(Editor's note: Today the Journal starts a new monthly column by Steve Scheier, the CEO and founder of the San Francisco-based Scheier+Group, which provides decision-making tools, training and techniques to help nonprofits and other organizations deliver improved results.)
Ray Rice’s assault of Janay Palmer has cast a bright light on domestic violence in America. Sadly, this assault was not an aberration. Our national obsession with the NFL has propelled this story to national prominence. Many have expressed revulsion about Rice’s actions as well as their disgust with the two-game suspension originally ordered by NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell. At this point, the question occupying everyone’s attention is, When did Goodell really see the video where Rice punched out Palmer? It’s a good question but I have two others I think are more pressing:
1) Why did Roger Goodell think that a two-game suspension was appropriate for a domestic violence assault?
2) How can any organization do an effective job of preventing domestic violence when so few of the affected gender have meaningful leadership roles in NFL ownership, team management, coaching or the NFL office?
Before imposing the original suspension, Goodell met with Rice and Palmer. In that meeting Rice admitted to striking Palmer in the elevator. That admission and the video of him dragging her from the elevator should have been enough for Rice to receive a significant penalty. Why didn’t that happen?
Even if we accept the commissioner’s story that he did not see the second video until it was released on Sept. 8, why did he need to see this other tape before he understood the viciousness of this crime and levied an appropriate penalty?
It’s simple. Before the outrage mushroomed into a controversy that could damage the NFL, the two game suspension is the penalty Goodell thought the assault deserved. Goodell weighed the interests of the parties, including Rice, Palmer, the Baltimore Ravens and the league, noted Palmer’s support of Rice, and decided a hand slap was the appropriate response. I would guess that Goodell was shocked by the ensuing outrage.
Let’s think about how Goodell might have made this initial decision. Assuming he made this decision on his own what were the “facts” as he knew them?
When making his decision on the Rice case, Goodell probably gathered information, considered the various options, and made what he thought was a “reasoned” decision. Unfortunately, whether we try to make “reasoned” decisions or rely on our gut instinct, the science of decision-making warns us to be conscious of our biases. This case is no exception. Our biases can be explicit but they are more often implicit.
Implicit biases are baked into our world-view and we may not even know we have them. We can also fall prey to confirmation bias where we look for and take in only the data that supports our view of the situation. I don’t know which if any biases Goodell was influenced by but below are some that are often used to minimize domestic assaults:
-- The assault wasn’t serious enough to warrant a significant penalty.
-- If the victim continues her relationship with her assailant, the punishment should be lenient.
--If prior experience with the assailant has been positive, and he demonstrates remorse, he’s a “good person” who made “one bad
mistake.”
Everyone is susceptible to these and other biases. And if the assailant advances our business or social interests we might choose to even more readily support this person. Goodell’s biases likely affected his initial ruling on the Rice case. As NFL commissioner, Goodell can discipline players for their behavior on and off the field. Goodell’s implicit biases and unchallenged power enabled him to make the unwise and insufficient two game suspension decision.
In the aftermath of this incident, the NFL instituted a new domestic violence policy: First time offenders get a six game suspension and second offenders are banned for life. This is a good but belated, step. However, if the league really wants to curb domestic violence the next step is to bring more women into the NFL.
Women own five of the 32 NFL teams. There are virtually no women at top levels of any NFL franchise, no women officials, and few senior women in the NFL league office. And of course there isn’t a single female football coach. Why is this?
At a time when more women than men are receiving undergraduate degrees, and the numbers of female fans of the NFL is at an all time high, why does the NFL remain so male dominated? Because that’s what the guys in charge are comfortable with.
What if the NFL aggressively recruited women into positions of authority? Would the game change? No. But, put more women in the NFL and you’d change the discussion on domestic violence. And as a bonus I’m quite sure that their actions would accelerate the business prospects of the league.
Some people are calling on Roger Goodell to be fired. Unless he lied about when he saw the second video, I think he should be retained. I also think he should be tasked with bringing more women into the NFL. If one or more outspoken women were in the room during that initial meeting, I doubt Rice would have received just a two game suspension and the NFL would not have a black eye.
...
Steve Scheier is the CEO and founder of the San Francisco-based Scheier+Group, which provides decision-making tools, training and techniques to help nonprofits and other organizations deliver improved results. He can be reached at steve@stevescheier.com, 415-307-4507.
