Ethical Dilemmas with Star Athletes

In the midst of the recent suspension of Brandon Davies from BYU, and consequently, the BYU Basketball team, I have realized that a situation like the one BYU officials had to deal with linked to Brandon Davies could have been an ethical dilemma (based on the circumstances and specific codes of honor broken, which I am unaware of). Personally, I know my senior year volleyball coach and team faced an ethical dilemma towards the end of our season. I grew up in Minnesota, where I was very unaware of drinking and drug use, but upon moving to Kansas before my Senior year of high school, I was surrounded by those activities much more (because of the increased consumption, I assume). I played Volleyball, Basketball, and ran Track & Field. During the Volleyball season, there were many different dynamics that already caused drama and contention--who played, underclassmen taking over upperclassman spots, transfer students coming in to the mix, etc. One Saturday morning, two of our starting Varsity players showed up to practice apparently "hung over." They also had tally marks on their hands (in marker) which, according to teammates, were tally's for shots of alcohol taken in a popular game that students tended to play at that time. Our coach was not involved in any of these conversations, but he was aware of some of the comments floating around, as well as to the behavior of these two girls. He was faced with, what I think was, an ethical dilemma.

Situation

Our team was in a unique situation that year—the school was in its 4^th year since its inception, and their sports teams had not been developed enough to have winning seasons yet. Women’s Volleyball was the only exception, it had been the only sport thus far that had success. During the year I was there, we were on our way to continue that success (as we had beaten many of our top competitors and had 2-3 potential Division 1 athletes).

Dilemma

My coach was faced with an ethical dilemma—does he investigate the situation and in turn, punish his two starters? Or does he turn a blind eye to the whole situation and play them as if nothing happened, and no one knew?

Action

My coach did a little bit of both options, he took the girls into his office (none of us knew what they talked about), and played the girls as if nothing happened. When he played the girls in the next game, he was obviously nervous, and some teammates were obviously bugged.

Real Solution

I don’t think what my coach did was right. I obviously don’t know what they talked about in that office, but I do know he was aware of what probably happened. He could have thought that they weren’t proven guilty enough, but it was well known among everyone of what the consequences for such actions were. He should have not played those girls and taken a potential loss. I agree with what BYU officials did in the Brandon Davies case, and I hope coaches/schools around the nation look to BYU’s example and do the right thing.

BYU's Intramural Program--Aligning for the Better

BYU has one of the largest intramural sports programs in the country. Students can be involved in over 30 sports year-round, and can join the 12,000 other students, faculty and staff, and BYU ward members that sign-up each year. Compared to other programs in the country, BYU obviously has become more aligned with the 7-S model because they need to in order to accommodate all the participants. I have worked for BYU Intramurals since September of 2008; first as an official and now as an activity supervisor. I really love the intramural program, and I know that many participants take the program for granted. Over these past couple of years, I have seen some ways that the program could be improved, ways that they could become more fully aligned with the 7-S model, specifically with style and shared values.

Shared Values. Other than the fact that BYU programs already expand on BYU’s mission to create an experience that is (1) spiritually strengthening, (2) intellectually enlarging, and (3) character building, leading to (4) lifelong learning and service; BYU intramurals does not, to my knowledge, have their own shared values. If Intramurals had a specific and known set of goals that the employees could all work towards together, there would be more synergy, more satisfied participants, harder working employees, and a better overall program.

Style. Intramural employees are very segregated, with the officials never interacting with the supervisors except when working—and even then, the officials are mostly in the game, while the supervisors are on the sidelines. Supervisors have their meetings, luncheons, retreats, etc.; while officials have their own meetings, retreats, and parties. As an official, I always felt that the supervisors were above us, but they were being paid the same as us, and my boss always felt the need to remind us that we were all on the same level. Another aspect that bothered me as an official was the fact that the supervisors went on an annual weekend retreat to Sundance. The officials went to a 3-hour ropes course activity. Besides the fact that officials need to have a stronger relationship with their co-workers than supervisors do (because they frequently work in pairs, whereas supervisors work individually), providing a much better retreat for supervisors creates a disconnect between the groups. If intramurals were to create an operating style that fostered better relations between the two groups, similar outcomes to creating shared values would occur—more synergy, better understanding of each other, and a better overall program.

I really do feel that BYU Intramurals is a great program that is already aligned in most of the S’s of a great company, but I feel that if they did look for ways to improve, they could definitely find some.

Billionaire Investor Believes in Clorox

Carl Ichan, a billionaire investor, recently took a 9.08% stake in Clorox Co. His reasoning was that Clorox is mistakenly undervalued because of their big brands (i.e. Britta Water, Hidden Valley Ranch, and Burt's Bees). This move by Ichan sent Clorox shares up by 9% and to a new high. Icahn may seek to discuss business plans with management although he agrees that their brands are leading in their categories and that their following big trends is very beneficial.

Clorox has recently tried to focus on growing trends of "health and wellness, sustainability, affordability, and products geared toward a multicultural market."

Many believe that Icahn was drawn to Clorox's "amalgamation of many different brands" and that he wants to take advantage of that. Clorox has, however, started selling off some brands so that they could focus on more lucrative areas; i.e. the area of disinfection with their bleach wipes.

I believe that Clorox is trying to move towards more of a Hedgehog Concept. They are realizing that they may have had too many brands and that they need to focus on something that they can be the best in the world at, they can focus on something that they are deeply passionate about, and that they can, consequently, have more profit. Although they are not quite there yet because they are trying to apply the hedgehog concept to different brands within their company, as well as different product areas, they are working more towards it now more than ever.

Clorox has always been known as a cleaning, disinfecting, sanitizing brand that have products doing the same thing. They can be the best in the world at providing disinfecting products with bleach that so many people are in need of with new fears of different illnesses sprouting up year after year. Clorox can be the best in the world at disinfecting, and they have an overwhelming understanding of the area, they just need to focus on making it the best in all aspects, in all countries, and in all situations.

Analysis on the article, Icahn takes 9 percent stake in Clorox

Taco Bell Trying Too Hard?

Last week, the Mexican fast-food chain, Taco Bell, was sued on claims that the chain "falsely advertised its products as 'beef.'" The suit, filed by an Alabama law firm, alleges that Taco Bell's meat only has 35% beef, doesn't meet USDA requirements, and contains binders and extenders. The suit has since been found to be "bogus" because a) Taco Bell's beef contains 88% USDA-inspected beef and no extenders or binders, b) "the lawsuit cites U.S. Department of Agriculture guidelines for labeling ground beef, which don't apply to restaurants", and c) the lawyers would have to prove that customers are expecting something different than Taco Bell claims, which most customers know they're not getting 100% beef.

Today, Taco Bell placed full-page print ads in over 3 major newspapers in order to "set the record straight." Putting ads in national newspapers is no inexpensive task, but is it necessary? Are Bell’s ads, titled "Thank you for suing us," followed by a counter to the suit helping their business, or hurting them? Sometimes, when companies participate in comparative advertising by putting down the other product, customers are put-off and think that the company placing the ad is too pre-occupied by justifying their product in comparison to competitors. Taco Bell shouldn’t focus on the suit filed against them, but should focus on their quality products/beef and move on from there. Many Americans are unaware that there was even a suit, and knowing more about the beef than previously wanted may hurt them instead of help. Yes, Taco Bell needs to face the brutal facts that they were put in the public eye in an unpleasing way, but they need to do so by focusing on the facts of their product, not the problem that someone else may seem to claim. Like my dad always told my brother who was easily provoked by his siblings, “Don’t let them win, don’t let them get you to react, because that’s what they want.” So to Taco Bell, I say the same thing.

Quotes and analysis pulled from the article, "Taco bell fights back on beef lawsuit with ad push."

Google Moves to Promote Growth

As of late, Google has been implementing many different strategies in order to increase their growth. Last July, Google's shares were priced $433.63 and has since risen to $625.69 today. How will Google continue to grow in 2011? By focusing on their profit pool products and services, namely Youtube and Android, as well as getting the right people back into the company. Google will need to keep an eye on competitors like Facebook and Twitter, but because they provide products appealing to more people, they need to strive to differentiate from those two competitors in order to stay in the game.

Yesterday, Google announced that co-founder, Larry Page, will be replacing Eric Schmidt as CEO. Page is passionate about Google and will add to a "new team structure that ... could result in faster decision making" (JP Morgan analyst, Imran Kahn). The core team will remain the same, but Page will help things get rolling with their current products and services as well as helping to head up new projects that will help Google differentiate and grow.

Google has already found that their complementing products, Youtube and Android, will substantially help growth in 2011, but they need to continue to capitalize on these products in order to widen the gap of this competitive advantage before others enter into the same product lines.

Many are concerned about Google's future growth, but they are doing the right things to not only to help out their own company revenue, but to continue to soar above their competitors.

Analysis on YahooFinance article "Google investors worry about future growth."