Insist on objective criteria to evaluate options
Agree on an independent standard — market rate, precedent, expert opinion — before applying it to the specific deal.
Why it works
When each party insists on their preferred terms, the only resolution is power — who yields. Objective criteria displace this: if both parties commit to a fair standard in advance, applying it is procedurally legitimate and neither party loses face by accepting it. The negotiation shifts from "what do we each want?" to "what does the standard say?" — a more solvable question.
How to do it
- Identify relevant objective standards before the negotiation: market rates, legal precedent, professional norms, independent appraisals.
- Propose the standard before proposing a number: "Let’s use market rate as our benchmark — what does your data show?"
- If you disagree on the right standard, negotiate the standard first, then apply it.
- Be willing to accept an unfavorable outcome if the agreed standard produces it — credibility depends on consistency.
Evidence
Using objective criteria converts the negotiation from a will contest to a reasoning exercise. Research on procedural fairness shows that people accept worse substantive outcomes when the process is perceived as fair — objective criteria create that legitimacy. Lind & Tyler (1988) consolidated the evidence that perceived procedural fairness drives acceptance of outcomes independently of how favorable those outcomes are. (observational)
Objective criteria can be cherry-picked — each party tends to favor standards that support their position. The principled move is to agree on the standard before knowing which direction it cuts.
Sources
- Lind & Tyler (1988), The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice
- Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice. New York: Plenum Press.
Common mistake
Proposing objective criteria only when they favor you, which destroys the legitimacy the criteria are supposed to provide — the other party will not accept criteria selected for your convenience.
Practice this with IX Coach
7 days free, then $40/month (~$1.30/day).
More practices for Principled Negotiation, Made Practical
- Separate the people from the problem
Address relationship concerns and substantive issues in different registers — treating people well and the problem hard.
- Focus on interests, not positions
Ask why a position is taken — the underlying interest is almost always more negotiable than the stated demand.
- Invent options for mutual gain before selecting
Generate multiple creative options without commitment before evaluating any — the solution space is usually larger than the initial positions suggest.
- Frame proposals as "yesable propositions"
Make your proposals easy for the counterpart to say yes to — not easy on your terms, but easy to accept as legitimate.
- Acknowledge emotions explicitly in negotiation
Name what you see the other side feeling — it reduces defensive heat and keeps the substantive conversation workable.
Related concepts
- BATNA: Your Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement
Walk-away power, realistic alternatives, and why your BATNA is your negotiating power
- ZOPA: The Zone of Possible Agreement
Mapping the deal space, identifying overlap, and knowing when no deal is the right outcome
- Never Split the Difference, In Practice
The FBI hostage-negotiation toolkit, with the mechanism behind each move
- Nonviolent Communication (NVC), Made Practical
The four components, the mechanisms behind them, and an honest read on the evidence