September 16, 2010

Insert Address

Dear Mr. Last Name:

We are very excited about our upcoming Statewide Student Ethics Challenge! In fact, this will be the largest one ever since we began sponsoring these events six years ago. It is inspiring to see so many young people care about doing the right thing and we are delighted that you will be an important part of this process.

About the Ethical Cases:

You will be receiving a reminder notice later, but we wanted to give you some idea of what to expect. To that end, copies of all of the cases are included with your packet. You will note that many of these are “hot-button issues” and are intentionally designed to be somewhat provocative – as ethical dilemmas often tend to be. You will also notice that many of these cases go beyond typical business scenarios. Others may fall heavily within your area of expertise. That’s okay – the same principles of evaluating these various situations still apply.

Ethical Theories:

Some of the vernacular the students may use could be a bit unfamiliar, so to help you with that, we are also providing a summary from a program that attorney and founding member Jim Priest conducted for OK Ethics a year ago. In it, you will find some handy, simple reference questions that may be useful to you in evaluating the students’ responses related to ethical theories.

Purpose & Intent:

The primary purpose of your involvement is to encourage these students in their pursuit of ethical knowledge. We also want to help prepare them, not only for the Regional Ethics Bowl in San Antonio, but for handling the ethical conflicts that they will inevitably face in life. To that end, you will be asked to make notes on each presentation during the judging process and to share your feedback with them in a constructive and caring manner. Whether we agree with their stance or not, we want to be sure that the students identify as many ethical issues as possible and that they present their arguments in clear, concise ways. (See judging criteria.) In some cases, you may be asked to judge, at other times, you might be asked to moderate a session to ensure the rules are followed. All are important jobs.

Details & Dress Code:

Even though this event is being held on a Saturday and we typically tend to dress more casually on our days off, we have encouraged students to be professionally dressed in suits and ties. To that end, we’re asking our team of judges to reflect the same level of business attire that reflects the decorum of this event.

Statewide Student Ethics Challenge

Page Two

Details for the event are as follows:
Time: 8:00 a.m. (Judges Orientation)

9:00 to Noon (Rounds)

Noon to 1:00 (Lunch and interaction with students)
1:00 Winners announced

Date: Saturday, October 16, 2010

Location: University of Central Oklahoma Campus
College of Business Building
(See Campus map for the Business Building next to Lot 5)

(Parking available in lots 5 and 10)

Questions: Call Pam Fountain, OK Ethics Foundation President, at
(405) 858-8800, ext 102 or send her an email at

. For the day of the event, call

Shannon Warren on her cell phone at 826-7648.


Team of Judges & Sponsors:

Below is a current list of all our judges as well as our sponsors, Enterprise-Rent-A-Car who provided a $2500 grant as well as our wonderful Navigator and Oklahoma Star members whose dues help to contribute to this event.

·  Lisa Axisa, NASBA’s Center for Public Trust (NYC)

·  Carol Ringrose Alexander, Retirement Investment

·  Ray Belford, Belford Consulting

·  Tony Blasier, Chesapeake Energy

·  Rev. Linda Brinkworth,
St. Luke's United Methodist Church

·  Scott Carter, The Journal Record

·  Young Chappell, Boeing

·  Keith Chappell, Boeing

·  Dr. Jim Collard, Citizen Potawatomie

·  Carolyn Elliott, Express

·  Garyl Geist, Giant Partners

·  Joy LaBar, SandRidge Energy

·  Brian Rice, Ideal Homes

·  Edith Steele, Retired - Oklahoma Accountancy Board

·  Linda Stone, Cadre

·  Linda Streun, Ideal Homes

·  Joe Walker, Grant Thornton

·  Shannon Warren, OK Ethics

·  Oklahoma District Attorney’s Office

If for any reason, you cannot participate, please notify Pam Fountain immediately as the absence could throw off the organization of this event. Again, we cannot thank you enough for your involvement in this important initiative. It means a lot to our students as well as to the future of OK Ethics.

Sincerely,

Shannon Warren

Founder

Oklahoma Business Ethics Consortium

P.O. Box 3174

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73101-3174

(405) 858-2233

cc: Pam Fountain

PARTICIPATING TEAMS

Presented according to the team’s timing of registration.

University of Oklahoma / Breea Bacon / Asst. Director / Academic Integrity Systems
Oklahoma City University #1 / Dr. Barbara Crandall / Chair and Professor / Management
Oklahoma City University #2 / Dr. Barbara Crandall / Professor and Chair / Marketing & Management
OSU / Dr. Andrew Urich / Assoc Prof / Legal Studies
East Central University 1 / Dr. Thomas Lanis / Associate Professor / Business Administration
East Central University Team 2 / Dr. Pat Fountain / Professor / Business Administration
UCO - Team 1 / Dr. Katherene P. Terrell / Chair/Professor / Accounting
University of Central Oklahoma - 2 / Dr. Bambi Hora / Professor / Accounting
University of Central Oklahoma – 3 / Jane Calvert / Assistant Professor / Accounting
Southern Nazarene University / Cindy Powell / Professor / School of Business
Langston University-OKC Campus 1 / Dr. Deborah Burroughs / Director of Programs & Services / Academic affairs
Langston University-OKC-Team 2 / Dr. Deborah Burroughs / Director of Programs & Services / Academic Affairs

PRIZES & REWARDS

·  The top three scoring teams will receive funding from the OK Ethics Foundation to travel to San Antonio, TX for the November 13, 2010 Regional Student Ethics Bowl as follows:

Team Ranking / Travel Funding / Scholarship for s business ethics certification will be awarded to
university advisors.
1st Place / $2500 / $800
2nd Place / $1500 / $800
3rd Place / $500 / N/A

·  The Foundation will host the students and advisors of these three teams at dinner on the River Walk on Saturday evening, November 13

JUDGING CRITERIA

Please note that you will be provided with scoring sheets and instructions for the competition when you arrive for orientation on October 16. Below is the criterion that the National Ethics Bowl uses and should be applied at our Statewide Student Ethics Challenge:

As judges, you will be asked to evaluate student presentations along the following guidelines. In judging the presenting team, you should try to base your scoring solely on the following factors (score between 0 to 40 points, allocating no more than 10 points per factor).

1)  Clarity and Intelligibility:

Was the presentation clear and systematic? Regardless of whether or not you agree with the conclusion, did the team give a coherent argument in a clear and succinct manner?

2)  Avoidance of Ethical Irrelevance:

Did the team avoid ethically irrelevant issues? Or, was the team preoccupied with issues that are not ethically relevant or are of minor ethical relevance to the case?

3)  Identification and discussion of Central Ethical Dimensions

Did the team’s presentation clearly identify and thoroughly discuss the central ethical dimensions of the case?

4)  Deliberative Thoughtfulness

Did the team’s presentation indicate both awareness and thoughtful consideration of different viewpoints, including especially those that could loom large in the reasoning of individuals who might disagree with the team’s position?

Conflict of Interest?

Do you have a personal tie with any of the competing universities that could potentially compromise your position as a judge? If so, please advise Pam Fountain.

A Framework for Ethical Decision MakingExcerpts are provided from a program conducted in 2009 by one of our Founding Members, Jim Priest of the law firm Whitten, Burrage, Priest, Fulmer, Anderson & Eisel. This framework for thinking ethically is the product of dialogue and debate at the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics at Santa Clara University. Primary contributors include Manuel Velasquez, Dennis Moberg, Michael J. Meyer, Thomas Shanks, Margaret R. McLean, David DeCosse, Claire André, and Kirk O. Hanson. This article appeared originally in Issues in Ethics, V. 1, N. 2 (Winter 1988).It was last revised in May 2009.

Recognize an Ethical Issue

1.  Could this decision or situation be damaging to someone or to some group? Does this decision involve a choice between a good and bad alternative, or perhaps between two "goods" or between two "bads"?

2.  Is this issue about more than what is legal or what is most efficient? If so, how?

Get the Facts

3.  What are the relevant facts of the case? What facts are not known? Can I learn more about the situation? Do I know enough to make a decision?

4.  What individuals and groups have an important stake in the outcome? Are some concerns more important? Why?

5.  What are the options for acting? Have all the relevant persons and groups been consulted? Have I identified creative options?

Evaluate Alternative Actions

6.  Evaluate the options by asking the following questions:

·  Which option will produce the most good and do the least harm? (The Utilitarian Approach)

·  Which option best respects the rights of all who have a stake? (The Rights Approach)

·  Which option treats people equally or proportionately? (The Justice Approach)

·  Which option best serves the community
as a whole, not just some members?
(The Common Good Approach)

·  Which option leads me to act as the sort of person I want to be? (The Virtue Approach)

Make a Decision and Test It

7.  Considering all these approaches, which option best addresses the situation?

8.  If I told someone I respect-or told a television audience-which option I have chosen, what would they say?

Act and Reflect on the Outcome

  1. How can my decision be implemented with the greatest care and attention to the concerns of all stakeholders?
  2. How did my decision turn out and what have I learned from this specific situation?