Cambrian College, has found itself, in the space of less than three years, involved in yet another lawsuit. 

Creative eLearning Design (CeD) alleges the College in conflict with their statements to CeD had included a course program within their strategic direction, which in latter part of 2011 and extending through the first half of 2012 was discussed and developed between CeD and Cambrian.  Cambrian’s President, Sylvia Barnard, encouraged information sharing on a particular program concept that CeD had developed, through a proposed partnership agreement, then; months later told CeD the college had decided not to pursue that direction of learning opportunities for students. 

The CeD president said her company would never have known of the real intent of the information sharing had it not been an ad placed in November 2012, looking to replace the retiring president. What transpired after that can best be described as content for a ‘based on real life’ movie.  You know the kind I mean, where the little guy stumbles across seemingly insignificant information and has to struggle with the decision to walk away or take on the big guy. 

While conducting research into the strategic direction developed for submission to the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities and the board of governors of the college and created by the out-going president, CeD stumbled on the something very disconcerting.  There, in black and white was the very project that had been extensively discussed within the previous year and signed off by the President of the College, Sylvia Barnard. 

CeD contacted the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities and was informed that dealing with a complaint against the president is the responsibility of the board of governors and was instructed to get the complaint before the board of governors for the college. CeD contacted the chair of the board of governors, requesting a meeting to present the case of complaint against the then president.  This proved a fruitless exercise.  The chair of the board, after reviewing the information passed CeD off onto the president, citing this as an operational issue.  Since the complaint dealt with the president, the actions of the board were not in keeping with creating an amicable solution. 

There was little left to do, except seek legal advice. And so, now, the college must defend an action taken over what could be, at the very least, poor choices.  

The ramifications for an organization, making poor choices, can spell disaster; especially when those choices are made in a setting that stresses transparency, accountability and adherence to a strict moral code.  For these types of organizations, the results could be devastating to the public confidence and ultimately the survival of the organization!