Sandusky Scandal Essays

Sandusky Scandal Essays Sandusky Scandal Essay Sandusky Scandal Essay that the senior officials acknowledged there may be a real problem but where in too deep and did not Pennsylvania State 14 know how to handle it. This concern along with denial are what prompted Schultz to seek outside council realizing these incidents were a part of a bigger issue with Sandusky (Spooking Sullivan, 2012). However, once the core group of officials again agreed to keep details of the incident hidden for the betterment of Penn State, they also ignored each of their individual consciences and moral ethics trusting the other persons Judgment and decisions over their own. Had there been no doubt that Sandusky intentions were innocent there would have not been so much secrecy surrounding it where any other issue was transparent between HRS, the board of trustees. There was a clear indication by these senior officials actions to weigh the success of the university over the code of principals and ethics it was founded on, focusing on the needs of the group and trust in each other over their obligation to protect children as school officials. Solution to ethical issues is a part of the previous discussion to implement checks and balances, rules and regulations. One way to prompt ethical behavior is to train employees to a see something, say something rule. This could be achieved by funding multiple lines of communication between departments and administration. The university could have easily funded a tip hotlist worked by an independent agency responsible for fielding and investigating complaints that could be summarized for the board of trustees in monthly meetings. This form of communication would create more openness to report department issues anonymously regardless if someone was covering it up. Chapter eight in Robbins and Judges Organizational Behavior, discusses the concept of courtship and grouping. An underlining issue of the Sandusky Scandal was that the core group was operating in a grouping capacity. According to B grouping occurs when a consensus overrides the realistic appraisal of alternative rouses of action, which is what resulted in the core group assigning Sandusky 15 behavior to being Just inappropriate oppose to criminal; because he was viewed as a longtime friend/colleague, instead of objectively situational based. The solution to this type of opinion forming in terms of B is utilizing courtship perception; which causes an individual to make a shift towards a less conservative opinion that would vary from the original groups position. Implementing a different course of action such as the officials idea to alert the police and HRS would have resulted in a better outcome for the entire group instead of its dismemberment from poor decision making and lack of leadership (2014, p. 263). Thoughts Conclusion and Ending The overall consensus of public opinion regarding the Sandusky scandal is that it could have been prevented. Considering how organizational behavior operates, its purpose is to create interpersonal relationships that serve a common purpose; whether it is a positive or negative outcome Monsoons, n. D. ). It is almost odd that the public reacted with such shock that an institution was capable of producing such a secretive environment believing they are above common law. The combination of individuals and environment that operate within a systematic structure influences the success or failures of businesses Monsoons, n. D. ). The structure of influence if based on the pattern of behavior that influences the environment and controls how individuals think and behave within that structured environment. Think about how B operates in other institutions that participate in scandalous behaviors and cover- ups. Since the dawn of enlightenment, the widespread scandals of the Roman Catholic Church have become a well-known secret. Thousands of reports have been add against the Catholic Church and their participation to cover-up child sexual abuse by Pennsylvania State University Scandal 16 priest. The notion of child abuse through the Catholic Church has been an on-going issue because of the loyalty shared among members of the church towards the Vatican (Kim, 2013). Like Penn State the Vatican is a representational imagine that people within the organization glorify. By comparison, in terms of a church and school being organizational institutions, Sandusky is as a priest; and the core group is as the clergy. Sandusky held a position of power that others sought to please and inform to; keep in mind, that scandals are seldom exposed until years after the initial occurrence (Kim, 2013). Yet after corruption within the organization becomes public, the blame does not fall on the entity that it represents. Mainly because people are not going to stop being catholic do to the reputation of priest the scandals have exhibited for the church. In the same terms, university students are not going to stop pursuing a higher education due to scandals within the athletic department. Scandals can be dismissed by blaming the corruption of those individuals involved while maintaining an image that the organization itself is not to be blamed for the behaviors of those that operate within it. Environments within an institution create a culture of the greater good mindset. There is an intangible entity that allows the most revolting acts of abuse virtually go unpunished (Borrowers, 2004). There is no difference in the fundamentals that govern B and its ability to take a group of people and control their behavior based on what bonds them to their organization and the environment within it. The institution of churches, schools, and governments operate under the same fundamental principles that is the basis of organizational behavior and what an individual is capable of within an inclusive environment loyal to a cause. The idea that organizational behavior is capable of producing the most influential environments in any type of group setting based on the individuals commitment to the greater cause of the Pennsylvania State University Scandal 17 institution itself, to the point of going against ones own morals and better Judgment (Hub, 2003). Organizational behavior is built on shared goals, commitment to the successes of the image, and deep trust towards the belief of an institution. For a member of the priesthood or faculty of the university to expose secrets would be a betrayal to what they have come to identify themselves as. This reason of exposing truths and feeling as though the individual has betrayed part of their own public identity, stands for public shaming; which may be worse than a moral driven secret and guilty conscious (Borrowers, 2013). Consider how powerful is the image for which one is willing and capable of committing crimes in the name of loyalty to their organization. References 8 Alder, C. (2013).