OHIO STATE JOURNAL ON DISPUTE RESOLUTION (Vol. 27:2 2012] mediators of tools that could be used to move disputes more quickly towards resolution. Such evaluative mediators argue that in certain circumstances mediators better help parties resolve disputes if they selectively address the substance of the dispute where appropriate and/or offer suggestions about how it might be resolved.93 Although many, including this author, remain dedicated to the idea that facilitative mediation is preferable in most instances,94 there is growing acknowledgment that in certain kinds of mediations, evaluative techniques may be appropriate.95 Mediators who possess substantive expertise in a specific field can use that knowledge and experience to aid the resolution of certain kinds of disputes.9 6 Post-election process dispute resolution, for reasons to follow, falls into this category. Scholars have pointed to a number of ways an "expert" mediator can be useful. For example, a mediator with substantive expertise can help by educating the parties about ways in which the law may vindicate their rights or ways in which similarly situated parties have resolved their disputes.9 7 Mediators with substantive expertise may also help parties avoid an unfair result. 98 Mediators with subject matter experience can also raise bidden dangers that parties might not foresee or provide ideas for options that have been useful in other contexts.99 93 L. Randolph Lowry, To Evaluate or Not: That Is Not the Question, 38 FAM. & CONCIUATION CTS. REv. 48, 55 (2000) ("evaluation is a technique to move parties from positions they have taken that have resulted in impasse to a mutually agreeable position so a settlement then takes place."). 94 Huge concerns about party self-determination, mediator neutrality, and problems associated with quality control of mediator evaluations drives this skepticism. See supra note 82. 95 It should be noted that facilitative mediation techniques need not be thrown out the window when an evaluative model is adopted. Indeed, the best evaluative mediators recognize the benefits of facilitative principles and work to incorporate them as they mediate, effectively shifting between a facilitative and evaluative approach as the situation dictates. Telephone Interview with Howard Bellman (August 15, 2011). 96 Brian Jarrett, The Future of Mediation: A Sociological Perspective, 2009 J. DISP. RESOL. 49, 70 (2009) (noting that sector specialization has led in some instances to the beneficial use of a more evaluative approach, Jarrett uses U.N. conciliation efforts as an example in which, "the United Nations provides a kind of practical power politics in its mediation programs that have precious little to do with the objectivity, impartiality, and neutrality associated with the facilitative model."). 97 Scott H. Hughes, Facilitative Mediation or Evaluative Mediation: May Your Choice Be A Wise One, 59 ALA. LAW. 246, 247 (1998). 98 Id. 99 Cris M. Currie, Mediating Off the Grid, 59 DISP. RESOL. J. 9, 12 (2004). 348 HeinOnline -- 27 Ohio St. J. on Disp. Resol. 348 2012