People seek out an organizational ombuds in their setting for a wide variety of reasons. Some are simply seeking information on resources. Others want to explore their options in a safe, confidential setting without triggering unplanned consequences. Some seek ombuds help on very sensitive issues that require great listening and support skills. And some may reach out initially to test whether the ombuds, in fact, offers a meaningful resource. But virtually all people who approach the ombuds arrive with unspoken and often unconscious needs. Among them, the need to feel heard, respected, and appreciated as an individual.

For decades now conflict theorists have identified three general sources of satisfaction that are necessary for a person involved in resolving their conflict situation to feel that they have met their needs. Over time, this concept has evolved to refer to a “Satisfaction Triangle,” or as I refer to it “Satisfaction Triad.” In this concept, the three primary sources of satisfaction are required in various degrees to reach a durable resolution of the conflict or concern that is acceptable to everyone involved. 

While this concept is typically discussed in the context of more formal settings, such as a structured mediation, a grievance process, or even litigation, over my years of working with people as an organizational ombuds, I found people have the same basic needs even when working in the very informal setting that an ombuds program offers. 

This post provides an overview of the “Satisfaction Triad”  and explains the importance of meeting these needs  even when providing services in the very unstructured, confidential, and informal setting that an organizational ombuds program offers.

The Satisfaction Triad

1. Procedural Satisfaction. This is a measure of how satisfied the person is with their experience working within the system. In more formal settings this measures whether the person going through the process felt it was fair, balanced, inclusive, and provided a fair opportunity to be heard in a system that ensures such fairness. 

Even though the ombuds approach is relatively unstructured and informal this is also an important and relevant concept in that context:

• Does the person trust that the ombuds is adequately impartial, neutral and independent? 
  • In physical “brick and mortar” programs, is our office appropriately located and confidential?
  • Is the program adequately documented and structured to meet standards and best practices? 
  • In virtual programs, is the way the program works clear and do the virtual systems support the program in a way that ensures compliance with the ombuds way of providing services?
  • When the person visits the ombuds, do they feel safe, deeply listened to and actually “heard?”
  • Are the follow-up measures and work that the ombuds does with others involved meaningful and transparent?

 

2. Substantive Satisfaction. This is a measure of how satisfied the person is with the outcome of engaging in the process. In structured situations, such as litigation or a negotiated resolution to a conflict, this measures the extent to which the person feels that their needs were met in terms of the outcome. A simple example would be the high satisfaction one might feel when they “win” a lawsuit.

But this is also a relevant metric for ombuds work, and perhaps even more so. Unlike virtually any other process, people working with an ombuds retain a high level of control over nearly every aspect of the process. They can choose to move their concern into a more formal process, or they can choose to meet with ombuds and take no further action. In essence, beyond accepting the basic conditions to work with the ombuds (honoring confidentiality, and understanding its limits), the approach a person takes to resolve their concern is entirely up to them. Within reason, it is self-directed. To help ensure that the visitor is satisfied in this context, it is important that the ombuds:

• Works with the visitor to fully and deeply explore the range of options, resources, and approaches reasonably available to the person. It would cut against this metric if the person later discovered options and approaches that they feel should have been explored with the ombuds.
• Helps the visitor feel that the larger system treated them fairly. For example, it may not be enough for the person to pursue a formal complaint if the deck is stacked against them. Most ombuds believe that they have a responsibility to help ensure that the systems and alternatives offered to the person are fair. This, of course, is not to be confused with expecting an ombuds to become the person’s advocate.

 

3. Psychological Satisfaction. Of the metrics discussed, this is perhaps the most important and meaningful – especially in the ombuds context. This is a metric of how the person feels they were treated in the process. Were they treated with dignity and respect? Were relationships with others repaired or improved?  Did the person feel truly understood and was there empathy? Were underlying emotional needs fulfilled? 

In the ombuds setting, this metric can be incredibly important:

• Did the person build trust and rapport with the ombuds?
• Did the person feel respected and truly understood during their time with the ombuds?
• Did the person feel safe and confident enough to openly share their issues, fears, doubts, mistrusts, and aspirations?
• How did the ombuds make them “feel?”
• While understanding that the ombuds was not their advocate, did the person feel that the ombuds fully understood the concern and  the person’s goals and worked vigorously to help the person develop approaches to achieve those goals?

While one might assume that the most important metric in this “triad” is the outcome, my experience and indeed the research show that this is not the case. Process and support can play a critical role. For example, while in a different role, I worked with a person who was ultimately terminated for misconduct. But in my final conversation with him, he said “Of course I was unhappy with the outcome, but I felt I was treated fairly and with respect.” To me, this illustrates what I have consistently seen – non-judgment, fairness, and respect have a powerful impact. 

In other articles and in my upcoming book, I discuss the importance of “Staging” and “Ceremony” as tools to ensure that the ombuds projects respect and fidelity to the ombuds concept. In our recent article, Dr. Mary Rowe and I discussed the fundamental importance of informality and the interdependence of the ombuds practice standards that form the essence of the ombuds concept.(https://ioa.memberclicks.net/assets/docs/JIOA_Articles/JIOA-2024-M%20.pdf). And, at first glance, one might wonder how an ombuds can possibly provide “ceremony,” while remaining an informal resource. One might also wonder what I mean when I use the word “staging” in the ombuds concept. 

 

Prerequisites. For the ombuds to work effectively with a new person presenting their concern often requires the ombuds to work in the context of some generally safe assumptions and prerequisites. Among others, these may include:

• Trust in the ombuds is not automatic. It must be established. This trust is earned as the ombuds demonstrates:
  • Fidelity to the ombuds process and its fundamental design elements;
  • A safe, non-judging environment in which the person can share their concern and discuss options,
  • An opportunity for the catharsis provided by opening up and feeling that they are respected and truly heard.

 

Staging/Place-setting. So where and how do “staging” and “ceremony” fit in this? Just as when a host pays special attention to setting a place at the

table for their guests, Staging or Place-setting in the ombuds context is the art of providing an atmosphere and environment where the person feels welcome, comfortable and safe to open up. In a visit to one ombuds office, I was dismayed to see that the ombuds office was located in an old office in very public setting, furnished only with hard wooden chairs and a metal desk. Does this environment project respect to the visitor or value to the ombuds program itself? Staging involves time and place. Staging is providing a safe, quiet, confidential, and comfortable setting that projects that the organization values the ombuds concept as well as people using the program. Staging means providing a serene setting, where everything down to the tone of the carpet and wall color has been considered

In brick and mortar programs, staging means that the organization projects commitment to the program through thoughtful design and physical location of the ombuds office. Staging is effective ventilation, sound insulation, lighting, and neutral decor. In virtual program settings, staging means providing contact mechanisms and access information in a way that also reflect the organization’s sincere commitment to the concept such as elegant communication portals, seamless and automatic translation protocols, and transparent and timely feedback.

 

Ceremony. In light of the ombuds value and, in fact, its standard of practice of “informality,” the concept of “ceremony” may seem incongruous. But when one understands the critical role that procedural and psychological satisfaction play in the visitor’s assessment of whether the ombuds program

met their needs, ceremony becomes an essential element. In Japanese culture, for example, the tea ceremony, or “Chado,” is viewed as a traditional cultural activity that  embodies harmony, respect, purity and tranquility. Similarly, the meeting between an ombuds and their visitor should project respect, safety, non-judgment, and a comparatively tranquil opportunity to be heard and to explore the options and alternatives available to them. 

So how do we create ceremony while respecting the concept informality? First, ceremony should not be confused with formality in terms of process or structure. In the ombuds context ceremony is reflected in how we treat our visitor and manage the visitor’s overall interaction experience with us as the ombuds. Ceremony typically involves:

• Providing a warm and respectful welcome to the person when they arrive.
• Offering them tea, water, or another beverage.
• Providing a serene, private, and comfortable waiting area if required and if possible.
• Giving the visitor time to “settle in,” once they are in the meeting space. It helps the person to gather themselves, if you give them a few minutes to get comfortable in their chair, have their drink in hand, and an opportunity to ponder the artwork and setting before you even enter the room.
• Observing our own formalities (as informal as they may be), such as an unrushed introduction, a calm and clear explanation of our commitment to the visitor and what they can expect.
• An opportunity to ask questions, and then an unrushed opportunity to tell their story while ensuring that they don’t feel any sort of pressure to present their concern in any organized fashion. Often this is reassuring them that, like a jigsaw puzzle, the full picture will emerge in good time and that just sharing their concern is more important than being perfectly organized in that process.
• Projecting that the visitor is the complete center of your attention as the ombuds for that window of time. While sometimes meeting notes are important to ensure follow through on commitments, the  focus during the meeting is on eye contact and engagement with the visitor. Notes can follow. 
• Likewise, if the visitor feels that there is something very important that you should write down, observing the ceremony of taking the time out to jot down that note in their presence.
• Engaging in active listening where it is clear to the visitor that you are tracking with them and fully understand their concern and its impact on them.
• Being clear about your commitments and follow up steps and honoring them.
• When the occasional glitch occurs in follow up or in communication, being completely transparent and owning accountability.
• When appropriate and certainly when propriety warrants, seeking additional support, such as asking permission to involve another ombuds colleague in the meeting to ensure that the visitor feels that they have received the very best from the ombuds program.

All these factors and more reflect the ceremony in the ombuds context.  

So, while ombuds typically characterize themselves as an informal, off-the-record, independent, confidential resource, there are great opportunities for the ombuds to ensure that they and their ombuds program are perceived as an important resource that can help the person achieve substantive, procedural, and psychological satisfaction.

© Bruce J. MacAllister, J.D. 2025, all rights reserved.

BJM

June 2025