One State agency and one field office of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service were the sites for this comparative study. Each agency has its own distinctive brand of mediation. On the basis of observations and the mediators' explanations of their activities, the mediator's role emerged as the factor that most differentiated the two approaches. The State mediators act and describe themselves as dealmakers, while the Federal mediators act more as orchestrators of the process. These role differences are apparent throughout the cases -- in their structure and in the types of strategies the mediators use to help the parties resolve their disputes. Analysis of the organizational contexts in which these State and Federal mediators work suggests that differences in agency history, modes of organizational socialization, and interactive structure may provide the most compelling explanations for the divergent approaches to practice. Footnotes and 32 references.