{"id":1714,"date":"2026-02-02T22:16:12","date_gmt":"2026-02-02T22:16:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/bizexteam.com\/?p=1714"},"modified":"2026-04-10T17:26:49","modified_gmt":"2026-04-10T17:26:49","slug":"embedded-embeddedness-and-structure","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/bizexteam.com\/index.php\/2026\/02\/02\/embedded-embeddedness-and-structure\/","title":{"rendered":"Embedded, Embeddedness, and Structure"},"content":{"rendered":"

In a Linked in<\/em> post discussing a recent call for submissions to the Journal of the International Ombuds Association, Ombuds Elizabeth Hill discusses the potential for confusion when ombuds use the same term to explore two separate equally important ombuds program concepts. I appreciate the potential for confusion when \u201cembedded\u201d is used to describe different, potentially overlapping concepts. While I may be overlooking issues Liz envisions are part of the dialogue, I suggest the way to avoid this confusion is \u201cembedded\u201d within Liz\u2019s own post. Liz goes on to distinguish how I use embedded versus embedded as a reference to the \u201cstructural placement\u201d of an ombuds program. For years, when I discuss the concept of placement of the program, I refer to how the program is \u201cstructured.\u201d This post explores these two important concepts.<\/p>\n

To begin, the dictionary (dictionary.com) indicates that the term “embedded” may be used in at least five different ways, including: 1.) Closely fitting an item into something; 2.) Incorporated as an essential characteristic; 3.) Being embedded within a unit or structure (such as a journalist in a military unit); 4.) Working closely with a group or being invited to participate as an expert; 5.) placing one resource into a larger resource, such as an embedded video. Thus, when we use embedded to discuss organizational placement as well as deep organizational fluency and knowledge, there is definitely potential for confusing application of the term. The dictionary defines \u201cstructured\u201d as \u201chaving or manifesting a clearly defined structure or organization,\u201d and defines \u201cstructure\u201d as \u201carrangement of parts, elements, or constituents.\u201d<\/p>\n

This article explores the interconnectedness and program implications of how a program and its ombuds are \u201cstructured,\u201d versus its degree of the ombuds \u201cembeddedness.\u201d The question of how an ombuds becomes \u201cembedded,\u201d that is becoming a facile, effective, knowledgeable, respected and trusted resource to serve the organization regardless of program structural placement applies universally regardless of how the program is structured. It could be a contracted external program or a program structurally “embedded” within the organization. \u201cStructure,\u201d as I use it, includes organizational placement, and other important related issues, such as structure\u2019s implications relevant to the important IOA standards governing independence, impartiality, confidentiality, and even informality. The concepts of structure and embeddedness involve some fundamentally different questions and some overlapping questions.<\/p>\n

Exploring how an ombuds program is \u201cstructured\u201d has other implications. In his cogent comments to my original post on The Embedded Ombuds (https:\/\/bizexteam.com\/index.php\/2025\/05\/07\/the-embedded-ombuds\/),<\/em> Andrew Larratt-Smith posed additional questions. He posited that \u201cthe design and structure of an ombuds position are extremely important.\u201d He asked \u201cCan an individual be effective and well engaged with their organization even if they are in a poorly designed and disempowered position?\u201d As I see it, this question helps distinguish between the two concepts. It helps illustrate that \u201cstructure,\u201d has far deeper and broader implications than where a program is placed on the organizational chart or indeed placed external to the organization. As Andrew Larratts-Smith also pointed out, the growth of the outsourced approach to providing ombuds services raises serious questions. He observes that \u201can ombuds is a person not a business.\u201d I believe that each of these comments raise deeply fundamental questions regarding program \u201cstructure\u201d and program \u201cembeddedness (again, as I use the term).<\/p>\n

The questions illustrate the reality that, for an ombuds to be effective, structure and embeddedness are mutually \"\"dependent. They are essentially the yin and yang of program design and operation. One can be organizationally fluent, and highly embedded, but if the program from which they operate is inherently disabled by poor structure, they cannot be fully effective. One can work from a well-structured ombuds platform, but if they are tone deaf to the culture, ignorant of their companion services, and a stranger to its managers and leaders, they are doomed to suboptimal performance.<\/p>\n

A lot of the discussion within the ombuds community focuses on whether a business that provides contract ombuds services can be adequately embedded, achieve adequate embeddedness, and indeed be structured so that the individuals providing the services know the organization, appreciate its culture, and can be trusted and effective. Some believe that being structured outside of the organization means that ombuds is inherently limited. But this view ignores the reality of many of today\u2019s workplaces and workspaces. While the concept of a brick-and-mortar office structure for ombuds service delivery is alive and well, many workplaces are themselves structured to be remote and contractor-driven. The workforces of many project teams and whole high-tech organizations are now fully distributed \u2013 often globally. A brick and mortar, embedded (in-house) program would be of no utility. One of my last major ombuds roles was with an international NGO. Its board members and operators were located in Paris, London, Los Angeles, Miami, Christchurch, and Melbourne.\u00a0 It\u2019s functional arms were distributed internationally. It would have been impossible to structure a program that was \u201cin-house\u201d as there was literally no \u201chouse.\u201d Yet the Ombuds Program operated successfully through the entire twelve-year existence of the organization (which was designed to sunset). And, the effectiveness of the ombuds program was cited as a reason that the stakeholders concluded that the purposes of the organization had been fully realized and there was no need to continue beyond the basic term originally conceived. Whether there is an actual workplace or campus, or whether the work is performed in a virtual workplace, effective structure and embedding must always be considered.<\/p>\n

Andrew Larratt-Smith also keenly observes that many in the ombuds field \u201care conflating the services we provide with the [ombuds role]\u201d leading to a risk that we define ourselves by the tools we use, rather than by the larger role we play. In my experience, programs that allow themselves to be defined tactically by focusing on specific tools or a narrow service set, such as \u201cworkplace conflict resolution\u201d (alone) are the programs that end up at greatest risk when resources become constrained. They are often viewed as redundant with similar programs in HR or elsewhere. Programs that define themselves strategically as a key risk management resource with deep knowledge of the organization and its \u201cindustry\u201d find greater resilience. They are often viewed by executive leadership as of equal value and status to in-house counsel. These are the programs that are sustained. This is because it is impossible view them as redundant to other resources by, as Andrew points out, conflating some tools used with true program scope.<\/p>\n

For several years, I served as co-chair of the IOA Standards of Practice Task Force, which, after years of benchmarking, drafting, revising, sharing, and incorporating input, ultimately resulted in the current IOA Standards of Practice. These Standards are not and should not be etched in stone, and are already under review. This depth of involvement with the Standards of Practice, gave me deep awareness of the current tenets of ombuds practice. Yet, as I have reflected on those fundamentals, I believe they overlook fundamental concepts that apply as deeply and broadly to the profession. True, concepts of independence, impartiality, and confidentiality are deeply tied to structure, but a structure focus creates a coherent paradigm by which these separate concepts can be collectively considered. The concept of effectively embedding an ombuds program (as I use the term) is completely overlooked by the current standards except by the farthest stretch of their interpretation. Thus, I encourage broad dialogue around these topics and thank Liz, Andrew, \u00a0and others for raising the important questions.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In a Linked in post discussing a recent call for submissions to the Journal of the International Ombuds Association, Ombuds Elizabeth Hill discusses the potential for confusion when ombuds use the same term to explore two separate equally important ombuds program concepts. I appreciate the potential for confusion when \u201cembedded\u201d is used to describe different,…<\/span><\/p>\n

Read More<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"image","meta":{"_exactmetrics_skip_tracking":false,"_exactmetrics_sitenote_active":false,"_exactmetrics_sitenote_note":"","_exactmetrics_sitenote_category":0,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1714","post","type-post","status-publish","format-image","hentry","category-uncategorized","post_format-post-format-image"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/bizexteam.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1714","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/bizexteam.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/bizexteam.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bizexteam.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bizexteam.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1714"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/bizexteam.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1714\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1729,"href":"https:\/\/bizexteam.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1714\/revisions\/1729"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/bizexteam.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1714"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bizexteam.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1714"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bizexteam.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1714"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}