5 Insist on Using Objective Criteria

The chapter opens by noting that conflicting interests persist despite rapport or creativity, and that settling on willpower leads to inefficiency, strain, and unwise outcomes. The remedy is to negotiate on grounds independent of either side’s will—objective criteria such as safety codes, market value, precedent, or scientific models.

Using a house-foundation dispute, the text shows rejecting horse-trading in favor of safety standards. It argues principled negotiation—anchored in fair, accepted benchmarks—produces wiser, more amicable, and more efficient agreements, particularly with multiple parties or constituencies. A Law of the Sea example demonstrates how an MIT economic model reframed fee debates from positional standoffs to reasoned adjustments on both sides.

The chapter then explains how to develop objective criteria: identify multiple fair standards (e.g., replacement cost, blue book, court awards), favor legitimacy and practicality, and apply reciprocity tests. It also presents fair procedures—"one cuts, the other chooses," taking turns, drawing lots, expert advice, mediation, or last-best-offer arbitration—to secure outcomes independent of will and harness parties’ incentives for mutual gain.

Guidance for negotiating with criteria follows: frame each issue as a joint search for fairness (“What’s your theory?”), agree first on principles, and reason openly about which standards apply and how. When different legitimate standards point to different results, splitting the difference on principled grounds is acceptable, or the parties can seek a neutral view on which standard to use.

The chapter insists on never yielding to pressure—bribes, threats, trust appeals, or obstinacy—but yielding to principle only. This stance shifts process toward merits, strengthens resistance to arbitrary concessions, and often improves substantive outcomes. If the other side won’t justify its position, choose between your best alternative and accepting any objectively justified offer. A brief insurance case shows principled use of standards enabling a swift, fair settlement.