Guiding Principles

Honesty is fundamental to the profession and practice of management. It is therefore the bedrock premise of management education at Yale. In the community of students, faculty, staff, and alumni of the Yale School of Management, honesty and integrity build the trust essential to a free and lively exchange of ideas.

The Yale SOM Honor Code is intended to foster the school’s exceptional learning environment and to support conduct that will distinguish the faculty, staff, students, and alumni in their lives as managers, at school, at school-related functions, and in the larger management community. 

The Honor Committee has jurisdiction over all Honor Code violations including matters of academic dishonesty and egregious violations of the social and professional norms of behavior.

Academic Integrity

The SOM community supports the highest standards of academic integrity. All academic work affords an unparalleled opportunity to put forward new and innovative ideas; at SOM, we aspire to always acknowledge the ideas upon which new solutions are based.

Faculty should provide guidelines for students on the parameters of classwork. A student who has any question about the way in which work is to be completed is responsible for contacting the professor for clarification.

Students will familiarize themselves with the standards of proper citation via print and online resources, available on the SOM internal website.

Community Standards

Every member of the SOM community—students, faculty, staff, and alumni (hereafter collectively referred to as “community members”)—plays an integral role in carrying out the school’s mission to educate leaders for business and society. Our standards of professional behavior, on and off campus, advance SOM’s progress in this regard and seek to strengthen our entire community.

A hallmark of the SOM community is its inclusivity. The school respects, values, and celebrates the diverse backgrounds and views of community members. Community members aspire to standards of conduct while at Yale, and as they function in the larger management community, that will further distinguish SOM as a center of integrity and fair dealing.

Students must uphold the highest standards of professional behavior, among community members as well as with prospective employers and all other constituents of Yale. This standard includes promoting and holding others accountable to maintain a culture of active inclusion, respect, and integrity.

The SOM community’s commitment to professional and ethical excellence extends into interpersonal interactions among community members. As a community, we are committed to equitable opportunity in all aspects of student and academic life.

All forms of discrimination fall outside the bounds of expected behavior.

Conduct and expression that are protected by a university policy (e.g., the Policy on Freedom of Expression, found at https://secretary.yale.edu/report-committee-freedom-expression-yale) are not violations of the Honor Code.

Each member of the community is expected to uphold these values for all other community members.

Students must remember that they represent the school in all of their actions as they take part in activities in the university, New Haven, and the larger management community..

Procedures of the Honor Committee

Charge and Composition

The Honor Committee considers instances of academic infractions and other serious Honor Code violations by SOM students. The committee is responsible for collecting facts pertaining to such infractions and violations, making judgments about them, and determining sanctions where appropriate. In addition, the committee reviews and proposes revisions in SOM discipline policy and procedures where needed and communicates its policies and actions to the community at large.

The committee is appointed by the deputy dean for academic programs. It consists of four faculty members (one of whom shall be designated chair), up to sixteen SOM students (ordinarily three from each full-time M.B.A. class, two from each M.B.A. for Executives class, one from the M.A.M. program, and up to five from the M.M.S. programs), and the dean of students or the dean of students’s designee (who shall act as secretary to the committee and shall be nonvoting). The student members will typically serve for the duration of their enrollment at SOM or two academic years, whichever is shorter. A list of Honor Committee members is available on the SOM internal website.

Process

Suspected violations of the Honor Code should be reported to the chair of the Honor Committee or the administrative director of the relevant degree program (i.e., for cases involving students in the M.B.A., M.A.M., and M.M.S. programs, the dean of students; for cases involving students in the M.B.A. for Executives program, the assistant dean for the M.B.A. for Executives program). 

The committee will collect the facts relevant to each complaint under consideration and make judgments on whether an infraction or violation has been committed and on its seriousness to the community. Based on these judgments, the committee will apply a sanction that it deems appropriate to the offense. Failure to cooperate with the committee’s investigation, not being forthcoming to the committee, or lying to the committee are extraordinary violations of the Honor Code and may be occasion for increased sanctions or a separate charge at the discretion of the committee.

To provide for some consistency in sanctions from year by year, the committee chair shall inform the committee (ordinarily before the first case of the year is heard) of sanctions meted out for certain classes of cases in prior years. Penalties should be set based upon the severity of the infraction, rather than the impact of such penalty on the student’s personal situation.

Although deviations may be taken by the chair when appropriate to a given case, the following steps are customary:

1. The work of the committee normally begins when a member of the university community (faculty, student, or staff) brings a probable infraction to the attention of the committee chair or the relevant administrative director. The chair or the chair’s designee then meets with each student who is the subject of the complaint, informs them of the complaint, and requests information and materials pertinent to the complaint.
2. Based on the information gathered, the chair decides whether the offense, if the charge is true, is of sufficient seriousness and the evidence is sufficiently strong to warrant the attention of the committee. If the complaint is deemed to warrant the committee’s attention, the chair or the chair’s designee informs the student who is the subject of the complaint. The student is directed to review the Committee Policies and Procedures, which provide them the opportunity: (a) to appear before the committee, (b) to examine all written and electronic materials being provided to the committee as soon as possible, and ordinarily at least forty-eight hours in advance of the meeting, and (c) to submit a written statement to the committee prior to the meeting.
   
   The committee chair shall take one of the following actions when a case is brought forward:
   a. Dismiss the case for lack of evidence or insufficient seriousness
   b. Send the case to a subcommittee
   c. Send the case to the full committee
   
   The subcommittee consists of the committee chair (or another faculty member on the Honor Committee designated by the chair), one first-year full-time M.B.A. student, and one second-year full-time M.B.A. student, chosen from the Honor Committee by the chair. If the accused student is not enrolled in the full-time M.B.A. program, then whenever it is possible without delaying the scheduling of the hearing, the chair will add to the subcommittee a third student member of the Honor Committee from the student’s program. The subcommittee is empowered to take the following actions:
   a. Exoneration
   b. Warning (verbal or written)
   c. Probation
   d. Mandatory F in course (for academic infractions)
   e. Send the case to the full committee
   
   The accused student may appeal any decision from the subcommittee to the full committee. The student must make the appeal to the committee chair within five working days of the subcommittee’s decision.
   
   The full committee consists of the full-time M.B.A. students and the faculty members of the Honor Committee. If the accused student is not enrolled in the full-time M.B.A. program, then whenever it is possible without delaying the scheduling of the hearing, the chair will add to the full committee at least one student member of the Honor Committee from the student’s program. Student members of the Honor Committee who are not enrolled in the full-time M.B.A. program do not ordinarily hear cases of students not in their program. The full committee is empowered to take the following actions and may impose other sanctions of intermediate severity:
   a. Exoneration
   b. Warning (verbal or written)
   c. Probation
   d. Mandatory F in course (for academic infractions)
   e. Suspension of one or more terms + mandatory F in course
   f. Expulsion, a permanent separation from Yale SOM
   
   The appeal of the subcommittee decision to the full committee can result in a sanction more severe than the one originally imposed.
3. The chair informs the subcommittee or full committee members of the individual(s) involved in a case. Committee members are invited to excuse themselves from the case if there is a conflict of interest that makes them unable to be objective about the case. If the chair has such a conflict of interest, the chair appoints another faculty member of the Honor Committee to serve as the chair of the case. If a committee member is excused and a quorum cannot be met, the chair recommends to the deputy dean for academic programs a successor for temporary appointment to the committee for participation in the matter.
4. Prior to the hearing, the chair informs the accused student of the procedures that will be followed and the membership of the committee. Within one day after receiving that notification, the student may object that a member should be excused from the hearing by stating in writing the basis for this objection. On receipt of this objection, the chair will rule on whether the member should be recused from the proceedings and, if this is done and a quorum cannot be met, will recommend to the deputy dean for academic programs a successor for temporary appointment to the committee for participation in the matter. A decision of the chair not to recuse the challenged member will be communicated to the student, who may within one day after receiving the notice appeal the decision to the deputy dean for academic programs. The deputy dean’s decision to deny or grant the appeal will be final.
5. The committee endeavors to conduct its business in such a way as to protect the privacy of all individuals who are involved with the case. In addition, it seeks to make its judgments as promptly as is consistent with the need to establish the facts of the case and to come to judgments based on these facts.
6. At the beginning of any meeting with the subcommittee or full committee, the student will be informed that recording or transmission of video or audio is not permitted.  The student will be asked to confirm that they are not recording or transmitting the meeting. Failure to confirm will result in the student’s forfeiting the opportunity to appear before the committee.
7. The subcommittee and the full committee will seek to make decisions by consensus if possible. When consensus is impossible, a vote will be taken and the decision with majority support will be enacted. No decision shall be made without a quorum of committee members (defined as at least two faculty members and three students for the full committee and all members of the subcommittee).

8. The committee chair will inform the charged student of the committee’s decision within twenty-four hours of the decision.

9. At the time the committee informs the student of its decision, it will also inform the deputy dean for academic programs.

10. The deputy dean for academic programs will offer any student against whom an infraction or violation is found the opportunity to meet with the deputy dean as soon as the dean’s schedule may permit to raise any objections to the proceedings on the grounds of procedural irregularity or prejudice. The deputy dean will investigate the objection and may remand the matter to the committee to correct the procedural irregularity or to re-deliberate after disqualifying the member or members found to be prejudiced. A decision of the deputy dean that the proceedings were not irregular or that there is insufficient evidence of prejudice will be final.

11. The accused student can appeal the severity of the penalty, but not the findings, from the full committee to the Faculty Review Board, which consists of the deputy dean for academic programs and two faculty members who were not part of the full committee. The student must make the appeal in writing to the deputy dean within five working days of the full committee’s decision.

    General dissatisfaction with the committee’s decision does not constitute a basis of appeal. The committee chair may submit a written or oral explanation of the committee’s decision to the Faculty Review Board. The student’s written request and supporting materials will be made available to the Review Board, but the student is not permitted to attend the Review Board meeting. The Review Board’s role in the appeal is to judge the appropriateness of the punishment assessed by the committee, assuming the correctness of the committee’s finding of a violation. The appeal of the full committee decision to the Faculty Review Board can result in a sanction more severe than the one originally imposed. The decision of the Faculty Review Board is final and not subject to further appeal within the university.

12. The ex officio member of the committee (the dean of students or the dean of students' designee) helps steer the case through the process and attends all meetings of the subcommittees, the full committee, and the Faculty Review Board.

Records and Files

A penalty of expulsion will appear on a student’s transcript. Correspondence related to any disciplinary penalty will remain in the student’s internal Yale SOM file and in the files of the Honor Committee. Penalties of suspension for a full semester or longer will also appear on a student’s transcript. Upon completion of the suspension, the SOM registrar will remove the suspension notation from the transcript upon the student’s request. 

Records of committee meetings about particular cases will be kept by the dean of students, who will act as secretary to the committee. These records will be kept in a confidential file. Only the deputy dean for academic programs, the dean of students, the administrative assistant to the dean of students, and the current chair of the Honor Committee shall have access to them. The relevant academic dean and the chair will be responsible for providing committee files to the dean of students to ensure the completeness of the committee files kept in the office of the dean of students.

For each term, the secretary to the committee shall prepare a document summarizing each case in which the committee saw fit to assess any sanction. Each summary shall include a description of the offense and the sanction assessed. These summaries shall not identify the students involved and so far as possible shall avoid contextual information that would reveal or encourage speculation about the identity of individual students. Honor Committee reports will be posted to the SOM internal website and disseminated to SOM students and faculty at the end of the academic year and at the beginning of the fall and spring terms.