Paula Murray's Statement on the McCombs School's Commitment to Ethics and Honor
The McCombs School of Business has a commitment to honor and ethics. It is apparent to me, judging from comments and inquiries I have received recently, that our students, faculty, staff and alumni believe strongly in these principles as well.
We derive this high standard from the university of which we are a part. Our purpose is to prepare the next generation of individuals who will act responsibly; improve quality of life for themselves and others; and serve the communities in which they live and work. This foundation of ethical behavior is essential to the disciplined culture of excellence that exemplifies our students, our faculty and our alumni.
The undergraduate program takes specific steps to expose each student to these principles and to emphasize their importance.
Every undergraduate student takes BA 101, a course which emphasizes integrity, fair treatment, and honesty, in the context of academic studies, career, and life in general. Topics of discussion include:
• Definition of ethical and moral principles
• The high costs of ethical lapses
• Real life scenarios in business and recruiting
• Ethical Code of Conduct
• Five-Step Decision-Making Process
• The McCombs Recruiting Code of Ethics
Additionally, all students take at least one other course encompassing ethics and leadership. Our students have ample exposure to discussions outside the classroom dealing with responsibility, leadership and integrity, such as the McCombs Leadership Forum, which recently included a very thoughtful discussion on ethical leadership.
An example of how these principles are applied at the school is the BHP Honor Code, adopted by the students, signed by applicants and then re-signed as incoming students:
BHP Honor Code: We, the students of the Business Honors Program (BHP), have adopted this code as an expression of our commitment to ethical standards. We believe honor and trust are essential to a superior academic experience and continued professional success. It is intended to unite us and create an atmosphere of trust and mutual respect. Each student must abide by and defend the code.
Therefore we resolve that:
• We will abide by university policies for academic integrity.
• We will neither give nor receive unauthorized aid during completion of academic requirements.
• We will not act to gain any unfair advantage or to cause academic or professional harm to another student.
• We will not misrepresent facts or qualifications at any time.
• We will not purposely obtain or possess property belonging to the university or another student without consent, nor will we deny other students access to university resources.
• We will treat all individuals fairly and with dignity regardless of race, gender, creed, age, disability, national origin, and sexual orientation.
Those who suspect an honor code violation are asked to report that violation. In addition, student leaders meet with each student organization to reemphasize how these principles apply to daily student life.
We also insist that students follow a written code of ethics in their internship and career endeavors.
Students who access McCombs Career Services make a signed commitment, renewed yearly, to abide with a code of ethics that demands courtesy, respect, honesty and authenticity in every dealing with career services staff, fellow students, recruiters and others. We work closely with recruiters and solicit feedback to ensure students follow these rules. To do otherwise is to violate the trust of this institution and become subject to the consequences of that violation.
The university has processes in place to uphold the standards of student conduct and academic integrity.
Student Judicial Services in the office of the Dean of Students promotes academic integrity, investigates alleged violations of university rules, and implements discipline. The following is from their statement of principles:
Student Judicial Services strives to hold students accountable for their actions and to address all behavioral concerns with students in a manner that fosters self-reflection, a greater awareness of their obligations within the larger communities to which they belong, and a heightened sense of the personal responsibility they have for their choices, the consequences of those choices, and the direction of their lives.
Potential penalties vary, the most serious of which may include suspension, expulsion, denial or revocation of a degree, and/or withdrawal of a diploma. Financial aid may also be affected by a disciplinary penalty.
One final note.
Allow me to emphasize one other principle held at The University of Texas at Austin. We have strict policies about the handling of any issue related to a student. Due to federal law protecting student privacy, we are prohibited from public discussion of any matter related to an individual. I say that not just as an attorney concerned about the law, but as a dean, teacher and mother concerned about fair and equitable treatment of our students.
I hope this statement sufficiently summarizes our commitment to high ethical standards, which have been exemplified throughout the world by more than 90,000 alumni of our school.
Paula Murray
Associate Dean, Undergraduate Program
McCombs School of Business



Comments
#1 I remember in my BA 101 we
I remember in my BA 101 we were presented with the scenario of a saleswoman buying her own product and donating it to a high school in order to meet her sales target (and receive a bonus). We were told it’s unethical under the premise that she was hired to sell to others, not to herself. This was unpersuasive since the situation is clearly not unethical. The only unethical part is management’s poor structuring of her compensation package which creates perverse incentives. The saleswoman was acting rather ethically, being charitable and providing for her family.
This experience made me cynical about the school’s ethics education. It is not based on real world ethics: property rights, individual autonomy and mutual respect.
#2 As a faculty member for 17
As a faculty member for 17 years, I have had several occasions to send students to the Dean of Students for a possible scholastic dishonesty issue. I believe in the system and believe we are upholding a greater good when we investigate and report possible violations. The vast majority of our students appreciate our poilicies and work to uphold them. I will review my own class structure and ensure that it is relevant to the current situations faced.
#3 Pierre, allow me to propose
Pierre, allow me to propose another analysis of the case you mentioned (although I obviously only know the details you've provided).
The Robin Hood defense is unpersuasive to me, noting that she donated the product to a high school and supported her lovely family at the same time. That is a red herring.
(Similarly, I'm not interested in Bernie Madoff's charitable contributions or his largesse to his wife, as generous as he might have been it has no influence on the ethics of how the funds were obtained.)
What if she had sold the items on the black market to feed her drug habit? Her disposal of the products has no bearing on the ethics of her original decision to inflate her sales figures through artificial means.
In my view, her lapse is in acting as if the company's interest is only in a sales figure. What if the following month she had purchased half her total sales, just to meet her goal? Then, getting desperate, she purchases 3/4 of her total sales the next month. Finally, to make her quarter sales figures she goes deep into debt and purchases all of the product in the third month. Each month the company has made their sales, yet each month they have grown weaker, as the network of customers has dwindled to zero. In the end her scheme would collapse and so might the company.
Yes, there are perverse incentives in almost every system, very difficult to remove them completely in the real world. Every society relies in part on an assumption that individuals will work in the best interests of the group, whether out of self-interest or a sense of justice.
I am an advocate of the free market system, but I agree with Prof. Eli Cox who writes that if the typical business person is only an "economic man" who is selfish, rational, and amoral, then free-markets have no chance. http://blogs.mccombs.utexas.edu/mccombs-today/2008/09/cox-creed-of-greed...
I appreciate the discussion, and would be interested in your response.
#4 I too am opposed to
I too am opposed to neoclassical "economic man" nonsense, I adhere to the Austrian School of Economic's approach of purposeful human action with bounded rationality and dispersed knowledge.
She bought the product because the cost of purchasing it was lower than her bonus. Obviously, if the cost was greater than her bonus she wouldn't have taken that course of action. Now if her job depended on making the sales figures and her only way of doing so was to buy 1/2 or all of the product, that is a clear signal that she needs to find a different source of employment.
If management had instead based her bonus on a percentage of sales, there would have been no perverse incentive.
If management felt that having a robust and diversified sales network is important, they should add her number of clients as a variable in her compensation package.
Instead of taking advantage of the loophole in the company's compensation scheme, she should provide constructive feedback to management so that they have a better compensation structure. But nevertheless, she did not do anything unethical.
It's much like the Stanford Prison Experiment, yes the guards acted inhumanely, but it's the organization that is at fault, since any individual in the guards' position would have acted similarly. In a complex adaptive system like a company or the economy, we have to recognize when the agents are acting fraudulently (Madoff) and when the system is out of whack (this example).
I too appreciate the discussion and did not anticipate that someone would have such a thoughtful response!
#5 Thanks for the detail on the
Thanks for the detail on the case. It is helpful for me to see your reasoning with more explanation.
#6 The vexing part was that the
The vexing part was that the entire class unanimously agreed with me that the saleswoman was not acting unethically, yet the professor persisted in her error and concluded "well it's unethical and she shouldn't have bought her own product."
There was no follow up discussion.
I think the key debate is whether individuals have constructive obligations to organizations outside of the contractual obligations they consent to. I argue that no they do not. Imposing such constructive obligations on them is coercive and denies individual autonomy.
Examples of such unethical constructive obligations are the draft, not being "greedy", and taxation without effective representation.
Of course, since the university is federally funded, teaching students that our current system of government may be unethical is out of the question. It's unwise to bite the hand that feeds you, academic freedom has its limits.
Leave a comment
We want to hear from you! To keep discussions on-topic and constructive, comments are moderated for relevance and for abusive or profane language.