MARCH 2025 | 21 THE OKLAHOMA BAR JOURNAL communication can transform the way we approach conflict, enabling us to advocate more effectively while preserving relationships and promoting lasting resolutions. By integrating these principles into our professional lives, we can ensure that our legal practices remain dynamic, compassionate and responsive to the evolving needs of our clients and the broader community. Together, we can lead by example, demonstrating how a more thoughtful, human-centered approach to dispute resolution can create a stronger, more empathetic legal system. ABOUT THE AUTHORS Zana L. Williams is an attorney, advocate and the founder/CEO of Mindful Resolutions, delivering communication training through high-stakes negotiation, mindfulness and restorative justice. She has more than 18 years of experience in legal, youth-based and high-conflict roles and certifications in managing aggressive behaviors, nonviolent communication and trust-based relational intervention. Ms. Williams was named a U.S. Embassy keynote in Africa; her programs – from classrooms to boardrooms – reduce tensions, improve relationships and enhance productivity. Kathryn R. Wilson is a second-year J.D. candidate at the OCU School of Law and an intern at Mindful Resolutions. She holds an M.S. and B.S. in sociology. Ms. Wilson is a licensed legal intern at the Oklahoma County District Attorney’s Office: Juvenile Bureau, a distinguished member of the Oklahoma City University Law Review and the researcher and writer for the Philip C. Jessup International Law Moot Court Competition team. ENDNOTES 1. Stephen J. Ware, Principles of Alternative Dispute Resolution, 6-8, 4th ed, (2023). 2. Id. at 7. 3. Id. at 7-8. 4. Benard S. Mayer, Beyond Neutrality: Confronting the Crisis in Conflict Resolution, Jossey-Bass (2010). 5. Ware at 421. 6. 97 Model Rules of Professional Conduct 1.4 (American Bar Association, 2024); Okla. Stat. tit. 5A, app 3-A R. 1.4 (b); See also Ware at 421 (adding that [to] identify their clients’ interests, lawyers should learn to interview their clients in a way that makes the client comfortable telling the lawyer the whole truth and nothing but the truth. And forthright communication must go in the other direction, too. The Model Rules of Professional Conduct state that “[a] lawyer shall explain a matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit the client to make informed decisions regarding the representation.”). 7. See Ware at 15 (generally, “a lawyer may, for example, believe that a particular process of dispute resolution is generally very costly and low in quality. But that lawyer may have a professional obligation to recommend that process if it appears to be in the client’s interests.”). 8. Ware at 421-22. 9. See Ware at 422-23 (explaining that “[t]o avoid falling into the trap of letting your bottom line become your reference point, be aware of your absolute limits, but do not focus on them. Instead, work energetically on formulating your goals – and let your bottom line take care of itself. Orient firmly toward your goal in the planning and initial stages of negotiation, then gradually reorient toward a bottom line as that becomes necessary to close the deal. In other words, reach for the stars while keeping your feet firmly on the ground.”). 10. Id. 11. Id. at 13-4. 12. Id. 13. Id. 14. Id. at 13. 15. Id. at 14. 16. Leonard L. Riskin, “Mindfulness: Foundational Training for Dispute Resolution,” 54 J. Legal Education, 79, 83 (2004). 17. See id. (explaining that “[t]he meditation practice begins with developing concentration, usually by focusing on the breath. Next the meditator directs his attention to bodily sensations, emotions, and thoughts, then works toward ‘bare attention,’ a nonjudgmental moment-to-moment awareness of bodily sensations, sounds, thoughts, and emotions as they arise and fall out of consciousness. Mindfulness meditation (also known as insight meditation and vipassana meditation) both requires and produces a measure of equanimity, which reinforces the ability to fix attention where we want it to be.”). 18. See id. at 80 (explaining that “[m]indlessness impairs our work as practitioners of dispute resolution in several ways. For example, it could mean that a mediator or negotiator is not very ‘present’ with the other participants or with himself, i.e., not fully aware of what is going on. This diminishes the professional’s ability to gather information and to listen to, and understand, others and himself, and even to achieve satisfaction from his work. The second problem is that, in the grip of mindlessness, we sometimes rely on old habits and assumptions, rather than deciding what behavior is most suitable in the precise circumstances we are encountering.”). 19. Id. 20. See Leonard L. Riskin and Rachel Wohl, “Mindfulness in the Heat of Conflict: Taking STOCK,” Vol. 20 Harvard Negotiation Law Review, 121, 123 (2015) (Riskin and Wohl explain that even those skilled in using conflict management tools may fail to apply them effectively due to deficits in awareness, referred to as the “Six Obstacles”: overly self-centered perspectives, strong negative emotions, habitual reactions, emotional sensitivity (excessive or insufficient), lack of social skills and inadequate focus.). 21. Supra note 18. 22. See Riskin at 88 (“Exercises on listening (active or not) often form important parts of such [education and training programs that deal with mindfulness and negotiation or mediation]. Students, already in a reasonably mindful state, are asked to engage in activities in which their ability to listen is challenged by emotional or other distractions, and they are asked to be aware of these distractions. The programs also include exercises on negotiation that encourage the students to notice and examine the assumptions about negotiation that they hold and implement. Similarly, in mediation training, exercises are intended to examine assumptions, strategies, and techniques, at many levels of the decision-making process.”). 23. Liza Varvogli and Christina Darviri, “Stress Management Techniques: Evidence-Based Procedures That Reduce Stress and Promote Health,” Vol. 5 Health Science Journal, 74, 74-89 (2011). 24. Id. 25. See Cheryl M. Graves, Donyelle L. Gray and Ora Schub, “Restorative Justice: Making the Case for Restorative Justice,” Vol. 39 Clearinghouse Review Journal of Poverty Law and Policy. 219, 220 (July-August 2005). (Restorative justice models draw from centuries-old traditions of Indigenous cultures, including Native American, African and Maori practices. For instance, the Navajo tradition of peacemaking involves victims, offenders and their families or clans in a communal process to “talk things out in a good way” and agree on practical solutions. Similarly, the Maori-inspired family group conference emphasizes the participation of children and families in resolving disputes, fostering accountability and addressing victims’ needs for healing.). 26. Id.; See also John Braithwaite, “Restorative Justice: Assessing Optimistic and Pessimistic Accounts,” Vol. 25 Crime & Justice, 1, 55-65 (1999), www.jstor.org/stable/1147608. (Adding that “there are increasingly solid empirical grounds for suspecting that we can often reduce crime by replacing narrow, formal, and strongly punitive responsibility with broad, informal, weak sanctions – by making the many dialogically responsible instead of the few criminally responsible. By dialogically responsible I mean responsible for participating in a dialogue, listening, being open to accountability for failings and to suggestions for remedying those failing.”). 27. Graves, Gray and Schub at 223. 28. Supra note 25. 29. Id. 30. Supra note 14. Statements or opinions expressed in the Oklahoma Bar Journal are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Oklahoma Bar Association, its officers, Board of Governors, Board of Editors or staff.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTk3MQ==