This chapter analyzes the complex ways in which new norms and standards emerge out of multi-stakeholder initiatives when stakeholders have conflicting interests. We present a team game-theoretical framework in which players can switch between two kinds of reasoning: an individual mode in which stakeholders aim for the best possible outcome for themselves and a "we-mode" in which they are genuinely concerned with finding a standard that is optimal for the whole group. We show that a higher inclination towards "we-mode" reasoning is beneficial overall and maximizes individual payoffs and the outcome for the entire group. We argue that cooperation is therefore in the rational self-interest of stakeholders; it is not just desirable from a vague moral perspective. We conclude that in a world where national regulatory frameworks are losing their grip, only norms that have been worked out by a sufficiently large number of "we-reasoning" stakeholders can be called legitimate.