Two principal types of fact-finding – without recommendations and with recommendations – are considered. The author finds little value in the former, except when utilized to invite impartial technicians to assist the parties on such issues as insurance and pensions in advance of negotiations. Fact-finding with recommendations simulates the arbitration process, but decisions are neither binding nor derived from a contractual framework. Fact-finding with recommendations also differs from mediation, and may follow unsuccessful mediation. The distinctive attributes of mediators, in contrast to arbitrators, are discussed.