In a surprising announcement to the campus last Friday, UC Berkeley's Chancellor said that MWI had been hired to "relaunch" the Staff Ombuds Office. In January 2024, Sara Thacker retired after 16 years as the Director, leaving Shatika Ricketts as Assistant Ombudsperson and uncertainty about the future of the office. MWI will provide a team of three experienced Ombuds: Tera Bisbee (former Ombuds at Cal State University San Bernardino); Ralph Johnson (former America Ombuds at McKinsey & Company); and Jen Sims (former Staff Ombuds Office at the University of Texas). The full announcement has many more details:
Dear Berkeley Staff Community:
We are pleased to announce that we have engaged with MWI, a nationally recognized dispute resolution provider, to relaunch a full-service Staff Ombuds Office for our campus. This will help us address staff vacancies, increase our responsiveness, and allow the office to begin taking on new cases again.
About Staff Ombuds Services
The Staff Ombuds Office will continue to be a confidential, impartial, informal, and independent resource designed to support members of the UC Berkeley staff community as they address university-related concerns.
The primary mission of the Staff Ombuds Office is to provide a confidential, off-the-record space where staff members can share their concerns, explore possible next steps toward resolution, and become better equipped to move forward productively. Ombuds team members can share relevant university resources and policies, talk through ways to raise an issue informally or formally, coach people through how to have difficult conversations, mediate between two or more people, work with groups in conflict, and more. Additionally, the Staff Ombuds Office provides anonymized, aggregated data to university leadership to help illuminate areas of concern and systemic issues.
This voluntary resource is one of many avenues at UC Berkeley designed to facilitate and strengthen relationships between individuals and departments as we work together to provide a safe, supportive, and inclusive community.
New Pilot Model
We have contracted with MWI to provide ombuds services for the next six months. Staff will be served by an ombuds team comprised of three seasoned and independent ombuds professionals versed in the culture, policies, and procedures of UC Berkeley. The ombuds team will be compliant with the International Ombuds Association’s Standards of Practice and Code of Ethics, upholding the principles of confidentiality, impartiality, informality, and independence.
Tera Bisbee, Ralph Johnson, and Jen Sims will serve as the staff ombuds team for Berkeley. Their virtual offices will be open and fully operational as of July 1, 2024. Those seeking ombuds services are welcome to learn more about the service and how to contact an ombuds on the Staff Ombuds website (the website will be updated with contact information for MWI, on July 1). The team will provide neutral and timely services and offer visitors a choice of ombuds.
During the six-month pilot period, we will be evaluating engagement with the new team and model and deciding on a future course so that there is no gap in service at the end of this pilot period.
We are thrilled to be relaunching the Staff Ombuds Office and encourage you to reach out to this excellent team of ombuds for support should the need arise.
Sincerely,
Carol T. Christ, Chancellor
Khira Griscavage, Associate Chancellor; Chief of Staff to Chancellor Christ; and Chief Ethics, Risk, and Compliance Officer
Sharon Inkelas, Deputy Compliance Officer and Special Faculty Advisor to the Chancellor on Campus Welfare
I hope that I am not running afoul of the letter or spirit of the newly clarified Ombuds-Blog guidelines for comments with this... Please feel free to edit any/all of my thoughts below if necessary.
ReplyDeleteThe UC system's commitment to the ombuds function has always seemed pretty solid. Many of the UC ombuds offices have been around for decades and some of the most respected members of our community have spent time in UC ombuds roles (shoutout to 2024 Trailblazer Award winning ombudsman Tom K.) There have even been some notable recent positive developments in the UC sphere with the creation of the new UCOP and Santa Cruz offices and additional staff added to others. That said, I can't help but feel as though the move to outsource the staff ombuds function at Cal is a pretty concerning development and a departure from that commitment.
For better or worse, the outsourced ombuds model seems to be here to stay. While I think it can play a positive role in expanding ombuds access, especially for those smaller organizations that can't sustain a dedicated internal ombuds, I bristle at the prospect of outsourcing being used to replace already existing and established offices in large organizations. I think there is real value in for an ombuds in having the first-hand lived experience of being an employee in the organization where they are seeking to help their customers navigate challenges and conflicts. Perhaps I am biased by my own experience of working as an employee of the organization where I ombuds but I struggle to understand how can you truly "ombuds where you're at" if you aren't inside the organization you're serving? So much of my value (at least in my own mind) comes from understanding the written AND unwritten rules; from not only knowing the policies but having the relationships with the people who write and interpret and enforce those policies; from being able to empathize with the frustration of callers to my office about the "quirks" of my organization because I too have dealt with our HR/GC/leadership.
This has little to do with any concerns about the quality of MWI's ombuds/services. They have been gobbling up quite a few well-respected practitioners as of late and seem to be taking the role and the work very seriously. That's awesome and I hope they and other contract ombuds providers are successful in breaking into new areas and popularizing the use of ombuds beyond the more traditional academic and public sector strongholds. More ombuds is better for everyone and access to an external ombuds is far superior to no access to an ombuds. But for their growth to come at the cost of cannibalizing an office currently celebrating it's 40th year (!!!!) and that until recently employed 3 full-time ombuds appears to me to be a gigantic step backwards -- for the staff at Berkeley and for the ombuds community as a whole.
I am a bit of a natural pessimist (if that's not obvious) and I would love to hear other's thoughts on this news. Is there a perspective that I am missing or context that helps to explain this move?
Thank you! No notes.
DeleteI appreciate your thoughts, OP. My initial thought and concern centered around Shatika. There was no mention of her or Julia (who I believe is still there? I can't find any more recent updates on this blog) in the chancellor's letter. I truly, sincerely hope that their positions haven't been eliminated in favor of this change.
DeleteI do believe that remote or outsourced work can be done well, with intention.
Julia moved to JPL about a year ago to restart that office. https://ombuds-blog.blogspot.com/2023/06/jet-propulsion-laboratory-relaunches.html
DeleteTom - thank you for creating and nurturing a forum for ombuds to share concerns (and hopes) about a profession that we all value and seek to protect.
DeleteAnonymous - I (and the team at MWI) appreciate you voicing your concerns. It gives me an opportunity to understand your perspective and share another point of view for you to consider.
Your commitment to the ombuds profession and to your ombuds colleagues is clear. I/we at MWI share this commitment.
Being selected to support an ombuds office that started 40 years ago this summer is an honor. While respecting and committing to building on what is working, we have made improvements, including bringing in Chuck Howard to help draft an ombuds charter that was signed by the Chancellor before we (re)launch on July 1st.
You asked about what will happen with existing staff (in this case Shatika) when we support an established ombuds office. We are excited and grateful that Shatika is available to work with the ombuds team from MWI. She's already proven to be super helpful as we navigate, learn about, and build working relationships at UC Berkeley. We look forward to supporting her as she grows an as ombuds practitioner.
While this is not the forum to answer and respond to all of your concerns about the outsourced ombuds model, I ask that you reflect on the language that was used in your post and its origin. While I appreciate you acknowledging MWI’s efforts to provide quality ombuds services, I think it’s fair to ask you to assume positive intent. Every ombuds should be evaluated on their actions and whether their services are aligned with IOA's SoPs and CoEs. We're proud of the ombuds services that we've provided to clients since 1997 and are grateful to our panel of incredibly talented ombuds who serve our visitors every day.
I (and members of the team from MWI) welcome a chance to speak with you and others about the outsourced ombuds model and our work with UC Berkeley. I would also like to understand (and learn from) how you ombuds.
Feel free to reach out to me at cdoran@mwi.org to set up a time to talk. Thanks.
Chuck.
This is concerning to me also. I am not talking about MWI’s intent - I’m sure its motive’s are high, but the impact throughout the profession could be devastating. There are intrinsic differences between an internal ombuds and an external ombuds. It seems to me that an external service is much more of an EAP - very transactional. I’m struggling with the idea that there can be the same deep relationships with leadership that help ombuds be agents of systemic change, and allow the ombuds to offer support to leadership and administration at all levels, not just offering conflict resolution on a small level to individual employees. It dilutes the concept of an organizational ombuds. It would be really helpful if MWI offered their services as an on ramp to re-establishing an internal ombuds office. I can imagine that organizations see this as an economic value and don’t understand what they are losing. This new move is a danger sign for the profession.
DeleteHi Chuck, anonymous poster #2 (not the OP). I just wanted to chime in that my post was centered around concern for Shatika. I should be more clear that I wished the chancellor would have provided an explanation as to if she will remain, or how her role might be impacted. Going through transitions is challenging, so I merely was trying to offer support for that. As I stated I fully believe that outsourced and/or remote work can be done well. Best of luck to you and your team!
Delete(Also thank you Tom for the quick update about Julia, I had done a very quick search and clearly missed that!)
Thanks Anonymous #2. It sounds like it would have been helpful to you and others if the Chancellor would have provided an updated about Shatika in her announcement. We're looking forward to working with her starting in July. I/we appreciate the well-wishes! Take care.
DeleteWhile it's hard to track the Anonymous posts, I appreciate the opportunity to respond.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure how an IOA-compliant ombuds resource would be like an EAP. You'll have to explain that one to me.
No need to struggle with the idea that there can be the same deep relationships with leadership that help ombuds be agents of systemic change. I agree with you that it's hard to imagine an ombuds being truly effective without strong relationships with leadership, the administration, faculty and staff senates, employee groups, unions, etc... This is required of both in-house and outsourced ombuds and we both know that no ombuds is exempt from putting in the work to build them.
It's true that MWI and other outsourced providers make ombuds services available to smaller companies and universities. It's also true that these and other large companies, universities, and non-profits continue to work with us year after year because we provide and demonstrate value to their organizations.
The real danger sign to the profession is not supporting all IOA-compliant ombuds practitioners. I wish nothing but success to you and all of the other ombuds out there.
Feel free to reach out to me at cdoran@mwi.org if you want to discuss. Thanks.
This discussion is long overdue. We are seeing the Uber-fication of our field.
ReplyDeleteIt is brazen and insulting to market this “outsourced ombuds” model as an adequate substitute to a robust, well-structured internal organizational ombuds office. Unless we as ombuds practitioners begin to make the distinction, especially to those who would contract for these services, our field will become dominated by a few large contractors like MWI, with unprotected, disempowered gig-workers reporting to business-minded executives.
This is a perversion of our craft.
Lest you think I am alarmist, here is a quote from MWI’s website:
“Cost-Effective: An outsourced ombuds provider offers the organization a choice of two or more ombuds to serve the population at a cost that is less expensive than hiring a full-time in-house ombuds since the organization does not pay employee benefits to members of the ombuds team.” https://www.mwi.org/dispute-resolution-for-companies/organizational-ombuds/
I agree that this discussion is long overdue. I propose we have a thoughtful exchange of ideas about the different ways practitioners ombuds.
ReplyDeleteI also agree that organizations should be served by robust and well-structured IOA-compliant ombuds providers. There are in-house and outsourced ombuds who meet this standard and there are those who don't. I'm curious if you feel the same way about in-house ombuds who are not well-structured and do not practice to IOA Standards.
We both know that our field will not "become dominated by a few large contractors like MWI, with unprotected, disempowered gig-workers reporting to business-minded executives." I founded MWI as a 501c3 not for profit 30 years ago and have always sought to work with the most experienced, skilled, and creative ombuds, mediators and trainers who are free to work with MWI for as long as it works for them. Same is true for our clients.
I read that you and others are concerned, fearful, and don't fully understand the outsourced ombuds model. There's so much to discuss, including that it's the only truly independent ombuds model, which impacts perceptions of impartiality, informality, and confidentiality (including having email and other data systems separate from the organizations we serve).
Like it or not, we're all ombuds. I believe that it's in our collective interest, for the sake of the profession, to focus on supporting each other as we build the profession together.
Perhaps a panel discussion at the next IOA conference?
Feel free to contact me at cdoran@mwi.org if you'd like to set up a time to talk. Thanks.
Chuck.
It’s easy to criticize MWI for their model but I think that alone misses the mark. They exist and are successful because there is a market for what they do. If you don’t like it, look inward a bit - what are the conditions that are leading to places like Berkeley seeking their services? What is happening to build support and strength internally within institutions? The ombuds world has felt very navel-gazing/get-off-my-lawn to me at times, and a lot of what’s happening in this discussion is bringing back those feelings.
ReplyDeleteOmbuds that are an integral part of organizations are well placed to be valuable contributors to organizational improvement and succees. For way too long, too much focus has been put on ombuds as a form of alternative dispute resolution. While ADR is a tool of ombuds, our value to our organizations is our ability to bring a wide range of knowledge, skills and abilities to bear in support of employees and the organization. If an ombuds is not contributing to the strategic success of an organization--in a way that no other office can--it can be outsourced or cut.
ReplyDeleteGreat points, @StrategicOmbuds. Serving as dispute resolvers is only one aspect of our role that includes providing anonymized upward systemic feedback, serving as thought partners with leadership, strategizing with ERG leaders and other employee groups, etc...
ReplyDeleteI agree with and would like to build on your last point about ombuds who do not contribute to the strategic success of an organization. I suggest that this applies to any ombuds, whether in-house or outsourced. If an ombuds does not contribute to the strategic success of an organization, in the unique way that ombuds can given our SoPs, outcomes might include being cut and replaced with an effective ombuds, whether in-house or outsourced.
As usual, I am finding myself in a position of gratitude that this blog is available as a forum for these sorts of discussions! It's really wonderful to be able to hear from others in the community about their perspectives.
ReplyDeleteWhile I agree with elements of what's been said by multiple commenters, including Chuck, I am particularly struck by the line: "We are seeing the Uber-fication of our field." This so perfectly captures the concerns that prompted my original comment! I feel validated to see my three and a half paragraphs of text summarized back so accurately and succinctly -- clearly, Concerned Ombuds is in the right profession.
I do not doubt Chuck's assertion about his positive intentions, and I value his willingness to engage with those of us in the online peanut gallery, it doesn't feel particularly fair to declare "we both know that our field will not 'become dominated by a few large contractors like MWI, with unprotected, disempowered gig-workers reporting to business-minded executives'" in the comments section of a press release about multiple ombuds positions at a large university being replaced by contractors... Respectfully, it does kind of feel like we are starting to see a few large contracting organizations dominating the ombuds space.
Similarly, while I also don't doubt that "large companies, universities, and non-profits continue to work with [MWI] year after year because we provide and demonstrate value to their organizations" I think it's a bit disingenuous to not also acknowledge that the value being referenced here by MWI is explicitly a financial one. To another commenter's point, you don't need to look too hard to find examples from other industries of the potential deleterious long term impact of an exclusively profit-driven approach to system design (see: Uber as an example).
Because I think it's important that it not get lost in this conversation, I will again repeat: I do think MWI and other contract ombuds providers have the potential to fill an important role in the larger ombuds ecosystem, particularly for smaller organizations that can't sustain their own internal ombuds. But I do also absolutely believe that the ombuds profession is vulnerable to exploitation by the same "business-minded executives" who routinely buy positive PR for their large organizations through all manner of performative activism (see: greenwashing, pinkwashing, sportswashing, etc.)
The last time I can recall reading a "surprise announcement" on the Ombuds-Blog about a new office was when MWI was contracted to stand up an ombuds for the 300,000 employees at CVS in the wake of a sexual harassment scandal. Chuck Howard was involved in that effort as a senior advisor, there was an IOA complaint charter written, and an all-star roster of experienced contractor ombuds attached. That program was shuttered in less than a year. CVS is the sixth largest corporation in the US and the University of California System has an endowment of almost 30 billion dollars. My guess is that these large organizations aren't signing a six month contract with MWI because they can't afford to pay for employee benefits or because they think that's how you establish an effective organizational ombuds office. This looks a lot like an attempt at performative ombuds-washing.
I'll attempt to close on a more collaborative note. I agree wholeheartedly with Chuck that it is in our collective interest to focus wherever possible on how we can support one another as we build the profession together. And I think Chuck's suggestion of a IOA conference session on this subject is a great idea. I would definitely attend that session.
COMMENTS FOR THIS POST ARE CLOSED.
ReplyDelete