Formed in joint activities. Main characteristics of joint activity. Property to be created or acquired in the future

In accordance with Article 1043 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the conduct accounting common property can be entrusted to one of the parties to the contract simple partnership legal entities. When reflecting in accounting and financial statements operations related to participation in joint activities (simple partnership agreement), the partner organization is guided by paragraphs 13 - of this Regulation, and the partner conducting common affairs in accordance with the simple partnership agreement is guided by paragraphs 17 - of this Provisions.

13. Assets contributed to the account of a contribution under a joint activity agreement are included by the partner organization in the composition of financial investments at the cost at which they are reflected in the balance sheet as of the date the agreement enters into force.

14. When forming the financial result, each partner organization includes in the composition of other income or expenses the profit or loss on joint activities to be received or distributed among the partners.

15. The property to be received by each partner organization as a result of the division in accordance with Article 1050 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation upon termination of joint activities is reflected as the repayment of deposits accounted for as financial investments. If there is a difference between the value of the contribution accounted for as part of financial investments and the value of the assets received after the termination of the joint activity, it is included in other income or expenses when forming the financial result. Assets received by a partner organization after the termination of a joint activity are accepted for accounting in the valuation recorded in a separate balance sheet as of the date of the decision to terminate the joint activity.

(see text in previous edition)

For depreciable property accepted for accounting after the termination of joint activities, depreciation is charged during the newly established useful life in accordance with the rules determined by the Accounting Regulation "Accounting for Fixed Assets" PBU 6/01, approved by Order of the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation dated March 30 2001 N 26n (registered with the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation on April 28, 2001, registration N 2689).

16. The financial statements of a partner organization shall be submitted in accordance with the procedure established for legal entities, taking into account the financial results obtained under a joint activity agreement. In the balance sheet of the partner organization, the contribution to the joint activity is reflected in the composition of financial investments, and in case of materiality, it is shown as a separate item. In the income statement, the profit or loss due to the partner organization according to the results of the section is included in other income or expenses when forming the financial result.

(see text in previous edition)

The explanatory notes to the balance sheet and income statement as part of the reporting segment disclosure of joint ventures by a partner entity show:

share of participation (contribution) in joint activities;

share in total contractual obligations;

share of jointly incurred costs;

share in jointly received income.

17. When organizing accounting, a partner conducting common business in accordance with a joint activity agreement ensures separate accounting of operations (on a separate balance sheet) for joint activities and operations related to the performance of its ordinary activities.

The indicators of a separate balance sheet are not included in the balance sheet of a partner conducting common business.

Reflection of business transactions under a joint activity agreement, including accounting for expenses and income, as well as calculation and accounting of financial results on a separate balance sheet, are carried out in accordance with the generally established procedure.

18. The property contributed by the participants of the agreement on joint activities as a contribution is accounted for by the partner who, in accordance with the agreement, is entrusted with the conduct of common affairs, separately (on a separate balance sheet).

Contributions made by participants in joint activities are accounted for by the partner conducting common business on the account for recording the contributions of partners in the assessment provided for by the agreement.

In accounting, property acquired or created in the course of the implementation of a joint activity agreement is reflected in the amount of actual costs for its acquisition, manufacture, etc. Accounting for the acquisition or creation of new fixed assets, intangible assets and other investments in fixed assets carried out in the usual way.

Depreciation on depreciable property within the framework of a separate balance sheet is carried out in accordance with the generally established procedure, regardless of the actual period of their use and the previously used methods of depreciation before the conclusion of a joint activity agreement.

19. At the end of the reporting period, received financial results- undistributed profit (uncovered loss) is distributed among the parties to the agreement on joint activities in the manner prescribed by the agreement. At the same time, within the framework of a separate balance sheet, as of the date of the decision on the distribution retained earnings(uncovered loss) reflects accounts payable to partners in the amount of their share of retained earnings, or receivables to partners in the amount of their share of uncovered loss due for repayment.

20. A partner conducting common affairs shall compile and submit to the parties to the agreement on joint activities, in the manner and within the time limits established by the agreement, the information they need for the formation of reporting, tax and other documentation. At the same time, the submission by a partner conducting common affairs of information included in the financial statements of partners is carried out within the time limits specified by the agreement, but not late, established by the Federal Law of November 21, 1996 N 129-FZ "On Accounting" (Collected Legislation of the Russian Federation, 1996, N 48, Art. 5369; 1998, N 30, Art. 3619; 2002, N 13, Art. 1179; 2003, N 1, items 2, 6; N 2, item 160; N 27 (part I), item 2700).

21. The liquidation balance sheet is drawn up by a partner conducting common business on the date of termination of the agreement on joint activities. At the same time, the property due to each partner as a result of the division is accounted for as the repayment of his participation share (contribution) in the joint activity.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

Course work

THEORETICAL PROBLEMS OF JOINT ACTIVITIES

Introduction

1. Psychological analysis of real joint activity in domestic psychology

2. Main signs of joint activity

3. Approaches to communication problems in joint activities

4. Psychological structure of joint activity

5. The role of interaction in the structure of joint activities

6. The role of interconnectedness in the formation of the total subject of activity

7. Dynamic features of joint activity and its cumulative subject

8. Space for joint activities

8.1 Characteristics of the external practical side of the activity as a process

8.2 Characteristics of the internal activity plan as a function (relationship)

8.3 Description of the vector "Communication in activities

8.4 General definition spaces for joint activities

LITERATURE

communication aggregate entity joint activity

Introduction

In social psychology, in psychology, labor and management, developmental psychology and acmeology, there has been a marked increase in interest in the study of groups performing joint activities. The relevance of these issues is determined by a number of practical needs. For example, group maintenance of large systems highlights a number of problems that require a comprehensive study of joint activities. The same issues are significant in the performance of various types of activities of groups operating in a limited area of their stay and a strictly defined composition. Of particular interest is the problem of the development of joint activity in the process of ontogeny.

In a modern economically developed society, in fact, any labor activity, in terms of content and form of organization, objectively becomes more and more joint. BF Lomov wrote that individual activity does not exist on its own, but is “woven” into the activity of society and that any individual activity is an integral part of joint activity.

In order to most fully present the mechanisms of the flow of joint activity, it seems to us that it is necessary to consider not only the socio-psychological aspects of activity, but also to fully penetrate into the essence of the problem in the general psychological plan.

As noted by B.F. Lomov, the works of domestic psychologists of different generations laid the foundations and developed ideas about the psychological structure of activity, its morphology, structure, dynamics, regulation mechanisms and principles of study, where activity appears in general psychological terms as a specifically human form of activity, as a psychological category (L.S. Vygotsky, S. L. Rubinshtein, A. N. Leontiev, B. M. Teplov, A. V. Zaporozhets, M. Ya. Basov, etc.).

Later, other approaches to the psychological analysis of activity began to be intensively developed as a means of its practical rationalization, optimization. vocational training, designing activities, etc. - that is, in the applied plan. It is these approaches, in our opinion, that will become the basis for the development of further research on joint activities, since they narrow down to the study of the direct activity of a real person, move away from general theoretical schemes into the world of labor activity of an individual.

1. Psychological analysis of real joint activity in domestic psychology

V.D. Shadrikov developed the concept of activity system genesis in relation to the goals of psychological analysis of labor activity on the basis of theoretical, experimental and applied research (36,37). The concept of systemogenesis acts as a unity of genetic, psychological and systemic study of activity. The author formulates ideas about the ideal object of psychological analysis of activity. as a system, the idea of the psychological system of activity as the structure of the main constituents of activity with its diverse coordination and subordination relationships.

Analyzing the works of V.D. Shadrikova, A.V. Karpov notes that the conceptual and applied meaning of the concept of the psychological system of activity lies in the fact that it not only reveals the main constituents of activity, but also gives their integral structure. In addition, in the works of V.D. Shadrikov, the thesis of activity as a system receives its concrete embodiment, so from the connections of the motivation block and the goal block, their interaction appears such an important formative activity as its personal meaning for the subject. V.D. Shadrikov offers a detailed and methodically supported procedure for the psychological analysis of activity. This procedure includes the analysis of activity at the following main levels: personal-motivational, component-target, structural-functional, informational, individual-psychological, psychophysical. In turn, each of these levels includes sublevels, various aspects and procedures for analyzing activities. The concept gives a holistic view of activity as a system, its main components, the totality of functional connections between them, as well as genetic connections, indicating the patterns of activity development.

G.M. Zarakovskiy and V.I. Medvedev developed the concept of the psychological and physiological content of the activity. The authors propose to proceed from the existence of four main components of psychological activity for its analysis: intentional, operational, activation-regulatory and basic.

The intentional component, through objectified needs and actualization of motives, ensures the formation of the purpose of the activity.

The operational component is a process of transformation of information and energy, directed through the instrument of activity to its object (external or internal conceptual). The processes running in these components are controlled activation-regulatory component (through specific and non-specific activation, as well as volitional efforts). The basic component includes functional processes that ensure the vital activity of the organism, the regulation of its functions in accordance with the nature of the activity.

Based on this concept, a classification of actions was proposed depending on the presence of one or more goals - a class of simple and compound actions. Criteria for psychological analysis of the content and structure of actions are defined (the nature of the task that the operator solves through this action; the content of psychological operations reflected in the mind of the operator; a set of objective characteristics that can be registered in the course of activity).

In addition to those listed above, one can name such works as “Psychological analysis of activity in the concept of “reflection efficiency” by D.A. Oshanina, "The functional structure of the system of conscious regulation of activity" O.A. Konopkina, “Functional model of objective action” by V.P. Zinchenko, N.D. Gordeeva, "The concept of engineering and psychological analysis and synthesis of professional activity" G.V. Sukhodolsky, “Structural and functional concept of activity analysis” by A.M. Volkova, Yu.V. Mikadze and G.N. Solntseva, and others. Of particular interest is the psychological analysis of activity in the works of B.F. Lomov. The starting point is the position on activity as a socio-historical category, which is generally characteristic of Russian psychology in general and applied psychology in particular. It is this status of the category of activity that makes it possible to discover in it systemic determinants for the psychological study of individual activity or the activity of the subject, which, according to the author, should become the direct subject of psychological study. Perhaps only B.F. Lomov most successfully resolves the dilemma that arises when the development of activity problems is deepened, when its subject itself fades into the background, yielding, according to some studies, in favor of the objective conditions for the flow of activity. The subjective, mental side, is obscured, sometimes turns into a set of mental functions of the operator enumerated by the authors. B.F. Lomov, on the other hand, believes that the task of analyzing activity is, on the one hand, to consider activity as a determinant of the system of mental processes, states, properties of the subject, on the other hand, to identify the influence of this system on the efficiency and quality of activity, that is, to consider the mental as a factor activities. In his works, B.F. Lomov suggested systems approach to the study of activity and singled out the main "formers" of this system: motive, goal, activity planning, processing of current information, operational image (and conceptual model), decision making, actions, verification of results and correction of actions. The above concepts provide an opportunity for a comprehensive consideration of joint activities small group, considering that the joint activity has a much more complex structure than the simple sum of individual activities.

2. Main signs of joint activity

In this case, signs are understood as the distinctive features of joint activity as an integral and relatively independent phenomenon. Let us take the signs of cooperation as the basis for their selection. In political economy, historical materialism and sociology, this issue has been analyzed in detail. The concept of "cooperation" performs a methodological function in the study of joint activities. Specific types of cooperation are various professional activities.

The cooperation of people in labor is caused by the need to master such an object of labor, which is inaccessible to an individual, and if available, then only by his part. Hence, the presence of a common goal for the participants included in the activity should be considered an obligatory sign of joint activity. Like any other form of human activity, joint activity becomes expedient if there is a consciously set goal and subordination of joint activity to its achievement (in its essence, the process of joint activity is the achievement of the goal).

In addition, participants in joint activities must have an incentive to work together, that is, have a common motivation.

A single goal and a common motivation are indispensable conditions not just for the implementation of joint activities by its various participants, but for the formation of a certain production community from separate individuals, i.e. small group as a subject of joint activity. The formation of a certain community from them leads not to the summation of individual productive forces, but to their multiplication: the combined productive force becomes greater than the sum of the productive forces of individual workers. Consequently, the association, combination or conjugation of individual activities (and individuals), understood as the formation of a single whole, is an essential feature of joint activity. Jointness as a special quality of activity is generated by such an association of individuals, in which an interconnection and interdependence arise between them, given by activity.

Joint activities can be carried out in conditions of different intensity of people's connections with each other.

The association of individuals and the simultaneous performance by them of the same or similar labor operations are characteristic only of the simplest types of cooperation. If the labor process is complex, then the mere fact of uniting a large number of people who work together makes it possible to distribute various operations among different workers. The division of a single process of activity into separate functionally related operations and their distribution among the participants is the next characteristic feature of joint activity.

The distribution of individual activities takes place in a community (group) created to perform joint activities, and characterizes the functional structure of this community. The degree of clarity, certainty of the distribution of functions in the group characterizes the level of its structure. The distribution of functions (activities) or, according to B.F. Lomov, the "specification of tasks" in joint activities cannot be purely random, but each mutually complements each other and determines the mutual dependence of its participants. An important position in this regard was put forward by R.F. Abulkhanov, who noted that the further the specialization of each worker went, the greater their dependence on each other in labor processes, the higher the role of the community uniting them as a collective producer of a certain product. The structuring of joint activity is one of the most important properties of a collective subject.

To describe and understand joint activity, it is not enough to simply unite people in space and time and functionally distribute individual activities among its participants, even with a common goal and common motivation. Joint activity requires not spontaneous, but strictly coordinated, distributed and interrelated actions and duties. Coordination of individual activities of participants in joint activities is a necessary and essential feature of it. Coordination provides for a strict sequence of operations in accordance with a predetermined program. Such coordination is usually carried out taking into account the numerous characteristics of the activity: spatial, temporal, pace, intensity, rhythm, etc.

Coordination is achieved through control. The need to manage individual activities sets a qualitatively new level of complexity for joint activities. In individual activity, a person himself programs his actions, intensity, volume of work, without making them dependent on the actions of other people. Joint activities cannot be carried out without establishing clear links between different operations, and therefore, between different participants, without appropriate coordination of their activities. It is joint activity that gives rise to managerial work, a characteristic feature of which is the focus on the participants in joint activities, and through them on the subject of labor. Consequently, management is the most important feature and attribute of joint activity.

Its other sign is the presence of a single final result (total product) for its participants. Joint activity just arises in order to achieve a result at all (in the case of the complete impossibility of achieving it by one person) or to be achieved in shorter periods of time. A single end result must be correlated with the overall goals of the joint activity and thereby determine how the joint activity was really purposeful. Comparison of a single result with the costs of achieving it allows you to determine the effectiveness or efficiency (productivity) of joint activities. The overall result can also be correlated with the individual costs and results of individual participants in joint activities in order to assess the individual contribution of each to the results of joint activities.

A necessary condition for joint activity is a single space-time stay and functioning of the participants in joint activity (the joint subject of joint activity). The presence of a single space and the simultaneous performance of individual activities by different people can be considered as elementary features, but without which joint activities cannot develop. Many modern types of joint labor activity, generated by accelerating scientific and technological progress (for example, space exploration, etc.), may have unstable and indistinctly defined boundaries of a single space.

The foregoing allows us to conclude that the main features of joint activities are the following: the presence of a common goal and a common motivation (an incentive to work together), the division of activities into functionally related components and their distribution among participants, the unification of individuals and individual activities and their coordinated implementation, the presence of management ( including self-management), common end results, as well as a single space and simultaneity of individual activities. The selection of a set of basic features of joint activity is necessary for socio-psychological analysis, but it would be premature to call this set complete and complete.

3. Approaches to communication problems in joint activities

In the philosophical, psychological and sociological literature there is no unity regarding the attribution of communication to one of the types of activity or its consideration as an independent phenomenon. Also, the question has not been clearly resolved: whether communication should be attributed to the system of subject-object or subject-subject relations. V.N. Sagatovsky developed in his works the idea that communication lies within the limits of activity, if the latter is considered classically as "social practice", that is, in a general philosophical, not applied, sense. L.P. Bueva interprets communication as something different, fundamentally different from activity in her book "Man: Activity and Communication". L.M. Arkhangelsky and V.G. Afanasiev criticize the allocation of communication as a type of activity, but they defend the activity approach to the analysis of communication, since it "is an indispensable attribute of any human activity", being inherent in both knowledge and work. Probably, the authors rely on the works of B.G. Ananiev, who defined personality as "the subject of labor, communication and cognition". DI. Dubrovsky also supports this position, separating communication from activities, but maintaining an activity-based approach to its study.

A.A. Leontiev in the article “Communication as an Object of Psychological Research” wrote: “Psychologists are unanimous in understanding communication as one of the types of activity,” however, pointing out that this does not mean that communication acts “as an independent activity.”

B.F. Lomov argued that communication cannot be defined as a type of human activity, that it is something fundamentally different from activity, because it connects the subject not with the object, but with another subject, but below he defined communication as “interaction of subjects”. Communication is an internally necessary condition for the implementation and development of joint activities, on the basis and around which a team is created, the processes of communication serve as the most important prerequisite and at the same time a way, a form of existence and development of the team as an integral psychological formation, since it is communication that forms the community of individuals performing joint activity. The same point of view is shared by G.M. Andreeva. Thus, in modern social psychology there is a fundamental methodological problem of the relationship between communication and activity. At the same time, the discussion has a sufficient number of general questions, whether the activity “generates” communication or whether they act as “equal” forms of individual human being, or communication itself is an activity, etc. There are also specific questions about what is the mechanism of the impact of joint activities on communication, and vice versa, communication on joint activities. So far, we can say with certainty only that the mechanism of such interaction exists objectively.

4. Psychological structure of joint activity

The question of the structure of joint activities is the least developed. To consider it, let us turn to the results of studies of the psychological structure of individual activity as more advanced in general and labor psychology. Individual activities are constituent elements or parts of a holistic joint activity, therefore their correlation can be considered as a ratio of parts and the whole.

On the relationship between the part and the whole, we present the statement of V.G. Afanasiev: “In fact, the whole and the part are both logically and ontologically correlative and inextricably linked with each other. The whole makes sense only in relation to the parts that form it, and the part is inconceivable outside the whole to which it belongs ... The whole and its parts are inseparable, the whole outside of its own parts is nothing, just like the parts outside the whole to which they belong are no longer parts. This is the dialectical principle of the interaction of the part and the whole in relation to a variety of systems.

From this follows the proposition that individual activity can only conditionally be considered as an isolated and closed system, since in reality it is always included in the structure of joint activity.

The emergence of a single joint activity as a new integral system from a set of individual ones is only one side of the interaction between individual and joint activities. The inclusion of individual activity in the structure of joint activity, in turn, inevitably leads to a change in the very structure of the individual activity of each of its participants. Joint activity actually transforms the structures of individual activities, however, not due to the elimination or exclusion of some individual components of the latter, but, on the contrary, due to their mutual complementation and qualitative enrichment in the conditions of joint activity. The main components of the psychological structure of individual activity are used to analyze the structure of joint activity. This follows from the principle of isomorphism of functional systems, which was formulated by P.K. Anokhin: "A fundamentally functional system provides a universal architecture for any activity, a universal principle of functioning." In accordance with this principle, the structures of individual and joint activities are isomorphic, which makes it possible to single out and consider such components that are common to them. This approach in the analysis of the structure of joint activities is actually implemented in the works of B.F. Lomova, E.I. Golovakhi and others.

The description of the psychological structure of activity usually begins with the identification of the subject's goals. However, the goals of socially useful activity, as a rule, are not generated by the subject from within himself, but have socially necessary tasks as their source. Speaking about the individual subject of activity, K.A. Abulkhanova-Slavskaya writes that the task is a social form of his motivation for activity, which causes, limits, and structures his activity. A socially necessary task can be the starting point for analyzing the psychological structure of joint activity.

By analogy with individual activity the structure of joint activities includes the following components.

The overall goal of joint activity is the central component of its structure. A common goal is understood as an ideally presented future result, which a community of individuals (aggregate subject) seeks to achieve. The general goal can be broken down into more specific and specific tasks, the gradual solution of which brings the collective subject closer to the common goal.

An obligatory component of the psychological structure of joint activity is a common motive that induces the community of individuals to joint activity, that is, a direct motivating force. Here, complex and insufficiently studied questions arise, firstly, about the relationship between individual and group motivation in joint activities, and secondly, about the relationship between its general goals and motives.

The next component of joint activity is joint action, i.e. such elements of it that are aimed at fulfilling the current (operational and fairly simple) tasks of joint activities.

The structure of joint activities is completed by the overall result obtained by its participants. To reveal the psychological structure of joint activities importance has not only a general objective result, but also its subjective reflection by the collective subject. By analogy with the goal as an ideally presented future result, here it is necessary to talk about the subjectively presented result of joint activities, which can approximately be expressed through subjective group assessments of what has been achieved. However, this aspect is not well understood.

As noted, the most important condition for joint activities is the need for unification (combination), distribution and coordination (coordination) of individual activities. These processes cover all the main components of both individual and joint activities. Consequently, the presence of common goals and objectives of joint activities, for example, does not remove the need for such a combination, distribution and certain coordination of individual goals and objectives of the participants in joint activities, which makes it possible to effectively achieve its common goals.

In joint activities, a combination of individual motivations of participants is achieved. Individual motives are not excluded in joint activity, although, of course, under its influence, they undergo some changes, undergo a certain dynamics. The combination of individual motives, according to B.F. Lomov, can generate a wide variety of effects: Changes in individual motives and goals in the conditions of joint activity, "enrichment" of the motivational sphere of each of its participants, or the collapse of joint activity as a result of a collision of motives. Individual motives can also mutually reinforce or weaken each other.

Joint actions arise as a result of strictly coordinated individual actions, which must be clearly distributed among all participants in advance and correlated with each other in time and space. The actions performed by each of the participants in the joint activity are determined by its common goals and phased tasks, however, when organizing joint activities in practice, many other factors arise that change the distribution of individual actions. For example, the specific composition of the participants in joint activities (in terms of quantity, professional readiness, etc.) can lead to a significant redistribution of individual actions, to a change in the “pattern” in their implementation, etc. The overall end result of joint activities consists of combining the results of individual activities of its participants. These results have a certain distribution in the group in the form of a set of individual contributions of each participant to the overall result. Coordination of individual results in joint activities is carried out with the help of operational assessments and control of both current and final results of joint activities.

Such constituent components of activity as its goals and objectives, motives, actions and operations, as well as results, are common to the psychological structures of individual and joint activities.

5. The role of interaction in the structure of joint activities

To obtain a holistic view of the relationship of people in production, it is necessary to consider the structure of not only production activity, but also its subject. Moreover, the two named approaches - activity and subjective - turn out to be the most effective when, with their help, they not only reveal different aspects of the subject of research, but reveal these aspects in their interconnection. Thus, the psychological structure of joint activity should be analyzed from the standpoint of the theory of social relations, which are realized in the interaction of people with each other, in communication, actions, etc. An important place in this analysis, from our point of view, should be occupied by the category of interaction.

Joint activity represents the unity of two sides: firstly, joint effects on the common object of labor; secondly, it is the impact of the participants in joint activities on each other, which are set by the social relations of production and necessitate the selection of other structural elements of joint activities. Such interactions are determined by the focus on the common subject of joint labor activity, i.e. they are subject-directed types of interaction.

Interaction between people is an essential feature of the structure of joint activity, its main distinguishing feature in comparison with individual activity. Interaction should be understood as such a system of actions in which the actions of one person or group of persons determine certain actions of others, and the actions of the latter, in turn, determine the actions of the first. Joint and individual activities differ from each other not only and even not so much in the presence of interaction between the participants in joint activities, but in the nature of the inclusion of interaction in the psychological structure of the activity itself.

Interaction between people, or communication, as one of the specific forms, can also take place during the performance of relatively independent individual activities, however, it is not included in the structure of this activity and does not introduce fundamental changes into it. In this case, the interaction, figuratively speaking, is “present next to” individual activity, accompanying it in the form of communication. Such interaction is not subject-oriented and does not change the structure of activity. Otherwise, the activity ceases to be individual, but becomes a form of joint activity. Interaction and communication, in the words of B.F. Lomov, "permeates, as it were, joint activities, playing an organizing role." The structure of joint activity is actually formed, functions and develops precisely through the interaction between its individual participants.

Thanks to the direct or indirect interaction of individuals, it becomes possible to unite, distribute and coordinate individual activities in a joint activity, and the interaction "penetrates" all stages of joint activity,
as well as its components, i.e. goals, motives, methods of implementation
and results.

The problem of the psychological structure of joint activity is closely connected with the most important question of the units of psychological analysis of joint activity. This question arises in connection with the need to break down joint activities in order to describe them in detail and study them in more depth. This need arises most acutely in applied research, when the task is not only to elucidate the psychological structure of activity, but also to change it and further improve the structure.

In the psychological theory of activity, objective actions and operations are the initial units of analysis. Speaking about the "units" of human activity that form its macrostructure, A.N. Leontiev in the "general flow of activity" singles out, firstly, individual (special) activities - according to the criterion of the motives that prompt them. Further, actions are distinguished - processes that obey conscious goals. Finally, these are operations that directly depend on the conditions for achieving a specific goal. Consequently, individual activity consists of a set of actions aimed at achieving consciously set goals, and operations as specific methods of action. With their help it is indeed possible to describe the structure of individual activity, but they become insufficient for describing the structure of joint activity.

In the socio-psychological literature, one can come across a proposal to single out acts of individual activities as possible "units" of analysis of joint activity, which act as a condition for the development of both individual individuals and group activity as a whole. Moreover, these acts themselves represent moments of the movement of individual activity. Individual objective actions and individual activities as a whole are included in the structure of joint activity as its constituent elements, however, neither from the individual activities themselves, nor even more so from their individual moments, it is impossible to derive a qualitative originality of joint activity. Any individual activity, no matter how important it may be, remains in relation to the joint as part of the whole, while maintaining relative independence and experiencing the leading influence of the whole.

Joint activity as a single, integral system arises, first of all, as a result of the establishment social connections between individuals and the realization of their social relations. Social relations are realized in joint activities, mainly in the processes of association, functional distribution and coordination of the activities of individuals, which, in turn, become possible due to their interaction with each other. Consequently, the target or object-directed interaction between them (and, therefore, between individual activities) can, in the first approximation, be taken as that “unit” of psychological analysis that reveals the qualitative specificity of joint activity in the same way that an objective action constitutes the specificity of an individual one. Target interaction in joint activities as one of the manifestations of social ties and relationships between individuals leads to the emergence of some of their commonality. Thanks to the interaction, the collective subject maintains its integrity and maintains its ability to function together.

Participants in joint activities are actually active subjects of influence on each other in order to achieve the common goals of joint activities. In social psychology, however, the category of interaction has not been sufficiently studied, and socio-psychological characteristics have not been singled out that would allow it to be specifically assessed and describe the practical interaction of people.

In joint activities, as a rule, several of the most typical strategies for the behavior of its participants in relation to partners are used:

a) assistance as effective help to others, active
contributing to the achievement of common goals of joint activities;

b) opposition to the achievement of goals by other participants
joint activities, the commission of actions that are inconsistent with them, going contrary to the partners in interaction;

c) avoidance of interaction, i.e. active care, avoidance
interaction with partners even in cases where the situation
and circumstances not only facilitate, but also require the interaction of participants in joint activities to achieve common goals.

A different ratio of the three identified strategies gives some typical situations interactions of people. If we consider dyadic interaction as its simplest and most indicative variant, then we can distinguish a number of socio-psychological types of interaction, which we conventionally designate as follows.

Collaboration: both partners in interaction assist each other, actively contribute to the achievement of the individual goals of each and the common goals of joint activities.

Confrontation: Both partners oppose each other
and hinder the achievement of individual goals.

Avoidance of interaction, i.e. both partners are trying
avoid active interaction.

Unidirectional assistance, when one of the participants in a joint activity contributes to the achievement of the individual goals of the other, and the second evades interaction with him.

Unidirectional counteraction, i.e. one of the partners
hinders the achievement of the goals of the other, and the second evades
from interaction with the first participant.

Contrasting interaction: one of the participants tries
assist the other, and the second resorts to the strategy of active
opposition to the first (in such situations, such opposition can be masked in one form or another).

Compromise interaction, when both partners show separate elements of both assistance and opposition.

The dyadic form of interaction, although common, is only a separate element in the system of interaction that develops in real joint activity and which requires special empirical research. The significance of dyadic interaction especially increases in managerial activity, when the principle of an individual approach of the leader to the performer is implemented. Under these conditions, the subject of management can be included in almost any of the above types of interaction, each of which has a different efficiency in achieving the goals of joint activities, and therefore requires the use of specific methods and techniques of managerial influence. Much here depends not only on the leader, but also on the strategy of the performer as a partner in interaction, without knowing which it is impossible to assess the effectiveness of one or another existing type of interaction. Various socio-psychological strategies and types of interaction are important to consider when practical organization and management of joint activities of the team.

Thus, the target, or subject-oriented interaction of the participants in joint activities, in our opinion, should be considered as a necessary “unit” of the psychological analysis of joint activities, but here the question of its sufficiency arises, which cannot be answered now. If we consider the possible "units" of the analysis of joint activities, then subject-oriented interaction has certain advantages over, for example, individual activity, and in particular action as its main constituent component, as well as communication. The objective action, and in general the individual activity of a person, is characterized, first of all, by its focus on the object and includes the subject-object relationship of a person. Communication between people implies, first of all, the analysis of subject-subject relations, with the exception of cases when communication acts as an independent type of activity. The targeted interaction of people simultaneously implies both their relationship to each other as subjects, and their joint relationship to a common object of activity. It is the interaction of participants in joint activities that ensures the transformation of the totality of individual activities into single system joint activities.

The subject orientation of interacting subjects is a prerequisite for the formation of an aggregate subject of activity, however, various forms of activity construction suggest both a direct subject-object orientation and an indirect subject-subject-object orientation. But both in the first and in the second case, the interaction between people seems to be a rather multifaceted phenomenon. Considering interpersonal interaction in the process of joint activity, domestic researchers highlight its nature, type and structure.

The nature of the interaction is understood as its dynamic side, i.e. interaction can be discontinuous - continuous, active - passive, rhythmic - arrhythmic, etc.

When analyzing the structure of interaction, three main components are usually distinguished:

Regulatory, affective, informational (B.F. Lomov),

Behavioral, cognitive, emotional (Ya.L. Kolominsky),

Practical, affective, gnostic (A.A. Bodalev).

All components are interdependent. So, for example, cognitive interaction may not be accompanied by behavioral interaction, but emotional dependence is an attribute of any connection (relationship) between people. The behavioral component is leading in the regulation of interpersonal relations in social-formal structures, the emotional one performs the main regulatory function in informal structures.

When considering the type of interaction, along with those described above, a classification was identified, which is determined by the different orientation of the subjects to a personal result or a common goal, to help or resist partners in joint activities, as well as the level of awareness and emotional coloring of interaction in a group.

6. The role of interconnectedness in the formation of the total subject of activity

The question of the formation of an aggregate subject of activity seems to be the key one in the analysis of the joint activity of small groups. On the basis of what arises the unification of people into a certain community, into one inseparable whole - this issue has been repeatedly studied specifically, [as a result, several levels of interconnectedness and interdependence of participants in joint activities have been identified. So, for example, N.N. Obozov proposed a generalized and most complete classification of interconnectedness.

Isolation (physical and social). This is an extremely rare form of organization of activity.
person. Lack of interconnectedness is usually relative.

Assumed relationship. It is known that not
only real interaction and communication between people changes
their relationship to each other, but the latter may occur as a result of the intended interaction, the alleged communication, i.e. in anticipation of interaction, a person evaluates other people depending on the situation he or she perceives.

Interconnection by the type of "silent presence" of other people when a person performs any individual activity. The most characteristic feature of the interconnectedness of this level is the so-called public effect, which consists in changing the characteristics of a person's individual activity and behavior under the influence of the passive presence of other people. Apparently, the "silent presence" is the most elementary form of jointness in the performance of activities.

Interconnection of the type "influence and mutual influence", carried out with the help of verbal and non-verbal means impact, for example, through the opinions and assessments of participants in joint activities. Depending on these opinions and assessments, the perception of each other by these participants, their attitude and behavior, and, consequently, the characteristics of their activities, change.

The active, or efficient, interconnectedness of people through the means of joint action. This kind of interconnectedness includes a wide range of joint activities. Effective interconnectedness can have a different degree of manifestation - from partial or minimal, to complete, or maximum, when the actions of one participant become impossible without the actions of others.

Collectivist interconnectedness is a qualitatively new step in development. The interrelationship of this level, firstly, may include the features of the previous levels, and secondly, it is characterized by the greatest coincidence of the personally significant, group and socially valuable content of joint activity. At the same time, personal and group in the content of joint activities are subordinated to the socially significant goals of joint activities.

Thus, interconnectedness is a factor indicating the presence of a unifying principle in group activity and determining the objective need for interaction.

Considering joint production, sports, educational, etc. activity, one should take into account the fact that any activity includes a goal, result, means and process of activity. Interconnection is expressed in greater or lesser dependence between group members at each level and implies not only the presence of a direct and feedback relationship between them, but also interdependence, mutual influence at various levels of interaction.

Analyzing the functional relationship, the following models of organizing joint activities are distinguished: joint-individual, joint-sequential, joint-interacting.

In accordance with the first model, a team, a section of machine operators, spinners, a group of students, etc., each perform work in his own section.

The second involves a conveyor organization.

The third is typical for many types of assembly work, team sports games, creative groups in collective discussion.

Considering these models from the point of view of levels of interconnectedness, we note the following: in joint-individual activity, the leading level is the interconnectedness through the result of activity, in joint-sequential - through the process, in jointly-interrelated - through the means of activity.

Comparison of the structure of interaction and levels of interconnectedness of the aggregate subject allows us to identify significant components of real joint activity.

7. Dynamic features of joint activity and its cumulative subject

Joint activity should be analyzed from the side of not only its structural components, but also the dynamic (procedural) components of the activity. In psychology, the structural characteristics of activity have been better studied so far, namely: goals and objectives, motives, methods of implementation, as well as results, that is, those elements that are common structural components of individual and joint activity. Less studied are the procedural features of joint activity, which determine its specificity. According to the theory of the mental as a process developed by S.L. Rubinstein and his students, the procedural nature of activity is a specific subject of psychological consideration. When determining the essence of joint activity, we proceed from the thesis that it unfolds in various socio-psychological processes, the totality of which and a certain sequence make it possible to single out and describe its distinctive features and forms of organization.

Socio-psychological processes essentially represent different types of interaction between participants in joint activities, set by common goals and motives, ways of organizing activities, and overall results. Interaction determined by activity is realized in group processes, taking specific forms.

Psychological analysis of the procedural nature of joint activities should include, at least, the study of a certain set of processes. In this regard, the subject of special analysis is the processes of group goal- and motive formation, distribution and integration (unification) of individual activities in the group, the processes of their coordination and coordination, control actions (management), as well as group evaluation of the results of joint activities. Thus, the listed group processes correspond to the distinguishing features of joint activity identified above.

Some of the selected processes (for example, goal setting, motivating and evaluating results) also take place in individual activities, however, such an increase as “group” means the emergence of their new quality. Group goal setting and motivation, as well as group evaluation of results, like other socio-psychological processes, are determined by the interaction of people not only with the subject of activity (i.e. objectivity), but also with each other (i.e. subjectivity). A dynamic approach to the analysis of joint activities was implemented in a comprehensive study of primary production teams, in which a comparative analysis of the above socio-psychological processes of joint labor activity in the conditions of traditional and brigade labor organization is given.

The socio-psychological analysis of joint activity should be carried out in close connection with the study of its total subject (group). If we turn to the data of social psychology, it can be noted that, until recently, the main attention was paid to the study of such group phenomena as the socio-psychological climate, interpersonal relationships, satisfaction with work and relationships in the team, cohesion, compatibility, leadership, etc. Summarizing , we can say that these studies concentrated around the phenomenon of interpersonal relations in a group, which dominated as an object of study in social psychology. This approach allows us to characterize the group as the subject of relations and communication. However, this is clearly not enough to describe the group as a subject of joint activity, although interpersonal relations certainly affect its characteristics and it is necessary to study them.

In the study of some labor collectives, in particular youth, discrepancies were repeatedly found between positive values indicators of relationships and communication in the team, on the one hand, and negative values of indicators of joint labor activity, on the other. In these collectives, there is a sort of shift of goals from labor activity to communication and friendly relations, the significance of which is exaggerated. These forms of human activity can become an end in itself in the work collective. The results obtained require special evaluation collective as a subject of labor activity. At the same time, of course, one should not reduce the role of communication and interpersonal relations in the team.

The main features of joint activity and the properties of its subject (group) are closely interconnected. Among the main characteristics of the subject of joint activity, it is necessary to single out purposefulness, motivation, the level of integrity (integration), structuredness, consistency, organization (controllability), performance (productivity), spatial and temporal features of the living conditions of the aggregate subject.

Let us briefly dwell on each selected property, offer parameters and indicators for their description and possible evaluation. As parameters, we consider some quantities that characterize them and set certain boundaries of manifestation. Indicators are data by which one can judge the level of development of properties. The number of indicators for each property usually exceeds the number of parameters.

The purposefulness of the aggregate subject of activity in this context is understood as the desire for the main socially significant goal. Purposefulness characterizes such a state of a small group, when the goal has a decisive influence on joint activities, subjugates it to itself, as if “permeates” it. In turn, the purposefulness of the aggregate subject of activity is characterized by group interests, the content of the goals that the group puts forward, collective social attitudes, beliefs, and ideals. Purposefulness expresses, first of all, really existing tendencies in the activity of a small group and is the most important characteristic his social and socio-psychological portrait. The type of value-oriented regulation of intragroup object-oriented interaction can be considered as a parameter of this property. It is assumed that the proximity or similarity of the value orientations of the participants in joint activities is manifested in the complementary and integrated orientation of the collective subject of activity towards some goal. This is an important prerequisite for the successful implementation of joint activities.

...

1. The concept of joint activity

The main factor generating and determining the content and process of joint activity is the communication of people.

There are various concepts of joint activity. It depends on what side of a person's life this term affects. In accordance with civil law, a joint activity is an agreement in accordance with which the parties undertake to act together to achieve a common goal. Under a joint activity agreement, the parties (participants) undertake to act jointly by combining property and efforts to achieve a common economic or other goal that does not contradict the legislative acts of the Russian Federation Monetary or other property contributions of the parties to the agreement, as well as property created or acquired as a result of their activities are their common share property. A participant in a joint activity agreement is not entitled to dispose of a share in common property without the consent of the other participants in the agreement, with the exception of that part of the products and income from this activity that is at the disposal of each participant. The participant who is entrusted with the conduct of common affairs acts on the basis of a power of attorney issued by the other parties to the agreement. The property united by the participants in the agreement for joint activities is accounted for on a separate (separate) balance sheet of that participant who, in accordance with the agreement, is entrusted with the conduct of common affairs of the participants in the agreement. The data of a separate (separate) balance sheet shall not be included in the balance sheet of a participating enterprise conducting common business. The distribution of profits, losses and other results between the parties to the agreement is carried out in the manner prescribed by the agreement. Each participant includes his share of the profit received as a result of joint activities in the composition of non-operating income when forming financial results.

From a psychological point of view, joint activity is an organized system of activity of interacting individuals, aimed at the expedient production (reproduction) of objects of material and spiritual culture. The hallmarks of collaboration are:

1) spatial and temporal co-presence of participants, creating the possibility of direct personal contact between them, including the exchange of actions, the exchange of information, as well as mutual perception;

2) the presence of a single goal - an anticipated result of joint activity that meets the common interests and contributes to the realization of the needs of each of the individuals included in the joint activity,

3) the presence of organizational and management bodies, which are embodied in the person of one of the participants, endowed with special powers, or distributed between them;

4) division of the process of joint activities between the participants, due to the nature of the goal, means and conditions for achieving it, the composition and skill level of the performers. This implies the interdependence of individuals, which is manifested either in the final product of joint activity, or in the very process of its production. If in the first case individual operations are carried out in parallel and do not depend on the sequence of actions of others, then in the second they are interdependent (specialized and hierarchized), since they must be implemented simultaneously as functionally different components of a complex operation or in a strict sequence, when the result of one operation serves as a condition for the beginning another. An example of a highly specialized joint activity is a collective scientific activity, which implies an extensive system of social roles for its participants;

5) the emergence of interpersonal relations in the process of joint activity, which are formed on the basis of subject-specific functional-role interactions and acquire a relatively independent character over time. Being initially conditioned by the content of joint activity, interpersonal relations, in turn, have an impact on its process and results. In social psychology, joint activity is considered as the main condition for the socio-psychological integration of the individuals included in it. Joint activity objectively has a multi-purpose character, which is due to its intra- and inter-system links. The fact that acts of individual activity are a condition for the existence and reproduction of both the individual himself and the processes of group activity as a whole indicates the interpenetration and mutual enrichment of individual and joint activities, the interaction of individual motivational and social normative conditions for joint activity.

Living beings are naturally characterized by activity, which provides the vital connections of the organism with the environment. The source of activity of living beings is the needs that induce them to appropriate reactions, actions...

The history of the formation of innovation. Innovation as an activity

Innovation is the process of creating, distributing and using a new practical means for a new or better satisfaction of an already known need of people, groups, society ...

Collective systems of organization and stimulation of labor

Collective (joint) is a form of labor organization in which the production task is set as a whole for any division of the enterprise ...

Organizational activity at the enterprise

The organization involves systematic and thoughtful actions (on the part of the subject) for the unconditional execution of the planned activities (on the part of the object). A collective body and an employee can act as a subject ...

Organizational structures of management of business entities of modern Russia

The organizational structure of management is one of the main categories of management theory. The need to clarify the concept of "organizational management structure" is due to the fact ...

The concept of a charismatic personality in management activities

The term "management", in management theory, means "a set of coordinated activities (actions) aimed at achieving the goals" ...

Psychological features personalities

psychological nature of temperament Interpersonal relationships are expressed in the compatibility of people. Compatibility is the optimal combination of the qualities of people in the process of communication that contribute to the success of joint actions ...

Development innovation activities JSC "Composite"

Innovative (innovative) is considered to be the activity of creating and using an intellectual product, bringing new original ideas before they are sold as finished goods on the market.

Improving entrepreneurial activity based on the development of a business plan for an enterprise using the example of Pozitiv Plus LLC

In the theory of entrepreneurship, there are various approaches both in establishing signs that allow classifying entrepreneurship, and in determining the qualitative and quantitative characteristics of these signs ...

Modern models of personnel management in the Russian Federation

The development of forms of collective creative activity is inextricably linked with the historical transformation of its initial forms of targeted association of collective activity: collectively - consistent ...

Signs - distinctive features ...

Types of joint activities according to L.I. Umansky

There are 6 properties of the subject of joint activity, which are interconnected: a) the purposefulness of the group subject of activity (the community of individuals) - the desire for the main goal; b) motivation - active, interested ...

Types of joint activities according to L.I. Umansky

Professor of psychology Lev Ilyich Umansky (1921-1983), devoted himself to the study of the psychology of organizational activity...

Management in the organization

The management of the joint activities of people lies in the relationship, unity of command, and in the self-government of the group. The activities of the leader are carried out as part of the joint activities of the socio-economic system ...

Personnel management in the system of modern management

The formation of forms of joint creative activity is associated with the transformation of the historically preceding forms of organization of joint activity: joint-sequential, joint-interacting, joint-individual...

Signs of joint activity (JA) are usually understood as its distinctive features as a holistic and relatively independent phenomenon. The main features of joint activity include the presence of:

a single purpose for the participants included in the activity;

general motivation;

unification, combination or conjugation of individual activities (and the individual), understood as the formation of a single whole;

division of a single process of activity into separate functionally related operations and their distribution among participants;

coordination of individual activities of participants, which provides for a strict sequence of operations in accordance with a predetermined program. Such coordination is usually carried out taking into account the numerous characteristics of the activity: spatial, temporal (theme, intensity, rhythm), etc. It is achieved through management;

management - the most important feature and attribute of SD;

a single end result (cumulative product);

a single space and the simultaneity of the performance of individual activities by different people.

The psychological structure of SD includes a number of components: common goals, motives, actions and results. The overall goal of a joint activity is a central component of its structure. The goal is understood as an ideally presented common result, to which the community of individuals (group subject) strives. The overall goal can be broken down into more specific and specific tasks, the stage-by-stage solution of which brings the collective subject closer to the goal. An obligatory component of the psychological structure of SD is a common motive that encourages the community of individuals to work together (i.e., direct motivating force). The next component of joint activity is joint action, i.e. such elements of it that are aimed at fulfilling the current (operational and fairly simple) tasks of the SD. The structure of joint activities is completed by the overall result obtained by its participants.

A.N.Leontiev in the "general flow of activity" singles out individual (special) activities - according to the criterion of the motives that prompt them. Next comes the level of actions - processes that obey conscious goals. Finally, this is the level of operations that directly depend on the conditions for achieving a specific goal.

The target or object-directed interaction between individuals (and, therefore, between individual activities) can, in the first approximation, be taken as a “unit” of psychological analysis of SD, which reveals its qualitative specifics (similar to how an objective action makes up the specifics of an individual).

In joint activities, as a rule, several of the most typical strategies for the behavior of its participants in relation to partners are used:

a) assistance as effective assistance to others, active contribution to the achievement of the overall goals of the SD;

b) opposition to the achievement of goals by other participants in the SD, the commission of actions that are inconsistent with them, going against the desires, opinions, behavior of partners in interaction;

c) avoidance of interaction, i.e. active withdrawal, avoidance of interaction with partners, even in cases where the situation and circumstances not only facilitate, but also require the interaction of participants in the SD to achieve common goals.

Researchers look at a number of socio-psychological types of interaction. Let's list them.

1. Collaboration: both partners in the interaction actively help each other, actively contribute to the achievement of the individual goals of each_and the grievances of the goals of the SD.

Confrontation: Both partners oppose each other and hinder the achievement of each individual's goals.

Avoidance of interaction, i.e. both partners try to avoid active cooperation.

4. Unidirectional assistance, when one of the participants in the SD contributes to the achievement of the individual goals of the other, and the second evades interaction with him.

Unidirectional counteraction, i.e. one of the partners hinders the achievement of the goals of the other, and the second evades interaction with the first.

Contrasting interaction: one of the participants tries to assist the other, and the second resorts to a strategy of active opposition to the first (in such situations, such opposition may be masked in one form or another).

Compromise interaction, when both partners show separate elements of both assistance and opposition.

The main signs of joint activity and properties of the SD subject are closely interconnected. Among the main characteristics of the subject of joint activity, it is necessary to single out purposefulness, motivation, the level of integrity (integrated™), structuredness, consistency, organization (controllability), performance (productivity), spatial and temporal features of living conditions.

The purposefulness of the group subject of activity represents the desire for the main goal.

Motivation as a property of a group subject of activity characterizes an active, interested and effective attitude (motivation) to joint activities.

The integrity (or integration) of a collective subject of activity is understood as the internal unity of its constituent elements. Integrity is evaluated by a combination of the following parameters: the density of functional connections between its members, the indicators of which are the frequency and intensity of contacts between them; level of functional interconnectedness; the ratio of the number of jointly performed functions to their total number; type of integrity of the collective subject, manifested in the nature of the dominant links between members of the team. An important property of a group subject of activity is its structuredness, which means the clarity and rigor of the mutual distribution of functions, tasks, rights, duties and responsibilities between members of the team, the certainty of its structure. Empirical indicators of structuredness can be the dominant ways of distributing functions (mutual complementation, safety net, duplication), ways of taking responsibility for performing functions in a team (concentration, distribution, diffusion of responsibility), characteristics of business mutual influence, etc.

Consistency is a harmonious combination of group members, the mutual conditioning of their actions. The consistency parameter is primarily the type or nature of the coordination (correlation) of the actions of the group members, which can be assessed using the following indicators: the dominant ways of resolving disagreements and contradictions, the leading "zone" of the coordination of the group members' actions, the level of conflict and the typical ways of behavior of its members in conflict situations. situations, etc.

The organization of a generalized subject of activity means orderliness, composure, subordination to a certain procedure for performing joint activities, the ability to act accurately, in accordance with a predetermined plan (plannedness).

An integral property of a collective subject of activity is its effectiveness, which characterizes the ability to achieve a positive outcome.

Model of regulation of joint activity. Conceptual analysis of field observations and experimental results allows us to construct a relatively hypothetical model for the regulation of joint activity. As you can see, the central block in this system is the "Conditions of activity and interaction" block. The distinction between such concepts as "activity" and "interaction" is not accidental. They act together in joint activities and mutually condition each other. V.E. Smirnov in his work "Psychology of adolescence" noted: "For group members who perform some kind of joint action, there are always two sides: stimulation from the work itself and stimulation coming from others." In joint activities, two aspects can be distinguished: a) the actual substantive activity; b) a set of processes that establish various connections and dependencies between people in the process of this activity or communication.

This opinion confirms the fact of separation of the conditions of activity and interaction. J. Lingard distinguishes two feedbacks: self-feedback about individual activity and social feedback due to the interaction between individuals. Feedback is one of the most important components of the regulation of any biological and social system. If, under the action of a person with a tool and an object of labor, practical activity is unthinkable without feedback, then in the conditions of interaction of a larger number of people, the feedback system becomes more complicated. Depending on this, Kurt Back distinguishes two types of communication (which correspond to certain structures of the language):

a) aimed at relationships, i.e. interactions;

b) aimed at actions and activities.

R. Bales distinguishes the area of emotions and the area of problem solving in joint activities. The area of emotions is characterized by the presence of such forms of speech and behavioral reactions, which are more focused not on the activity itself (problem solving), but on interaction (interpersonal relationships). These reactions have an emotional, subjective coloring, characterize the degree of satisfaction with joint activities. Another thing is the area of problem solving. This phase is associated with hypotheses, their discussion and decision making. The choice of the solution method, in turn, is associated with certain emotional experiences of the participants in group activities. So, we have found out the principle of distinguishing between such concepts as "activity" and "interaction".

It is clear that the effectiveness of the group's activity depends on many factors, as well as on the conditions in which it takes place. This may be a calm business environment, lack of pressure from outside, or stressful conditions when the group works in an extreme situation.

1. One of the most important factors determining the effectiveness of the joint activities of the group is the specificity and complexity of the tasks. This is a non-group factor, it is set from the outside and determines the content of joint activities. The complexity of the task depends not only on what mental processes and functions are involved in the activity (sensory-perceptual, mnemonic, logical), but also on how often actions are performed and skills are developed - the norms of interaction with the tool and the object of labor.

The time of joint work of any other type of interaction, for example, communication of friends, spouses, can be considered from different positions.

With the official organization of people's interaction, time is assessed as a factor of objective necessity for joint activities; the time of interaction in informal relations is determined by the internal needs of each of the participants in communication. The time of working together and living together is not only a condition for testing the strength of relationships, but also, more importantly, a factor in the formation of personal, in particular characterological, features of interacting people. S.L. Rubinshtein writes about this: “In long-term communication, the mutual influence of people on each other often leaves a significant imprint on their character, and in some cases there is a kind of exchange of characterological properties and mutual assimilation: as a result of a long life together, people sometimes acquire common features become in some respects similar to each other.

The quantitative composition of groups in the conditions of official relations (for example, educational activities) is determined from the outside. The quantitative composition is of some importance for the regulation of the effectiveness of group activity. B.F. Lomov wrote: “As the group increases, its efficiency increases, but only to a certain level: when a certain “critical value” is reached, the size of the group ceases to influence the effectiveness of its activity, and then, with its larger increase, the efficiency decreases (too large the number leads to the fact that people begin to interfere with each other)". But at the same time, it is necessary to correlate the specifics of the group's activities, the complexity of the tasks being solved with the actual number.

The ratio of the number of members of the group and the effectiveness of its work has a curvilinear dependence. In the manifestation of this factor, one should distinguish between the threshold values of the size of the group: a) the lower threshold is the number of persons able to cope with a common task; b) the upper threshold is the number of persons who effectively cope with the task, but which can be slightly reduced without visible damage.

Connectivity is one of the main factors influencing group interactions. At the same time, interaction should be understood as such a system of actions of participants, when the actions of one cause certain actions of other people. The degree of interconnectedness is determined by the nature of the interaction between individuals: formal or informal. In a formal organization, the principle of interconnectedness does not depend on the will of the people. Informal interpersonal relationships are not given, they are regulated by the participants in communication.

Little interconnectedness presents great opportunities for independent work. As the mutual connectedness increases, the possibilities of independent action decrease, but at the same time the role of group-wide achievements increases. Moreover, the increase in interconnectedness enhances the importance of the leader.

J. Lingard tried to determine the levels of mutual dependence, taking into account the complexity and quality of interpersonal relationships:

The 1st level of interconnectedness is characterized by a change in behavior under the influence of the presence of other persons behaving like spectators, and is designated by scientists as a "public effect";

2nd level - interconnectedness, in which behavior is changed under the influence of actively participating other persons in a particular activity. Joint action in this case must be distinguished by the degree of interconnectedness: "... from the emotional and interested joint activity of other persons without direct help ... - to mutual cooperation ... ".

The functional structure of the group can be differentiated into: primary (given by the conditions, as well as the formal characteristics of the organization); secondary (the distribution of role functions in the process of solving problems, for example, depending on the communicative qualities of the participants). Any group activity requires an elementary separation of functions. Without this, the functioning of even such a system as the relationship between two people is impossible. For the optimal regulation of the control system, a rational relationship between the given and arbitrary distribution of functional responsibilities is necessary. The arbitrary (secondary) distribution of functions is determined, on the one hand, by the system of tasks that the group solves, and on the other hand, by the individual-typical, personal and socio-psychological characteristics of the members of the group. In cohesive groups, the leader is more effective than in less cohesive ones. "Group cohesion" and "leadership effectiveness" are interdependent variables. A group can be cohesive only with an optimal distribution of functions between its members, so it is natural that the effectiveness of leadership will be greater; this quality of a cohesive group is a consequence of agreement within the group.

It is also interesting for us that many groups are isolated from the usual social environment (expeditions, crews of ships and spacecraft). The measure of a group's autonomy can be expressed in the nature of its behavior in a conflict situation. With high autonomy of the group, the conflict "closes" to some external object (for example, any person who is not part of the group; a device regarded as an external element). The weak autonomy of the group is expressed in the conflict that closes between its members. Social isolation, perhaps more than physical, affects a person's well-being. But in contrast to individual isolation, the absence of the usual social circle is compensated by an increase in the level of interpersonal relations within the group itself, although to certain limits. The narrowing of the circle and the deepening of communication quickly exhaust the informative value of each of the members of the group, which ultimately leads to individual isolation.

The autonomy of the group acts as a consequence not only of physical conditions, but also of internal and external socio-psychological ones. This is expressed in the fact that a well-working group, included in interactions with other groups, sometimes shows aggressiveness towards members of other groups.

In the activity of any person or group of people, a motive is distinguished. As a motive, it is the source or cause of an action. In the conditions of individual problem solving, the motive is associated with the level of claims of a given person and his capabilities. And in the conditions of joint work of a group of people, the claim of one may not be consistent with the claims of another.

The nature of the motivation of each member of the group and the entire group in goals differs in strength and direction. The internal motivation of each member of a group or collective is determined primarily by the conditions for solving problems, which can strengthen or weaken it. The strength of motivation depends on the mutual influence of group members on each other. With a high level of positive attitude to work, the motivation of each member and the entire group increases. The orientation of motivation is expressed through the orientation of the individual to personal success (to himself), collectivist (to the group) and business (to the task). Orientation to one's own or group results is directly dependent on the degree of interconnectedness between group members. With greater motivation, the motivation of group members for the overall effectiveness of joint activities increases, or a conflict arises in the group up to the failure to solve the problem.

8. Diverse in structure is a system of additional factors.

The individual psychological characteristics of the members of the group and its homogeneity-heterogeneity in various psychological characteristics are the essence of intra-group factors (there are two of them):

the first factor is the level of individual characteristics of group members. This is an indicator of the capabilities that each participant in joint actions has individually (this can include neurodynamic, psychomotor, intellectual, socio-psychological characteristics of people);

the second factor is the homogeneity-heterogeneity of the group (the degree of similarity between people in the group). For one type of joint activity, closeness, the similarity of group members in some way, is important. For other types of work, contrast and differences are a condition for the successful completion of group tasks. Of particular importance are the age and gender differences of people: their role in regulating interactions (communication, relationships) is extremely large.

The homogeneity-heterogeneity factor of a group has two levels:

The 1st level of homogeneity-heterogeneity of the group (the degree of similarity-contrast of probable participants in the interaction) is the ratio of their individual (natural), personal and socio-psychological parameters (temperament, intelligence, character, motivation, interests, value orientations, worldview positions). This level is involved in the regulation of the effectiveness of joint activities and interpersonal relationships of people. However, its regulatory function may be little realized by the members of the group. This does not mean at all that partners do not see real similarities or differences between themselves. It's just that it's so obvious that it's taken for granted;

The 2nd level of homogeneity-heterogeneity of the group is the ratio (similarity-difference) of their opinions, assessments, attitudes to themselves, to a partner, to other people, to the objective world. The second level is divided into two sublevels:

primary (or original). This sublevel is the initial data before the interaction of the ratio of opinions, assessments (about the world of objects and about their own kind) and attitudes (to the world of objects and towards their own kind);

the secondary sublevel is the ratio (similarity-difference) of opinions, assessments and relationships as a result of interaction between group members. It is a consequence of the interaction of opinions, assessments and relations of communicating partners and is regulated by such mechanisms of social behavior as imitation, suggestion, conformity. The degree of positive variability of opinions, assessments, positions is one of the main indicators of group cohesion and solidarity. This sublevel is transformed due to variability. Variability depends not only on the initial ratio of the parameters of the primary sublevel of heterogeneity, but also on the first level of heterogeneity of the group, i.e. from the ratio of individual, personal and socio-psychological characteristics of the members of the group. In turn, changing and accepting other opinions, assessments, attitudes is involved in the formation of value orientations, interests, i.e. there is a change in the first level of homogeneity - heterogeneity.

The initial, initial ratio of opinions, assessments and attitudes in the group characterizes the unity of views and expresses the similarity-difference of interests, value orientations and personal attitudes. Partners are not only aware of the similarity-difference in their opinions, assessments, relationships, but also feel its real significance for joint activities and interpersonal relationships.

From all of the above, we can conclude that a variety of systems of factors are involved in the regulation of the effectiveness of group activity:

a) non-group (physical and social);

b) intra-group (norms, interpersonal relationships, initial and resulting);

c) impersonal (homogeneity-heterogeneity in terms of individual psychological parameters);

d) intrapersonal (individual psychological characteristics of group members, their condition, initial opinions, assessments and attitudes). "

The factor linking all these systems is the factor of social significance of the joint activity of a group of people.

Analyzing the literature on the phenomenon of "joint activity", we see that there are several different approaches to the interpretation of joint activity, which depend on the belonging of the authors to different branches of psychology. But the greatest attention is paid to the phenomenon of "joint activity" in social psychology. Here the term "joint activity" is considered as the main condition for the socio-psychological integration of the individuals included in it. Joint activity objectively has a multi-purpose character, which is due to its intra- and inter-system links. The fact that acts of individual activity are a condition for the existence and reproduction of both the individual himself and the processes of group activity as a whole indicates the interpenetration and mutual enrichment of individual and joint activities, and the interaction of individual and social normative conditions of the joint process (Rubtsov V. V. 1989; dictionary, 1999).

So, joint activity is an organized system of activity of interacting individuals, aimed at the expedient production (reproduction) of objects of material and spiritual culture, and where the hallmarks of joint activity are:

In addition, literary sources indicate the presence of a psychological structure of joint activity. For example, Zhuravlev A.L. (2000) argues that the main components of the psychological structure of individual activity, previously identified in the general theory of psychology by Ananiev B.G., Zinchenko V.P., Leontiev A.N., Lomov B.F., Rubenshtein S.L. and many other researchers can be used to analyze the structure of joint activities. The description of the psychological structure of an activity usually begins with the identification of its goals. The overall purpose of the joint activity is an essential component of the structure of the joint activity. It is understood as an ideally presented future result, which seeks to achieve a community of individuals, that is, a collective subject. The common goal can be described in the form of more specific joint tasks, the gradual solution of which brings the collective subject closer to achieving the common goal.

An obligatory component of the psychological structure of joint activity is a common motive. This is what induces the community of individuals to perform joint activities, that is, the direct motivating force.

The next component in the structure of joint activities is joint actions aimed at the implementation of current and future tasks of joint activities and carried out with the help of numerous means of joint activities, both individual and group means, methods, and techniques.

The structure of joint activities is completed by the overall result obtained by a group of participants in joint activities. Here, not only the general objective result is important, but also its subjective reflection by individual and collective subjects. The end result of joint activities can be expressed through subjective individual and group assessments of what has been achieved in joint activities.

In addition, one of the most important components that have a direct impact on the effectiveness of joint activities is communication. Communication is organized in the course of joint activity, “about” it, and it is in this process that people need to exchange both information and the activity itself, that is, to develop forms and norms of joint actions (Lomov B.F., 1975. P. 132; reader , 2000). In the course of joint activities, it is extremely important for participants not only to exchange information, but also to organize an “exchange of actions”, to plan common activities.

The most important condition for the implementation of joint activities are the processes of distribution, association (integration), consistency (coordination) and management of individual goals, motives, actions and results, that is, all of these processes are related to all the main structures that make up the activity.

It is also important to emphasize that if a particular type of activity of the group does not correspond to any characteristic or it lacks separate structural components of joint activity, this does not mean that this type of activity completely lacks the properties of joint activity. An activity with an incomplete structure is considered by many authors to be a kind of joint activity. And empirical studies of the joint activities of A.L. Zhuravlev (2000) showed that in real life there can be a so-called joint activity with an incomplete structure - not a complete joint activity. Activity with an incomplete structure, in his opinion, remains at the same time a kind of joint activity. Moreover, the absence of one or another element of the whole can lead to a large number of varieties of such joint activities, for example:

In addition, it is necessary to note the role of interaction in the process of joint activities. And so, in the process of joint activity, there is a unity of two directions of influence of its participants: firstly, these are joint actions on a common subject of labor, which necessitate the use of the main structural components of the activity (goals, motives, actions and results, etc.). ); secondly, these are the mutual influences of the participants in joint activities, which are generated by the relations of production and which necessitate the selection and use of new elements in the analysis of joint activities. Such constituent components of joint activities are interactions between participants in joint activities, but not all, namely those that are determined by the focus on the common subject of joint activities, that is, subject-oriented interactions. Under the interaction here Zhuravlev A.L. (2000) understands such a system of actions of participants in joint activities, in which the actions of one person or a group of persons determine certain actions of other people, and the actions of the latter, in turn, cause certain actions of the first persons. The presence of interactions between people is the main distinguishing feature of joint activity compared to individual. However, they differ not only and even not so much in the presence or absence of interactions between participants in the activity, but in the nature of the inclusion of interaction in the structure of the activity itself.

In fact, the structure of joint activity is formed, functions and develops precisely through the subject-oriented or target interaction of participants in the activity, which, in turn, are included in the psychological structure of joint activity, on the one hand, and on the other hand, change the structures of individual activities of its participants, subordinating them to common goals and objectives of joint activities. Subject-oriented interaction as one of the real manifestations of social relations between the participants in the activity leads to the formation of some of their community in the form of a labor collective or a group of meditative training as a subject of joint activity or a collective subject.

After analyzing the literature we read, we see that at present in social psychology there are structural and dynamic or procedural approaches to the analysis of joint activities that complement each other.

In accordance with the structural approach, researchers focus on the analysis of the structural components of joint activities. Thus, having made a theoretical analysis of the works of supporters of this approach (Abulkhanov R.F., Vostroknutov A.I., Golovakha E.I., Zhuravlev A.L., Lomov B.F., Nikolov L. et al., 2000) the following signs of joint activity can be distinguished, where the signs are understood as distinctive features, properties that make it possible to determine the specifics of joint activity as an integral and relatively independent phenomenon:

In accordance with the dynamic approach to the analysis of joint activity, the attention of researchers is concentrated on studying the processes of its change and development (A.L. Zhuravlev, 2000). This is the basis for the search for the specifics of joint activity in comparison with individual activity. In fact, the dynamic approach is the essence of the social-psychological theory of activity, namely: joint activity unfolds in a set of group processes that allow us to analyze the content of joint activity and the forms of its organization in the tables below (Tables 1, 2):

Table 1

The main features and dynamic properties of joint activity and its collective subject:

Sign of joint activity (SD)

Socio-psychological process (SD)

1. Having a common goal

goal setting

(goal setting)

Purposefulness

2. Motivation to work

together (shared) motivation

Motivation

(motivation)

motivation

3. Division of activities into functionally related components

Distribution of functions between participants

Structured

(distribution)

4. Consolidation

individual activities

An association

(combination)

Integration

(unity)

5. Coordinated execution of distributed and combined individual

activities

Coordination

(coordination)

Consistency

(coordination)

6. Availability of management as

attribute function of SD

Control

(regulation)

Organization and manageability (adjustability)

7. Single end

result

Evaluation of group results

Productivity

(performance)

8. Having a single

space and

simultaneity of execution

individual

activities

Functioning in a single space and time

Conditions (spatial and temporal) SD group

table 2

The main properties of joint activities are their empirical manifestations (referents):

Characteristics (property) of the SD and the collective subject	Empirical manifestations of the properties of SD and the collective subject
1. Purposefulness	The ratio of individual and group goals: compliance, mutual complementation, discrepancy, contradiction, etc.
2. Motivation	Active, interested implementation of the SD, the focus of work, similarities - differences in the orientation of the SD participants, the intensity of involvement of the SD participants, etc.
3. Structured (distribution)	The nature of the distribution of functions, rigor, clarity, the presence / absence of duplication, partial overlap of functions, insurance
4. Integration (unity)	The level of interconnectedness of participants, the degree of their dependence on each other, the density of functional connections
5. Consistency (coordination)	Sequence of performance of activities, rhythm, correspondence of individual activities to each other, the presence of connectivity between the stages of work, discipline of activity
6. Organization and controllability (adjustability)	Following control actions, promoting control, counteracting it, avoiding control actions, self-government
7. Productivity (performance)	Joint Outcome Indicators (quantitative, qualitative)
8. Conditions (spatial and temporary) SD	Location of workplaces of participants in the activity, features of the territory (zone of work), distribution in time of individual activities performed

According to Zhuravlev A.L. (2000), socio-psychological processes are built on three foundations: 1) structural elements of joint activity; 2) a group of people - participants in joint activities; 3) on the subject-directed (target) of their interaction, including both the impact of each other's participants, and their joint impact on the common subject of activity. That is, in object-directed interaction, two main properties of joint activity are simultaneously integrated: objectivity (through orientation to the object of activity) and subjectivity (in the form of compatibility, collectivity).

Briefly summarizing, it can be argued that the main theoretical scheme for analyzing the psychology of a group in the process of joint activity should be the following sequence: subject-oriented (target) interaction - socio-psychological (group) processes - joint activity - psychology of the group itself.

The very same socio-psychological analysis of joint activity, regardless of the approach to the analysis of the phenomenon of "joint activity", should be carried out in close connection with the study of the subject of joint activity or a collective subject. However, the analysis of theoretical and experimental studies of joint activity demonstrates a wide range of ideas about its subject. However, behind all this diversity, two schemes for its description are visible:

1. The subject of joint activity is an individual. In a number of works, this paradoxical situation is declared directly: these are the cases when the authors talk about a joint-individual model of joint activity (Dontsov A.I., Dubovskaya E.M., Ulanovskaya I.M., 2003), about an individual type of problem solving in joint activity (Shcherbo N.P.) or designate by the term “joint activity” the situation of an individual solution of a problem in the conditions of silent co-presence of another person (Obozov N.N., 2000). a similar view of the subject of joint activity is characteristic of many Western works, in which joint and individual activity are considered as two poles of the same continuum. Silverman J. and Dzheringer I. believe that in joint activity a subject with a higher level of cognitive development, as it were, “absorbs” the activity of an individual with a lower level, so that in the end only one partner acts, and the other agrees with him.

2. The subject of joint activity is a set of individuals who solve one “common” problem in “the same space at the same time” (Umansky L.I., Dontsov A.I., Dubovskaya E.M., Ulanovskaya I.M. , 2003). Researchers who adhere to this idea of the subject of joint activity build their research according to the scheme: two or more participants are offered a certain task, and the process of solving it is interpreted based on the a priori belief that it is implemented by a group, collective, cumulative subject (these terms are used as synonyms ).

In addition, it is known that back in the 20th century, such researchers as V. Mede, F. Allport and V.M. Bekhterev established a difference in the course of human mental processes in conditions of individual and joint activity. And it was found that comparative analysis mental processes and functions in conditions of individual and joint activities, a clear distinction is possible, taking into account the interconnectedness of subjects. Thus, two levels are conventionally distinguished:

Obozov N.N. (reader, 2000) systematized some experimental data and analyzed the differences in the dynamics of mental processes and functions in conditions of individual and joint activities, taking into account the level of interconnectedness of subjects. His analysis of the study of mental processes and functions in conditions of the first level of interconnectedness or "silent co-presence" showed that the presence of other people leads to an increase in the strength of muscle tension and memory productivity, in particular, an improvement in long-term memory and an increase in the number of directed (by similarity) and free associations. At the same time, under these conditions, the subject experiences a decrease in various types of sensitivity; deterioration in attention and indicators of simple mental actions that require concentration of attention; a decrease in the number of directed associations (by contrast); decrease in the quality of results when solving "abstract" problems. Also Obozov N.N. claims that a detailed analysis of the data accumulated on this issue suggests that the joint stay causes the co-excitation of subjects who solve individual problems, which affects the dynamics of mental processes and the level of manifestation of functions, and also contributes to the little-conscious "rapprochement" of subjects in the dynamics of mental processes and functions , as well as in assessments, opinions, judgments.

In the conditions of the second level of interconnectedness or “mutual influence”, changes in mental processes and functions compared to individual activity are recorded according to the following parameters: the increase in the accuracy of perception of simple objects (number of details, size), as well as the perception of time, the increase in the accuracy of perception of complex objects during long periods of time. exposure, improvement in the definition of similar elements in objects, but at the same time, there is a deterioration in performance in the conditions of "interactions" in terms of the quality parameter of complex intellectual activity. Thus, the strengthening of mutual dependence causes significant changes in mental processes and functions of subjects.

An important condition for more effective joint activities is teamwork. Workability is defined as the unity (optimality) of interacting people in the performance of joint activities. The signs of operability are: high productivity of group members, accuracy and consistency of actions, favorable interpersonal relationships, reliability of teamwork, speed of mastering new joint actions, stability of their implementation. That is, we can assume that the workability depends on the level of empathy. Workability, as a rule, does not lead to the emergence of such phenomena of interpersonal communication as emotional closeness, identification, orientation towards intimate-personal communication of partners. Rather, it is the result of the successful implementation by the group of its instrumental functions, which makes it possible to achieve high productivity of activity, high satisfaction of group members with their work and group membership, and also generates a good level of mutual understanding, an adequate reflection by the participants of communication of everything that happens in the group (Babushkin G.D. ., Kulagina E.V., 2001).

In addition to all of the above, it is important to mention that the effectiveness of joint activities and the formation of optimal interpersonal relationships are due to three types of compatibility - social, psychological and psychophysiological, where "compatibility" refers to a multidimensional and multilevel phenomenon of intragroup interaction and relationships, which reflects the state of mutual satisfaction of group members , as a result of the optimal combination of their individual psychological characteristics and interpersonal roles. And on the basis of compatibility and operability, various strategies for the behavior of participants in joint activities are formed (Babushkin G.D., Kulagina E.V., 2001). So, in joint activities, the following strategies of behavior of participants in relation to each other are possible:

assistance as effective assistance to others, active contribution to the achievement of common goals;

counteracting the achievement of goals by other participants in joint activities, the commission of actions that are not coordinated with them;

avoidance of interaction, active withdrawal, avoidance of interaction with partners even in cases where circumstances not only facilitate interaction, but also require it.

A different combination of these three strategies determines the possible situations of interaction. If we consider dyadic interaction as its simplest variant, and used in the practical study described below, then we can distinguish the following series of socio-psychological types of interaction:

Collaboration - both partners assist each other, actively contribute to the achievement of the individual goals of each and the common goals of joint activities.

Confrontation - both partners oppose each other and impede the achievement of the individual goals of each.

Avoidance of interaction - partners try to avoid active interaction.

Unidirectional assistance - one of the participants in the joint activity contributes to the achievement of the goals of the other, and the second evades interaction with him.

Unidirectional opposition - one of the partners prevents the achievement of the goals of the other, and the second evades interaction with him.

Contrasting interaction - one of the partners tries to assist the other, and the second resorts to a strategy of actively counteracting him.

Compromise interaction - both partners partly contribute, partly oppose each other.

Summing up the review of the literature on the phenomenon of "joint activity", we can briefly characterize it as a process of group achievement of goals, where the group acts as an aggregate subject of joint activity with certain motives, methods and interpersonal relationships. Common knowledge, views and ideas form a group consciousness, which reflects the essential features of joint activity. And the achievement of positive results of joint activity is influenced by: the significance of its goals, the distribution of roles in accordance with group norms of behavior and the claims of individuals, the organization of self-government, the ethical regulation of interpersonal relations, and the psychological compatibility of group members. Internal solidarity, coordination of individual actions, mutual support, optimal management are the conditions for the successful implementation of joint activities.

N. Defoy

P.S. Modified and edited this article was included in the book: Natalia Defoy "The influence of meditation training on the level and channels of empathy"

Literature:

Babushkin G.D., Kulagina E.V. Psychological compatibility and teamwork in sports activities. - Omsk: SibGAFK, 2001.

Gulenko V.V., Tyshchenko V.P. Jung at school. Socionics - inter-age pedagogy. - Novosibirsk: NGU, 1997.

Dontsov A.I., Dubovskaya E.M., Ulanovskaya I.M. Development of criteria for analysis of joint activities. - M., 2003.

Brief psychological dictionary. - R-on-D .: "Phoenix", 1999.

Lomov B.F. Communication as a problem of general psychology // Methodological problems of social psychology. - M., "Science", 1975, p.124-135

Obozov N.N. Are we a match for each other at work and in our personal lives? - S.-P.: "Perseus", 1997.

Obozov N.N., Ovchinnikova V.S. Installation for the study of sensorimotor compatibility. //Electronics and sports.// - L., 1968.

Rubtsov V.V. Joint activity as a problem of genetic psychology // Psychological journal. No. 3, 1989.

Socio-psychological problems of joint activity in stressful and extreme situations // Actual problems psychology: traditions and modernity. Abstracts of international Kostyukov readings: In 2 vols. - Kyiv, 1992. T. 2.

Reader: Social psychology in the works of domestic psychologists. - S. - P., 2000.