V. Duty of Care Maturity Model Matrix

Therefore, key processes highlighted under duty of intervention within the Duty of Care Maturity Model matrix are:

Crisis management

Post-deployment de-briefing

Complaints mechanism

Disciplinary/sanctio ns procedures

Health and safety

Redress measures

Risk management process

Partnership arrangements

• The management of a ‘crisis’, which is an event that requires a response greater than that possible through routine management or procedures.

• A meeting to ask a series of questions about a completed trip or undertaking.

• An established process by which individuals can report complaints to the organisation about the organisation’s activities or its staff.

• A process through which individuals are disciplined due to non-compliance of organisational rules.

Sanctions are measures taken for gross acts of misconduct and may include dismissal.

• Regulations and procedures intended to prevent accident or injury in workplaces or public environments, including regulations and procedures intended to ensure physical and mental wellbeing of staff.

• Actions taken to remedy or compensate for a wrong or grievance, which can be financial or non-financial in nature.

• The process through which coordinated activities direct or control an organisation with regard to risk, including safety and security risk management responsibilities shared between individuals across the organisation.

• Arrangements between two organisations entering into partnership, e.g. an international organisation partnering with a local civil society group.

On the basis of the key findings highlighted in the previous section and the resulting duty of care maturity model framework, this study has developed a duty of care maturity model matrix.

This matrix aims to be a learning tool that allows organisations to understand the maturity of their safety and security-related duty of care processes from the Swiss legal perspective.

This duty of care maturity model matrix is a learning tool to support organisations in improving their duty of care. It does not intend to set duty of care standards and therefore should not be seen as a duty of care compliance assessment tool.

The matrix uses as a foundation the four duties described by Chavanne (2012) and is broken down by processes and maturity steps. The foundational duties and key processes reflect those described in the previous section of this study (see figure 8).

Figure 8: Duty of Care processes

Duty of Information

Recruitment Induction / Onboarding Training Risk assessment Pre-departure briefings for travellers

Duty of Prevention

Risk treatment Pre-departure measures for travelers Insuring against risks

Duty of Care

Duty of Monitoring

Auditing Safety and security incident information management Documentation

Duty of Intervention

Crisis management Post-deployment/travel de-briefings Complaints mechanisms Disciplinary/sanctions procedures Health and safety Redress measures Risk management process Partnership arrangements

The duty of care maturity model matrix presents five maturity steps, from initial to optimised, which indicate what an organisation should aim to have in place against each key process. There are two types of maturity models: bottom-up and top-down. This study employs a maturity model approach where the five maturity steps support initial assumptions about how maturity evolves: from ad hoc and reactive to where there is an organisational culture of learning and continuous improvement. An organisation, therefore, starts from where it is and is encouraged to continuously identify gaps and improve through learning and reflection. See figure 9 for the definitions of each maturity step.