Author
Listed:
- Robert Copeland
- Luke R. Potwarka
Abstract
•The use of performance enhancing drugs (PEDs) is an ethical concern in university sport.•Provides important insights into ethical decision making processes and structures.•Challenges readers to think critically about creating ethical team cultures.•PEDs strategies must consider cognitive antecedents and organizational factors.•Findings are interpreted in the context of relevant theory concerning PEDs use.This case study is written for instructors of sport management courses focused on ethics and integrity-related issues in team environments. The case highlights the real world example of the University of Waterloo Warriors varsity football that, in 2010, experienced the most significant doping scandal in Canadian university sports history, with a total of nine anti-doping rule violations asserted through the Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport. This case study also incorporates the findings of an independent review of the Waterloo football program in relation to the use of banned substances, and includes first-hand accounts from Bob Copeland who was the acting director of athletics. These findings are then interpreted in the context of relevant theory related to performance enhancing drugs (PEDs) use. Along with the findings of this review, which included interviews with athletes, coaches, and administrators, the case study provides important insights into ethical decision making processes and leadership structures in a team sport environment. Particular emphasis is placed on the role that individual cognitive antecedents and contextual organizational factors (i.e., policies, leadership, ethical climate, and infrastructure) play in ethical decision-making processes.
Suggested Citation
Robert Copeland & Luke R. Potwarka, 2016.
"Individual and contextual factors in ethical decision making: A case study of the most significant doping scandal in Canadian university sports history,"
Sport Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(1), pages 61-68, January.
Handle:
RePEc:taf:rsmrxx:v:19:y:2016:i:1:p:61-68
DOI: 10.1016/j.smr.2015.08.004
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rsmrxx:v:19:y:2016:i:1:p:61-68. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/rsmr .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.