https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/155103 2026-04-08T09:12:22Z 2026-04-08T09:12:22Z Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/159969 2025-07-09T03:01:38Z 2022-06-01T00:00:00Z

When is a Difficult Person not a Difficult Person? Negotiating Across Worldviews One-on-One Rowe, Mary

2022-06-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/159966 2025-07-08T03:01:34Z 2015-10-01T00:00:00Z

Negotiations Theory and Ombuds Practice Rowe, Mary Note: This article contains notes about people whose interests in negotiation are to injure the other party.

2015-10-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary P https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/159965 2025-07-08T03:01:40Z 1995-04-01T00:00:00Z

Options, Functions, and Skills: What an Organizational Ombudsperson Might Want to Know Rowe, Mary P Note: This article was also reprinted by The Ombudsman Association in 1995.

1995-04-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary P. https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/159820 2025-06-28T03:01:37Z 1991-10-01T00:00:00Z

The Ombudsman's Role in a Dispute Resolution System Rowe, Mary P. Note: This article includes a discussion of whether “an ombuds has any power.” Also, an earlier version of this article was presented at a 1990 Society of Professionals in Dispute Resolution (SPIDR) workshop. See Mary P. Rowe, "The Ombudsman as Part of a Dispute Resolution System," presented at a Society of Professionals in Dispute Resolution (SPIDR) workshop, 1990, https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/155803.

1991-10-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary P. https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/159816 2025-06-28T03:01:44Z 1990-07-01T00:00:00Z

Helping People Help Themselves: An ADR Option for Complaint Handlers Rowe, Mary P. Note from the author: This article was written for complaint handlers before current laws, but it includes a review of many points relevant for complainants who are interested in helping themselves, and for complaint handlers who support them.

1990-07-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary P. https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/159815 2025-06-28T03:01:43Z 1987-04-01T00:00:00Z

The Corporate Ombudsman: An Overview and Analysis. Rowe, Mary P.

1987-04-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/159811 2025-06-27T03:01:50Z 2023-01-01T00:00:00Z

Becoming an Ombuds at MIT Rowe, Mary Mary P. Rowe served for almost 42 years as an early organizational ombuds reporting directly to five presidents of MIT. This essay recounts Rowe’s early experiences in this work as she applied for and then, in early 1973, started her job at MIT, initially with the title of Special Assistant to the President and Chancellor for Women and Work at MIT. The essay also draws connections between Rowe’s early experiences in that job and the subsequent evolution of the organizational ombuds profession. This is a draft version of the article that was subsequently published in Conflict Resolution Quarterly.

2023-01-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary MacAllister, Bruce https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/159359 2025-07-06T03:08:54Z 2025-05-01T00:00:00Z

The Unique—and Effective—Quartet of Standards of Practice of Organizational Ombuds: Each Standard is Necessary—and Requires the Other Three Standards Rowe, Mary; MacAllister, Bruce Employers in many sectors consider adding an organizational Ombuds (OO) to their conflict management system. However, employers often have questions about this unusual profession. How are the International Ombuds Association (IOA) Standards of Practice different from the standards of other human services professionals within organizations—and different from the standards of other Ombudsmen? How do the IOA Standards of Practice contribute to the effectiveness of OOs? Organizational Ombuds practice to a unique quartet of Standards of Practice. One or more of the IOA Standards will be familiar to many, based on some similarities in other professions: Independence, Impartiality/Neutrality, Confidentiality, and Informality. But the set of four standards taken together appears to be unique to OO practice. The four IOA Standards enable OOs to serve an organization and its members effectively—by creating a zero-barrier office (a safe, accessible, fair and credible place) for every organizational constituent to discuss good ideas and difficult or painful concerns. This article explains why each of the four Standards is necessary to create the organizational Ombuds model—and how each Standard supports the other three.

2025-05-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/159356 2025-07-05T11:40:12Z 2024-12-01T00:00:00Z

Organizational Ombuds' Sources of Power and Influence Rowe, Mary This article discusses the sources of power—and the influence that derives from power—that organizational ombuds (OO) use. The article presents a standard list of ten sources of power and shows how these are affected by the International Ombuds Association (IOA) Standards of Practice. Under IOA Standards, ombuds are designated to be independent, confidential, impartial/neutral—and informal. Each IOA Standard is supported by the other three. Near-absolute confidentiality, in particular, requires the other three Standards, especially the IOA Standard of informality. And informality is vital for ombuds effectiveness. Because OOs do not make formal management decisions for the organization, other sources of power are much enhanced. These other sources of power—and the influence engendered by these sources—contribute greatly to ombuds effectiveness. Different cases may call for different sources of power at different times. In addition, ombuds may use many sources of power synergistically—that is, using many of them together.

2024-12-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary Hedeen, Timothy Schneider, Jennifer Escalante, Hector https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/159353 2025-07-06T03:08:58Z 2024-12-01T00:00:00Z

The Most Serious Cases Reported by Organizational Ombuds: Data from Surveys and Interviews Rowe, Mary; Hedeen, Timothy; Schneider, Jennifer; Escalante, Hector

2024-12-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary Hedeen, Timothy Schneider, Jennifer Escalante, Hector https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/159346 2025-06-27T13:39:12Z 2024-12-01T00:00:00Z

Some Organizational Ombuds Achievements Reported in the 2024 IOA Survey Rowe, Mary; Hedeen, Timothy; Schneider, Jennifer; Escalante, Hector

2024-12-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary Hedeen, Timothy Schneider, Jennifer Escalante, Hector https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/159345 2025-06-27T13:39:06Z 2024-12-01T00:00:00Z

What Do Organizational Ombuds Do? And Not Do? Rowe, Mary; Hedeen, Timothy; Schneider, Jennifer; Escalante, Hector Note: This working paper is an updated version of a 2020 blog post with the same title that is also available on DSpace@ at MIT, at https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/157465. This version draws on data from five biennial International Ombuds Association surveys, and the earlier version included data from only three such surveys.

2024-12-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary Hedeen, Timothy Schneider, Jennifer Escalante, Hector https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/159312 2025-06-20T08:25:58Z 2024-12-01T00:00:00Z

A Taxonomy of Organizational Ombuds: Descriptors of the Employment of Organizational Ombuds who Practice to IOA Standards of Practice Rowe, Mary; Hedeen, Timothy; Schneider, Jennifer; Escalante, Hector

2024-12-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/159310 2025-06-13T06:02:16Z 2024-10-01T00:00:00Z

The Poster War: An Ombuds Learns About Sources of Power, Helping People Help Themselves, and the Role of Affinity Groups in Bringing About Change Rowe, Mary

2024-10-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/159233 2026-03-04T03:11:02Z 2024-02-01T00:00:00Z

Negotiating for Jobs and Salaries (and Everything Else): Prepare, Prepare, Prepare Rowe, Mary This is a teaching note.

2024-02-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary Gottehrer, Dean M. https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/159077 2026-03-04T03:10:55Z 1997-03-19T00:00:00Z

Similarities and Differences Between Public and Private Sector Ombudsmen Rowe, Mary; Gottehrer, Dean M.

1997-03-19T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/158449 2025-04-07T09:10:00Z 2023-07-14T00:00:00Z

Helping Hesitant Bystanders Identify Their Options: A Checklist with Examples and Ideas to Consider Rowe, Mary Organizational bystanders sometimes act heroically in emergencies. Less well known are the bystanders who act very effectively, in quiet ways, in reaction to (potentially) unacceptable behavior. In addition, many bystanders (and bystanders of bystanders) consider action, but hesitate. There are many reasons why hesitation is understandable and may be appropriate. However, in many situations, hesitation can turn into effective action. Drawing on examples from ombuds practice, this article aims to assist organizational ombuds in helping hesitant bystanders identify and evaluate their options. The article includes a checklist of questions for hesitant bystanders that ombuds may find useful—and adds to the literature about why bystanders do or do not decide to act after learning of unacceptable behavior. The checklist may also be useful to those engaged in training programs for bystanders and others who provide support to hesitant bystanders.

2023-07-14T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/158448 2025-04-07T09:26:23Z 2023-07-14T00:00:00Z

Consider Generic Options When Complainants and Bystanders Are Fearful Rowe, Mary Organizational ombuds usually offer a choice of different options to constituents who call the office with a concern. In serious cases, ombuds might offer formal options such as filing a formal grievance. In addition, the ombuds can offer informal options, such as helping a visitor deal directly with their concern or offering to facilitate discussion with those involved. However, aggrieved persons and proactive bystanders often are very fearful about anyone knowing they have complained. In this situation, a “generic” approach—that focuses on an issue without naming anyone—can help to address the issues involved rather than the individuals. This can be done in ways that shield the privacy of the complainant. In addition to helping individuals, generic options serve affinity groups and the organization by supporting needed systemic improvements. This article discusses how organizational ombuds and other complaint handlers can use generic approaches in their work.

2023-07-14T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/158445 2025-04-07T09:14:18Z 2023-01-01T00:00:00Z

“'Drafting a Letter' for People Dealing with Harassment or Bullying" Rowe, Mary As an early ombuds, the author discovered that drafting a structured letter about being mistreated often helped constituents—with respect to both process and outcomes. This article describes the origins of “drafting a letter” with its uses, benefits, and sources of power. Drafting such a letter provides a tripartite structure (see the Appendix) for a mistreated person to present evidence—from diaries, calendars, communications, videos, photos, phone records, etc. This structure helps in considering many options for action, for example, just thinking things through, gathering more evidence, informal discussions, mediation, or a formal complaint. Or the writer may send the letter privately to the perceived offender; such letters may work to stop specific misbehavior. If the behavior then does not stop, a safe-guarded copy of the letter can be used as evidence that the writer tried to stop it. And—very importantly—just drafting a letter may help with pain, anger, and grief.

2023-01-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/158442 2025-04-08T04:42:38Z 2022-09-01T00:00:00Z

Is the Other Person Competing? Collaborating? Possibly Intending Harm? Ideas to Consider in a Negotiation Rowe, Mary

2022-09-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/158441 2025-04-08T04:09:45Z 2022-04-01T00:00:00Z

Changing Behavior, Letting It Be—Or Maybe Making It Worse: Ideas to Consider Rowe, Mary

2022-04-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/158071 2025-04-08T04:19:45Z 2021-08-01T00:00:00Z

Organizational Ombuds Data: Helping to Understand Ombuds Effectiveness Rowe, Mary

2021-08-01T00:00:00Z Borum, Randy Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/158070 2025-04-08T04:30:57Z 2021-01-01T00:00:00Z

The Importance of Bystanders in Threat Assessment and Management Borum, Randy; Rowe, Mary Bystanders—those who observe or come to know about potential wrongdoing—are often the best source of pre-attack intelligence, including indicators of intent and “warning” behaviors. They are the reason that some planned attacks are foiled before they occur. Numerous studies of targeted violence (e.g., mass shootings and school shootings), have demonstrated that peers and bystanders often have knowledge of an attacker’s intentions, concerning communication, and troubling behavior before the attack occurs. This chapter describes—with empirical support—why threat assessment professionals should consider bystanders; outlines a model for understanding bystander decision making; reviews common barriers to bystander reporting; and suggests ways to mitigate those barriers, to engage bystanders at an individual level, and to improve reporting. The principal aim of threat assessment is to prevent (primarily) intentional acts of harm. When tragic incidents of planned violence occur, however, it is almost always uncovered “that someone knew something” about the attack before it happened. This happens because, as attack plans unfold, people in several different roles may know, or come to know, something about what is happening before harm occurs. The perpetrators know, and so may others, including targets, family members, friends, co-workers, or even casual observers.

2021-01-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/158069 2025-04-07T09:12:18Z 2020-01-01T00:00:00Z

Supporting Bystanders: See Something, Say Something Is Not Enough Rowe, Mary The working paper discusses the need for a zero barrier office in a conflict management system to make it less risky for bystanders to offer information in serious cases. An expanded version of this working paper was later published as Mary P. Rowe, “Bystanders: ‘See Something, Say Something’ Is Not Enough,” Alternatives to the High Cost of Litigation Vol. 39, No. 10 (November 2021): 153-165.

2020-01-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary Hedeen, Timothy Schneider, Jennifer https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/157465 2024-11-05T03:45:35Z 2020-09-01T00:00:00Z

What Do Organizational Ombuds Do? And Not Do? Rowe, Mary; Hedeen, Timothy; Schneider, Jennifer Note: This article reflects data from three International Ombudsman Association surveys. It includes an appendix which compares organizational ombuds with other types of ombudsmen in the US.

2020-09-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary Hedeen, Timothy Schneider, Jennifer https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/157464 2024-11-05T03:36:47Z 2019-01-01T00:00:00Z

A Framework For Communicating How Organizational Ombuds Help to Manage Risk Rowe, Mary; Hedeen, Timothy; Schneider, Jennifer Note: Among other things, this article examines the importance of the International Ombudsman Association Standards of Practice in helping all constituents manage risks.

2019-01-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary Bloch, Brian https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/157273 2024-10-13T03:05:47Z 2012-01-01T00:00:00Z

The Solo Organizational Ombudsman Practitioner...and Our Need for Colleagues...A Conversation Rowe, Mary; Bloch, Brian It takes a village to produce a successful organizational ombuds.

2012-01-01T00:00:00Z Houk, Carole S. Rowe, Mary P. Katz, Deborah A. Katz, Neil H. Marx, Lauren Hedeen, Timothy https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/157272 2024-10-12T03:40:04Z 2016-11-14T00:00:00Z

A Reappraisal — The Nature and Value of Ombudsmen in Federal Agencies, Part 2: Research Report. Houk, Carole S.; Rowe, Mary P.; Katz, Deborah A.; Katz, Neil H.; Marx, Lauren; Hedeen, Timothy This Report outlines a mixed method research project that provides a comparative analysis of federal ombuds offices. The study utilizes a multi-stage approach, which includes four distinct and complementary elements: 1) a literature review and survey methodology (online surveys, interviews, and collection of program materials) across all federal ombuds offices; 2) a case study methodology to highlight promising practices; 3) a standards of practice policy discussion and a legal analysis relevant to the creation and operation of federal ombuds offices, and 4) recommendations offered both by surveyed participants and by the Research Team. The study is designed to help differentiate existing federal ombuds programs and practice, identify consistencies across ombuds offices, develop a framework for comparative evaluation, and identify promising practices. The results will provide an empirical basis for examining the shape and development of federal ombudsmen since ACUS’ Recommendation 90-2, and will inform the development of a new recommendation contained herein.

2016-11-14T00:00:00Z Houk, Carole S. Rowe, Mary P. Katz, Deborah A. Katz, Neil H. Marx, Lauren Hedeen, Timothy https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/157271 2024-10-12T03:05:18Z 2016-11-14T00:00:00Z

A Reappraisal — The Nature and Value of Ombudsmen in Federal Agencies, Part 1: Executive Summary Houk, Carole S.; Rowe, Mary P.; Katz, Deborah A.; Katz, Neil H.; Marx, Lauren; Hedeen, Timothy

2016-11-14T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary Williams, Randy https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/157131 2024-10-05T03:53:19Z 2014-01-01T00:00:00Z

Organizational Ombudsman Rowe, Mary; Williams, Randy (Note: This chapter includes a table that shows how organizational ombuds complement the roles of other conflict management offices in an organization.)

2014-01-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary Gadlin, Howard https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/157130 2024-10-05T04:04:37Z 2014-01-01T00:00:00Z

The Organizational Ombudsman Rowe, Mary; Gadlin, Howard This chapter discusses the OO (organizational ombudsman) in the context of organizational conflict management systems (CMS). The OO is a confidential, neutral, internal resource--formally independent of line and staff management--working informally, without decision-making power. OOs work with all employees and managers, and every workplace issue, as a "zero barrier" office. OOs seek fair processes for concerns brought to them. OOs refer to all formal and informal CMS options, identify "new" issues, and recommend systems improvements. The chapter discusses the emergence of the role in the context of social, political, and cultural changes over the past 50 years, especially in North America. It discusses the alternative dispute resolution movement--and concurrent emergence of the OO as an appropriate dispute resolution role within a CMS. It describes the functions--and competencies required--of ombudsmen, and discusses current challenges faced by those in OO roles.

2014-01-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/157129 2024-10-05T03:08:50Z 2012-01-01T00:00:00Z

Informality, the Fourth Standard of Practice Rowe, Mary In the 1970s and early 1980s, organizational ombuds recognized three basic pillars of their profession: independence, confidentiality and neutrality (impartiality). Informality was recognized as a fourth principle, or pillar of practice, somewhat later. This happened relatively slowly, over at least fifteen years, after the first three pillars were widely adopted. This article briefly describes that process. The article asserts that informality is an essential principle for the profession as practiced today—as essential as independence, confidentiality and neutrality. Without informality, the other three principles of OO practice could not function in today’s legal climate, and many managers would find OOs to be interfering with their authority. Informality permits OOs to offer a very wide variety of informal options, to all cohorts, and across all organizational boundaries.

2012-01-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/157128 2024-10-05T03:43:38Z 2011-01-01T00:00:00Z

What Happens to Confidentiality if the Visitor Refuses to Report Unacceptable Behavior? Rowe, Mary This article examines a common question frequently posed to organizational ombuds about what they would do if a visitor refuses to report or otherwise act responsibly about a situation that might present a risk of serious harm. It briefly reviews the Code of Ethics on confidentiality, and the concepts of “imminent risk” and serious harm. The article affirms the importance of seeking advice if there is time, without mentioning identities of those involved if that is possible, but being prepared to breach confidentiality if necessary to prevent serious harm. It discusses some options for getting information where it needs to go, on a timely basis, without the ombuds practitioner having to breach confidentiality, and points out that such options usually exist.

2011-01-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/156720 2024-09-13T03:37:42Z 2010-01-01T00:00:00Z

Identifying and Communicating the Usefulness of Organizational Ombuds, With Ideas about OO Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness Rowe, Mary Organizational ombudsmen contribute to many stakeholders: shareholders, management at all levels, those who call upon the office, people who are alleged to be a problem, responders whom the ombuds calls about a case or an issue, employees and managers in the organization who do not directly use the office, other cohorts in an organization like students and patients—and society. Ombuds perform many different conflict management functions, with many different skills, in many different contexts; they are difficult to evaluate. Ombuds need to identify and communicate their usefulness, including the tangible and intangible benefits relevant to their own stakeholders. One thesis of this article is that there are many powerful ways to do so. The other thesis is that there is no single, scientific way to calculate the cost effectiveness of ombuds. How an independent neutral adds value to an organizational conflict management system seems a particularly interesting topic for ombuds effectiveness research. Note: This article reviews many of the methodological problems in assessing the effectiveness of an ombuds office and emphasizes the importance of the “most serious cases” in demonstrating effectiveness and the importance of benchmarking before an ombuds office opens.

2010-01-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary Gadlin, Howard https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/156708 2024-09-13T03:32:34Z 2010-01-01T00:00:00Z

Ombudsman Rowe, Mary; Gadlin, Howard

2010-01-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/156707 2024-09-13T03:43:36Z 2010-10-01T00:00:00Z

The Several Purposes of the OO Crystal Ball Rowe, Mary The Crystal Ball began, in 1984, as a device to help Organizational Ombudsmen (OOs) to anticipate problems that are new to their organizations. This came about by collecting wisdom from many OOs about “new things.” Each OO may collect bits of new information from a whole organization—the Crystal Ball then pulls these ideas together. Over the years the Crystal Ball has proven useful in helping OOs in the important OO task of seeking, identifying, assessing and communicating issues new to their organizations. Crystal Ball discussions have in turn helped OOs to think about how to help their organizations to learn about and manage emerging issues, how to foster and collaborate on systems initiatives when appropriate—and how to follow up. The issues enumerated in this article have included many of the serious problems of our times. The Crystal Ball illuminates one important source of organizational ombudsman effectiveness. Note: This article shows that ombuds can help identify and assess issues new to the organization.

2010-10-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary Wilcox, Linda Gadlin, Howard https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/156663 2024-09-04T03:50:41Z 2009-01-01T00:00:00Z

Dealing with—or Reporting—‘Unacceptable’ Behavior Rowe, Mary; Wilcox, Linda; Gadlin, Howard People in organizations often see behavior that they think is unacceptable, unsafe, illegal—even criminal. Why do people who observe such behavior hesitate to act on their own, or to come forward promptly—even when affected by that behavior? Why do they not immediately report those whom they see to be acting in an intolerable fashion? Hesitation of this kind has been recognized for years; for example, there is a controversial literature about the “bystander effect.” In real life hesitation is not confined just to bystanders. People in all roles may hesitate to act. Why do some people—including many managers—waver, rather than acting effectively to stop behavior they find to be unacceptable? The most common reasons for hesitation are: fear of loss of relationships, and loss of privacy, fear of unspecified “bad consequences” or retaliation, and insufficient evidence. There are many other barriers and they are often complex. Perceptions of the organization and of supervisors are important, as is a complaint system that is seen to be safe, accessible and credible. Some people do act on the spot or come forward when they see unacceptable behavior. Reviewing the reasoning of people with whom we have talked may provide ideas for employers designing or reviewing a conflict management system.

2009-01-01T00:00:00Z Bloch, Brian Miller, David Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/156662 2024-09-04T03:58:16Z 2009-01-01T00:00:00Z

Systems for Dealing with Conflict and Learning from Conflict—Options for Complaint-Handling: An Illustrative Case Bloch, Brian; Miller, David; Rowe, Mary

2009-01-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/156661 2024-09-04T03:54:39Z 2009-01-01T00:00:00Z

An Organizational Ombuds Office in a System for Dealing with Conflict and Learning from Conflict, or ‘Conflict Management System.' Rowe, Mary

2009-01-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/156660 2024-09-04T04:05:09Z 2009-01-01T00:00:00Z

Organizational Systems for Dealing with Conflict & Learning from Conflict: Introduction Rowe, Mary

2009-01-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/156600 2024-09-04T03:42:55Z 2009-01-01T00:00:00Z

Find Yourself the Mentoring You Need Rowe, Mary

2009-01-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary P. Hicks, Wilbur https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/156458 2024-08-30T03:07:16Z 2004-01-01T00:00:00Z

The Organizational Ombuds Rowe, Mary P.; Hicks, Wilbur

2004-01-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/156457 2024-08-30T03:14:47Z 2004-09-01T00:00:00Z

What Was It Like Working with OCW? Rowe, Mary Note: This article is about putting the MIT Sloan Negotiation and Conflict Management course 15.667 online.

2004-09-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/156399 2024-08-27T04:01:32Z 2003-02-01T00:00:00Z

Requests for Personal Work May Pose a Conflict of Interest Rowe, Mary

2003-02-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/156398 2024-08-27T03:17:12Z 2002-01-01T00:00:00Z

Notes on Complaint Handling for Managers Rowe, Mary Note: This document was compiled for the MIT Sloan Negotiation and Conflict Management course 15.667 in 2002.

2002-01-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/156385 2024-08-23T04:02:23Z 2002-04-01T00:00:00Z

Cumulative Effects of Apparently Small Events Rowe, Mary

2002-04-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary Simon, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/156384 2024-08-23T03:01:51Z 2002-01-01T00:00:00Z

Effectiveness of Organizational Ombudsmen Rowe, Mary; Simon, Mary

2002-01-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary P. Wilcox, Linda J. https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/156359 2024-08-23T03:08:02Z 2000-01-01T00:00:00Z

Dealing with the Fear of Violence: What an Organizational Ombudsman Might Want to Know Rowe, Mary P.; Wilcox, Linda J.

2000-01-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/156252 2024-08-18T04:01:50Z 1997-09-01T00:00:00Z

Conflicts of Interest Arising From Personal Relationships Rowe, Mary

1997-09-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary P. https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/156251 2024-08-18T03:13:24Z 1997-01-01T00:00:00Z

What Is It Like to Be an Organizational Ombudsman? Rowe, Mary P.

1997-01-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/155966 2024-08-09T03:11:27Z 1994-01-01T00:00:00Z

People with Delusions or Quasi-Delusions Who "Won't Let Go" Rowe, Mary In recent years an increasing number of otherwise productive people, who appear to have delusions or quasi-delusions and who "won't let go," have come to the attention of workplace and university complaint handlers. These are people who have ideas which appear contrary to fact, and who, in addition, seem obsessed about these ideas. Complaint handlers come to hear about this sub-group of obsessed people with delusions or quasi-delusions in two ways. People with obsessive delusions may come in as complainants, and then continuously refuse to settle or give up the complaint. This may be true even after a court has ruled against them. Or they may be reported to the complaint handler as harassers when they follow, skulk, stalk, scare or anger others, and apparently cannot be persuaded to give up the object of their interest. There has been little published in the human resource or dispute resolution literature about otherwise productive persons who present in workplace or academic settings as both obsessed and quasi-delusional. In this article, the author sketches out characteristics of a specific group of people who have some obsessive beliefs and ideas that appear not to be based in reality. She suggests some ways individual complaint handlers and organizations may deal with questions and concerns posed by such persons.

1994-01-01T00:00:00Z Hendry, James Marti, Virgil Trocchio, Carole Bensinger, Ann Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/155965 2024-08-09T03:26:07Z 1994-01-01T00:00:00Z

The Corporate Ombudsman Handbook, second edition Hendry, James; Marti, Virgil; Trocchio, Carole; Bensinger, Ann; Rowe, Mary

1994-01-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/155963 2024-08-09T03:17:30Z 1993-01-01T00:00:00Z

"Respect, Respect, Respect," a comment on “What Should I Do with My Problem Employee? A Case Study" Rowe, Mary Note: This was also reprinted in Catherine Stover, ed., Problems and Solutions in Small Business Management (Upstart Publishing, 1995).

1993-01-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary P. https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/155962 2024-08-09T03:46:21Z 1993-01-01T00:00:00Z

Options and Choice for Conflict Resolution in the Workplace Rowe, Mary P. This chapter focuses on the need for providing choices for complainants.

1993-01-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary P. Ziegenfuss, James T. Jr. Perneski, A.J. Hall, Gary Lux, Marshall https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/155961 2024-08-09T03:56:53Z 1993-01-01T00:00:00Z

Perspectives on Costs and Cost Effectiveness of Ombudsman Programs in Four Fields Rowe, Mary P.; Ziegenfuss, James T. Jr.; Perneski, A.J.; Hall, Gary; Lux, Marshall Note: These articles includes analyses of five types of ombudsman offices.

1993-01-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary P. https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/155960 2024-08-08T03:44:16Z 1993-01-01T00:00:00Z

An Overview of Client and Internal Ombudsmen Rowe, Mary P.

1993-01-01T00:00:00Z Perneski, Tony Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/155804 2024-07-30T03:42:57Z 1990-01-01T00:00:00Z

Cost-Effectiveness of Ombudsman Offices Perneski, Tony; Rowe, Mary Note: This issue contains other articles, as well.

1990-01-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/155764 2024-07-24T04:03:16Z 1989-06-01T00:00:00Z

Should an Ombudsman Testify? Rowe, Mary

1989-06-01T00:00:00Z Ziegenfuss, James T. Jr. Rowe, Mary Robbins, Lee Munzenrider, Robert https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/155761 2024-07-24T03:58:43Z 1989-03-01T00:00:00Z

Corporate Ombudsmen Ziegenfuss, James T. Jr.; Rowe, Mary; Robbins, Lee; Munzenrider, Robert

1989-03-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/155759 2024-07-24T03:05:29Z 1989-10-01T00:00:00Z

Harassment at MIT: Think Prevention Rowe, Mary

1989-10-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary P. https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/155757 2024-07-24T03:32:18Z 1988-05-01T00:00:00Z

Organizational Response to Assessed Risk: Complaint Channels Rowe, Mary P.

1988-05-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/155753 2024-07-24T03:26:37Z 1988-05-25T00:00:00Z

Ombuds Jobs are Proliferating, and Characterized by Diversity Rowe, Mary

1988-05-25T00:00:00Z Hendry, James Rowe, Mary et al. https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/155752 2024-07-24T03:34:47Z 1987-05-01T00:00:00Z

The Ombudsman Handbook Hendry, James; Rowe, Mary; et al.

1987-05-01T00:00:00Z Ziegenfuss, James T. Jr. Robbins, Lee Rowe, Mary https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/155750 2024-07-24T03:14:24Z 1987-05-01T00:00:00Z

Corporate Ombudsmen: An Exploratory National Survey of Purposes and Activities Ziegenfuss, James T. Jr.; Robbins, Lee; Rowe, Mary

1987-05-01T00:00:00Z Roddy, John Rowe, Mary P. https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/155748 2024-07-24T03:50:45Z 1987-03-01T00:00:00Z

The Ombudsman as an Ounce of Prevention Roddy, John; Rowe, Mary P.

1987-03-01T00:00:00Z Rowe, Mary P. Baker, Michael https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/155715 2024-07-19T03:29:56Z 1984-05-01T00:00:00Z

Are You Hearing Enough Employee Concerns? Rowe, Mary P.; Baker, Michael This article provides an overview of non-union complaint systems in the U.S.

1984-05-01T00:00:00Z