New Year's Message on Zero Tolerance & the End of the DPA

William F. Owen, Jr., MD
President, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey

U.S. Attorney Christopher Christie and Federal Monitor Herbert Stern have released the final report from their two-year engagement at UMDNJ. Gratitude is again expressed to them and their teams for their guidance and oversight in reshaping UMDNJ. On the robust frame work that they and our Board of Trustees have put in place, we have much work to complete to ensure that UMDNJ continues to grow as a statewide asset. Thus, as offered in their summary report, the great progress that we have made is the only end of the beginning.

Many of the vulnerabilities called out in their concluding report are reminiscent of points raised in our most recent statewide, town hall meetings on the topic of workplace safety and employee protection. Our gatherings afforded a wonderful opportunity for me to better understand some of the challenges that may have slowed our success. We have used our meetings to openly discuss workplace environmental issues, as well as to set expectations for appropriate behaviors within UMDNJ. On this background, I have a simple but powerful expectation -- UMDNJ will be a place where integrity, respect, and civility between team members are paramount -- indifferent of your role and/or reporting relationships. Towards developing a system-wide position on integrity, respect, and civility at UMDNJ, your forthright input is greatly appreciated. Your testimonials, advice, and patience are powerful motivators. I recognize that daily, each of you live your commitment to UMDNJ’s vision and missions.

It is in this framework that I continue to encourage a zero tolerance environment for infractions or wrongdoing. Moreover, we can no longer afford to have team members feeling stifled to the point that they are fearful, when attempting to do the right thing – even if doing the right thing is to share your concerns with your manager, their manager, the Office of Ethics and Compliance, my office, or the Board of Trustees.

“Zero tolerance” does not describe the subsequent investigative process, if wrongdoing is suspected and thus reported. Our investigative process will be balanced and fair; both the accused and accuser will be actively protected from malicious, capricious, or retaliatory actions. Nor does zero tolerance refer to the process by which punishment is metered for an infraction. Penalties for wrongdoing, including those who level charges against otherwise innocent individuals, for the purposes of malice or revenge will be developed fairly and with balance. Corrective actions are best determined by those with proximity to the infraction.

“Zero tolerance” is a simple declaration of our values. It describes our own unwillingness to accept perceived wrongdoing and to look away. At some point during our recent two year shared journey, each of us should have been prompted to ask: “Why do some people tolerate wrongdoing, even when they recognize it?” This powerful question has been posed publicly toward UMDNJ. I have heard a poignant answer that applies to many situations in which people are mistreated. Inappropriate behavior is tolerated because of the three “I”s: ignorance, indifference, & inertia. Ignorance of the protections that exist for those who report wrongdoing; indifference to the positive changes that occur when ethical behavior is the standard; and inertia, e.g. complacency to wrongdoing to the extent that inactivity has become the norm. All of us have an obligation to manage the three “I”s and therefore personally take on the duties of improving our work environment.

I recognize that the management teams at UMDNJ must be optimally responsive to your concerns. Your executive management team will also have an attitude of zero tolerance for infractions, retaliatory actions, and an unprotected workplace. In this regard, we commit to optimize the structure and function of the Office of Ethics and Compliance based on best-demonstrated practices of professionalism, accountability and team member protection. One of the highlighted recommendations from the Monitor’s office, centered upon the need for additional investment in, and continued vigilance over, investigating allegations of wrongdoing. Indeed it was in that spirit that we appointed Mr. James Rowan, Vice President for Internal Audit, to oversee audits and investigations at UMDNJ – a task for which he is eminently qualified. Investigations at all levels of the organization will be performed objectively and without unwarranted influence, while balancing the rights of all those involved. Indifferent of the findings of an investigation, they will be developed and shared with the stakeholders for action as needed.

During our town hall conversations, I have come to recognize that for some, the reforms enacted to enhance the quality of our workplace are viewed as “compliance” activities. However, for most of UMDNJ, these are not matters of compliance but rather driving a culture of “integrity”. Integrity is an ethical trait that is in-grained – something that we learned at an early age based on our internal gauge of right and wrong. In turn, compliance is the external mandate to behave with integrity. For the few who are confused or misguided, compliance will assist with integrity. And for most of us, as UMDNJ acts with integrity, compliance activities will validate our sincerity.

So as we reflect on Judge Stern’s final report, we should all do so recognizing that our forward movement is a collective process. It is no longer acceptable to achieve our goals by any means necessary. Rather, we will be judged on how we achieve our goals, not just that we achieve them.

William F. Owen, Jr., M.D.
President