Trust in the Leader of Collaborative Process Design and Facilitation
SKILL SK-21 | Negotiation & Mediation
Principled Persuasion
The ability to make arguments that rely on objective criteria - shared norms, precedents, legal standards, or independently verifiable evidence - rather than on positional pressure, personal authority, or power asymmetry.
How to Develop It
1. Criteria identification
Before a negotiation, identify at least three objective criteria relevant to the issues: what does the law say? What are comparable project precedents? What do independent technical assessments indicate? Research each before the session.
2. Criteria introduction practice
Practice presenting criteria as shared reference points, not constraints: I thought it would be useful to look at what other similar projects have done. Here is what I found - I am curious whether you see it the same way. This invites rather than imposes.
3. Pressure response drill
Practice responding to pressure-based arguments with a calm redirect to criteria: I understand the pressure here, and I want to find something that works for both sides. Can we look at what the standard approach has been in similar situations?
Why This Skill Matters
In SE-GRM contexts, negotiations often occur across significant power differentials. When the stronger party relies on power rather than principle, agreement is obtained but not owned - leading to future contest or breakdown. Principled persuasion enables agreements parties genuinely accept as fair.
Observable Behaviors
+ Identifies relevant objective criteria before any negotiation begins
+ Presents criteria to all parties early as shared references, not weapons
+ Invites the other party to propose criteria rather than imposing them unilaterally
+ Declines to accept arguments based on power or pressure alone - redirects to criteria
+ Can articulate the principled basis for every commitment in a final agreement
Self-Assessment
Read each Reflective Question below and honestly consider how consistently you demonstrate this in your actual fieldwork, not how you think you should behave, but how you do behave. Then assign a score from 1 (lowest) to 4 (highest):
(1) Not yet developed: Rarely demonstrated in practice
(2) Emerging: Demonstrated sometimes, but inconsistently or only under favorable conditions
(3) Established: Demonstrated reliably in most situations, including moderately challenging ones
(4) Adaptive: Demonstrated reliably even in high-pressure situations, and practitioner actively helps
Common Gaps & Pitfalls
! Using objective criteria selectively - only when they favor your position
! Presenting criteria as constraints rather than shared reference points
! Yielding to pressure in high-stakes moments when principled alternatives exist
Reflective Questions Score from 1 (lowest) to 4 (highest):
I identify objective criteria relevant to negotiations before they begin
I introduce criteria as shared references, not as weapons in the negotiation
When faced with pressure arguments, I redirect to criteria rather than capitulating or escalating
Every commitment in agreements I reach can be explained on principled grounds
This website shared to the public for free courtesy of the
THE CONFLICT RESOLUTION GROUP FOUNDATION, INC.
www.coregroup.org.ph * info@coregroup.org.ph
through our SustainABILITIES Lab Project
© Pixelhaze 2024. A Hostinger Website Builder Template by Pixelhaze Studio
This toolkit is provided for general guidance and informational purposes only. It is not intended as legal, technical, or professional advice. While efforts have been made to ensure accuracy and relevance, users are encouraged to exercise their own judgment and consult appropriate experts when necessary. The developers of this toolkit assume no liability for any decisions or actions taken based on its use.