Business ethics are values that organizations apply in governing decisions and activities. The ethical, philosophical approach used by an organization in making a decision can affect the organizational reputation, growth, and level of productivity. NCAA has been focusing on establishing ethical standards within college sports to avoid the occurrence of scandals. However, the organization has been experiencing difficulties in performing its duties. NCAA has been ineffective in preventing ethical scandals in institutions such as the University of Alaska, State of Ohio, and the Penn State.
The National College Athletic Association Ethics Program failed to curb the occurrence the unethical behavior because the rules and regulation rely on the principle of honor of system. This policy indicates that NCAA operates under the assumption that all people in an institution are capable of making sound and practical decision. This assumption does not always hold as witnessed in the scandals in Penn and Ohio states. For instance, the Penn States scandal occurred when the former assistant coach assaulted five young football players, and no charges were taken upon the investigation of the incidence (Ferrell & Fraedrich, 2015). The senior coach reported the matter and no actions were taken showing a significant failure of the system. In the University of Alaska, the university administration and professors promoted students who had not qualified as majors to encourage the school football team.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
NCAA leadership promoted the ethical violation in the Ohio, Penn States, and University of Alaska by implementing less effective punishments. The punishments and fines that the NCAA imposes of people found guilty of violating a particular rule are smaller than the benefits (Ferrell & Fraedrich, 2015). This weakness exposes people to find it easier to break the rules and bear the costs rather than losing the benefits. As a result, there are increased cover-up of violation activities reported by officials to a higher authority. For instance, the scandal that occurred at Penn State was reported to university officials, but never pursued the issue beyond the university. The case at Ohio State happened because assistant coach violated the rights of players. As a result, the head coach covered up the action by not reporting the issue to NCAA officials. The NCAA creates principles and rules that help the universities in providing an oversight and monitoring operation and avoids any form of misconduct. The leaders remain reluctant in implementing such standards, thus contributing to the occurrence of the fault in the university teams.
If Penn State, state of Ohio, and University of Alaska had viable ethics programs, the outcome of the incidence would have been different. At Penn State, weakness of the ethics program persisted because officials failed to report the occurrence of the incidence. The ignorance by the state officials shows that the officials deliberately decided not to report the scandal. In this case, the university should have implemented a mandatory reporting policy to avoid the level of ethical misconduct (Covassin, Moran, & Elbin, 2016). In effect, criminal offences would be reported to the NCAA officials, thus triggering a severe investigation to curb the unethical actions within the university and the football team. The first incidence of sexual assault performed by assistant coach occurred in the year 1998. The head coach reported the matter to the university officials and failed to make further investigation, thus making necessary punishment. If mandatory reporting policy were in place, corrective measures would have been enacted, thus preventing occurrence of subsequent scandals.
NCAA rules and regulations promote ethical actions by preventing students and players from accepting gifts from boosters. However, these actions remain the most violated rules in the universities as the demonstrations focus on maintaining the name of the institution. For instance, Ohio University violated this rule when one booster gave a monetary gift to one of the players. The institution would have made it compulsory for players and coaches to sign a document that outlines the expected ethical actions to avoid the further occurrence of such scandals. If this strategy were in place, this incidence would not have occurred at Ohio University.
The NCAA rules and regulations promote equity for all students, irrespective of whether they are involved in the school team or not. This information indicates that players should not get special favors from the administration and academic should be the priority for all students (Hoffer & Pincin, 2016). In situations where minor cases are not addressed, they may shift to severe scandals. If Alaska University solved the minor issue for transferring junior students to major colleges without meeting the credit, the scandal would not have occurred. The incidence happened for five a period, forcing the NCAA to investigate the matter and impose punishment actions. This policy would prevent the issue of promoting players into senior college without meeting the credibility and satisfying the university.
NCAA leadership needs to implement different strategies to restore reliability and confidence among stakeholders. The approach can focus on accepting the mistakes made in the past and show commitment to preventing the occurrence of further scandals. In situations where the leadership agrees with the mistakes and takes account of the incidence, stakeholders will gain confidence in the corrective measures. This process needs to be accompanied by conducting a campaign and paying for adverts during sports events. Paid commercial advertisement sending messages such as zero-tolerance would create awareness of the ethical standards of the organization (Hoffer & Pincin, 2016). This approach will ensure that stakeholders of the NCAA see the seriousness of the organization in promoting ethical actions among the coaches, players, and the university administration. NCAA should also be in a position to encourage oversight among workers in the school’s athletic program. The punishment standards prescribed for a particular unethical action should be transparent such that people fear to violate the rules and regulations.
The Human Resource department should develop strategies for helping the NCAA to implement its ethical program. The human resource responsibility should take responsibility in preventing the occurrence of unethical behaviors within the school athletic team (Hoffer & Pincin, 2016). Many universities continue experiencing scandals even as the institutions understand the rules and regulations of NCAA. The rationale behind the increased corporation between the university human resource department and the NCAA is to create awareness and support investigation. For instance, the conflicts that occurred in Ohio, Penn, and University of Alaska presents lack of corporation between the NCAA and the universities to quickly investigate and punish the lawbreakers.
The Human Resource Department should regularly assess the performance of coaches and other employees in the school athletic team. As the university hires new employees such as coaches, the human resource department should take workers through the expected ethical standards and consequences associated with violation of the set standards (Covassin, Moran, & Elbin, 2016). Continuous assessment for violation of ethical standards would prevent the breach of such rules. The rationale behind this approach is to minimize the decision by employees o deliberately act unethically. For instance, if Penn State human resource department took responsibility for fighting punishing the assistance coach for working unethically, further incidences would not occur.
NCAA ethic program faces challenges in implementing its ethical principles and strategies. The problems are revealed through the increased cases of ethical scandals experienced in universities and colleges athletic teams. Penn, Ohio, and University of Alaska are examples of institutions experiencing ethical scandals. Addressing these challenges requires the intervention of both the NCAA leaders and the human resource departments from colleges and universities.
References
Covassin, T., Moran, R., & Elbin, R. J. (2016). Sex differences in reported concussion injury rates and time loss from participation: an update of the National Collegiate Athletic Association Injury Surveillance Program from 2004–2005 through 2008–2009. Journal of athletic training, 51(3), 189-194.
Ferrell, O. C., & Fraedrich, J. (2015). Business ethics: Ethical decision making & cases. Nelson Education.
Hoffer, A., & Pincin, J. A. (2016). The effects of revenue changes on NCAA athletic departments’ expenditures. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 40(1), 82-102.
