Various crises have plagued the EU's foreign policy over the last decade. As some member states increasingly question the founding principles of the EU, it is reasonable to expect that national representatives serving in preparatory bodies in the EU are forced to operate under stricter instructions from their capitals. Nevertheless, strong adherence to the coordination reflex and problem‐solving ethos is still prevalent within the political and security committee (PSC), the main policy coordination body within EU foreign policy. In order to understand this counterintuitive puzzle we conducted interviews with 20 PSC representatives. We found that national representatives primarily internalize and adhere to the rules and practices at the level of the group (procedural norms) rather than the founding principles of the EU (constitutive norms). Contrary to existing research, we argue that a theoretical distinction between these norms is necessary in order to understand fully how crises and contestation affect microlevel socialization.