A Logic for the Magic of Mindful

Negotiation
Darshan Brach

In this article, the author identifies similarities between the theories of

mindfulness meditation (and its Buddhist foundations) and interest-
based negotiation. She argues that incorporating such facets of mind-
fulness as purpose, presence, acceptance, and connectedness can
improve negotiator effectiveness as well as make the experience more
satisfying and uplifting for the negotiator.

Key words: negotiation, meditation, mindfulness, interest-based

negotiation, Buddhism.

[I]f we recognize why mediation works, we will be unlikely to

settle for less than those conditions and those states of mind
necessary for mediation to succeed.
— Albie Davis (1989: 18)

Introduction
In an article published more than fifteen years ago entitled “The Logic
behind the Magic of Mediation,” mediator Albie Davis argued that effective
mediation requires such qualities as respect, humility, and a positive and
nonjudgmental attitude (Davis 1989). She further suggested that the media-
tor’s demeanor and attitude, and the actions that flow from them, are at
least as important as clearly delineated strategies or techniques.

Darshan Brach is an adjunct professor at University of California, Hastings College of the Law in
San Francisco. Her e-mail address is darshb@aol.com.

10.1111/j.1571-9979.2007.00165.x
© 2008 President and Fellows of Harvard College Negotiation Journal January 2008 25
 Today, the cutting-edge of theory and scholarship in negotiation has
focused as well on the more amorphous, but clearly critical, role of mental
and emotional states in influencing human behavior in conflict situations.1
Numerous writers and scholars have investigated and offered a multitude of
strategies for dealing with emotions and optimizing success in negotiation.2
One such strategy gaining recognition in the field of conflict resolution
is the use of a particular form of meditation, called “mindfulness.” Mindful-
ness, derived from the ancient Theravaden Buddhist tradition, is a purpose-
ful, nonjudging, moment-to-moment awareness cultivated by meditative
practice (see Goldstein and Kornfield 1987; Gunaratana 1991; Kabat-Zinn
1994). The benefits of mindfulness meditation — for physical and emo-
tional health, quality of life, and overall well-being — have been studied
extensively over the last few decades, particularly by researchers in health
care and psychology.3 More recently, however, several theorists, including
legal scholars, have begun to articulate why lawyers, law students, and
alternative dispute resolution professionals, specifically, would benefit by
practicing mindfulness meditation (see Pounds 2004; Riskin 2004, 2006;
Rock 2005).
In this article, I explore some of the underlying connections, or paral-
lels, between the principles and practices of negotiation and meditation to
support these arguments for bringing mindfulness to negotiation. I hope to
illustrate how mindfulness can concurrently inform our negotiation prac-
tices while helping us to better incorporate our personal values into our
professional and personal worlds.
Because negotiating can be tense and stressful, living from our ideals in
such a milieu may seem like an almost impossible undertaking. Nonethe-
less, I propose that a kind of “magic” can occur when negotiators apply
mindfulness practices to negotiation. I seek a logical foundation for this
magic by examining four thematic parallels — purpose (or goals), presence,
acceptance, and connectedness — between the ancient practice of mind-
fulness, based on the teachings of the Buddha, and the practice of interest-
based negotiation.4 I have chosen in this article to concentrate on the
principles of interest-based negotiation because it has become the most
widely known and accepted alternative to older, more competitive nego-
tiation approaches (see Fisher, Ury, and Patton 1991).
The scope of this article is intentionally narrow. I do not address the
practical concerns raised in the literature about using mindfulness in nego-
tiation (see Pounds 2004). For example, I do not look at the question of
whether the ethics (such as honesty) implicit in a mindful approach would
undermine a negotiator’s ability to bargain successfully (see Peppett 2002).
Similarly, while I suggest a different perspective on success in negotiation
by exploring how we define our goals (or purpose), I do not take on the
thorny issue of lawyers as agents, where success is usually defined as
achieving the client’s goals.

26 Darshan Brach The Magic of Mindful Negotiation

Rethinking Goals
Those trained in interest-based negotiation recognize the importance of
looking beyond an individual’s stated stance to uncover his or her under-
lying motivations. Most dispute resolvers are familiar with this dichotomy as
the difference between positions and interests (Fisher, Ury, and Patton
1991). Interest-based negotiation is premised first on the idea that there are
two levels of “wants.” The wants presented outright in a negotiation, called
positions, are usually associated with demands regarding concrete, material
things or specific actions. The wants underlying these positions, the inter-
ests, are those sometimes intangible concerns or conditions that motivate
parties to take a particular position. In staking a position, untrained nego-
tiators frequently adhere to the often-misguided notion that winning our
positions is the only or best way to satisfy our interests, missing in the
process the many opportunities for mutually satisfying agreements that
recognition of underlying interests can create.5
Mindfulness can take us one step beyond the classic formulation of
interest-based negotiation. By helping to free its practitioners from what
Buddhists regard as the tyranny of thoughts and emotions, mindfulness can
open the door to a deeper and more meaningful dimension of interests.
Buddhist principles can inspire adherents to go beyond “wants,” while the
methods of mindfulness, discussed later in this article, seek to cultivate the
qualities of mind necessary to recognize and pursue our most profound
wants, rather than be diverted by more immediate and temporal goals
whose attainment often does not fully satisfy us. From a Buddhist perspec-
tive, such clarity of purpose — called “right understanding” — is a founda-
tion for spiritual awakening (Goldstein and Kornfield 1987: 3–4). Identifying
our true purpose can also form a critical first step for negotiating success-
fully from both a substantive (outcome-oriented) and a personal
(satisfaction-related) perspective.
Careful consideration of goals is important because negotiators can
encounter difficulties when what they want is misaligned with reality. At
the core of Buddhist philosophy is the universal truth that much of what
we seek to achieve is beyond our control.6 For this reason, Buddhists
believe that our attachment to material objects and particular transient
mind states, such as happiness, is at the root of our suffering as humans.
From this perspective, doing what we want and even getting what we
want, paradoxically, can bring suffering rather than enduring happiness.
While it is a natural human tendency to pursue good feelings and
experiences (called “grasping”) and resist those that cause us pain (called
“aversion”), followers of Buddhist philosophy believe that this perpetuates
a continued yearning for things to be other than they are. No matter how
much we have, this thinking goes, there is always something more to attain,
so we are chronically dissatisfied with what we have. Mindfulness, which

Negotiation Journal January 2008 27

involves practicing being“present”and“open”to all experience, seeks to lay
a foundation that can help us decouple from the treadmill of grasping and
aversion.
From a purely practical standpoint, a negotiator’s ability to keep his
or her “eyes on the prize” — his or her long-term goal — is fundamental
to concrete success in negotiation. But negotiators often forget or disre-
gard their goals because the emotional stress, conflict, and competitive-
ness they encounter in a negotiation setting can distract them. Richard
Shell even suggests that negotiators write down and bring their memo-
rialized goals into the negotiation because “[p]eople lose sight of their
real goals in competitive situations and pay far too much money, spend
too much time, or sacrifice too many other interests for the privilege of
saying they have won” (Shell 1999: 37). Like Shell’s pragmatic recommen-
dation, mindfulness practice enhances our capacity to focus and sustain
our attention consciously so that we can make the choices that serve our
truest purposes and avoid getting sidetracked by issues generated by ego
and emotion.
Most negotiators realize that, beyond “keeping our eyes on the prize,”
we must also make our intentions fully recognizable to others, through
both word and action. Without clear communication, the contextual fog of
competition and distrust in many negotiations can obscure good intentions.
Thus, skillful communication and unambiguous action is critical to ensure
that positive intentions are not misinterpreted.7
In spiritual practice as well, speaking and acting with integrity is
critical. Buddhism’s Eightfold Path to enlightenment advocates not only
wise intentions, but “wise speech” and “wise action” as critical elements of
ethical living, based on a reverence for life. Pema Chodron, a noted medi-
tation writer and speaker, wrote that compassionate action is based on
communication from the heart. She makes what she calls “a practical
suggestion: all activities should be done with the intention of speaking so
that another person can hear you, rather than using words that cause
barriers to go up and the ears to close” (Chodron 1994: 115). For negotia-
tors, wise speech and action can form the basis upon which the critical
element of trust is built. From such a foundation of trust, negotiators can
work more openly and effectively toward meaningful goals.

Cultivating Presence
To negotiate from our deepest purpose requires a level and quality of
presence — of mental focus and clarity — that can prove elusive. Main-
taining attention for any length of time is a difficult feat. Often, in both
life and negotiation, our body is in one place but our attention is else-
where, and while we appear to participate in a conversation on one
topic, we are often thinking about something quite different (our next
meal, for example.)

28 Darshan Brach The Magic of Mindful Negotiation

 This lack of mental discipline can have an extremely deleterious
impact on the success of our negotiations for several reasons. As discussed
previously, a first casualty of inattention can be losing sight of our real goals.
Additionally, when our thoughts are elsewhere, we miss information and
cues, both verbal and nonverbal. Further, with a mind easily distracted, we
lose mental acuity and are less able to take quick and appropriate action as
needed when the tides of a negotiation shift.
In this arena, the techniques of mindfulness can be particularly helpful.
Mindfulness practice can help us to maintain our focus on the topic at hand
by offering techniques that train our minds to stay in the present moment,
rather than drift unconsciously from thought to thought. While classical
meditation teachings use a wide variety of different objects upon which to
focus attention, the necessary training is in the process itself of concentra-
tion or paying attention.
Using Anchoring Techniques to Develop Concentration
Mindfulness practitioners use a strategy known as anchoring to learn how
to pay attention. Anchoring works by maintaining a focused concentration
on a particular object and then “re-collecting” our attention back to that
object each time that we are distracted by thoughts and emotions.8 Jack
Kornfield compares this process to training a puppy: “You put the puppy
down and say ‘stay.’ Does the puppy listen? It gets up and it runs away. You
sit the puppy back down again. ‘Stay.’ And the puppy runs away over and
over again” (Kornfield 1993: 59).
While many meditative practices use mantras or physical objects as
anchors, mindfulness practitioners more commonly use bodily sensations,
sounds, and the breath (the sensory experience of breathing). We use
bodily sensations as an anchor by holding our attention, moment by
moment, to the sensations in our body — by concentrating on the sensa-
tions in our whole body or on specific areas, such as our hands, stomach, or
feet. Similarly, mindfulness practitioners focus on the breath and, when we
notice our attention has wandered, we return to the breath — focusing on
the actual sensations caused by breath — again and again. Other practitio-
ners find that awareness of sound, noticing what we hear as it arises and
passes away, is a powerful anchor.
As we develop this anchoring practice, our concentration becomes
more sustained, and we can quiet our minds — we are less governed by our
thought processes. It is analogous to having volume control on a television:
we do not have to listen if we do not so chose. Without the TV blaring, we
can choose to attend to something else.
Anchoring also helps us to “re-collect” more quickly — noticing when
we are diverted by thoughts — and allows us to have the thoughts (which
are often useful and necessary) but be conscious that we are having them.
Following the actual experience of breathing, bodily sensations or sounds

Negotiation Journal January 2008 29

and charting mind movement cultivates an additional level of awareness in
which we can simultaneously experience phenomena and observe our-
selves experiencing it.
Being in a position to think, but also being cognizant that we are
thinking, allows us the objectivity to make better decisions. To illustrate this
point, you might imagine yourself in a movie theater. If you become fully
engrossed in the movie, you lose the awareness that you are sitting in a
theater watching a movie. Having the added perspective of knowing that
you are watching the movie allows you to be aware of what is happening
in the movie theater around you and gives you the capacity to reflect on
your own reactions to the movie. Maybe the thoughts spawned by the
movie are not accurate or productive. Maybe something going on in the
theater (not in the movie) should be attended to.
In negotiation, this added perspective or awareness can help us to
make decisions and judgments in a more considered way. If we are not lost
in our thoughts (the movie), we not only gain access to a broader field of
information, but we can begin to see and evaluate the impact of our
thoughts. When we are aware that we are thinking, we gain the discern-
ment to choose which thoughts to pursue and how to respond to them. We
can follow productive thoughts while letting go of distracting thoughts —
like those that come from our own biases or fears. We can look behind a
thought and see what is driving it, and then evaluate the wisdom behind
action based on that thought.
This added level of awareness is particularly important in those face-
to-face situations where negotiating is a dance that hinges on our ability
to make rapid and wise decisions. To do this, we need to pay attention to
what is actually happening at any moment in the negotiation as well as
be aware of our own thoughts and emotions. An example: you are in a
tense negotiation. Your thoughts may, understandably, drift to “what if this
doesn’t work out?” or you may start conjecturing that the person you are
negotiating with is trying to trick you in some way. This might make you
feel angry. With a trained mind, at some point earlier rather than later, you
will notice that you have become engrossed or lost in these mental pro-
cesses (with regular practice, returning to an anchor becomes more fre-
quent and automatic) and take corrective or “redirective” action. Further,
if and when you notice that your mind is agitated and distracted, you can
also consciously decide to use the anchor of the breath, for example, to
slow you down and allow you to realize where your thinking has taken
you.
With this “observer’s perspective,” rather than simply reacting to our
fearful thoughts about the outcome of the negotiation or our unconscious
judgment about the other negotiator, we can decide how or whether to act
on those thoughts. Thus, we gain an invaluable perspective on our own
mental and emotional processes. This perspective supports us in taking

30 Darshan Brach The Magic of Mindful Negotiation

actions that are more likely to be wise and appropriate because they are
based on a more objective and complete understanding of the situation.
Using Mindfulness Tools to Support Active Listening
Just as anchoring helps negotiators to concentrate, other practices can
serve to help negotiators deal with difficult negotiation counterparts by
supporting our ability to listen actively. Active listening techniques like
acknowledging, restating, reflecting, summarizing, and asking open-ended,
nonjudgmental questions help negotiators both uncover and understand
the other party’s underlying needs and perspectives and can also
strengthen relationships and build trust. But one cannot listen actively if
one’s attention is elsewhere — to benefit from active listening, we first
need to develop the presence of mind to undertake the process effectively.
Certain techniques of mindfulness practice can help us to cultivate the
presence that can facilitate active listening.
One mindfulness tool that helps us to listen is called “inquiry.” This
technique is analogous to the active listening tool of asking open-ended
questions. Mindfulness practitioners use “inquiry” to explore their own
experiences and those of others through asking such questions as “What is
happening right now?” and “What is going on in me or in this person that
needs attention?” and, when one feels resistant, angry, or distracted, asking
“Why do I feel this way?” or “What do I seek to avoid?” Inquiry can be
directed within or toward another person in order to delve into motiva-
tions, thus allowing for a deeper and more meaningful exploration of
interests in a negotiation. Rather than simply reacting to what a person says
or does, we can use inquiry to diagnose a situation and act more produc-
tively based on a more complete understanding of the negotiators’ needs.
Practicing the tool of inquiry on a regular basis can make this exploration
— perhaps in the form of open-ended questions — happen more fluidly
and naturally when one is faced with a difficult negotiation counterpart.
Another useful active listening tool in negotiation is to acknowledge
and validate the other negotiator’s perspectives and emotions. Communi-
cation improves when a negotiator identifies the other party’s concerns
and then acknowledges them without judgment. Alternative dispute reso-
lution practitioners have used the metaphor of a puzzle lying at the bottom
of a muddy pond. Strong emotions cloud the surface and the parties cannot
see the puzzle clearly enough to put the pieces together. Identifying and
addressing these emotions brings clarity; the puzzle pieces become easier
to see and the substance of the negotiation can be addressed.
In meditation, a technique called “noting” or “naming” can be used to
bring clarity (Kornfield 1993). When a strong emotion or sensation arises,
naming it — in the form of a soft mental noting — can be a skillful means
of recognizing and accepting it. Just as one can, for example, objectively
identify physical sensations (heat, tingling, tightness, pressure, etc.), one can

Negotiation Journal January 2008 31

also nonjudgmentally note one’s emotions and states of mind (anger, fear,
joy, boredom, restlessness). For negotiators, it is particularly important to
notice things like judgment, fear, and anger so that we avoid reacting hastily
and detrimentally in a tense bargaining situation.
Noting or naming diminishes the impact of distracting thoughts and
emotions by putting them in context so they do not overwhelm one’s
consciousness. This kind of neutral acknowledgement works on two levels:
one listens better because one is less distracted by his or her own emo-
tions, and one cultivates the nonjudgmental awareness that is at the essence
of both full presence and good listening.
A mindfulness activity known as “pausing” can also contribute to
processes of active listening and inquiry. Tara Brach defines a pause as “a
suspension of activity, a time of temporary disengagement when we are no
longer moving toward any goal”(Brach 2003: 51). At any moment of internal
or external chaos, a negotiator can stop, acknowledge what he is experi-
encing, and redirect himself as necessary.9 For example, he could take this
moment to make the inquiry “what is really important, what matters here?”
Practicing “Bare Attention” to Reduce Proliferation of
Unproductive Assumptions
Humanity’s ability to reason is one of our species’ defining characteristics,
but it generates its own negotiation challenges. Our assumptions and
biases, and our projections of our own biases onto others, can stall and
undermine trust and communication, throwing up barriers to productive
negotiation. Some theorists describe this phenomenon as the “ladder of
inference” (see Senge et al. 1994: 242). At the top of the ladder are the
beliefs that make a party angry or resistant. At the base of the ladder are
the raw data — the facts — on which the belief is based. Between those
two “rungs” lies the reasoning that interprets or misinterprets the data and
draws conclusions.
Skilled negotiators will guard themselves from unhelpful inferences by
questioning their assumptions — by looking down from the top of the
ladder to examine the data at the bottom. For example, a negotiator who
feels anger and lack of trust toward her counterpart could examine the
source of these feelings. Does her anger arise from misinterpreting data?10
She assumes that the other party speaks tersely because he does not like
her, but perhaps he has other reasons. Or do her feelings arise from her past
experiences, memories of which were triggered by his behavior? Once the
negotiator understands the source of her feelings, she will be better
equipped to move beyond them to address the issues at hand and resolve
the negotiation successfully. Understanding the “raw data” at the bottom of
the ladder — the facts absent bias and assumptions — enhances clarity and
understanding and makes it more likely that interests will be recognized
and addressed.

32 Darshan Brach The Magic of Mindful Negotiation

 Mindfulness practice looks to sensory experience as raw data and
suggests that the inferences that people habitually draw obscure this raw
data and create a gap between actual experience and conceptual reality. We
suffer from additional layers of fear, discomfort, and reactivity, according to
Buddhist thinking, because of the narratives we construct to explain our
experiences. We translate sensations and perceptions into conclusions. For
example, a person might awaken with a raw scratchy throat and a clogged
nose and determine that he is sick and will miss a scheduled meeting,
risking his career in the process, and imagining a whole host of catastrophic
events to follow. While the sensations of the malady may be uncomfortable,
the proliferation of thoughts and predictions of dire outcomes create
unnecessary suffering.
The mindfulness practice of “bare attention” seeks to diminish the
proliferation of negative thoughts by decoupling sensory data from con-
clusions. The ways we interpret the data — and the consequent grasp-
ing or resistance that accompanies that process — take us away from
raw experience. The training provided by bare attention seeks to help
practitioners to be more present and focused in their transactions and to
cultivate embodied presence absent inner dialogue, judgment, and reac-
tivity. The practice of “bare attention” begins with recognition of our
responses to our experiences. For instance, a negotiation counterpart’s
extreme demand might generate a flurry of judgment about that
party’s motives. Normally, we might then focus on fashioning our “come-
back,” what we are going to do if he or she refuses to be “reasonable.”
But, instead of feeding those thoughts (i.e., believing them, going with
them, and getting lost in them), a mindful practitioner might note them
by labeling them, for example, as “judgments” and “defensive thoughts.”
This process can make it possible to then actually experience the imme-
diate sensations and emotions in one’s body. With continued bare atten-
tion, our inner experience unfolds — we might first sense the heat and
tenseness of anger, then the squeeze of fear, and the ache or sinking
sensation of disappointment or loss. By not resisting such bodily sensa-
tions or emotions (the “raw data”) and by not becoming lost in one’s own
thoughts, one is able to detach mindfully from the experience. This is not
dissociation — experiences are felt fully but just not taken personally.
Instead, one develops the capacity to observe what is arising, and respond
— rather than react — from a position of greater clarity, balance, and
perspective.
Applying the Tools of Mindfulness in the Negotiation Context
Imagine that you are negotiating with someone whose insulting and con-
descending behavior is making you angry and resentful. Responding out of
anger will only escalate the tension. And, even if you do not “act out” in
your seething state you are less likely to take wise actions.

Negotiation Journal January 2008 33

 You might begin to become mindful by pausing to acknowledge to
yourself how reactive you are becoming. You might then use your breath to
re-anchor yourself to your body and then make a “check in” self-inquiry,
asking “What is happening?” to assess your state of mind. You might recog-
nize that you are resentful because you feel that you are not being
respected and anxious because you feel a need to prove yourself.
Next, you can focus your attention on your physical sensations. What
do the anxiety and resentment feel like physically? Are they causing dis-
comfort in your chest, stomach, or throat? Is there pressure or tightness in
your chest? Are you aware of your heartbeat? Is there a heavy knot in your
stomach? For a few moments, you might note or label these sensations and
how they change. Are they “pleasant” or “unpleasant?” Do they become
more intense or do they fade? (Such a process can seem cumbersome and
time consuming in the abstract, but it takes only a few seconds to drop
down to this level of awareness. In addition, practicing mindfulness tech-
niques on a regular basis and under less stressful circumstances enhances
one’s abilities to do so when the going gets tougher.)
With these few steps, we can ground ourselves in the reality of the
here and now and free ourselves from unproductive reactivity. From a full
awareness of how we are reacting, we are less in the thrall of the reaction
and are more likely to be able to focus on both our short-term negotiating
goals and our deeper interests. For example, we can use our heightened
awareness to acknowledge “OK, I’m furious because he is being a jerk but
if I yell at him, like I want to do, I will likely just make the situation worse.
My best bet is to remain calm and try to figure out why he is behaving like
this and then maybe I can get him to see it my way.”
The techniques described so far can serve together to enhance the
interest-based negotiators’ abilities to remain present and clear minded in
situations of conflict and stress. Such techniques as anchoring, inquiry,
noting, and pausing can help negotiators stay focused on their own goals
and interests as well as better discern those of the other party, and detach
productively from their own emotions, biases, and assumptions. Cultivating
the practice of bare attention can help negotiators to better see the reality
of a particular conflict by distinguishing the facts or raw data free from their
own cognitive biases.

Developing Unconditional Acceptance

Beyond helping us see what is real more clearly, mindfulness practice can
also help us to accept reality. While most of us would prefer to avoid
unpleasant experiences (and hold onto pleasant ones), the reality of the
human condition is that it is simply not possible to so completely control
our lives. Ben Franklin said that “[o]ur limited perspective, our hopes and
fears, become our measure of life, and when circumstances don’t fit our
ideas, they become our difficulties” (see Kornfield 1993: 73).

34 Darshan Brach The Magic of Mindful Negotiation

 Further, we often cannot even control our desire to change reality.
Even if one accepts the Buddhist belief that suffering is caused by the
identification and clinging that arises from grasping and aversion (wanting
or not wanting), it is not terribly practical to simply say “stop wanting.” Like
thinking, desire is part of human nature. Similarly, it may be easy to say,
“don’t be afraid” or “don’t dislike that,” but it is often difficult to do.11
The process of allowing, of “making room” in our psyches for all
experience requires an ongoing practice of realizing when we are resisting
reality and then making the conscious choice to accept it. We use the
techniques of mindfulness (discussed earlier in this article) to gain aware-
ness of our resistance. We develop our capacity for unconditional accep-
tance by cultivating a commitment and willingness to “stay” with difficult
experiences and to open ourselves to them.
Learning to “Stay”
Unconditional acceptance is certainly difficult to achieve, especially when
one’s experiences, thoughts, and feelings are unpleasant or painful. We
often defend ourselves against anger and blame, for example, by tuning out
those who express such emotions, by denying them, or by lashing out in
anger ourselves. (Our “fight or flight” response can be seen as one such
phenomenon.) In such situations, if one chooses not to listen, one will not
hear. Thus people in conflict situations understandably become prisoners
of their own viewpoints. Experienced negotiators, however, usually realize
that sidestepping difficult issues (fleeing) or exchanging accusations and
demands (fighting) does not resolve conflict or help them achieve their
goals. Rather, negotiators are more likely to make progress in such situations
if they are able to stop the cycle of attacks, acknowledge the other party’s
interests, and convey their own interests in a constructive manner.
Instead of fighting or fleeing, mindfulness practice can help the nego-
tiator develop what practitioners call a capacity to “stay.” If one is able to
avoid fleeing from or fighting tough experiences, this thinking goes, one
can find ways of transforming a downward spiral into a productive conver-
sation.12 When our conditioning tells us to fight back or run, however, it can
be difficult to live up to the principles of interest-based negotiation: to
listen, to seek to understand, and to jointly explore solutions.
One of the most basic premises of Buddhist thought offers support for
a more accepting perspective on reality — a recognition of the phenom-
enon of impermanence. According to this belief, the most fundamental facts
of human existence — life, sickness, and death — remind people that they
are often not in control and that everything in this world changes con-
stantly and is impermanent. The Buddha recognized this truth of imperma-
nence and taught that attachment consequently and inevitably creates
suffering. Practitioners of meditation gain a sense of this impermanence as
they monitor and experience the constantly shifting and changing flow of

Negotiation Journal January 2008 35

sensation in their bodies or when they listen to sound arising and then
disappearing. Given the impermanent nature of all things, Buddhist philoso-
phy suggests that cultivating a quality of unconditional acceptance,“letting
go,” can set one free. They believe that peace comes from a willingness to
let go, and unconditionally accept reality.
From a Buddhist perspective, accepting a reality does not mean that
one should not, cannot, or would not move to change it, it simply means
that one acknowledges what is true in any moment. It is only when we see
and accept reality that we can act to address it. This is important in
negotiation because when we are willing to recognize and accept truth, we
are open to a much broader range of data, including that which we do not
want to believe or hear. With this ability, we can more accurately analyze
and evaluate a situation and be better equipped to act judiciously.
Further, letting go does not require one to drop all desires and material
things. As Zen master Suzuki Roshi is reported to have said,“renunciation
does not consist in giving up the things of this world, but in accepting that
they go away.” Thus acceptance does not signal resignation or defeatism but
rather involves finding genuine satisfaction with reality and also being at
peace with impermanence.
Reframing to Spacious Awareness
Reframing is a key tactic in the negotiator’s toolbox. We reframe to shift the
parties from focusing on positions to focusing on interests, from focusing
on the past to focusing on the future, from blaming each other to making
joint contributions (Stone, Patton, and Heen 1999). Reframing will not
always resolve the conflict, but it can at least reorient the parties in a more
positive direction. Reframes often offer understanding and acknowledg-
ment, allowing the discussion to move from assertions of right and wrong
to a place where parties in conflict can move forward productively.
Developing what Buddhist teachers have termed “spacious awareness”
is a form of reframing that helps us to “stay” with difficult experiences by
broadening our awareness to include them, but not be defined by them (see
Brach 2003). It can help one to accept people and events without judgment
or rejection. In the context of negotiation, developing spacious awareness
is yet another mindfulness practice that can help the negotiator to listen
without reactivity and judgment.
Chogyam Trungpa, a Tibetan meditation teacher, once drew a “V”
shape on a piece of paper and asked his students what they saw. They
said, understandably, that it was a bird flying in the sky. Trungpa replied,
“no, it is the sky with a bird flying through it.” These are two quite dif-
ferent views: one of a bird, separate and alone, and the other of the sky,
broad and all-encompassing. Such a reframe can help practitioners to feel
the sense of expansiveness that allows them to hold — and allow — all
things within it.

36 Darshan Brach The Magic of Mindful Negotiation

 The mindfulness practitioner can use this kind of mental image to help
create a sense of spaciousness and possibility in stressful situations. He can
visualize an endless expanse of sky and use this image to sense his own
internal awareness as similarly broad and encompassing. By widening his
perceptive “lens” in this way, he can better deal with difficult situations
without becoming overwhelmed by them.
Two other critical strategies of interest-based negotiation have parallels
with this idea of “spacious awareness.” First, the technique of brainstorming
— thinking creatively, without fetters and without evaluation or commit-
ments — can be an important tool for devising creative solutions to meet
both parties’ interests and to enhance mutual gains. Just as cultivating
spacious awareness helps to broaden our perceptions beyond the limita-
tions that our minds construct, brainstorming seeks to expand the list of
possible options for resolving a dispute. In the negotiation context,
this means we have access to more and often better ideas for resolving
differences.
The second interest-based technique that relates to spacious awareness
is called “negotiation jujitsu” (Fisher, Ury, and Patton 1991: 107). The nego-
tiator uses negotiation jujitsu to respond to defensiveness, criticism, and
attacks by exploring them with openness and by seeking to understand,
acknowledge, and address the other party’s concerns. Developing an open
and spacious awareness can ease this conversational and relational shift by
helping us to release our instinctive defensiveness and to be more recep-
tive. An illustration: if you put dye in a sink, the water will assume the color
of the dye. If you put the same amount of dye in a lake, however, it would
have no affect. With a broadened awareness, such difficult emotions as
anxiety, anger, and hurt can exist, without disabling us emotionally or
shaking our sense of self.13

Connectedness: A Basis for Trust and Collaboration

Buddhist teachings provide a final support for effective and successful
negotiating — a view of ourselves as interconnected with all other beings.
Buddhism teaches that experiencing ourselves as separate entities gives
rise to grasping and fear. When we feel disconnected and separate from
others, it is natural to be wary and defensive. On the other hand, believing
ourselves connected to one another offers a foundation for trust and
collaboration, elements which are the sine qua non of interest-based
bargaining.
But developing trust within a negotiation can be challenging. We are
naturally disinclined to trust those we do not know, especially in adversarial
relationships. Even when the other party appears to be honest, a negotiator
may find it difficult to trust, especially if he has been cheated or taken
advantage of in the past. Fearing such an outcome, a negotiator may try to
“beat the other side to the punch,” thereby creating a cycle of mistrust

Negotiation Journal January 2008 37

and competition where fear of “being taken” can become a self-fulfilling
prophecy.
Certainly, it is difficult to trust in negotiations when our success and
survival seem to depend on winning a competitive game. With seemingly
nothing to tie together competing destinies, it can be difficult to abandon
the idea that, at the end of the day, someone will win and someone else will
lose. This is understandable — we live in a dominantly individualistic
culture, one in which we see ourselves as separate and distinct entities,
rather than as a part of an integrated whole. From this cultural construct, we
are likely to see things in competitive and “right versus wrong” terms (see
Markus and Lin 1999). In this paradigm, negotiation is most often viewed as
a contest between distrustful and competitive rivals.
Our cultural conditioning also makes it likely for us to see individual
achievement as a measure of worth or identity. Thus, it is no wonder that
many Westerners equate “winning” with success and “losing” with failure.
Our need to “not lose” can overshadow any impetus to find win–win
solutions (see Mnookin 1993). Given this conditioning, it is understandable
that trust and collaboration is hard to foster in negotiation.
Related to our need to “win” is our impulse to amass power and control
outcomes. With power, we bolster our sense of self. Yet, wielding power
coercively or injudiciously fosters resentment and distrust. The mindful
negotiator seeks instead an inclusive process based on mutual respect.
Similarly, from an interest-based perspective, overuse of power undermines
“buy-in,” a critical element of sustainable solutions. William Ury (1991), for
example, suggests “building a golden bridge” to attract the other side toward
a solution rather than drag or push them toward it. From this stance, a
mutually satisfactory agreement is more likely to result. Further, when both
parties participate in its creation, it is more likely that an agreement will be
mutually accepted and maintained over time.
Buddhist philosophy suggests that people should build their sense of
self-worth on a stronger foundation, one that does not require one to defeat
or outperform another in order to feel good about oneself. Just as “wanting”
can be an endless quest for satisfaction, the effort to be or do better than
others can be a continuous battle in which success is, at best, ephemeral.
The Buddhist concept of “codependent arising” offers a dramatically
different construct from which to address the issues of trust and collabo-
ration. According to this theory, everything and everyone is interrelated and
interdependent. In such a connected universe, one’s success depends on
the success of others, so fighting for supremacy would be self-defeating. A
view of ourselves as essentially related to one another not only allows for
trust and collaboration in negotiation, it requires it.
Many Western thinkers have embraced this perspective. Astronomer
Carl Sagan described humanity’s place in the cosmos by describing people
as “star stuff” because the elements that make up all life on Earth are

38 Darshan Brach The Magic of Mindful Negotiation

believed to have originated from stars. From this viewpoint, we are intrin-
sically connected with the other piece of “star stuff” who sits across the
table. Further, the science of ecology suggests that our lives and well-being
— economically, politically, biologically — are interwoven with everything
around us, just as the climate on one side of the globe can affect the
weather thousands of miles away or as one angry person can start a chain
reaction of anger, hostility, violence, or even war.
Mary Parker Follett, an early twentieth-century scholar of organizations
and communication shared this view of interdependence: “The source of
our strength is the central supply. You may as well break a branch off the
tree and expect it to live. Non-relation is death” (Davis 1997: 14).14 She
further articulates the rationale for recognizing human inter-connectedness
in this way:

The social process may be conceived either as the opposing and

battle of desires with the victory of one over the other, or as the
confronting and integrating of desires. The former means non-
freedom for both sides, the defeated bound to the victor, the
victor bound to the false situation thus created — both bound.
The latter means a freeing for both sides and increased total
power or increased capacity in the world (Davis 1997: 13).

From this perspective, collaboration is both necessary and appropriate.

But how do we deal with an often realistic fear of being taken advantage of
in a negotiation? Interestingly, some tested principles of game theory illus-
trate how a negotiator can collaborate without risking wholesale exploita-
tion (Hofstaeder 1985). A computer program entitled “Tit for Tat” provides
a formula for “winning” that requires all players to win. The approach
suggests that players collaborate on the first move, respond to “defection”
with responsive “defection,” and then “forgive” to allow for a return to
cooperation. Basically, this means starting with an intention to work
together in a trustworthy way, retaliating in some way when the other party
breaks the trust, but then initiating a return to a collaborative relationship.
In this model, the negotiator assumes and resumes an attitude of trust that
allows both parties to “win.” Like the paradigm of “codependent arising” and
the beliefs of Sagan and Follett, the “Tit for Tat” approach reflects the
ecological reality of human interdependence.15
There are other relatively “safe” ways to protect oneself and foster trust
in negotiation. For example, a collaborative relationship can start when
parties take small leaps of faith to build trust. Low-risk reciprocal actions
(an open and timely exchange of documents, for example) can form a basis
upon which parties can take increasingly greater risks to garner collabora-
tive gains. Parties can make symbolic gestures, as simple as a small gift or
handshake, that can send the message that there is a desire to work
collaboratively. A negotiating situation can offer such opportunities for

Negotiation Journal January 2008 39

calculated risks (such as short-term losses), which build trust and pave the
way for collaboration over time when the risks are greater. Further, nego-
tiators can develop mutually agreeable self-enforcing mechanisms where
violation of an agreement would result in a corresponding loss for the
violator. Such contingency agreements can allow collaboration to build
with reduced risk.
From a spiritual point of view, a “tie” in negotiation can offer satisfac-
tion in the form of identification with the other person and a sense of
belonging, fostered by the collaborative nature of the relationship. Once we
acknowledge that we are interdependent, it becomes more difficult to be
satisfied with a “win–lose” outcome — we achieve either a “win–win” with
collaboration or a “lose–lose” with competition.
The Value of Compassion and Kindness
Grounded in this paradigm of connectedness, several mindfulness practices
can help us to see in ourselves and others both our human vulnerabilities
and our goodness. These practices, intended to elicit our natural compas-
sion and kindness, are less strategic in the context of negotiation and more
related to purpose and to personal values and fulfillment. For many, a
deeper purpose — in negotiating and in life — is to be kind and compas-
sionate both toward ourselves and others. Mindfulness practice offers both
the foundation for these qualities and specific tools to cultivate them.
The full and open presence developed through mindfulness can help
its practitioners to recognize and accept with compassion their own vul-
nerabilities as well as those of others (see Analayo 2003; Chodron 1994;
Kornfield 1993). It allows the practitioner to become aware of the natural
human vulnerabilities — the fear, confusion, hurt — that are often unseen.
Such awareness gives rise to compassion and the potential for deepening
honesty in personal disclosure. One person’s capacity to see vulnerability,
to disclose more truthfully his or her own position, can give rise to recip-
rocal disclosure. This, in turn, can provide the ground for building a trusting
and collaborative relationship.
Several specific meditation practices can help us in this process of
opening our hearts. One practice, a “compassion” meditation, helps us to
explore our own suffering, fears, and longings, and offer ourselves care by
sending silent wishes for our own well-being. We can widen the circle of
well-wishing to include others, starting with those who are close to us and
eventually expanding these wishes to include all beings. This is a powerful
technique for allowing us to empathize with the pain in others, by first
recognizing it in ourselves.
Just as opening to our own vulnerabilities helps us to be open to those
of others, seeing the goodness in ourselves opens us to the goodness in
others. One simple technique for fostering this perspective, called “metta”
or “loving-kindness” meditation,16 begins by looking specifically in ourselves

40 Darshan Brach The Magic of Mindful Negotiation

and others for qualities that we value. We can also look at ourselves through
the eyes of someone who loves us. Once we can see the good in ourselves
— qualities like love, patience, generosity, humor, and honesty — we begin,
as with the compassion practice, to offer ourselves messages of care, then
to widen the circle of care to see goodness in others and to offer them well
wishes. Being able to see both the vulnerability and the goodness in others
can open us to a new level of relating that can radically transform a
negotiating experience.
When I have been in the most difficult of situations, negotiating with
someone I dislike and distrust, my ability to see beyond that person’s
demeanor, and recognize his or her fear, pain, and other emotions that I
shared has elicited my compassion and a sense of connection to that
person. It has dissolved my antipathy. From this vantage point, I have often
discovered something positive in that person, a good intention, a kindness
or perhaps something that we had not previously known that we shared. In
connectedness, I have found the roots of open-heartedness and the capacity
to respond in a way that can further mutual understanding.
The foundation for these qualities of heart is unconditional presence.
According to Buddhist philosophy, as we stop resisting, denying, and
pushing away those things in ourselves we dislike, our innate goodness can
shine through. Jack Kornfield wrote that “our problems become the very
place to discover wisdom and love” (Kornfield 1993: 71). By this statement,
he suggests that those things we would push away are the things that will
bring us the most learning, richness, caring (or loving-kindness) and com-
passion. He recommends using the tools of meditative practice — attention
and openness — to shift us from seeing difficulties as obstacles to seeing
them as opportunities.
This process and perspective, supported by mindfulness practice, I
believe, certainly enhances the process of collaborative negotiating. By
focusing our thinking and encouraging our sense of interconnectedness
with one another, mindfulness can make for a more intuitive and powerful
negotiator. Moreover, it can help the interest-based negotiator to negotiate
in keeping with principles that he or she values, and can provide the
foundation for a more fulfilling and satisfying negotiating experience.17

Conclusion
Mindfulness practice, leavened with clear seeing, acceptance, and compas-
sion, can help a negotiator relinquish distrust and competition in favor of
mutuality, connection, and collaboration. It can make the act of negotiating
more personally satisfying while enabling the negotiator to practice in
consonance with his or her values. Grounded in the powerfully transfor-
mative perspective of Buddhist thought, the practice of mindfulness can be
a potent tool for helping negotiators to relate to others with understanding
and trust. The poet Rumi encapsulates this potential beautifully:

Negotiation Journal January 2008 41

 Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and rightdoing
there is a field. I’ll meet you there.
When the soul lies down in that grass,
the world is too full to talk about.
Ideas, language, even the phrase each other
doesn’t make any sense.

To end this article as it began, I look again to Albie Davis, sharing the
words of her occasional alter ego, Mary Parker Follett:“we have an instinct
for wholeness; we get wholeness only through . . . infinitely expanding
reciprocal relations” (Davis 1997: 12). In this wholeness and reciprocity lies
the magic of mindful negotiation.

NOTES
1. In Beyond Reason: Using Emotions as You Negotiate, authors Roger Fisher and Daniel
Shapiro (2005) illuminate much about emotions and how to deal with them in negotiation. They
identify five “core concerns” that motivate people in negotiation. Much of the extensive research on
emotions is overviewed in Beyond Reason, so I refer readers to that text for more background
information. Writers have also looked at the impacts of personality, attitude, and values; see, for
example, Bowling and Hoffman (2003) and Cloke (2001).
2. For example, Difficult Conversations: How to Discuss What Matters Most by Douglas
Stone, Bruce Patton, and Sheila Heen (1999) is a helpful and practical guide for dealing with the
miasma of feelings and emotions ever present in negotiating in both personal and professional
situations.
3. Numerous doctors, scientists, and researchers have written and lectured extensively
on using mindfulness to address psychological and behavioral issues. See, for example, the
Mind and Life Institute, which looks at the intersection of Buddhism and modern science through
research and collaborative exploration. One well-known therapeutic approach called mindfulness-
based cognitive therapy is used extensively to address, among other things, stress, chronic
pain, addiction, and depression (see the work of Jon Kabat-Zinn and the Center for Mindfulness
in Medicine, Health Care, and Society at the University of Massachusetts Medical School, and
the publications and programs of Alan Marlatt, a University of Washington professor who
writes and lectures on using mindfulness in addressing addiction). The popular press has
followed these scientific developments and has written extensively about the benefits of mind-
fulness for health, mental acuity, and happiness. See Blakeslee (2007), Benson (2007), and Cullen
(2006).
4. While the “Buddha” is identified as a historical person (Prince Siddhartha Gautama), many
of the teachings ascribed to him come more from the symbolic and mythical aspects of his
persona. Much of Buddhist thought is, moreover, universal, and can be tied to many spiritual
traditions. In my opinion, one need not adopt this particular religion to benefit from exposure to
these ideas.
5. While positions can be hard or even impossible to reconcile, looking instead to interests
opens the field of possibilities. With more options to satisfy our needs, there is a better chance that
an ultimate solution will offer greater mutual gains and our true needs will be met. For example,
a car buyer and car seller can be at a standstill in price negotiations. Instead of simply focusing on
price and finding a compromise, an investigation into the motivations behind the projected sale or
purchase might bring other interests, unrelated to price, to light. The seller might need cash
quickly, so an immediate cash deal would be of value to him. The buyer might have a wish to have
certain modifications made to the car, and the seller might just be able to do this work without too
much trouble. Who knows, the seller might be glad to do this work, because he wants to build a
clientele for a business in remodeling old cars. The cash, the timing, the modifications all address
the parties’ needs more completely than a compromise on price.
6. Henepola Gunarantana (1991: 7) said that “[y]ou can’t ever get everything you want. It is
impossible. Luckily, there is another option. You can learn to control your mind, to step outside of
this endless cycle of desire and aversion.”

42 Darshan Brach The Magic of Mindful Negotiation

 7. We can show our intention by simply being transparent. For example, we might say,“I’m
really here to see if we can find a deal that works for both of us.” We demonstrate an intention to
be trustworthy by behaving in a consistent, understandable way, and by giving the other party our
trust, or at least the benefit of the doubt. See Stone, Patton, and Heen (2005), for some skillful
methods, involving the sharing of intentions, for communicating productively.
8. I believe there is a fundamental similarity — as well as a significant difference — between
anchors used in meditation and the use of anchoring in negotiation. An anchor in meditation helps
us to concentrate and focus attention, and anchors in negotiation are a cognitive tool for orienting
thinking in a certain direction. For example, we may be selling a car and seek to use the selling
price as our anchor.“This car cost me $35,000.” This statement has the effect of orienting a selling
price around the original price of $35,000. However, if we use the anchor of present Blue Book
value, $12,000, our discussion will revolve around and evolve from, this point. Anchoring as a tool
to support mindfulness diverges in purpose from that of the cognitive tool in that, ultimately,
anchoring in meditation is intended to provide a basis for an enlarged perspective or greater
awareness. Anchors in the negotiation context, conversely, generally work to limit or narrow a
parties’ perspective. For more on anchoring (as well as other cognitive biases), see Birke and Fox
(1999).
9. Pausing can be seen as analogous to “going to the balcony,” a technique suggested by
William Ury (1991: 37) in Getting Past No. Ury suggests that negotiators in tense situations should
“step back, collect your wits, and see the situation objectively.”
10. In Difficult Conversations, Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, and Sheila Heen address the issue
of misinterpretation of data and its impact on interpersonal disputes, particularly when each party
does not have adequate knowledge of the other party’s data. Many authorities recommend the
movement down the ladder of inference but do not provide a mechanism for doing so. Mindfulness
can help its practitioners to realize more often and more rapidly when they have made an
interpretive leap and the practice of “bare attention” offers a mechanism for moving back down the
ladder of inference. In this way, mindfulness supports “emotional intelligence” by increasing our
understanding of our own emotional processes — our self-awareness (Goleman 1995).
11. Kornfield recommends cultivating the practice of “letting go.” He suggests that we
“[a]llow what is present to arise and pass like the waves of an ocean” (Kornfield 1993: 112). He
cautions, however, that “letting go” is difficult and can itself be a subtle form of aversion (the
pushing away of unpleasant experience).
12. This ability is analogous, in my mind, to the story of the Buddha sitting under the “bodhi”
tree on the eve of his enlightenment. That night, Mara, the god of delusion, attacked the Buddha
with all of the painful parts of our psyches: hatred, grief, pride, jealousy. The Buddha, instead of
resisting or fleeing, stayed put and met each of them with an open heart, and they fell aside.
13. As Stone, Patton, and Heen point out in Difficult Conversations, our sense of ourselves
(our identities) can be threatened in tough interpersonal situations and this can make a conversa-
tion “go from difficult to impossible” (Stone, Patton, and Heen 1999: 113).
14. Contrary to predominant Western views of individual sovereignty, Mary Parker Follett saw
human beings as closely connected despite apparent differences. She observed,“We could not have
an enemy unless there was much in common between us. Differences are always grounded in an
underlying similarity . . . I always feel intimate with my enemies. It is not opposition but indiffer-
ence which separates [humans]” (Davis 1997: 15).
15. See also Thomas (1974). Lewis Thomas, a physician and essayist, explored the intercon-
nectedness of man and nature by analogy to the science of microbiology.
16. For more on the loving-kindness practice, see Salzberg (1995).
17. I do not suggest that cultivating mindfulness and a sense of interconnectedness means
that negotiators should drop all of their reasonable defenses to exploitation. These are, rather,
techniques for expanding horizons and becoming more open, as appropriate, to a deeper connec-
tion with those with whom we deal.

REFERENCES
Analayo, S. 2003. The direct path to realization. Birmingham, UK: Windhouse Publications.
Benson, H. 2007. Zen and the art of lawyering: Legal eagles find meditation a stress solution, San
Francisco Chronicle (July 30). Available from http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?
file=c/a/2007/07/30/mnghor9dpm2.dtl.

Negotiation Journal January 2008 43

Birke, R. and C. R. Fox. 1999. Psychological principles in negotiating civil settlements. Harvard
Negotiation Law Review 1: 1–57.
Blakeslee, S. 2007. Study suggests meditation can help train attention. New York Times (May 8).
Available from http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/b/sandra_
blakeslee/index.html.
Bowling, D. and D. Hoffman. (eds). 2003. Bringing peace into the room: How the personal
qualities of the mediator impact the process of dispute resolution. San Francisco: John
Wiley.
Brach, T. 2003. Radical acceptance: Embracing your life with the heart of a Buddha. New York:
Bantam Books.
Chodron, P. 1994. Start where you are. Boston: Shambala Publications.
Cloke, K. 2001. Mediating dangerously: The frontiers of conflict resolution. San Francisco: Jossey
Bass.
Cullen, L. T. 2006. How to get smarter, one breath at a time, scientists find that meditation not only
reduces stress but reshapes the brain. Time January 10. Available from http://www.time.com/
time/magazine/article/0,9171,1147167-1,00.html.
Davis, A. M. 1989. The logic behind the magic of mediation. Negotiation Journal 5: 17–24.
— — —. 1997. Liquid leadership: The wisdom of Mary Parker Follett (1868–1933). A Leadership
Journal: Women in Leadership — Sharing the Vision 2(1). Available from http://
sunsite.utk.edu/FINS/Mary_Parker_Follett/Fins-MPF-03.txt.
Fisher, R. and D. Shapiro. 2005. Beyond reason: Using emotions as you negotiate. New York:
Viking.
Fisher, R., W. Ury, and B. Patton. 1991. Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in,
2nd edn. New York: Penguin Books.
Goldstein, J. and J. Kornfield. 1987. Seeking the heart of Wisdom. Boston: Shambhala.
Goleman, D. 1995. Emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam Books.
Gunaratana, H. 1991. Mindfulness in plain English. Taipei: Wisdom Publications.
Hofstaeder, D. R. 1985. Metamagical themas: Questing for the essence of mind and pattern. New
York: Basic Books.
Kabat-Zinn, J. 1994. Wherever you go, there you are: Mindfulness meditation in everyday life. New
York: Hyperion.
Kornfield, J. 1993. A path with heart: A guide through the perils and promises of spiritual life.
New York: Bantam.
Markus, H. R. and L. R. Lin. 1999. Conflictways: Cultural diversity in the meanings and practices of
conflict. In Understanding negotiation, edited by D. Prentice and D. Miller. New York:
Russell Sage Foundation.
Mnookin, R. 1993. Why negotiations fail: An exploration of barriers to the resolution of conflict.
Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution 8: 235–249.
Peppett, S. R. 2002. Can saints negotiate? A brief introduction to the problems of perfect ethics in
bargaining. Harvard Negotiation Law Review 7: 83–96.
Pounds, V. M. 2004. Promoting truthfulness in negotiation: A mindful approach. Willamette Law
Review 40: 181–224.
Riskin, L. L. 2004. Mindfulness: Foundational training for dispute resolution. Journal of Legal
Education 54: 79–90.
— — —. 2006. Knowing yourself: Mindfulness. In The Negotiator’s fieldbook, edited by A. Kupfer-
Schneider, and C. Honeyman. Chicago: ABA Publishing.
Rock, E. 2005. Mindfulness mediation, the cultivation of awareness, mediator neutrality, and the
possibility of justice. Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution 6: 347–365.
Salzberg, S. 1995. Loving-kindness: The revolutionary art of happiness. Boston: Shambala Books.
Senge, P., A. Kleiner, R. Ross, C. Roberts, and B. Smith. 1994. The fifth discipline fieldbook. New
York: Doubleday.
Shell, R. G. 1999. Bargaining for advantage: Negotiation strategies for reasonable people. New
York: Penguin Books.
Stone, D., B. Patton, and S. Heen. 1999. Difficult conversations: How to discuss what matters most.
New York: Penguin Books.
Thomas, L. 1974. The lives of a cell: Notes of a biology watcher. New York: Viking Press.
Ury, W. 1991. Getting past no: Negotiating your way from confrontation to cooperation. New York:
Bantam Books.

44 Darshan Brach The Magic of Mindful Negotiation