A recent Above the Law column suggests that lawyers often default to formal mediation without first considering a cheaper, faster alternative. The author argues that before spending on a full mediation process, counsel should ask whether the parties might benefit from simply getting the key decision-makers on a call.
The piece contrasts the structure and cost of formal mediation with the flexibility of an informal settlement conference. In the informal format, there is no neutral third party or lengthy preparation; instead, the people with authority to settle speak directly. That can cut through posturing and move the dispute toward resolution more efficiently.
The column is an opinion piece rather than a report of empirical findings, so it does not claim that informal conferences always work. But it makes a practical case: for some disputes, the informal route may be the better first step, with formal mediation held in reserve if needed.