Journal of the International Ombuds Association (JIOA)

IOA Journal Volume 6, Issue 2 (2013)

Interviews with Pioneers of Higher Education Ombudsmen
Tom Sebok

Abstract
Eleven pioneers of higher education ombudsing were interviewed for this article; including three different types of pioneers: 1) those who served in the ombudsman role in the early days before there were professional organizations, Standards of Practice, formalized training, journals, newsletters, or conferences, etc.; 2) those who, largely through their publications and presentations, significantly influenced the thinking and practices of their colleagues; and 3) those who played key roles in starting and/or leading the professional organizations that support the work of higher education ombudsmen. A variety of topics are presented, including such things as their recollections of starting this work, meeting other colleagues, forming associations with other ombudsmen, challenges, rewards, and/or their accomplishments.

Reconsidering the Neutrality and Impartiality Standard: A Multidisciplinary Analysis
Zachary P. Ulrich

Abstract

All organizational ombuds (OO) are neutrals, but what does “neutral” and “impartial” mean in the context of other professions, and what implications might those alternative meanings have for ombudsman practice? This paper analyzes the IOA standard of neutrality and impartiality by leveraging findings from the diverse fields of moral philosophy, historical analysis, political science, systems theory, mathematical modeling, social cognitive psychology, and neuropsychology, among others. The paper goes on to explore both the benefits and shortcomings of the neutrality and impartiality standard vis-à-vis the ombudsman role, and briefly explores whether or not the application of alternative standards might better suit the OO profession as it evolves, specifically as an agent of organizational conflict monitoring and reporting, as an agent of organizational change, and as an advocate for individuals and groups when necessary.

Abstract

Attempting to capture the significant positive effects that an Ombuds Office can have upon an organization, the author poses a simple, objective, and easily managed data collection methodology that illuminates the Ombuds’ worth to an organization. Seven Risk Categories are defined, with guidelines for data collection being confined to only what is told directly to the Ombuds by a visitor upon initial intake. IOA standards of confidentiality and impartiality and availability of objective data are discussed in relation to the Risk Categories. An example of a Risk Categories data report is provided, with an evaluation of limitations of this methodology.

Reconsidering the Neutrality and Impartiality Standard: A Multidisciplinary Analysis
Zachary P. Ulrich

Abstract

All organizational ombuds (OO) are neutrals, but what does “neutral” and “impartial” mean in the context of other professions, and what implications might those alternative meanings have for ombudsman practice? This paper analyzes the IOA standard of neutrality and impartiality by leveraging findings from the diverse fields of moral philosophy, historical analysis, political science, systems theory, mathematical modeling, social cognitive psychology, and neuropsychology, among others. The paper goes on to explore both the benefits and shortcomings of the neutrality and impartiality standard vis-à-vis the ombudsman role, and briefly explores whether or not the application of alternative standards might better suit the OO profession as it evolves, specifically as an agent of organizational conflict monitoring and reporting, as an agent of organizational change, and as an advocate for individuals and groups when necessary.

A Simple Methodology for Increasing Visibility and Capturing Organizational Ombuds Worth
Katherine Y. Biala

Abstract

Attempting to capture the significant positive effects that an Ombuds Office can have upon an organization, the author poses a simple, objective and easily managed data collection methodology that illuminates the Ombuds’ worth to an organization. Seven Risk Categories are defined, with guidelines for data collection being confined to only what is told directly to the Ombuds by a visitor upon initial intake. IOA standards of confidentiality and impartiality and availability of objective data are discussed in relation to the Risk Categories. An example of a Risk Categories data report is provided, with an evaluation of limitations of this methodology.

Read Articles

JIOA Archives

About the JIOA

The Journal of the International Ombuds Association (JIOA) is a peer-reviewed online journal for scholarly articles and information relevant to the ombudsman profession. As members of a relatively new profession, we continually strive to understand, define and clarify the role and function of the professional organizational ombuds.

The JIOA will help foster recognition that what we do for our agencies, corporations, colleges, and universities is worthy of study. While we must vigorously protect the confidentiality of our interactions, we can still study and be studied to understand what we do and how we do it; what works well and what doesn't work; what our options are; how social, technical and legal changes may impact us; what the profile and career development of ombuds professionals might be, and other matters of interest.

The JIOA can facilitate a greater interest in ombudsing, enhance our professional standing, and serve to give us a better understanding of our dynamic roles and the impact on our institutions and agencies. The Journal also will allow IOA members, other ombuds, and other professionals to reach out to their colleagues with their ideas, research findings, theories, and recommendations for best practices and to engage in ongoing discussions of critical issues.

Learn more about the JIOA and the manuscript submission process.

Learn More 

If you have any questions about the JIOA please contact the co-editors via email at [email protected].

• Shannon Lynn Burton, Michigan State University

Email JIOA