Source: (2004) Papers presented at the Third Conference of the European Forum for Victim-Offender Mediation and Restorative Justice, 'Restorative Justice in Europe: Where are we heading?', Budapest, Hungary, 14-16 October. Downloaded 22 September 2005.

Surfacing information to the mediation table is crucial. Information is surfaced to serve the parties rather than serving the mediator. Methods of obtaining and sharing information are diverse. Mediator style in bringing out information and the personalities of the players can change the whole concept of mediation as a practice. Six categories of mediation have emerged as most widely known: 1) Generic, 2) settlement-driven, 3) cognitive systemic, 4) transformative, 5) humanistic and 6) narrative. Some mediators’ methods of uncovering information and defining issues are inconsistent, however, with the individual mediation style chosen. The ability to choose a specific type of mediation suitable for the situation at hand requires the ability to identify and perform the each of the different mediation styles. The “community mediation movement�? of North America (including penal, neighbourhood, and family) gave birth to a similar movement in Europe in the eighties. The first family and victim-offender mediators in Europe naturally shaped the meeting between the parties after that generic community mediation model. As with the rest of the western world, other mediation styles in Europe were developed in order to serve different purposes. When doing commercial or corporate mediation, civil mediation, family mediation, community mediation, VOM (Victim Offender Mediation) or VOC (Victim Offender Conferencing) we can draw on experiences from this variety of styles. In both the generic, transformative, humanistic and narrative mediation models, we attempt to identify feelings, needs and concerns of the parties in order to create an environment for empathy, empowerment and recognition. Author's abstract.