Observations of actual mediation sessions, interviews with key informants, and archival data were used. The authors found that the projects could be distinguished according to (a) uses of coercion and consensus in affecting a resolution, (b) the type of posturing that took place between mediator and disputants, and (c) the type of discourse employed. The authors argue that differences between the two projects emanated from whether the project was planned and executed by a state agency or whether it was community-based. 1 note, 2 tables, and 42 references. (Author abstract)