Unlock document.
This document is partially blurred.
Unlock all pages and 1 million more documents.
Get Access
CASE 5
EARLY WARNING OR FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY? CONCUSSION RISK AND THE CASE
OF THE IMPACT SENSING FOOTBALL CHINSTRAP
5-1
CASE AUTHORS TEACHING NOTE
Clifton D. Petty (Drury
University) Michael R.
Shirley (Drury University)
Critical Incident
Overview
This critical incident describes a product controversy faced by Battle
Sports Science, LLC, a company established in 2009 to design and market
products aimed at improving the safety of young athletes. The company
developed an Impact Sensing football chinstrap with a light that
changed from green to yellow or red when it detected a possible head
injury. On October 5, 2011, National Public Radio (NPR) aired a report
which raised questions about the product, including an interview with a
biomechanics researcher (Dave Halstead) who flatly refuted the claim
This incident is best suited for use in Business Law, Business and
Society, Marketing, or Corporate Policy or Ethics courses at the
undergraduate level.
Research Methods
This critical incident was written based on secondary sources—including
Learning
Objectives
The learning objectives for this critical incident are for students to:
1. Analyze a dilemma involving the marketing of a controversial
product, one with the potential to reduce concussions risks, but
one that is also challenged by experts in the field of
CASE 5
EARLY WARNING OR FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY? CONCUSSION RISK AND THE CASE
OF THE IMPACT SENSING FOOTBALL CHINSTRAP
5-2
Sensing product.
Questions
1. The Impact Sensing chinstrap was developed to help players and
coaches recognize potential head injuries. How serious is the
2. Battle Sports Science, LLC is marketing a product for its potential
to reduce the number and severity of concussion injuries in football.
Answers to
Questions
1. The Impact Sensing chinstrap was developed to help players and
coaches recognize potential head injuries. How serious is the concussion
problem in football, and is the Impact Sensing chinstrap a viable
product in terms of addressing this problem?
Students should recognize that concussions are a serious health risk
for young football players. Instructors may wish students to do some
basic research on the problem of concussions in football—the issue is
receiving widespread attention.
CASE 5
EARLY WARNING OR FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY? CONCUSSION RISK AND THE CASE
OF THE IMPACT SENSING FOOTBALL CHINSTRAP
desire of aggressive players to make the “big hit”—often in the form of
spearing (leading with the helmet). High school players often take
their cues from college and pro athletes, and many elite athletes gain
a reputation by delivering punishing hits to rival players.
In a typical college class, it is likely that at least one or two
students have been competitive football players at some point, or are
currently playing college football. Many other students are likely to
Students should be encouraged to respect different views on the nature
of football and the concussion controversy, and to consider them part of
the range of perspective that a company such as Battle Sports Sciences
LLC must consider in this market. Stakeholder voices in the football
equipment market are likely to be as vocal as fans of the game and to
With respect to the question of whether the Impact Sensing chinstrap is
a viable product in terms of addressing this problem, students
encounter an interesting product responsibility dilemma. On the one
hand, concussions are a serious and pervasive problem in high school
football. Beyond the relatively few cases of serious injury,
Battle Sports Sciences must consider how its Impact Sensing product is
likely to be used by players and coaches. Certainly, the company should
provide clear and complete instructions, but some problems are
CASE 5
EARLY WARNING OR FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY? CONCUSSION RISK AND THE CASE
OF THE IMPACT SENSING FOOTBALL CHINSTRAP
5-4
foreseeable. The presence of technology often causes individuals to
become dependent on the technology vs. perception and judgment. Coaches
may focus on the chinstrap’s light, for example, vs. the player’s
demeanor and appearance (i.e., dilated pupils, dazed appearance). It is
possible that the critics are correct about the device under-detecting
whiplash type injuries (rotational events), and Battle Sports Sciences
will only know that this is the case when their product is in widespread
2. Battle Sports Science, LLC is marketing a product for its potential to
reduce the number and severity of concussion injuries in football.
Critics such as Dave Halstead are arguing that such claims are
misleading, if not patently false. How are stakeholders likely to
respond to these arguments? What is your initial response?
At least five major stakeholders dominate Battle Sports Science’s
competitive environment. These include young players, their parents,
coaches and athletic departments, school administration and
chinstrap business. Who would be impacted by the sale of the product,
and how? Who would be impacted if the product were withdrawn from the
market, and how?
The ultimate aim of this CI is for students to recommend a decision on
CASE 5
EARLY WARNING OR FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY? CONCUSSION RISK AND THE CASE
OF THE IMPACT SENSING FOOTBALL CHINSTRAP
5-5
the following question: Should Battle Science move forward with
marketing and aggressive rollout of its chinstrap product, or should
the company take a few steps back toward a more conservative path of
additional testing or limited product launch (i.e., pilot test)? As
students work toward this discussion, they will likely use one of two
It is important to note that using the normative Stakeholder
perspective does not necessarily lead to a conclusion that Battle
Science should go slow and do more testing. A student might reasonably
argue that even a slightly greater probability of identifying a
concussion might lead young athletes to argue that they have a positive
interest in access to the Impact Sensing Chinstrap. The delay of
testing and slower rollout might mean that some at-risk athletes suffer
knock on traumas due to undiagnosed concussions.
Using a stakeholder approach, students should recognize a handful of
CASE 5
EARLY WARNING OR FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY? CONCUSSION RISK AND THE CASE
OF THE IMPACT SENSING FOOTBALL CHINSTRAP
5-6
major stakeholders in this case. For example, some communities are
deeply committed to high school football in general, and to their home
team in particular. The pressures on school administration and coaching
staff, for example, may be quite intense. Certainly, community members
do not want to see young players injured, and may turn on a coach who
seems insensitive to injury. But fans may also press hard for winning
seasons, championships, and recognition for the team and its players.
Parents are a volatile stakeholder group in relation to sports and
injury risk. Most parents are safety conscious and want their child to
be reasonably safe on the football field.
They realize that nearly every competitive player will suffer minor to
moderate injuries from time to time, but do not want their child to face
a higher risk for serious injury. From this perspective, many parents
would monitor safety and coaching practices, and notify school officials
if they believe they spot shortcomings. On the other hand, parents may
become caught up in the competitive spirit and in their desire for
athletic success for the team or their child. Once the game begins, many
parents become fans. They want the team to win, and they may be willing
to push the boundaries of safety at times for the sake of a big win.
Parents sometimes pressure coaches toward more aggressive play, and even
encourage a coach to play their child to play hurt or return to the
field too quickly after a recent injury—including what some parents
refer to as a “mild” concussion.
Players want to perform well, win games, and enjoy the camaraderie of
the team and (fan) community. High school football players are
teenagers, and as a group, they tend to minimize safety risks. Talented
or hopeful players are motivated to earn a spot at the next level,
either a football scholarship or the opportunity to make a college team.
Competition for the best scholarships is intense, and players and their
coaches are highly motivated to present the athlete in the best possible
light. This may mean covering up or minimizing injuries and encouraging
players to play as often as possible. Average players also want to play
CASE 5
EARLY WARNING OR FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY? CONCUSSION RISK AND THE CASE
OF THE IMPACT SENSING FOOTBALL CHINSTRAP
a significant role on their team and are often competing with other
players for a starting position on the team roster, and for maximizing
their playing time. Such motivations, together with a competitive
spirit, may lead players to hide or minimize injuries. Unlike fractures
or sprains, concussion symptoms are often more subtle and easier to mask
(i.e., no limp). No player wants to suffer a devastating brain injury,
but a combination of youthful confidence and various competitive
motivations may lead players to take unsafe chances with concussion
risks.
3. What factors would play a central role in determining product
liability in a court of law if a young player suffers a severe
concussion while wearing an Impact Sensing chinstrap?
Product liability continues to be an important area in business
management. This legal concept refers to the liability of manufacturers
and sellers when product defects cause consumers, or in this case,
Key factors will include what representations are offered as to the
functions and performance of the Impact Sensing football chinstrap.
Warranties can be both express and implied, speaking of quality,
merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. Such warranties
CASE 5
EARLY WARNING OR FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY? CONCUSSION RISK AND THE CASE
OF THE IMPACT SENSING FOOTBALL CHINSTRAP
5-8
can also be disclaimed, though there are specific requirements to
accomplish such a result. Questions as to the exercise of “due care”
by Battle Sports Science will be explored to determine if negligence
is applicable. While not likely, misrepresentation could also be a
factor in the case. To be actionable, the misrepresentation must be
of a material fact, must be made with the intention to deceive and be
relied upon by the injured party.
CASE 5
EARLY WARNING OR FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY? CONCUSSION RISK AND THE CASE
OF THE IMPACT SENSING FOOTBALL CHINSTRAP
General Discussion and Pedagogical
Notes
This incident is focused on the issues of product responsibility and
product liability in a dynamic and controversial context. Battle Sports
Science LLC is targeting the young athlete participating in sports such
as football, baseball, and hockey; which are characterized by moderate
to high risks of head injury. Concussions are on the rise among high
school athletes, and medical experts are raising concerns about the
longer-term health impact of repeated blows to the head. This critical
incident is focused on the company’s football product, an Impact
Sensing chinstrap. Football is by far the largest market for the
company, with over one million participants at the high school level.
The incident might best be used along with some study of the fundamental
issues of product liability and product responsibility. One of the
authors teaches a Corporate Policy & Ethics course and would place the
incident to follow a few basic readings on Product Responsibility or
Liability, such as “A Primer on Product Liability,” in Marianne
Jennings’ text Business Ethics: Cases and Selected Readings, 7th
edition. Students might also be assigned some light research on the
topic of concussions in football. This is a hot button issue at all
levels of the sport—professional (NFL), college (NCAA), and high school
(NFHS). Finding information on the concussion problem is quite easy, and
Chiefly it is important that visiting experts are focused on offering a
CASE 5
EARLY WARNING OR FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY? CONCUSSION RISK AND THE CASE
OF THE IMPACT SENSING FOOTBALL CHINSTRAP
5-10
catalyst for student discussion and engagement, versus a focus on
debating one another in a venue where students happen to be (passively)
in attendance.
While to our knowledge no lawsuit has been filed against Battle Sports
Science, the company is injecting its product into a context that is
increasingly litigious. Concussions are often devastating injuries, and
in the worst-case scenarios involve severe brain-related disability or
theory, business & society).
The incident is relatively short, and many students will arrive with
some familiarity of the issue—and likely some opinion as well. It is
important to give all students an opportunity to do some reading and
study ahead of class discussion, in order to avoid a situation of uneven
knowledge and confidence among students in the class. This incident
lends itself to group discussion—particularly by stakeholder
perspectives (coaches, players, parents, etc.), or to debate regarding
the best course of action for Battle Sports Science to pursue with
This teaching note was prepared by the authors and is intended to be
used as a basis for class discussion. The views presented here are those
of the authors based on their professional judgment and do not
CASE 5
EARLY WARNING OR FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY? CONCUSSION RISK AND THE
CASE OF THE IMPACT SENSING FOOTBALL CHINSTRAP
References
Cross, Frank and Miller, Roger Leroy (2012). The Legal Environment of
Business, Text and Cases – Ethical, Regulatory, Global, and Corporate
Issues, 8th Edition.
Donaldson, Thomas & Preston, Lee E. (1995). The Stakeholder Theory
of the Corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications, Academy
of Management Review, volume 20(1), January.
