Dear In Practice,

As an ombuds, I am committed to being non-judgmental and accessible. I firmly believe these values are essential to my work. Still, there have been times when I’ve been faced with a situation where I felt continued services were no longer appropriate or productive. 

In one case, the visitor, long after their initial concern was resolved, continued requesting weekly meetings to discuss a range of personal and work-related issues. After several meetings I noticed he would check his watch and excuse himself after 50 minutes. It was then that I began to suspect he was confusing our meetings with therapy. 

Another situation involved a visitor who displayed what Bill Eddy would describe as “high conflict behaviors.” During our conversations she was visibly frustrated with my impartiality, so much so that she complained about the “do-nothing” ombuds office to leadership. Still, she continued contacting the office and requesting meetings to discuss her latest issue. 

Under what circumstances can I ethically discontinue services for a visitor who wants to continue utilizing the ombuds office? And how do I do so with the least negative impact to the visitor, my office, and my own sense of ethical duty?

Letting Go of a Good Thing

Often we are our own worst enemy: when a visitor finds value in consulting with us, they might not want to let a good thing go.

Here, one visitor sees the ombuds as an effective personal advisor and a second, though argumentative, has also discovered the value of the office. Our role is not to create dependencies but to equip visitors with tools to address similar issues on their own in the future.

I have seen your second example manifest in two ways: (1) The visitor does not want to pursue any option discussed, hoping instead that the ombuds will handle the situation – hence the “do-nothing ombuds office.” (2) The issue defines a visitor’s career and has become a “cause” such that resolving the issue will leave the visitor without a workplace identity.

Closure on the initial issue, whether resolved or not, is essential. It is important for the ombuds, the visitor, and for data tracking. Restating your role, and its limitations, can be helpful steps toward closure, as can helping the visitor identify other resources in the organization. 

We have an ethical duty to help our visitors move on with their lives. If you’ve communicated as suggested above, this may require you to be direct and tell the visitor that you have nothing left to offer and see no value in continuing to meet.

Thomas Zgambo, retired ombudsperson at IMF

Encouraging Self-Efficacy

Navigating visitor expectations while maintaining the integrity of the ombuds role requires careful balance, patience, and clear communication. When confronted with the visitor behaviors described, I have pushed back with open-ended questions. Here is how I might respond:

Help me understand what you might be looking for from the Ombuds Office. I see that you are scheduling frequent weekly visits, what is it that you are hoping to resolve in our time together? My role is to empower you to come up with solutions you feel you might be able to implement. I can coach and provide you with the tools. I am wondering what might be preventing you from addressing the conflict directly.

Another effective technique is "naming the dynamic," by gently and objectively identifying patterns or behaviors that are emerging in the conversation.

It sounds like you want the ombuds to make decisions and provide actions. What is preventing you from making decisions and moving to action? What are you most concerned about? What do you think is keeping you from moving forward?"

The approach of using open-ended questions to guide visitors toward self-reflection and empowerment creates opportunities for insights to emerge and aligns with ombuds intent of fostering independent problem-solving. Maintaining ethical standards, practicing active listening, and offering guidance within the ombuds framework allow us to provide a space where visitors feel heard while also encouraging self-efficacy.

Jacqueline Villafane, Ombuds with Infinidad Consulting, LLC

A Gap Between Expectations and Service

As much as we remind our visitors that our services are voluntary (we can't force them or anyone to participate,) we should also remind ourselves that voluntary engagement applies to us as ombuds.

How we discontinue service may vary. Once, I must confess, I hung up on a visitor (I know, I know, mea culpa.) After a couple hours of going in circles, they were not listening and kept talking over me. I simply told them I was going to count backwards from 10 to 1 and hang up if they didn't stop talking. This was rare and only one of two people I’ve had to abruptly disengage with. Sometimes, we just have to say 'no' for our own professional principles and personal well-being.

In your scenario, your visitor viewed the office as the "do-nothing" ombuds. They are absolutely right. As ombuds, we don't take action. When there is a gap between visitor expectations and our services, we most likely can't change that and they need to go somewhere else. Why go to the doughnut shop when you want a bagel? In other words, we can't meet their needs.

Reese Ramos, Director and University Ombuds at Virginia Tech

We value the opportunity to engage with our membership on the dilemmas we face in our roles. Please let us know your perspective on this dilemma in the comment section below.