It is often said (particularly by arbitrators) that arbitration is different from litigation. Not just the fact that there is no appeal or that discovery is discretionary, but that the attorney representing a party should be going about the task differently from how things are done in court.
Rarely if ever does someone explain in specific terms that make sense what that difference is. What follows is an attempt to explain this from someone who had a hard time figuring this out while representing parties in arbitration.
Arbitration almost always occurs because transaction lawyers agreed to the arbitration clause. Arbitration services market their dispute resolution processes by emphasizing the economy and speed available in arbitration. They impart this message to the arbitrators on their panels as well. If the parties put an arbitration clause in their agreement, it stands to reason that they affirmatively decided that they wanted something different from what they would get in court.