A question that I often come across is how do you pick a mediator. Do you want someone that has topic specific knowledge and expertise? Do you want someone who utilizes facilitative mediation techniques v evaluative techniques? Do you agree to the opposing side's recommendation with a view that if they suggested that mediator because that mediator would have a greater influence on the party who recommended that mediator, or is the opposite true? Do you want your suggested mediator to be the one chosen? Do you want a former judge as the mediator? I have generally found that a mediator that uses a combination of both techniques is the best way to go. A mediator schooled in both facilitative and evaluative techniques can be more flexible in going about problem solving. They can be facilitative to start and evaluative when necessary to close the deal. In any event, it is also my belief that if my opponent suggests a mediator, there must be a reason. I generally agree with my opponent's choice, unless there is some real bad blood and/or if I believe that the mediator's personality and my client's will clash. If you are the one making the selection, remember, personality does count.
