One for All and All for One? Melinda Asbel watched as three of her classmates filed out of the conference room. Then She turned back to the large wooden table and faced her members (a student and three faculty members) of the university's judiciary committee. The three students—Joe Eastridge, Brad Hamil, and Lisa Baghetti—had just concluded their appeal against plagiarism conviction Stemming from a group project for an international marketing course. Melinda, who happened to be in the class with the students on trial, remembered the day that professor, Hank Zierden, had asked Joe, Brad, and Lisa, along with the group’s leader, Paul Colgan, to stay after class. She happened to walk by the classroom a half later and saw four glum students emerge. Even though Paul had a chagrined expression on his face, Joe was the one Who looked completely shattered. It didn't take long word to spread along the ever-active grapevine that Paul had admitted to plagiarizing his part of the group paper. At the hearing. the students recounted how they’d quickly and unanimously settled on Paul to lead the group. He was by far most able student among them, someone who managed maintain a stellar GPA even while handling a full course load and holding down a part-rime job. After the group worked together for weeks analyzing the problem and devising a marketing plan, Paul assigned a section of the final paper to each member. With the pressure of all the final paper to each member. With the pressure pf all those end-of-the -semester deadlines bearing down on them, everyone was delighted when Paul volunteered to write the company and industry background, the section that typically the most time to produce. Paul gathered in everyone’s contributions, assembled them into a paper, and handed the final draft to the other members. They each gave it a quick read. They liked what they saw and thought they had a good chance for an A. Unfortunately, as Paul readily admitted when Professor Zierden confronted them, he had pulled the section that contributed off Internet. Pointing out the written policy that he had distributed at beginning of the Semester, which stated that each group member was equally responsible for the product, the professor gave all four students a zero for the project. The group project and presentation counted for 30 percent of the course grade. Joe, Brad, and Lisa maintained that they were completely unaware that Paul had cheated. “It just never occurred to us Paul would ever need to cheat”. Brad said. They were innocent bystanders, the students argued. Why should they be penalized? Besides, the consequences weren’t going to fall on each of them equally. Although Paul was suffering the embarrassment of public exposure, the failing group project grade would only put a dent in his solid GPA. Joe, on the other hand, was already on academic probation. A zero probably means that he wouldn't the 2.5 GPA that he needed to stay in the business program. At least one of the faculty members of the judiciary committee supported Professor Zierden’s actions. " We're assigning more and more group projects because increasingly that's the way these students are going to find themselves working when they get real jobs in the real world," he said. "And the fact of the matter is that if someone obtains information illegally while on the job, it's going to put the whole corporation at risk for being sued, Or worse. Even though she could see merit to both sides, Melinda was going to have to choose. If you were Melinda, how would you vote? Vote to exonerate the three group project members who didn’t cheat. You’re convinced that they had no reason to suspect Paul Calogen of dishonesty. Exonerating them is the right thing to do.

BuyFind

Management, Loose-Leaf Version

13th Edition
Richard L. Daft
Publisher: South-Western College Pub
ISBN: 9781305969308
BuyFind

Management, Loose-Leaf Version

13th Edition
Richard L. Daft
Publisher: South-Western College Pub
ISBN: 9781305969308

Solutions

Chapter 18, Problem 1ED
Textbook Problem

One for All and All for One?

Melinda Asbel watched as three of her classmates filed out of the conference room. Then She turned back to the large wooden table and faced her members (a student and three faculty members) of the university's judiciary committee. The three students—Joe Eastridge, Brad Hamil, and Lisa Baghetti—had just concluded their appeal against plagiarism conviction Stemming from a group project for an international marketing course. Melinda, who happened to be in the class with the students on trial, remembered the day that professor, Hank Zierden, had asked Joe, Brad, and Lisa, along with the group’s leader, Paul Colgan, to stay after class. She happened to walk by the classroom a half later and saw four glum students emerge. Even though Paul had a chagrined expression on his face, Joe was the one Who looked completely shattered. It didn't take long word to spread along the ever-active grapevine that Paul had admitted to plagiarizing his part of the group paper.

At the hearing. the students recounted how they’d quickly and unanimously settled on Paul to lead the group. He was by far most able student among them, someone who managed maintain a stellar GPA even while handling a full course load and holding down a part-rime job. After the group worked together for weeks analyzing the problem and devising a marketing plan, Paul assigned a section of the final paper to each member. With the pressure of all the final paper to each member. With the pressure pf all those end-of-the -semester deadlines bearing down on them, everyone was delighted when Paul volunteered to write the company and industry background, the section that typically the most time

to produce. Paul gathered in everyone’s contributions, assembled them into a paper, and handed the

final draft to the other members. They each gave it a quick read. They liked what they saw and thought they had a good chance for an A. Unfortunately, as Paul readily admitted when Professor Zierden confronted them, he had pulled the section that contributed off Internet. Pointing out the written policy that he had distributed at beginning of the Semester, which stated that each group member was equally

responsible for the product, the professor gave all four students a zero for the project. The group project and presentation counted for 30 percent of the course grade. Joe, Brad, and Lisa maintained that they were completely unaware that Paul had cheated. “It just never occurred to us Paul would ever need to cheat”. Brad said. They were innocent bystanders, the students argued. Why should they be penalized? Besides, the consequences weren’t going to fall on each of them equally. Although Paul was

suffering the embarrassment of public exposure, the failing group project grade would only put a dent in his solid GPA. Joe, on the other hand, was already on academic probation.

A zero probably means that he wouldn't the 2.5 GPA that he needed to stay in the business program. At least one of the faculty members of the judiciary committee supported Professor Zierden’s actions.

" We're assigning more and more group projects because increasingly that's the way these students are going to find themselves working when they get real jobs in the real world," he said. "And the fact of the matter is that if someone obtains information illegally while on the job, it's going to put the whole corporation at risk for being sued, Or worse. Even though she could see merit to both sides, Melinda was going to have to choose. If you were Melinda, how would you vote?

  1. Vote to exonerate the three group project members who didn’t cheat. You’re convinced that they had no reason to suspect Paul Calogen of dishonesty. Exonerating them is the right thing to do.

Expert Solution

Want to see the full answer?

Check out a sample textbook solution.

Want to see this answer and more?

Experts are waiting 24/7 to provide step-by-step solutions in as fast as 30 minutes!*

*Response times vary by subject and question complexity. Median response time is 34 minutes and may be longer for new subjects.

Chapter 18 Solutions

Management, Loose-Leaf Version

Additional Business Textbook Solutions

Find more solutions based on key concepts
How are inflation and unemployment related in the short run?

Principles of Microeconomics (MindTap Course List)

Why do economists make assumptions?

Essentials of Economics (MindTap Course List)

COST OF COMMON EQUITY Percy Motors has a target capital structure of 40% debt and 60% common equity, with no pr...

Fundamentals of Financial Management, Concise Edition (with Thomson ONE - Business School Edition, 1 term (6 months) Printed Access Card) (MindTap Course List)