Dispute Resolution Tradeoffs in Ombuds Office Design

Authors

Kristen M. Blankley, University of Nebraska College of Law

Abstract

An organizational ombudsman (or “ombuds,” used as the preferred term in this paper) is a conflict resolution specialist who works as either an employee or contractor within the organization it serves. Unlike mediators or arbitrators, ombuds work only with a designated constituency group (often employees or other stakeholders) to solve a variety of conflicts at the lowest level possible within the organization. Ombuds, while preserving the confidentiality of the information they learn, can report trends to the organization or the public. While ombuds do not have the authority to make formal policy changes or other formal decisions, their work informs management and can lead to organizational change.

Traditionally, organizational ombuds are employed by the organization and have no duties other than their work as ombuds. However, over the last forty years, two new variations of this model have appeared. The first variation is where the ombuds are employees of the organization and have additional duties related to the organization’s mission. This paper refers to those as “collateral duty” ombuds. The second involves using a contract model to outsource the ombuds role to non-employees. The paper refers to these people as “outsourced” ombuds.

This paper examines the design choices in structuring ombuds offices, comparing all three models. Each model offers distinct benefits and tradeoffs in relation to the core ethical pillars that ombuds practice: independence, impartiality, informality, and confidentiality. Traditional ombuds offices can provide high accessibility and internal trust but may face challenges with perceived conflicts due to their embedded status. Collateral duty ombuds, who balance ombuds responsibilities with other organizational roles, offer cost efficiency and rich institutional knowledge but carry a heightened risk of potential conflicts of interest. Outsourced ombuds bring flexibility and a fresh perspective, yet they can face challenges related to organizational integration and continuity.

A significant gap in the legal literature surrounds ombuds practices, particularly regarding the ethical and practical implications of non-traditional ombuds models. This paper addresses this gap, providing insights for organizations designing or evaluating their ombuds programs. The analysis concludes with a call for further research on best practices for ombuds structures that balance ethical considerations with organizational needs, especially as interest in alternative ombuds models continues to grow.

Disciplines

Administrative Law | Business Organizations Law | Dispute Resolution and Arbitration | Labor and Employment Law | Law

Recommended Citation

Kristen M. Blankley, Dispute Resolution Tradeoffs in Ombuds Office Design, 27 Cardozo J. Conflict Resol. 67 (2025).
Available at: https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/cjcr/vol27/iss1/6