We continue to consider an important aspect of the activities of any enterprise - conflict management in an organization, since knowing the signs of a conflict situation, the patterns of conflict development, identifying the motives and goals of the parties to the conflict, By realizing his true interests in a specific situation and organizing a joint search for solutions, a manager can solve management problems much more effectively. Life practice shows that conflict is an integral part of human relationships, and therefore it exists as long as a person exists. As the American psychologist B. Wool noted, “Life is a process of resolving an infinite number of conflicts. Man cannot avoid them. He can only decide whether to participate in making decisions or leave it to others.” A manager at any level needs to develop skills in rational management of conflict situations, which implies choosing not only an adequate strategy (or combination of strategies), but also a set of optimal tactics and tools for influencing an opponent. It should be noted that the choice of conflict management tools in an organization is largely influenced by the previous experience of participants in conflict interaction, their attitude to the current conflict situation and the main parameters of interaction. The attitudes of the participants in the conflict, in turn, begin to determine such characteristics of the conflict as: – the goals pursued, – the partner’s perception of the situation, – the “scope” of the subject of disagreement, – the nature of interaction with the partner, – the means used to influence the partner. Based on a generalization of the results Analysis of the noted characteristics of specific conflicts can distinguish different models of conflict development: cooperation model, cooperation model, competition model: Fig. 1. Models of development of conflict interaction (according to N.V. Grishina) Based on a certain type of interaction, it is advisable to make a choice in favor of one or another tactic of behavior in a conflict situation. In general terms, tactics of behavior in conflict can be described as a set of techniques for influencing an opponent, a means of implementing a strategy, and the same tactics can be used within different strategies. The German philosopher and sociologist G. Simmel argues that the expression of hostility in conflict plays a positive role, since it allows for the preservation of relationships in situations of stress, thereby preventing the disintegration of the group, which is inevitable in the event of the expulsion of hostile individuals. So, for example, threat or pressure, considered as destructive actions, can be used in the event of the unwillingness or inability of one of the parties to concede beyond certain limits. According to V. G. Zazykin, Doctor of Psychology, Professor of the Russian Academy of Public Administration under the President of the Russian Federation: “The actions of many opponents of the conflict, regardless of its type (with the exception of intrapersonal), are characterized by stereotyping: the tactics and techniques used replace each other in a certain sequence, they themselves are not diverse. Such stereotypical behavior is determined by the “focusing” of the individual on the conflict, the strong influence of negative emotional states, which in a specific way change the perception of reality. Therefore, many conflicts proceed according to the same pattern, using the same techniques and tactics.” In general, hard, neutral and soft tactics of conflict interaction are distinguished: Fig. 2. Tactics of influencing an opponent in a conflict (according to N.I. Petrova, modified by the author) The main characteristics of tactics of influencing an opponent are as follows: Tactics of capturing and holding the object of the conflict. Used in conflicts where the object is material. Tactics of physical violence (damage). Techniques such as destruction of material assets, physical pressure, blocking other people’s activities, etc. are used. Tactics of psychological violence(damage). Most often, this tactic is used by the stronger party, which also has great opportunities to strengthen its own resources. This tactic causes offense in the opponent, hurts pride, dignity and honor. Its manifestations: insult, rudeness, offensive gestures, negative personal assessment, discriminatory measures, slander, misinformation, deception, humiliation, strict control over behavior and activities, dictatorship in interpersonal relationships. Discredit is achieved through harsh criticism and ostracism. Note that such criticism, in essence, may be fair, but it takes on a form that provokes the opponent to rash actions or statements. This technique is almost always used in emotional conflicts of a vertical orientation. In this case, one of the opponents accuses the other, who defends the interests of a group, collective, or organization, of having hidden purely personal (often selfish) interests, which in fact are supposedly the main ones for him. Pressure tactics. The range of techniques includes presenting incriminating evidence and blackmail. Risk. This tactic is designed for the effect of surprise. The risky party undertakes a series of quickly following each other, the most effective actions, to which the opposing party simply cannot fail to respond. Thus, the risky party puts its opponent under conditions of severe time pressure, which, combined with information uncertainty, forces him to make blunders and mistakes. Experience shows that it is usually those who have fewer opportunities or less chances to strengthen their resources who take risks. Waiting, “maintaining the previous state.” This tactic, which has the appearance of ending a conflict, is often used in order to obtain additional information about the opposing side, its resources, ways to increase them, and to create the impression of being peaceful. Waiting, the lack of action on the part of one of the opponents creates a kind of situation of uncertainty, and uncertainty generates tension. In this case, the opponents, being in a state of tension due to the conflict itself, are also subject to additional stress due to the uncertainty of the situation. Many cannot withstand such double pressure and take some action, usually wrong. This serves as information about the state of opponents and their capabilities. If the process is delayed, then the waiting party itself can initiate some tentative actions, even minor concessions, in order to provoke a certain reaction from the opponent and obtain the necessary information. The technique of waiting is used quite often in conflicts when the resources of opponents are approximately equal. If the opponent believed the disinformation and accepted it as the true state of affairs and balance of power, this prompts him to take active actions, which in fact are provoked, and therefore erroneous. As a result, his chances of success are sharply reduced. Demonstration of strengthening one's own resources. This tactic consists in the fact that one of the parties demonstratively lets the other know about the real possibility of increasing its own resources to such an extent that they will significantly overlap its resources. This tactic is designed to provoke a programmed reaction on the part of the opponent: his way out of a conflict situation, since his real capabilities will seem weaker, or forcing him to negotiate and seek a compromise on conditions unfavorable to him. This is a rather cunning tactic that requires acting skills on the part of the party that uses it. Everything usually unfolds according to the following scenario. In a very friendly, almost paternal tone, the opponent is told: “...I treat you very well, I even sincerely sympathize with you, so I want to warn you that you have gotten yourself involved in a very bad story. Do you know that I have... that the person on whom he depends... is my loved one...” and so on. The main thing is to convince your opponent of