For workplace mediation programs, success is most often measured by assessing the agreement rate. However, it is unlikely that all signed agreements are of equal quality. Starting with the principle that the “success” of a mediation program cannot be limited to its agreement rate, we designed a study to assess the quality of mediation agreements. This article uses a questionnaire based on a five-dimension framework (mediator’s usefulness, procedural justice, satisfaction with agreement, confidence in agreement, and reconciliation between parties) to conduct a cluster analysis of a sample of agreements from a governmental mediation program. Three types of agreement are identified: disappointing, satisfactory, and value-added agreements. The study’s theoretical contributions as well as its practical implications for mediators and mediation programs are discussed.