9 April 2009

To: Lisa Welch and Tianlong Yu, Co-Chairs, Faculty Welfare Council
From: Seran Aktuna and Cindy Schmidt, Faculty Ombuds
Re: Annual Report for 2008

This report covers Spring, Summer, and Fall 2008, the sixth full year of operation for the Faculty Ombuds Service.  Below we summarize our work with faculty, while maintaining the strictest anonymity/confidentiality for all concerned, and outline activities related to maintaining effective Ombuds services. We then reflect on the year’s activities and share our plans for the near future.

Summary of Work with Faculty
As in previous years, the office has continued to provide its service to faculty in a wide range of situations, many of which extended over a number of months.  Ombuds assistance has taken several forms, depending on the needs of the visitor(s).  For individuals, the Ombuds role has typically involved listening, brainstorming to identify options and resources, and helping visitors to arrive at their own solutions to problems. We also acted as resources to help individuals identify and contact the recognized university channels through which to proceed with the solution they have chosen, and have at times, worked as an intermediary with key University personnel to help visitors address issues.  For groups of two or more, Ombuds have aided with conflict resolution by facilitating constructive communication and clarification of the issues, both surface and underlying, which have led to the conflict. 

The raw numbers for 2008 show that we had 30 contacts with faculty, down from the 39 contacts we had in 2007 but still within the range of volume of visitors seen in previous years (i.e. 48 (2006), 35 (2005), 40 (2004), and 30 (2003)).  These 30 contacts were spread over 16 different cases or situations, some involving multiple parties and others involving work with only one individual (i.e. the person who contacted us).  Like the volume of visitors, the number of cases is consistent with past experience, very close to the 17 in 2007, 18 cases in 2006, 17 in 2005, and 21 in 2004. In terms of length of Ombuds intervention, 9 cases required meetings, conversations, or other activities lasting several weeks or months while the other situations usually involved a single meeting of an hour or more with subsequent telephone contacts. Simpler inquiries, made by individuals seeking information on procedures, University policies, or the operation of the Ombuds service, required information searches and return phone calls to the faculty. Such simple inquiries constituted only a minority of calls to the Ombuds office in 2008.

Individual visits to the Ombuds office ranged in length from less than an hour to over two hours.  The amount of Ombuds time devoted to each situation following the individual visit varied between a brief information-gathering phone call and follow-up call to the visitor, to numerous hours of further face-to-face and phone consultation with the visitor and other select department or University personnel. In addition, for each case, time was spent in consultation between the two Ombuds. In every case, we ask the visitor’s permission to share his/her situation with the Ombuds who was not present at the initial visit and this permission has always been granted. This opportunity for the two Ombuds to consult and brainstorm with each other has proven especially important as both Ombuds are relatively new to this role. This practice ensures that both Ombuds are involved (to varying degrees) in every situation brought to the attention of the office, providing the benefit of two perspectives and two analytical approaches. Time was also devoted to interacting with University personnel on behalf of the visitor(s).

As in previous years, we saw a distribution of male and female visitors, as well as diversity in ethnic origin and faculty ranks, including tenured and tenure track faculty and lecturers/ instructors.  As in past years, tenured and tenure-track faculty (with numbers being more or less equally divided between the two) comprised the majority of Ombuds visitors. The contract negotiations between the University and the collective bargaining unit representing non-tenure track faculty affects the availability of the Ombuds office as a resource for non-tenure track faculty.  As our Operating Papers make explicit: “In those instances where one or more of the individuals involved are represented under a collective bargaining agreement, ombuds services can only be provided if they do not represent a violation of the covering agreement.”  This year no non-tenure track faculty contacted us.

As has been the case every year, the issues brought to the Ombuds office in 2008 were diverse and generally overlapping—i.e., in any given situation, several issues are at play simultaneously.   Faculty availed themselves of Ombuds services at various points as the difficult situation unfolded and progressed. Some contacted the office fairly early, as they saw the problem developing or continuing, thus using the office in more proactive and exploratory ways, while others brought their concerns to the Ombuds when it seemed that all other options, short of a grievance or separation from the university seemed viable. The following list provides an overview of the types of issues for which Ombuds assistance was sought in the past year.

Retention, tenure and promotion decisions
Retention reviews and decisions regarding promotion or termination of contracts provided a context for several of the situations brought to the Ombuds office.  The procedures and policies that governed those decisions, as well as the interpersonal relations and histories that surrounded the situation have been a recurring focus of visitors seeking Ombuds assistance.

Due process in cases of termination was also an issue.  Faculty sought the services of the Ombuds to voice their feelings, and also to seek information about such issues as official notification and benefits.  When requested by the faculty, Ombuds accompanied them to meetings with School and University administrators.

Relationships with supervisors/department heads and other faculty colleagues
Issues related to departmental climate, perceived supervisor bullying, communication difficulties with colleagues, perceived ethics violations by colleagues and ongoing problems with turf definition were common concerns expressed by visitors to the Ombuds office in 2008.  Specific concerns included questions of collegiality and professional behavior; perceived unfair treatment of non-tenured faculty by their tenured colleagues; evaluations of faculty by Chairs and Deans; lack of mentorship for junior faculty; perceived lack of voice by junior faculty; administrative judgments perceived as somewhat capricious by the faculty member involved; and/or the absence of adequate policy guidelines in some retention decisions.  We also spoke with Chairs and faculty to explore options for dealing with problematic relationships between members of the faculty in the unit.  While some of these issues were listed in previous reports as perennial issues, others were unique to the situations addressed this year.

Problematic situations with students    
As in past years, faculty contacted the Ombuds office to discuss the role Department Chairs or Deans should play in problems faculty face with students, including disagreements over grades and matters of classroom management.  While some faculty members expressed concern over what they perceived to be a lack of support from the department Chair in resolving the conflict that had arisen with a student, other faculty members were concerned that the Dean or Department Chairs were yielding too much influence regarding grades and curriculum.

Miscellaneous
As is the case every year, the Ombuds office was contacted by individuals, either staff or students, who are not covered in the scope of Ombuds services as currently written. These contacts, typically fewer then ten cases in number, result in a short discussion in which the Ombuds indicates campus resources that are available to the caller/visitor. 

Compensation and benefits issues,while being infrequent in the past, were not brought to our attention in 2008. 

Activities Related to Maintaining Effective Ombuds Services
In addition to our primary activities as outlined above, we have been engaged in numerous activities to maintain and improve the work of the Ombuds Office.  The following paragraphs describe these endeavors.

In the Spring 2008 semester, Debbie Mann and Cindy Schmidt completed another round of visits to every department and faculty unit on campus, aimed at increasing awareness of the Ombuds functions and availability, distributing flyers describing the Faculty Ombuds service, and answering questions.  In Spring 2008, Seran Aktuna (English Language & Literature) was selected to replace Debbie Mann whose Ombuds term was ending at the end of May 2008.

During the Summer 2008 semester, Cindy and Seran worked to revitalize the physical environment of the Ombuds Office. Based on our request, the office was painted and a newer computer, which allowed for greater access to important information, was provided.  In addition, to create an atmosphere that is welcoming and conducive to the work of the office, we selected art from the University Museum to be hung and placed in the office. 

Since we were both fairly new to this role (Seran was appointed in the Summer of 2008 and Cindy was appointed in the Fall of 2007), in early Fall 2008 we arranged a meeting with key University personnel who are in a position to facilitate the work of the Ombuds office.  Those in attendance included: Venessa Brown, Mark Bacus, Paul Pitts and Julie Hopwood.  During this meeting, we clarified our role and responsibilities and discussed as a group how our job might involve working with the key personnel on campus.  All invited University personnel described the services offered by their offices and identified how we could best cooperate with them in our role as Ombuds.  

In Fall 2008, Seran Aktuna and Cindy Schmidt participated in New Faculty Orientation, introducing incoming faculty to the types of services offered through the Ombuds Office.  In addition, a memo was sent to all Deans, Chairs and Directors, reminding them of the services offered through this office.

The Ombuds also engaged in additional strategies to improve visibility of the office and the overall climate of faculty interaction on the University campus.  Nine books on effective communication strategies and conflict management were purchased as references for faculty who would like to read more about effective ways to engage with colleagues.  Faculty members are encouraged to borrow these books from the Ombuds office. In addition, we worked with Laura Million to update the website.  Active links to select sites such as Human Resources and faculty senate were added to provide faculty with information on the most frequently asked questions.

As in the past, another activity essential to the work of this office is the ongoing and frequent collegial interaction between to the two faculty Ombuds. Conducting the business of this office requires thoughtful reflection regarding the rights and concerns of the visitors who come to our office and also of those with whom they interact within the University community.  As is expected when dealing with conflicts between faculty or other work-related stressors, situations which bring faculty to this office are often complicated and do not lend themselves to easy solutions.  The Ombuds consult one another to identify appropriate strategies to assist visitors.  This is done at all times with consideration for the appropriate ethical conduct expected from this office.  Additionally, the Ombuds keep abreast of their professional organization, the International Ombudsman Association.  The two SIUE Ombuds have maintained contacts with key individuals in the organization and can contact them with questions regarding professional Ombuds practices.  The SIUE Ombuds respond to questions and complete surveys posted through the website of this international professional organization.

Reflection  
Evaluating our success or failure in helping faculty come to terms with their challenging situations is difficult to do in any but the most anecdotal ways because seeking feedback from visitors following their work with us is inconsistent with the Ombuds Standards of Practice. Some people who work with the Ombuds office end up leaving the university and whether this is to be regarded as a successful resolution or not is far from clear; it depends entirely on the perspective of the person evaluating the outcome. Other individuals continue in the same stressed situations that brought them to seek Ombuds assistance only with a greater degree of orientation within the situation and a greater sense of the range of options available to them (in some cases, fewer options), thus providing a certain degree of comfort if not exactly resolution.  Still others do report a clear improvement in their situations as a direct result of actions taken upon consultation with the Ombuds. This improvement can take the form of a work still in progress or of a truly happy outcome. Our general impression remains that the Ombuds service is a valuable resource for faculty in need. We provide the much-needed help for faculty to navigate around sensitive issues while helping them work through the bureaucracy and the politics of academic life.  Such one-on-one help can in turn improve faculty productivity and retention, hence aiding the mission of the institution. Although faculty understand that the Ombuds function does not include the power to take action of any substantive kind, most people we work with seem to be nothing but appreciative of the service the Ombuds office provides in assisting with working within and through recognized channels and university policies, identifying options, weighing the pros and cons of each from a neutral perspective, and providing a listener committed to confidentiality and impartiality who hears their concerns non-judgmentally.

As we reflect on 2008 and look ahead to 2009 and beyond, our goal remains the same: to ensure that the Ombuds service is utilized by as many people as may be helped by it and to continue to see the service integrated into the life of the University.  As in past years, we will make the annual report available to faculty on our website in order to provide them with a more nuanced view of the types of services the office provides. Sharing the annual report, while respecting the confidentiality and anonymity of previous visitors, provides us another opportunity to make our office known to the faculty, in addition to the email announcement of office hours that we send out at the start of each semester (in August, January, and May).   In Fall 2009 we will visit departments again to talk about our services and to meet with new faculty. We are also planning to invite a guest speaker to present a faculty workshop on conflict resolution and effective workplace communication.

It is our goal to continue our own professional development as Academic Ombuds. In July 2008, Prof. Aktuna attended Ombuds 101, a training workshop for beginning Ombuds, offered by the International Ombuds Association. Both Ombuds maintain membership in the IOA which also serves as a resource for practicing Ombuds.  We follow the listserve to keep abreast of developments and events in the field. We intend to keep in touch with the organization, especially with other Academic Ombuds by attending the 7th Annual Midwest meeting of College and University Ombudsperson to be held in July 2009 at Northern Illinois University in DeKalb, Illinois.

Accepted as amended and approved by the Welfare Council on April 23, 2009.

Submitted to the Faculty Senate on May 7, 2009.

SIUE Home
URL: http://www.siue.edu/UGOV/FACULTY/OMBUDS/
Published by: Faculty Ombuds Service Office
Last update: May 15, 2009