This chapter examines the evolution of dispute resolution methods, tracing the gradual shift from adjudication as the dominant legal paradigm to the growing emphasis on consensual approaches such as negotiation and mediation. While the constitutional rule of law in modern societies elevated courts and arbitration as the primary arenas of conflict resolution, the chapter highlights that adjudication—once residual and subsidiary—has progressively become overloaded, bureaucratized, and increasingly inadequate to address the diversity and complexity of contemporary disputes. Issues such as inefficiency, excessive formality, adversarial culture, and limited capacity to resolve polycentric conflicts are identified as structural limitations of adjudication, generating dissatisfaction and opening the way to alternative methods. Negotiation is presented as the most direct and underdeveloped professional skill among lawyers, whose training often privileges positional and rights-based reasoning over interest-based dialogue. The chapter analyzes the dynamics, strategies, and cultural factors that shape negotiation, distinguishing between distributive, integrative, positional, exchange, and principled models. It stresses the importance of emotional intelligence, preparation, and relational skills as essential to effective practice, while also acknowledging structural disincentives within legal markets that undermine negotiation’s potential. Mediation by a neutral third party is then explored. The chapter situates mediation in historical, cultural, and comparative contexts, distinguishing facilitative and evaluative approaches and emphasizing confidentiality, creativity, and flexibility as its core features. It also discusses the rise of institutionalized mediation, digital technologies, and restorative practices, while critically assessing empirical evidence on its effectiveness and limits. The final section engages with debates on consensual methods, addressing criticisms regarding informality, power imbalances, and the risk of privatizing justice. While recognizing these challenges, the chapter argues that consensuality enhances perceptions of fairness, compliance, and procedural justice, offering a necessary complement to adjudication. It concludes that rebalancing the dispute resolution ecosystem requires fostering a culture of negotiation and mediation within legal practice to ensure more participatory, efficient, and human-centered justice.