Two models may be drawn up of coalitions of the willing. The first model is epitomized by the group of countries assembled by the United States for the mobilization of the 2003 Iraq war. The second model is the form of coalition associated with the anti-personnel landmines campaign and the initiative on the International Criminal Court in the mid- to late-1990s. This paper will explore the relationship between these different types of coalitions. The former type is characterized by a top-down, state-centric and coerced/opportunistic strategic form. The latter type by way of contrast takes a bottom-up, voluntary, mixed actor, diplomatic approach. Yet, alongside these differences are some striking, but unanticipated similarities. Most dramatically, both types have been assembled on an intense stylistic basis with an eye to avoiding the frustrations associated with working via established institutions. By looking more closely at the external expression and inner workings of these modes of activity, the model of coalitions of the willing is stretched out in terms of their motivations, sense of ownership and future trajectory.