Ethical Boundedness
The case I choose to expound on the subject of ‘Ethical boundedness’ is the scandal that recently rocked the American National Football League (NFL) that involved the New Orleans Saints club. In mid March 2012, reports emerged that the New Orleans Saints defense was embroiled in a scandal where it was said to be offering bonus pays to players who managed to cause injury to opposing offensive players. At discovery of the unethical bounty system, the NFL launched an instant investigation and passed down a stiff punishment to the New Orleans Saints. The NFL indefinitely suspended the defensive coordinator Gregg Williams while Sean Payton, the head coach, was relinquished off his duties for a year. In addition, hefty fines were pinned on the New Orleans Saints organization itself. This effectively translates the New Orleans Saints will be out of the Super Bowl action for quite a long time to come.
The brawl between NFL and the New Orleans Saints best represents the fifth topic addressed by Bazerman and Moore in relation to the concept of Bounded ethicality – The Psychology of Conflict of Interest. This argues that decision makers often fall short of realizing the conflict-of-interest situations they may be in (Bazerman & Moore, 2008). Even when they recognize it, they usually commit the crime of overestimating their ability not be wrongly influenced. In taking the punitive actions against the New Orleans Saints and its players, the NFL contradicted their own interests of running a league that full of action (Moore, 2005).
The way I see it, the NFL aimed to send a clear message to teams by resorting to such punitive measure against the faulty New Orleans Saints. The NFL was passing a warning to teams to not engage or promote any unethical or unsportsmanlike conducts that would serve to render the health and safety of opponents’ players at risk. Failure to do this would attract extreme punishment for individuals and clubs in the wrong. However, the million dollar question is whether such stiff punishment will indeed deter any future unethical bounty systems by football clubs. In addition, one wonders if it would by any means contribute to greater health and safety of NFL players.
In my considered opinion the penalties slammed at individuals and the club will not solve the ethical issues that bedevil the sport. This point of view is founded on the arguments of Max Bazerman’s theory of ‘Bounded ethicality.’ According to the Harvard Business School Professor of Negotiation, Organizations, and Market, a greater extent of practices that individuals and groups engage in do not as a result of their immoral or evil nature (Bazerman & Moore, 2008). On the contrary, the unethical conducts are basically triggered by elements of the social or organizational context in which the people themselves reside. In other words, these social contexts bring about favorable conditions for the unethical conditions to become more palatable and frequent. Accordingly, the unethical behaviors are enhances by the social context of the individuals or bodies at the receiving end as opposed to particular pathological personality disorder of the involved (Bazerman & Moore, 2008).
In this case, it is evident that the NFL is convinced that the New Orleans Saints’ bounty system is by no doubt a key factor that renders the player safer unsafe in the league. It is my point of view that the NFL is missing out on the bigger picture. It is an open secret that the game of football is by nature a more physical and inherently violent one. Those who play the football game have to be well-built and with much stamina. There is also no arguing that the headgear does not only come in handy as protective gear but also as an attack weapon. Year in year out, the concussion statistics of NFL seasons reveal high incidents of concussions between and among the players. This only translate that players of American football are always at high risk of getting head injury in the course of the tournament regardless of whether there is bounty or not. I thus find it irrational for NFL to resort to severely punishing individual players who go for big hits or teams that encourage their players to deliver hits-that-injure. There is a popular wise adage that goes “don’t hate the player, hate the game.” American football is a game known to reward violence and that’s what the bigger portion of the game’s fans flock into the stadiums to witness.
In view of the above, I believe the NFL would have done better if only they acted in line with bounded ethicality by appreciating the dynamics that result in the problems it is striving to solve in the game. This is because of the very aspect that Bounded ethicality involves requires us to rationalize the seemingly unethical actions of individuals or teams, fondly referred to as “everyone else is doing it” or “that’s how it’s done.” It must be taken into consideration that when the New Orleans Saints defense resorted to the unethical bounty system, it was relying on the aspect that that’s the nature of the American football game itself – knocking out your opponent, fairly or unfairly. As a matter of fact, the game is characterized by a number of other incentives that encourage aggressive, ultra-violent, defensive play as the appropriate way to play the game. For instance, fans of the American football get extra entertainment on the “jacked up” show on ESPN that show weekly clips of players engaging in epic hits. This in itself means that violence in the game is rewarded by airtime on ESPN.
In the same breath, the legendary defensive players of the game that have made it into the hall of fame are remembered for their violent epic hits as compared to their sportsmanlike tackles. In all fairness, the punitive and stringent measures that NFL has adopted are nothing more of a public relations maneuver. Furthermore, it is utterly unethical to punish players for doing what they have been nurtured to do all their lives. It would help to understanding that routine is encoded in to a person’s mind through a long term memory – for football players it has become muscle memory.
In summary the decision makers in NFL ought to review their decision as it only amounts to psychological conflict-of-interest and does not necessarily put to rest the issue of offensive nature of the American football.
References:
Bazerman, H. Max, & Moore, A. Don. (2008). Judgment in managerial decision making. New Jersey, John Wiley & Sons.
Moore, A. Don. (2005). Conflicts of Interest: Challenges and Solutions in Business, Law, Medicine, and Public Policy. London, Cambridge University Press.
