There are a number of tactics that Party can use in an effort to prevail in conflict. The more important ones, presented in an order that moves from lighter contentious tactics to their heavier counterparts, are:
The light-to-heavy sequence is often seen as conflict unfolds (though not all the tactics in the list are found in every conflict), reflecting the common tendency for conflict to escalate.
Ingratiation can take the form of the following:
This can be a powerful tool if Other does not see that it is being manipulated.
Shaming is a common and powerful technique around the world. The greatest danger with shaming is that it will drive Other away from the Party, weakening Party's future influence on Other. The solution to this problem is reintegrating shaming, which combines shaming with gestures that reaffirm Other's bonds with Party.
The tit-for-tat strategy is used by rewarding Other for cooperation and punishing Other for noncooperation. It may well be the most common of all the contentious tactics. Its main drawback is that it can create a conflict spiral (a vicious circle of action and reaction), which leaves Other without a clear understanding that it can do business with Party.
This problem can be mitigated by giving Other a grace period before administering a punishment, by explaining the tit-for-tat procedure in words, and by occasionally shifting to cooperation during a conflict spiral with the hope that Other will reciprocate.
Promises, threats, and coercive commitments all must be credible to be effective. This means that Other must see Party as having the capability and intent to take the action that has been mentioned and having enough surveillance over Other's behaviour to tell whether Other has complied.
Physical harm to persons or property can have emotional as well as instrumental (strategic) sources, and its use often reflects both kinds of sources working together. Instrumental violence is frequently coupled with tactics as tit-for-tat, threats, or coercive commitments.