an obvious indicator of such a desire is the fixation on depiction, sometimes grotesque, of already existing problems, troubles and difficulties, but especially predicted, additional hardships for the population.

Protective mechanism "Life is a game". The well-being of very large groups of the population largely depends on the actions and decisions of the holders of power. Erroneous or insufficiently professional actions of the former may pose a threat to the integrity and stability of the state. Constant awareness of this would be a powerful stressor for them. The psychological mechanism “Life is a game” serves as protection against it: many leaders form an attitude towards their activities as a specific game for a limited circle of people. And like any game, it can be played successfully or with mistakes and defeats. But in any case, it really affects the interests of only those who play. For any active participant in the game, its rules and conditions, the behavior of other players, etc. are very important. And therefore, it is quite natural that in the speeches of political leaders of various ranks, the share of statements on intra-party, factional issues, on political personalities, regulations is exceptionally large. and procedures, the removal and appointment of certain personalities, that is, in fact, on technological ("game") moments that are not directly related to the interests and needs of voters.

Psychological defense mechanisms formed at an involuntary level are an important integral part systemic adaptation of a person to the general and specific conditions of his life and activity. The conditionally compensatory nature of this form psychological adaptation gives it a primary focus on maintaining the subjective comfort of the individual, and not on the objective tasks of activity. Timely detection of the action of protective mechanisms, the establishment of the reasons for their launch serve as prerequisites for increasing the efficiency of activity while maintaining the integrity and harmony of the "I".

Having set the concept of communicative competence as the willingness and ability to use resources to organize and implement effective communicative actions, it is necessary to determine the set of content components. Dispositions, knowledge and skills will be sequentially considered as candidates for this role.

Personal dispositions. When solving the problems of improving and developing communicative competence, it is practically impossible to be guided by a limited understanding of the concept of communicative competence (quite appropriate, for example, in diagnostics for the purposes of professional selection), reducing its content to a set of communicative skills and abilities, although it is advisable to consider the latter as the core or core formation of the entire systems of communicative competence. An expanded understanding of the content of communicative competence can be found among those who are engaged in practical work on the development of communicative competence, even when it appears under other names. For example, F. Burnard, discussing the problems of training interpersonal skills, specifically and repeatedly emphasizes the need to work with what he calls personal qualities, namely: work on the development of warmth, sincerity, empathy and goodwill [Burnard, 2001, p. 19–25, 30]. I. Atvater, speaking about the skills of active listening, emphasizes the role of attitudes towards a communication partner (such as a positive attitude towards a partner and empathy), without which the use of techniques in itself does not give the desired effectiveness [Atwater, 1988, p. 54–58].

For L. Petrovskaya, the concept of a social attitude (relationship) in characterizing competence in communication is, apparently, one of the central ones. It is directly included in the definition of what she understands as competence in communication [Petrovskaya, 1989, p. nine]. In other places, she notes the importance of "the desire to understand the partner's position", setting on "comprehensiveness of perception, evaluation of the partner" [Petrovskaya, 1989, p. 87], among the effects of the training, the attitude “to social and psychological activity” and the humanistic attitude “to a communication partner” are noted and analyzed [Ibid., p. 118–128].

M. Argyle includes in the concept of social competence even such stable character formations as extraversion and emotional stability. Argyle's reasoning for classifying character traits as components of competence stems from his way of selecting components into his criteria-based empirical model. Since both extraversion, emotional stability, and the desire for dominance, according to a number of empirical studies, are positively associated with two of the three competency criteria (popularity and leadership effectiveness), they were included in his list. There is every reason to consider personal dispositions among the candidates for inclusion in the components of communicative competence. Another thing is that a thorough study of the grounds for the inclusion of certain personal formations in the composition of communicative competence is necessary. The question of whether personality traits, and even more so traits of temperament and character, belong to communicative competence is rather controversial. The fact is that such formations as character traits and temperament, as a rule, are associated with the productivity of solving various problems in a far from simple way. There is reason to believe that there is some optimum (and even optima) for the severity of such traits, at which the efficiency will be the highest. This is evidenced by the numerous data obtained by the laboratory of V. Merlin in the study of the relationship between the productivity of activity and the characteristics of temperament [Merlin, 1981], and some work carried out in other directions. In this regard, the results of one of A. Zhuravlev's studies are of the greatest interest. This study is very relevant both to one of Argyle's criteria and to one of the components of his model. Zhuravlev showed that the success of the leader's activity is related to the degree of his extroversion curvilinearly, and the nature of this relationship is described by an inverted W-shaped curve. In other words, there are two optimal zones of extraversion severity (moderate extraversion and moderate introversion), in which leaders have the highest efficiency; extreme extraversion and introversion, as well as their complete balance (ambiversion), are associated with reduced success [Zhuravlev, 1985]. Apparently, the relationship between certain differential psychological characteristics and the effectiveness shown in different types of activity does not always have to have a similar form, or it must always be curvilinear. But it would also be naive to assume, as Argyll did in fact, that connections of this kind can be regarded as linear.

Knowledge. The content of the concept of communicative competence must include knowledge; knowledge about the rules of behavior in certain communicative situations (knowledge of local etiquette), knowledge of signs for recognizing the situations themselves and individual episodes, knowledge about the patterns of the flow of certain communicative processes, and much more. The inclusion of knowledge in the composition of competencies is indisputable, in any case, not unconditional. With a narrow interpretation of the concept of competence (competence), knowledge in itself is not considered as an element or component of competence. It is not the presence of knowledge that is recognized as important, but the fact of its use in the performance of certain actions. In other words, the form of existence of knowledge is critical; competence is not related to knowledge for reproduction, but knowledge manifested in behavior. It is difficult to agree with the exclusion of knowledge from the content of the concept of communicative competence or with the inclusion in it of only those types of knowledge that are most directly manifested in behavior. Such restrictions essentially narrow our possibilities in the analysis of the content and structure of such education as communicative competence. Thus, knowledge of the rules of etiquette and the form of awareness of these rules are most directly related to the level of communicative competence [Zhukov, 1988]. If a person does not know the rules of local etiquette at all, then he will violate them in a very noticeable way, which will inevitably indicate to everyone around him his complete incompetence and force them to somehow recognize him as incompetent in a certain circle of social situations. Knowledge-in-Action, i.e., unconscious adherence to the rules, is the next, higher level of development of communicative competence. This form of existence of knowledge ensures the recognition of the rights of the individual to full participation in various forms of social interaction, but nothing more. Awareness of the system of rules of the social episode and the social situation as a whole gives the individual much more. In this case, he gets the opportunity for a meaningful selective violation of the rules, since following the rules “does not say anything” (except that the individual is a full-fledged participant in communication), and their violation forces others to somehow interpret such violations. By guiding the direction and manner of interpretations with appropriate explanations, the individual can expand his possibilities of influence. The foregoing is enough to accept the need to include knowledge in the field of attention and take into account the form of their existence in the analysis of communicative competence. At the same time, it should be emphasized that we are talking not only about knowledge of the “know-how” type, that is, knowledge of recipes for action. The cognitive resources of interpretation, the interpretation of one's own and others' behavior, the essence and meaning of a communicative situation and a social episode, are of no less, and perhaps even greater importance. Here we mean not only interpretation for oneself, which is necessary for a full understanding of one's position, but also interpretation for others, more precisely, the possibility of full participation in the development of a joint interpretation of what is happening. And the main interpretive resource is knowledge, in whatever form it exists: in the form of scientific knowledge, common sense or mythological knowledge.

There is another layer of knowledge that is related to the process of competence formation and does not belong to either know-how knowledge or interpretation resources. This is a class of processual or didactic knowledge. This is a system of representations, desirable or even necessary, at the time of constructing a system of actions and optional during their execution. This class of knowledge includes knowledge of grammar, knowledge of the periodic table of chemical elements, knowledge of the general scheme of urban transport [Levin, 2001, p. 262]. This kind of knowledge fulfills its role at the stage of preliminary orientation and becomes unnecessary or redundant after the system of actions has developed and improved. If we turn to the problem of communicative competence, then here we can name all kinds of psychotechnical myths [Ivanov, Masterov, 1999], didactic schemes such as the “Johary window”, the Blake and Mouton models, the ABCs of transactional analysis and other developments that have been successfully used for several decades in work to improve communication skills [Lopukhina, Lopatin, 1986; Filonovich, 2000]. The functions of such representations and schemes are akin to the functions of scaffolding in the construction of buildings. Being necessary during construction, they become more than unnecessary in the operation of what has already been built.

The need for a special discussion of the role of knowledge in the formation and improvement of communicative competence is due to the fact that a completely different approach has the right to exist in other areas of competence. This primarily applies to technical competencies. It is quite possible to successfully master the skills of using household appliances, industrial equipment and apparatus based on step-by-step instructions and even observing the actions of those who have already mastered all this technology before. One can even imagine, albeit with great difficulty, that there is a possibility of successfully mastering the skills of repairing all this equipment. A completely different matter is social skills and abilities. Firstly, as noted above, in addition to the correct execution of a series of body movements, there is a need to explain or signify the meaning of the actions performed for others, which is very difficult, if not impossible, without relying on fairly well-articulated knowledge. Secondly, the degree of standardization and unification of industrial products continues to be several orders of magnitude higher than the standardization of social life, no matter what the anti-globalists say about the latter. And this means that the mechanical reproduction of well-learned body movements in a not very rigidly structured, and, moreover, rapidly changing social situation will not always lead to success. What has been said is enough to leave any doubts about whether knowledge should be included in the composition of full-fledged components of communicative competence. Another thing is that when assessing the degree of perfection of competence for the tasks of professional selection, there is no need to build procedures for extracting knowledge from the assessed ones every time. In most cases, it is sufficient to assess the perfection of skills, since it is clear that in these circumstances it is impossible to effectively perform without the necessary knowledge. At the same time, the diagnosis of competence for learning tasks in some cases requires an assessment of knowledge, since it is not always clear what is the reason for the unsatisfactory performance of a communicative action - the lack of the necessary knowledge or the inability to apply it. It is quite understandable why a narrow interpretation of the concept of competence (as the sum of competencies) is popular among those involved in professional selection. It is equally understandable why this narrow interpretation is strongly criticized by those involved in learning and development.

Communication skills. As for skills and abilities, there are almost no discrepancies between representatives of different schools and approaches - almost everyone agrees that skills and abilities are not only necessary, but also the most important components of any kind of competence. It should be noted that in relation to the concept of communicative competence, it is preferable to use the term skills. The concept of skill is often associated with highly automated systems of body movements, which, with rare exceptions, do not play an important role in the processes of interpersonal communication.

But if there are no differences in general, then there is a noticeable scatter of opinions about what should be the specific composition of the skills included in the content of the concept of communicative or interpersonal competence. In most North American guidelines for the development of communication skills, a block of general and special skills is distinguished. General skills are divided into speaking skills and listening skills. Both in those and in others, verbal and non-verbal components are distinguished. It is customary to give priority to listening skills and non-verbal behavior. The predominant attention to listening is explained by the fact that this set of skills is not formed within the framework of the traditional system of education. The emphasis on non-verbal components of interpersonal behavior is due to the uncontrollability of most reactions of this type on the part of consciousness. Among the special skills most often distinguished are the ability to conduct interviews with new hires, organize production meetings, conduct presentations, conduct a business conversation, instruct subordinates [Blandel, 2000; Layhiff, Penrose, 2001].

At the level of a more fractional division of communicative skills, significant differences can be found between different authors. So, in the manual of L. Hune and R. Hune, the block of listening skills is divided into the following components: determining the goals of listening, choosing listening techniques, organizing attention, analyzing content, and organizing effective feedback. In I. Atvater's book, the main sections are designated as follows: organization of attention, skills for empathic listening, skills for active listening, possession of non-verbal communication, organization of memorization. The same block in the manual by A. Sanford et al. is presented in the form of four subblocks: listening to develop a response, listening to understand, perception of the communicator's personality, and the formation of a sense of belonging. Paradoxical as it may seem at first glance, but at an even more detailed level, that is, when describing specific techniques, the degree of uniformity increases again. Almost all manuals describe eye contact techniques, non-verbal speech accompaniment, the “echo” technique (repeating key phrases after the speaker), paraphrase technique (repeating the meaning of the partner’s statement in other words), etc. . Apparently, it is at this level that such a degree of differentiation of communicative acts has been achieved, a further increase in which leads to the loss of the semantic content of the distinguished components.

The situation on the European continent looks somewhat more mixed. In presenting their views on the composition of the necessary skills, some authors adhere to approximately the same position as their overseas colleagues. Indicative in this regard is the position of the well-known British specialist in the field of training F. Burnard. Burnard gives a list of communication (interpersonal) skills, consisting of the ability to conduct consultations, the ability to work with a group (facilitation), the ability to give and take interviews, the skills of confident (assertive) behavior, the skills of writing, the ability to conduct telephone conversations. As basic skills, he highlights such as counseling skills (including active and empathic listening), interviewing skills, the ability to work in a group context (including the ability to facilitate), and assertiveness skills. At a more detailed level, such types of skills as the ability to maintain eye contact, the ability to express one’s feelings and reflect the feelings of others, the ability to ask questions and listen to answers, the ability to say “Yes” and “No”, the ability to work with non-verbal communication signals, the ability to give assessment of oneself, others, group, process, events [Burnar, 2001; 2002].

But you can also see differences. Some European researchers, primarily in the UK, Germany and Italy, prefer to give lists that are more focused on research and theory than teaching practice. M. Argyle is best known in this area. In his criteria-empirical model, he cites a number of social skills that do not appear in the lists of North American authors. This is due to the peculiarity of building a model of social competence. This model was built on the basis of clearly explicated criteria and a basic principle. Three criteria were taken: popularity (including sociometric); leadership effectiveness; social adaptation. Certain social skills were included in the components of social competence if and only if several published studies found statistically significant associations of these skills with at least one of the specified criteria. Based on this principle, the list includes such skills as: the ability to reward (give positive feedback), the skills of "soft" ("enveloping") interaction, interpersonal sensitivity, the ability to put oneself in the place of another, the skills of appropriate self-presentation.

R. Harre identifies a special class of skills related to the planning of one's communicative actions based on the understanding of social situations and the meaning of individual social episodes. He pays special attention to the ability to interpret the actions of other people and the ability to explain to others the meaning of their own actions. These classes of skills are distinguished not so much on an empirical basis, but on the basis of the version of the theory of human action that he develops, which is a fusion of behavioral and analytical approaches. Another well-known theorist working in the field of analysis of communicative actions, J. Habermas, almost does not use such concepts as communicative skills and habits, preferring the term "social-cognitive equipment of action". Nevertheless, de facto, he identifies as the main skills such as the ability to take into account the position of the immediate partner in communication and the position of the wider social environment. In addition, it is important for him to have the skills with which one or another participant in communication substantiates his claims to full participation in the communicative discourse [Habermas, 2000].

Many domestic psychologists do not consider behavioral skills as a central link or core component of communicative competence. Quite characteristic is the point of view that Yu. Emelyanov explicitly expressed: “The key ways to improve communicative competence should be sought not in polishing behavioral skills and not in risky attempts at personal reconstruction, but on the ways of active awareness by the individual of natural interpersonal situations and of himself as a participant in these activity situations, on the path of development of socio-psychological imagination, which allows you to see the world from the point of view of other people" [Emelyanov, 1985, p. 56]. Elsewhere, he uses the pejorative characterization “training of social skills” to characterize behavioral methods [Ibid., p. 54]. At the same time, the importance of skills as such is not denied, but the emphasis is on skills of a different kind, primarily on skills that provide understanding of the communicative situation. Emelyanov has the ability to put himself in the place of another person [p. 56], possession of non-verbal means of communication [p. 102], the ability to work with feedback [p. 105]. A similar position is taken by L. Petrovskaya. In her opinion, socio-psychological training solves two groups of tasks: the development of special skills such as the ability to conduct a discussion or resolve interpersonal conflicts and deepen the experience of analyzing situations of communication, i.e., increasing the adequacy of analyzing oneself, a communication partner, a group situation as a whole [ Petrovskaya, 1982, p. 103]. Among the specific skills she stands out diagnostic skills, as well as the ability to express their feelings and listen to the interlocutor [Petrovskaya, 1989, p. 86–87]. In another place, she notes the importance of the ability to build contact at different psychological distances [Petrovskaya, 1999, p. 152] and the ability to flexibly change one's position [Ibid., p. 154–155]. According to Petrovskaya, the skills associated with giving and receiving feedback play a special role in the development of competence [Petrovskaya, 1982, p. 122–138; 1989, p. 23-26, 142-194]. The importance of the ability to work with feedback is also indicated by M. Klarin. You should immediately highlight in the list of skills those that are fundamental (fundamental), nuclear (part of many synthetic skills) and special (optional). The former include such skills as the ability to work with feedback, since only on the basis of these skills is it possible to fully master and further improve other skills. As core skills, it is necessary to consider the ability to listen and the ability to clearly express one's thoughts. Special skills include such as the possession of mimic-pantomimic accompaniment of speech during a public speech.

So, to solve the problems of training and development, it makes sense to consider the composition of communicative competence as a set of knowledge, skills and dispositions (attitudes and predispositions), and it is precisely for the tasks of formation, improvement and correction, since for other tasks it would be more appropriate to define this content in a different way. . For example, as it was already mentioned above, when carrying out diagnostics of competence for the purposes of professional selection, it is advisable to limit ourselves to highlighting only those components that, firstly, are symptomatic, and secondly, are more accessible for instrumental operationalization (meaning the possibility of using the established methodological device that meets the standards of reliability and validity).

The definition of the component composition in itself is a necessary, but not the final stage in the conceptualization of ideas about the content of communicative competence. It is important to establish links (subordination, coordination, temporal, genetic) between the selected components. Then it will be possible to talk about building models to solve certain theoretical or practical tasks, analytical or constructive tasks.

Building models of communicative competence in this study carried out theoretically, i.e. based on conceptual concepts developed in science. As such representations, first of all, those that describe the process of generation and regulation of human action were used. The main sources for constructing models were the concepts of R. Harre, V. Zinchenko [Zinchenko, 1991; 1996] and P. Ershov [Ershov, 1959; 1972]. In the theory of regulation of human action developed by R. Harre, D. Clark and N. Decarlo, it was especially significant for us to single out the constitutive and regulatory hierarchy and to single out three main levels of the functioning of the psyche; in the concept of the structure of Zinchenko's action, the most valuable idea turned out to be the idea of ​​various forms of awareness and comprehension of various parts overall composition actions [Zinchenko, 1991; 1996]; in the stage picture of the unfolding of the action, the description of the change in behavioral patterns during the transition from one stage of action to another turned out to be essential for our purposes [Ershov, 1959; 1972]. The choice of these sources as the basis for building models is due, firstly, to the fact that all of them, as basic concept use the category of action and, secondly, contain unambiguous criteria that allow one to clearly distinguish individual components or components of one or another model. For the level model, such a criterion is the way the content of the action is represented in consciousness (both the fact of representation itself and the form of awareness), for the process model, it is a change in behavioral patterns. The use of the above approaches as a conceptual framework made it possible to outline the general contours of the models, their content content was carried out on the basis of the earlier analysis of the component composition of communicative competence.

Level model of communicative competence. As a basis for constructing such a model, we will use the concept of the level structure of the mechanisms for generating and regulating communicative actions. And as the first, "fundamental" level, we denote what is called the operational composition of communicative actions. At this level, communicative competence is described as a set of knowledge and skills necessary for successful communication. It includes "knowledge" of the rules of behavior in typical social situations and a fairly wide range of communication techniques ("repertoire of interpersonal reactions"). In addition to purely technical equipment, it is necessary to include here what can be called a sense of relevance (“reactive sensitivity”), which is expressed in the ability to “play along” with a partner and is only partially explained by knowledge of the rules of communicative etiquette. You can designate all of the above as a technical level, or a level of communication techniques.

The ability to operate with existing knowledge and skills to solve communication problems belongs to another level, which can be called operational-tactical. If the units of analysis at the level of techniques were knowledge and skills, then, characterizing the tactical level, one can speak of skills and understanding. This refers to the ability to plan and carry out communicative actions based on an understanding of a holistic communicative situation, including the vision of opportunities to achieve goals that open and close during the deployment of interaction. This level includes not only the ability to adjust one's actions in connection with a changing situation, but also the ability to transform the situation by one's actions if it becomes unfavorable for solving the tasks set.

The characterization of the level organization of communicative competence would be incomplete if we do not mention communicative attitudes, orientations and predispositions, such as orientation towards open or closed communication, attitude towards manipulation, and similar formations. Here we inevitably go into areas that are in contact with and even included in what is appropriate to call the sphere of personal competence. But this is how it should be, because it would be strange to call someone communicatively competent who solves the situation amazingly well and achieves his goals in a way that ultimately causes harm to him, significantly exceeding the momentary gain received; or someone who is looking for difficult paths where there is a towed road. Those formations that provide a trans-situational orientation in communications and are responsible for understanding the place and role of a particular social episode in a person's life constitute the strategic level of communicative competence.

What a person will do or is already doing is determined at the operational-tactical level, but how he will do it and what it may ultimately lead to is determined in completely different places. A feature of the tactical level is also the fact that it is he who is most illuminated by the light of consciousness. Strictly speaking, the degree of awareness is the criterion for attributing certain processes to one level or another. The technical level consists of components that are unconscious, as they say, by definition, since they are predominantly highly automated skills and background knowledge (implicit assumptions, axiomatics of communication) - skills such as the ability to adjust the volume of speech to the distance from the interlocutor and the noise level in the room; such knowledge as the knowledge that if you call out to a good friend you accidentally see, he will definitely greet you somehow. A person is aware of some part of his technical resources, he does not even guess about others. But in this case, the critical thing is not whether the individual will include certain knowledge or skills in the list of his communicative resources, but whether he is aware of the application of this knowledge and skills in the process of their actual use.

The formations attributable to the strategic level are just as implicit as the components of the operational-technical level, but for a different reason. AT classical psychoanalysis the content of the Super-I is declared fundamentally unconscious in connection with the method of its formation. The point is rather not that communicative attitudes are fundamentally unconscious, but that they are virtually uncontested and do not require the inclusion of a mechanism of conscious choice. Here, as in the case of the components of communicative technology, again, it is not important whether this or that person guesses about his beliefs, beliefs, aspirations, motives, predispositions, orientations and inclinations. The bottom line is that they direct his thoughts and actions and at the same time do not bother to "timely" notify him of this. At the moment of their impact on consciousness, they are not accountable to this very consciousness.

Returning to the general scheme of the level structure of communicative competence, one should agree that this construction at first glance appears as a traditional hierarchical structure. At the same time, the relations of subordination do not always and not in everything coincide with the relations of influence. In a sense, the tactical level works like a "servant of two masters", developing a plan of action based on both the strategic line and the available technical resources.

The presented picture of the structure of communicative competence, i.e., the relative position of its components, helps to highlight the directions in which work can be deployed to improve this very competence. Firstly, it is an inventory, as well as the expansion and enrichment of the repertoire of communication techniques and the multiplication of the fund of knowledge in the field of local (linked to specific social situations) communication etiquette. Secondly, this is the development of experience in building behavior plans and their implementation in solving various communicative tasks. Thirdly, this is an analysis of existing supra-situational attitudes and orientations, as well as behavioral predispositions, and, if it is deemed necessary, work to correct their content and orientation. In addition, a three-level representation of the composition of communicative competence allows us to see two main ways of improvement, based on the concept of expanding consciousness. This is a temporary expansion of the boundaries of the operational-tactical level with the inclusion of components of the upper and lower levels in its composition. The upward path is characteristic of those types of training that are associated with the concept personal growth. The downward extension is inherent in what is called instrumental training.

Process (microgenetic) model. Level analysis largely clarifies the composition and method of interrelations of the components of communicative competence, but does not give a complete picture. It should be supplemented by a procedural analysis, which describes the actual genesis (or microgenesis) of a communicative action. With an extremely enlarged analysis, three phases, or stages, of the deployment of a communicative action are distinguished: determining the situation, forming an action plan, executing the plan with making corrections along the way. Each of the phases, in turn, can be divided into separate subphases. Thus, the first phase breaks down into such components as the identification of an event constituting the core of the situation; assessment of the event and the situation as a whole; interpretation of what is happening. The plan formation phase, in turn, can be subdivided into such components as goal setting (goals), resource assessment, and the formation of the operational composition of the action. In the executive phase, it is advisable to single out the execution of the plan itself, corrections (associated with both execution errors and changes in the situation) and explanatory activity (accompaniment), i.e. those elements of behavior that are not determined by the goal, but contribute to the understanding of the action by others.

Joint consideration of the results of level and process analyzes allows us to identify two main problems of improving communicative competence. This is, firstly, the problem of understanding the communicative situation and, secondly, the problem of managing one's behavior. At the same time, understanding the situation and managing behavior should be considered quite broadly. Thus, the understanding of a communicative situation includes not only its categorization, i.e., the definition of a genre or an appropriate type of communication, but also a vision of opportunities and limitations for realizing one’s goals and intentions; determining the motives and goals of the behavior of other people; anticipation of the consequences of certain options for the implementation of their actions, both in the current situation and in a wider context. As for the problem of managing one's behavior, this is, first of all, the movement from field behavior to more autonomous and at the same time more social, which implies the ability to decenter, take into account the interests and needs of other people, including the need to understand the goals and intentions of the subject communicative action. From this it is clear that both these problems are not separated by impenetrable barriers and it is difficult to count on the successful resolution of one of them without significant progress in resolving the other.

In order for communication to be productive and contribute to the achievement of goals when communicating with people, each specialist in his professional activity must have communicative competence.

Communicative competence is a system of internal components necessary to create effective communication in a certain range of situations as a result of interpersonal interaction. Competence in communication has universal human characteristics and, at the same time, characteristics that are historically and culturally determined.

Competence in communication implies the willingness and ability to build contact at different psychological distances - both distant and close. Difficulties can sometimes be associated with the inertia of the position - the possession of any one of them and its implementation everywhere, regardless of the nature of the partner and the uniqueness of the situation. In general, competence in communication is usually associated with mastering not any one position as the best, but with adequate familiarization with their spectrum. Flexibility in an adequate change of psychological positions is one of the essential indicators of competent communication.

Competence in all types of communication consists in achieving three levels of adequacy of partners - communicative, interactive and perceptual. Therefore, we can talk about different types of competence in communication. The personality should be aimed at acquiring a rich and diverse palette of psychological positions, means that help the completeness of partners' self-expression, all facets of their adequacy - perceptual, communicative, interactive.

The realization by a person of his subjectivity in communication is associated with the presence of the necessary level of communicative competence.

Communicative competence consists of the ability to:

• 1. Give a socio-psychological forecast of the communicative situation in which to communicate;
• 2. Socio-psychologically program the process of communication, based on the uniqueness of the communicative situation;
• 3. To carry out socio-psychological management of communication processes in a communicative situation.

The forecast is formed in the process of analyzing the communicative situation at the level of communicative attitudes.

The communicative attitude of a partner is a kind of program of personality behavior in the process of communication. The level of attitude can be predicted in the course of identifying: the subject-thematic interests of the partner, emotional and evaluative attitudes to various events, attitudes towards the form of communication, the involvement of partners in the system of communicative interaction. This is determined in the course of studying the frequency of communicative contacts, the type of partner's temperament, his subject-practical preferences, and emotional assessments of forms of communication.

With this approach to the characterization of communicative competence, it is advisable to consider communication as a system-integrating process that has the following components.

• * Communicative-diagnostic (diagnosis of the socio-psychological situation in the context of future communicative activity, identification of possible social, socio-psychological and other contradictions that a person may encounter in communication)
• * Communicative-programming (preparation of a communication program, development of texts for communication, choice of style, position and distance of communication
• * Communicative and organizational (organizing the attention of communication partners, stimulating their communicative activity, etc.)
• * Communicative-executive (diagnosis of a communicative situation in which communication of a person unfolds, a forecast of the development of this situation, carried out according to a previously meaningful individual program of communication).

Each of these components requires a special socio-technological analysis, however, the scope of the presentation of the concept makes it possible to dwell only on the communicative-executive part. It is considered as a communicative and performing skill of the individual.

The communicative-performing skill of a personality manifests itself as two interrelated and yet relatively independent skills to find a communicative structure adequate to the topic of communication, corresponding to the purpose of communication, and the ability to realize a communicative plan directly in communication, i.e. demonstrate the communicative-performing technique of communication. In the communicative and performing skills of the individual, many of her skills are manifested, and above all the skills of emotional and psychological self-regulation as the management of her psychophysical organics, as a result of which the personality achieves an emotional and psychological state adequate to the communicative and executive activities.

Emotional-psychological self-regulation creates a mood for communication in appropriate situations, an emotional mood for a situation of communication, means, first of all, the translation of ordinary human emotions into a tone corresponding to the situation of interaction.

In the process of emotional and psychological self-regulation, three phases should be distinguished: long-term emotional “infection” with the problem, topic, and materials of the upcoming communication situation; emotional and psychological identification at the stage of developing a model of one's behavior and a program for future communication; operational emotional and psychological restructuring in a communication environment.

Emotional and psychological self-regulation acquires the character of a holistic and complete act in unity with perceptual and expressive skills, which also constitute a necessary part of communicative and performing skills. It manifests itself in the ability to sharply, actively respond to changes in the situation of communication, restructure communication, taking into account the change in the emotional mood of partners. Psychological well-being, emotional mood of the individual are directly dependent on the content and effectiveness of communication

The perceptual skills of a person are manifested in the ability to manage their perception and organize it: correctly assess the socio-psychological mood of communication partners; establish the necessary contact; on the first impression to predict the “course” of communication. They allow the individual to correctly assess the emotional and psychological reactions of communication partners and even predict these reactions, avoiding those that will interfere with achieving the goal of communication.

Expressive skills of communicative and performing activity are usually considered as a system of skills that create the unity of voice, facial expressions, visual and motor-physiological-psychological processes. At its core, these are self-government skills in the expressive sphere of communicative and executive activity.

The connection of emotional-psychological self-regulation with expressiveness is an organic connection between the internal and external psychological. This desire provides external behavior, expressive actions of the individual in communication in communication. The expressive skills of the individual are manifested as a culture of speech statements that correspond to the norms of oral speech, gestures and plasticity of postures, emotional and mimic accompaniment of the statement, speech tone and speech loudness.

In various cases of communication, the invariant components are such components as partner-participants, situation, task. Variability is usually associated with a change in the nature of the components themselves - who is the partner, what is the situation or task and the peculiarity of the connections between them.

Communicative competence as knowledge of the norms and rules of communication, possession of its technology, is an integral part of the broader concept of “communicative potential of the individual”

Communicative potential is a characteristic of a person's capabilities, which determine the quality of his communication. It includes, along with competence in communication, two more components: the communicative properties of the individual, which characterize the development of the need for communication, attitude to the method of communication and communication skills - the ability to take initiative in communication, the ability to be active, emotionally respond to the state of communication partners, formulate and to implement their own individual program of communication, the ability to self-stimulation and mutual stimulation in communication.

According to a number of psychologists, we can talk about the communicative culture of the individual as a system of qualities, including:

• 1. Creative thinking;
• 2. Culture of speech action;
• 3. Culture of self-adjustment to communication and psycho-emotional regulation of one's state;
• 4. Culture of gestures and plasticity of movements;
• 5. Culture of perception of communicative actions of a communication partner;
• 6. Culture of emotions.

The communicative culture of the individual, like communicative competence, does not arise from scratch, it is formed. But the basis of its formation is the experience of human communication. The main sources of acquiring communicative competence are: socio-normative experience of folk culture; knowledge of the languages ​​of communication used by folk culture; experience of interpersonal communication in a non-holiday [form] sphere; experience of art. Socio-normative experience is the basis of the cognitive component of the communicative competence of an individual as a subject of communication. At the same time, the real existence of various forms of communication, which are most often based on a socio-normative conglomerate (an arbitrary mixture of communication norms borrowed from different national cultures, introduces a person into a state of cognitive dissonance). And this gives rise to a contradiction between knowledge of the norms of communication in various forms of communication and the way that the situation of a particular interaction offers. Dissonance is a source of individual psychological inhibition of the activity of a person in communication. The person is excluded from the field of communication. There is a field of internal psychological stress. And this creates barriers to human understanding.

The experience of communication occupies a special place in the structure of the communicative competence of the individual. On the one hand, it is social and includes internalized norms and values ​​of culture, on the other hand, it is individual, since it is based on individual communication abilities and psychological events associated with communication in a person's life. The dynamic aspect of this experience is the processes of socialization and individualization, implemented in communication, ensuring the social development of a person, as well as the adequacy of his reactions to the situation of communication and their originality. In communication, the mastery of social roles plays a special role: organizer, participant, etc. communication. And here the experience of perception of art is very important.

Art reproduces the most diverse models of human communication. Acquaintance with these models lays the foundation for the communicative erudition of the individual. Possessing a certain level of communicative competence, a person enters into communication with a certain level of self-respect and self-awareness. The personality becomes a personified subject of communication. This means not only the art of adapting to the situation and freedom of action, but also the ability to organize a personal communicative space and choose an individual communicative distance. Personification of communication is also manifested at the actional level - both as mastery of the code of situational communication, and as a sense of what is acceptable in improvisations, the appropriateness of specific means of communication.

Thus, communicative competence is necessary condition successful realization of personality.

AT scientific literature Several approaches to understanding communicative competence are presented. So, M. A. Vasilyk defines it as follows: “Communicative competence is a certain level of formation of personal and professional experience of interaction with others, which is required for an individual in order to successfully function in a professional environment and society within the framework of his abilities and social status.” F. I. Sharkov understands communicative competence as “the ability to choose a communicative code that ensures adequate perception and purposeful transmission of information in specific situation».
Neither definition can be considered satisfactory due to the following factors. First of all, they do not rely on a basic understanding of the category of competence as such. Meanwhile, in the phrase "communicative competence" the adjective "communicative" is a predicate of the basic concept of "competence". Further, the above definitions are based on not fully adequate ideas about the communicative personality as a social subject that implements communicative practices. The first of the definitions actually expands communicative practices to the entire field of social practices of the individual. As a result, without any argument, the communicative competence of a person is equated to a much broader category - social competence. The second definition, on the contrary, unreasonably narrows the understanding of the category under consideration, reducing it only to the ability to choose communicative codes.
In addition, additional comments can be made on the definition proposed by M. A. Vasilik and his colleagues. If we discard the clarifying elements, this concept represents communicative competence as a certain level of formation of the subject's experience of interaction with other subjects. This interpretation of the category under consideration is vulnerable for several reasons. Firstly, the very linkage of the category of competence with the verbal construction “the level of formation
experience." Secondly, this concept closes communicative competence only to personal experience, leaving out such important components of a communicative personality as knowledge and abilities.
Competence in its most general form is understood as the possession of knowledge that allows one to judge something, to express a weighty authoritative opinion. In a broader sense, competence is the ability of a subject to realize his competence in a particular field of activity.
Competence in this context means a certain area of ​​responsibility, terms of reference, function or set of functions assigned to a social subject in the system of social functioning (social competence) or public division labor (professional competence).
There are two understandings of competence - normative and terminal. Normative understanding interprets the category of competence as a property of a subject to realize his competence within the limits that are socially recognized (normal) in a given society (community). Going beyond the normative interval both from below (undercompetence) and from above (hypercompetence) is considered abnormal and falls under the category of incompetence. With this understanding, the competence of the subject has a certain extended character, and it is possible to raise the question of greater or lesser competence. If the subject realizes his competence at a lower value of the normative interval, he is less competent. If at a higher level, his competence is higher. The terminal understanding of competence interprets the norm not as an interval, but as some strictly specified value. With this approach, only two states of realization of the competence of an individual in any field of activity are possible - competence and incompetence. In the future, we will use the normative understanding of the category of competence. Based on this understanding, we can formulate the so-called metric definition of competence: under the competence of the subject we will
to understand the measure of the implementation of his competence, or, in other words, the characteristics of the quality of the implementation of competence in a particular field of activity. /> Considering the category of competence, we can distinguish between general and special competence.
The first is closely related to the processes of socialization and can also be designated as the social competence of the individual. By general or social competence, we mean the ability of a social subject to function normally (that is, within the range specified by social norms) in society.
Special (professional) competence is the ability of a social subject to function normally (that is, within the range specified by the relevant social norms) in a specialized field of activity and in the professional community, to effectively implement specialized (professional, job, etc.) competence. Special competence is a function of special education, professional socialization and professional experience.
Communicative competence in its most general form can be defined as the ability of a person to function normally (that is, within the range specified by the relevant social norms) as a communicative actor. Or, if we use the metric version of the definition, by communicative competence we mean the quality of the performance of the functions of a communicative actor by a social subject.
Fundamentally important for this understanding of communicative competence is its closeness to the normative range. This isolation means that the category of communicative competence is by its nature relative. Depending on the normative range of this or that element of society, the same person can be recognized as communicatively competent in one community and incompetent in another.
The communicative competence of a person in the general case consists of two components - general and special communicative competence. For most individuals, those whose professional activities are not related to the organization and implementation of communication, general communicative competence coincides with communicative competence as such.

General communicative competence is part of the social competence of the individual. It characterizes the ability of an individual to communicate in various situations and is implemented at the level of everyday communications, everyday practices of information interaction both in everyday life and in the professional sphere. For professional communicators, in addition to the general one, special communicative competence is also required. The latter is a kind of "aerobatics" of communicative knowledge, skills and abilities that a communicator needs to perform professional functions. Special communicative competence, like any special competence, requires special training.
The category of communicative competence should not be confused with the categories of communicative effectiveness or communicative effectiveness. Communicative effectiveness should be understood as the measure of achieving the goal of the communicator as a result of the interaction initiated by him. By communicative efficiency is meant the ratio of communication effects, corresponding to the goal of the communicator, and the resources used by the communicator to achieve these goals in this interaction, reduced to a common denominator (cost or otherwise). In terms of its content, the concept of communicative competence is closest to the concept of communicative qualification of a person.
Turning to the solution of the second of the tasks we have identified for this section, we note that there are even more attempts to form a list of parameters of the communicative competence of a person in the scientific literature than the formulations of the definition of this category. These lists are more or less detailed. So, F. I. Sharkov designates only one parameter - the ability to communicate - as the main component of communicative competence. I. I. Seregina identifies two of its main characteristics - "firstly, the ability to communicate with other people (sociability), and secondly, the possession and ability to operate with semantic information." Auto Team
The ditch under the guidance of M. A. Vasilik offers as many as eight components of communicative competence: knowledge of the norms and rules of communication (business, everyday, festive, etc.); high level speech development, allowing a person in the process of communication to freely transmit and perceive information; understanding of non-verbal language of communication; the ability to make contact with people, taking into account their gender, age, socio-cultural, status characteristics; the ability to behave adequately to the situation and use its specifics to achieve their own communicative goals; the ability to influence the interlocutor in such a way as to persuade him to his side, to convince him of the strength of his arguments; the ability to correctly assess the interlocutor as a person, as a potential competitor or partner, and choose their own communication strategy depending on this assessment; the ability to evoke a positive perception of one's own personality in the interlocutor.
The methodological weakness of these lists, despite the fact that many positions in them are not in doubt, lies in the fact that they seem to “hang in the air”, do not rely on systemic ideas about the structure of a communicative personality. And as a result, the sets of characteristics of communicative competence proposed by various authors are eclectic, do not have a systemic character, are not necessary and sufficient.
To avoid these problems, it is necessary to turn to the transactional model of a communicative personality developed above. It is on this model that the proposed structure of the communicative competence of the individual is based.
There are two possible approaches to constructing a structural scheme of a communicative personality - a broad and a narrow one.
A broad or complex approach involves using all elements of the transactional model of a communicative personality potentially falling under the definition of communicative competence to form the required structure. Like impressions
analysis, these components function as part of the habilitation, resource-cognitive and operational blocks of characteristics of a communicative personality. As a result, a complex structural model of a person's communicative competence acquires the following form.
Communicative competence of the individual (complex structural model)

A narrow or operational approach from the whole complex of characteristics of a communicative personality leaves only an operational block - a block of skills as a basis for building a model of communicative competence. The methodological grounds for such a limitation lie in the fact that the sphere of communicative skills and abilities is the last, highest level of the transactional model, built on top of all other levels. At the same time, the logic is realized: the more the communicative skills of the individual correspond to socially recognized norms, the more they are developed within the normative range, the greater the communicative competence of this individual.
The operational structural model of a communicative personality has the following form:

Communicative competence of a person (operational structural model): the level of skills and abilities to determine the nature and pragmatic parameters of a communicative situation in order to select relevant communicative means; the level of practical knowledge of the code systems of verbal and non-verbal communication; the ability to encode and decode, use an individual stock of verbal and non-verbal means to ensure effective communication; the level of skills and abilities of building a discourse in accordance with the norms and rules set by the cultural context of communication; the level of skills and abilities of varying communicative means in the process of interaction depending on the dynamics of the communicative situation; the level of skills and abilities in choosing communication channels that are adequate to the goal of the communicator and relevant to the situation of interaction; the level of skills and abilities of communicative introspection and reflection; the level of skills and abilities for assessing communication practices and the communicative competence of communication partners; the level of skills and abilities to identify and overcome communicative noise and communication barriers.
Both models of a person's communicative competence (complex and operational) can be used in practice - to assess the communicative competence of specialists of any profile, management personnel, professional communicators. However, due to the lower labor intensity, in practice it is more often recommended to use the operational model. The complex model is used in especially difficult communication situations - when planning anti-crisis communications, when selecting key communicators for solving especially critical tasks, when investigating the causes and factors of emergencies and crisis situations, etc.
To these components that characterize the personality as a potential communicative actor in terms of the parameters of his consciousness and, more broadly, the psyche, one more component must be added. This component has a different ontological nature than all
discussed above. It characterizes the real practices and objective characteristics of the individual as a possible communicator or recipient, and thus belongs to the world of being, not consciousness. This component reflects the actual biological, socio-demographic and social phenomenology of the subject of communication - a communicative personality. It can be designated as a phenomenological component. It is undoubtedly necessary among the characteristics of the phenomenon under consideration, although, as mentioned above, it has a fundamentally different nature compared to the other components. Indeed, the nature of the functioning of a person as a source or recipient of messages in the communicative process depends not only on her motives, knowledge of codes and the ability to apply them, but also on such parameters as gender, age, social status, and finally appearance.