You said (my emphasis),
In recognition of the mistakes that led us here, we invited Ms. Cellio to apply for possible reinstatement on all six sites following our new reinstatement process. Ms. Cellio expressed concerns about the new process and has not applied.
I applaud you for admitting responsibility in this matter, but a better response would be to offer her her diamond back. Why should she go through a process without a clear likelihood of success if the problem was largely caused by your failure to communicate with her? If I want to make amends for hurting someone, I make them. I may ask them what they want or expect in terms of amends, but I do not give them a form and tell them to fill it out to apply for possible consideration.
Another thing to consider is why the initial actions took place. Admitting wrongdoing is hard, but I have read in multiple sources that lasting behavioral change requires an understanding of the contributing factors. In other words, "I'm sorry, my bad" is necessary but not sufficient. One must confront the source and handle it.
For example:
- Ignorant or poorly-qualified staff can be trained or educated in the proper procedures, policies, principles, ethics, or best practices.
- A rogue employee can be fired, and safeguards put into place to dissuade future employees from "going rogue".
- Bad legal advice can be handled by getting better lawyers.
- Conflicts of interest can be handled via recusal.
- Physically and/or emotionally burnt-out staff (who might lash out irrationally due to stress) can be asked to take a vacation to recharge.
In software development, we sometimes speak of "root causes". Maybe a particular kind of error keeps popping up, and it gets fixed each time the customer complains, but the real reason it is such a problem is a poor requirements-gathering process. What is the root cause of the mistakes above?