The article discusses whether Norway's and Russia's 'bargaining experience' in the Barents Sea might have furthered the conclusion of the 2010 delimitation agreement between the two countries. Leaning on institutional theory about how bureaucratic procedures evolve into standard operating procedures, I ask whether the continuous bargaining between Norway and Russia in the Barents Sea over fisheries management and the protection of the marine environment might have accustomed the parties to reaching agreement. Is there evidence that entering compromises has become the ‘standard operating procedure’, even when the parties’ principal positions do not conform?