Cruz, Angel Nicole B.

Realizing the Objectives

The Case

University A spends a minimum of 100K for European trips of Dean Torres. The trips involve paper
presentations, attendance to international conferences, linkages with other universities abroad, and
benchmarking of best practices.

However, unknown to the management of University A, Dean Torres is also employed as an academic officer in
University B. The latter is aware of the employment of Dean Torres in University A. When the management of
University B learned about the trip of Dean Torres in Europe, it requested him to visit two schools (in Europe)
regarding its 3 programs under conception. Since University B would only be a rider on Dean Torres trips, it
offers him 50K as a personal allowance.

Dean Torres was glad about the offer. He needed money for the upcoming kidney operation of his wife. For his
European trip, he is entitled to full transportation, accommodation and personal allowances by University A,
intended for the paper presentation and 2 additional days for ocular inspections/visitations of HEIs in a
location of his choice.

For such, he is anticipating additional 30K savings for the allowances to be provided by University A, since he
has already communicated to some friends and relatives to accommodate him for his upcoming trip.

(However), University A is undergoing budget tightening due to a decrease in enrolment as a result of K to12
implementation.

Dean Torres argues that the upcoming European trip (his 3rd in a row) has been approved by the Academic
Council prior to the implementation of the K to12. Furthermore, the Dean argues that the said official trip is
necessary to maintain the current autonomous status of the University (A) as well as the level 4 accreditation of
his College’s two prime programs.

Unknown to Dean Torres, the President of University A is aware of his employment in University B because her
brother in law is the current president of University B. She is likewise aware of the 50K subsidy to be provided
by University B to him (Dean Torres).

Her brother in law has talked to her secretly to support the European trip of Dean Torres because if such would
push through, it would definitely benefit the two universities.

The President does not know what to do. Her brother in law was instrumental to her installation as president of
University A because of his numerous connections in the academe. He was her principal sponsor too in her
pursuit of her Ph.D. abroad.

Adopted from the lectures of Dr. Madeline Co during the 2nd Gen. New GE Training at the University of the East
Compiled by Dr. Clive Alvyn N. Ocon
 Activity 1: The President and Dean Torres

If you were the president of the University what would you do?

As the president of the university, I should be held accountable and undergo a firm level of resolution to the
dilemmas that will concern the current state of the university. Personal, organizational, and structural dilemmas are evident
in the case being drawn. As the president of the university, in-depth study of the dilemmas is taken into consideration. The
supposed outcome must be calculated evenly. Since the university is undergoing a budget tightening due to the decreasing
enrollment because of the sudden implementation of K-12, I will then mandate a program memorandum wherein students
from private or public schools can access quality education at a discounted price. Students can access quality education at a
negotiable price. The enrollment will also be extended for late enrollees to be able to reach the desired quota of students.
However, this could affect the university's delay of assets, but then it would be an additive to the current budget of the
university. Dean Torres will then be able to proceed with the trip; the university would retain its standing; the agreement
and relation between me and the university council wouldn’t be affected; as well as the trust and relationship between me
and my brother-in-law.

If you were Dean Torres, what would you do?

Given the terms and conditions of the dilemma as a dean, I should be able to equate it and treat it with adequate
resolution. The university’s state as per quality and recognition will be at stake. Given that University A is the school which
has given me a conditional and salient engagement in Europe, but due to the tight budget, major irregularities may occur
that will affect the trip. But on the other hand, University B, an undisclosed affiliation, provides me with a 50k budget
which I will be able to use for my wife’s upcoming kidney surgery as well as for the trip. I was accountable for both
instances, which I could use for a firm solution to the dilemma. Despite the consequences, I will discuss with University A
the offer given to me by the other university. Why did I consider the offer despite my agreement to it? Both universities
require a thorough discussion of possibilities. I state that if I accept the offer from University B, I would be able to continue
with the trip that will retain the accreditation of University A and also a win with University B. Therefore, I would be able
to also fund my wife’s kidney surgery and I wouldn’t be torn between the two. I assure the two parties that this could be a
diverse and positive idea.

Adopted from the lectures of Dr. Madeline Co during the 2nd Gen. New GE Training at the University of the East
Compiled by Dr. Clive Alvyn N. Ocon
Activity 2: Dean Torres Case

Given the moral dilemma of Dean Torres, citing the level of a dilemma (personal, organizational, and
structural/systematic) in the following arguments. Write only the letter that corresponds to your answer:

A. Personal B. Organizational C. Structural/Systematic

1. HEIs must adhere to academic excellence at all times as their social and moral
obligation to people.
2. Dean Torres may offer to pay 50% of his travel expenses to reduce the cost of his trip but this would lessen the amount he is
saving for the kidney operation of his wife.
3. Other colleges in University A will take the case of Dean Torres as a precedent to request official trips at the expense of the
University.
4. Accrediting bodies require HEIs to have an adequate number of linkages, researchers, and paper presentations for level 4
status to maintain the good quality of education.
5. Dean Torres may opt to lessen the “side trips” (ocular/visitations with other schools) to reduce the cost of his official trips but
this may compel him to return the allowance given by University B.
6. The HEI that employs Dean Torres may opt to secure funds from outside sources and private individuals. However, this
option may run counter from “No Collection Policy”.
7. Dean Torres may opt to defer the trips until the University attains financial stability when enrolment for the tertiary level
normalizes but this would likewise mean, having to defer his wife’s kidney operation.
8. President of University A to allow the potential downgrading of the University’s accreditation status due to existing financial
constraints and in a way, impliedly decline the request of her brother in law.
9. The President may suggest to the Academic Council the suspension of expensive trips of academic officials by creating an
urgent policy on cost-cutting measures.
10. The level of accreditation is a highly recognized indicator of quality among HEIs and such University A must maintain its
status.
11. The President may petition to the Academic Council to withdraw its approval on such trips citing a reasonable cost-cutting
policy (but this would decline the request
of her brother in law).
12. Almost all HEIs are affected by the implementation of K+12, hence, it is but reasonable for HEIs to allow their academic
officials to look for 2nd employment.
13. Accreditation requirements get complicated and economically demanding as the application levels up.
14. CHED to look into accreditation policies of different accrediting bodies.
15. Dean Torres may recommend a faculty who is willing to shoulder half of the cost of the said official trip but share only half
of his allowance.

Answers:

1. C
9. B
2. A
10. B
3. B
11. A
4. C
12. B
5. A
13. C
6. B
14. C
7. A
15. A
8. A

Adopted from the lectures of Dr. Madeline Co during the 2nd Gen. New GE Training at the University of the East
Compiled by Dr. Clive Alvyn N. Ocon