Organizational Ombuds serve as a confidential, independent, neutral and informal dispute resolution resources for a specific entity. These unique characteristics distinguish Organizational Ombuds from Classical Ombuds, mediators, arbitrators, and other alternative dispute resolution professionals. The term "Ombuds" is shorthand for "Ombudsman," "Ombudsperson" and "Ombuds officer," which also are used widely although Google's latest tool, the Ngram Viewer, seems to contradict the usage of other variant terms.
After offering an explanation of an organization ombuds like that above, I am often asked why an organization should be interested of one when, for instance, a telephone hot-line has been very successful in alerting the company to problems. I have always maintained that a hot-line is a terrific idea and certainly better than nothing.
But think about it for a moment: would you be satisfied with “better than nothing?” Put yourself in the seat of a frustrated/angry/resentful employee or even an employee, manager, or a C-level hotshot with a concern regarding continued employment. Where or to whom are you going to go for comfort and/or assistance? You could go to the HR office—if this function is not outsourced or available only on-line. But be mindful that HR must document all visits, so the concept and promise of confidentiality are not necessarily heeded. Back to the hotline: will you feel the least bit of relief talking to a telephonic voice answering from a void somewhere else on the continent or on a continent far far away? While the person behind this voice is in a position to help you give notice of a problem, what does she or he know of your employer, your company culture, much less the latest gossip floating from dept. to dept.? Where is that priceless personal touch?
Many ombuds who are under contract to an employer entity can also work far from the factory or corporate offices. Their special expertise, however, requires education about the company, and the ombuds makes it a point to know as much as possible about the product, service, staffing and history. Hot-lines cannot complete such diligence nor do they need to, merely acting as a reporting tool. They are not charged with following up on a concern other than reporting back that there was an initial report made (by virtue of the phone call). Hot-lines are not entrusted with working out conflicts and trying to prevent them from becoming repetitive time- and energy-consuming activities in the workplace. Hot-line operators are not entrusted to ask the pertinent questions that could help a caller work out a personal difficulty. Generally, hot-lines function as anonymous bulletin boards of email or twitter forms of communication. Ombuds are trained facilitators who work on behalf of all employees with the goal of increasing workplace harmony. Ombuds know what’s required to make a workplace a better place to spend the day and earn the employer profits and a good reputation as a hot place to work. The desirable reality creates a desirable reputation, which benefits not only employees but facilitates recruitment, which delivers dollar dividends as the company expands. Expansion means moving up opportunities for employees already on board.
All employees would love to have their own personal advocate at the workplace but, realistically, wouldn’t it be almost as good to know that the ombuds to whom you are spilling your guts will not be more sympathetic to and spend more time with others than with you? Designating fault in a situation isn’t even as important as being able to tell someone about it, especially if a “situation” could develop into a SITUATION. Sadly, a hot-line operator is not going to work out a time to talk with you via Skype or give you a consistent face and voice and communication mode. Hot-line operators read from scripts or may stock questions to ask the caller with little leeway for deep questioning.
All in all, using a hot line may be “better than nothing” and just as effective as writing to Dear Abby. Even if you avail yourself of the hotline service more than once, there is no guarantee of talking with the same person. To me, that’s just not personal enough.
