Ombuds processes and disputant reconciliation

Abstract

Effective dispute resolution systems are critical to the functioning of large universities and organizations. However, the design of dispute resolution systems is often inadequate to achieving the stated goals of the system. Analysis of the cases of 45 disputants reveals how the design of a university dispute system and the social context can prevent an ombudsperson from successfully reconciling relationships. This study shows how a dispute system that generally failed to utilize face-to-face meetings or mediation techniques between disputants in a social context of fear and limited social ties was unable to reconcile or preserve working relationships. Analysis from normative pragmatic and social contextual approaches to disputing provides a mechanism for understanding the problems encountered by this ombudsperson and provides a tool for designing more effective dispute resolution systems.

Enhancing Communication Interventions and Evaluations through Communication Design

“…However, the ombuds system generally was not successful in reconciling relationships between students and faculty. In part this was due to the fleeting nature of relationships in academe, where students can typically choose to take classes from different professors after the semester is over (Harrison & Morrill, 2004). Additionally, though, students expressed very different motivations for using the ombuds system and very different desires for outcomes.…”

“…However, understanding how these processes work and are experienced by disputants requires an examination of the design using relevant theoretical approaches, such as theories of procedural or organizational justice (e.g. Harrison & Morrill, 2004). Additionally, though, these theories can also help to advance new designs.…”

“…Designs in theory work differently than designs in action. This is demonstrated through one element of the work on ombuds, which focused on how different elements of strategies as enacted by the ombud worked toward or against the stated goals of the system (Harrison & Morrill, 2004). As a tool of critique and analysis, a communication design approach is very useful in uncovering the specific contradictions between stated goals and typical outcomes based on the nature of the relationships and social context surrounding disputes.…”

“…My own work on ombuds (Harrison, 2003(Harrison, , 2004(Harrison, , 2007Harrison & Doerfel, 2006;Harrison, Hopeck, Desrayaud, & Imboden, 2013;Harrison & Morrill, 2004) focuses specifically on disputes that arise between students and faculty members, and focuses primarily on student experiences. To understand how individuals make sense of and experience elements of the designed process I interviewed disputants as they moved through different stages of the grievance system, including interviews before they began the process, and after every subsequent meeting or interaction in relation to the process.…”

“…The ombudsman saw just resolution of the dispute, reconciliation of the disputants, and upholding the standards of the university as key goals of the process. Additionally, the ombudsman wanted the office to build bridges across campus with both faculty and students (Harrison & Morrill, 2004). A few of the key elements of the design included a process that was neutral and confidential, where students had the opportunity to give voice to their grievance and had control of the process.…”