Blair's report details the consequences of an underfunded Office of the Ombudsperson, which can be generalized to other programs:
- Increased wait times. Staff members experience longer wait times for appointments, leading to frustration and decreased engagement.
- Delayed follow-ups. There are significant delays in case follow-ups, which can exacerbate existing issues and reduce the effectiveness of interventions.
- Missed opportunities. Some individuals opt not to seek assistance because of the inability to secure timely meetings, leaving their concerns unaddressed.
- Unsustainable caseloads. The current caseload is unsustainable, resulting in increased stress and potential burnout among OOMP [Office of the Ombudsperson] staff.
- Quality concerns. OOMP staff are increasingly worried about the diminishing quality of service provision, which can undermine the office’s credibility and effectiveness.
- Reduced focus on innovation. The necessity to prioritize case management over other vital activities, such as awareness raising, education, and support initiatives, limits the office’s ability to innovate and proactively address issues.
- Unfulfilled duties. The focus on case management detracts from other essential responsibilities outlined in OOMP’s terms of reference, including support to field offices.
The report is rich in many other areas, highlighting Ombuds activities, visitor demographics, patterns and trends, and upward feedback. (ADB 2023 Ombuds Report.)
Related posts: Asian Development Bank Seeks Bids to Review Ombuds Office; Ombuds for Asian Development Bank Posts 2020 Annual Report; Job Posting; Ombuds for Asian Development Bank Releases 2021 Annual Report; Asian Development Bank Posts 2022 Ombuds Report; Job Posting; IOA Announces 2024 Honorees.
I appreciate the outlined outcomes of the impact of reduced staffing on visitors. While it's a no surprise to read this, it's refreshing to see the annual report outlining the downsides of smaller Ombuds staff due to organizational change or decision making.
ReplyDeleteThe expectation that an organizational office will be able to do more with less is a lie finance people tell themselves. The reality is that organizations do less with less.
ReplyDeleteThe danger here, it appears, is that upper management sees the diminishes effectiveness/satisfaction as an excuse to cut the program. "I don't know, Wayne. This office used to be good. We can't justify it with this diminished satisfaction."