Student Who Was Missing-in-Action Custom Case Solution & Analysis

1. Evidence Brief (Case Researcher)

Financial Metrics

• Program tuition: $48,000 (standard executive MBA fee) (Source: Para 2)
• Tuition payment structure: 50% due at matriculation, 50% at start of year two (Source: Para 3)
• Opportunity cost of student vacancy: $24,000 (lost second-year tuition) (Source: Para 5)

Operational Facts

• Setting: Executive MBA program, high-touch, cohort-based model (Source: Para 1)
• Attendance policy: Mandatory attendance for core modules; 80% threshold for graduation (Source: Para 4)
• Student status: Subject (Mr. Aris) has missed three consecutive weekend intensives (Source: Para 6)
• Communication: Subject is non-responsive to emails, phone calls, and formal warnings (Source: Para 8)

Stakeholder Positions

• Program Director: Concerned with policy enforcement and academic integrity (Source: Para 9)
• Faculty: Frustrated by project group disruption caused by missing member (Source: Para 11)
• Subject (Aris): Silent; no explanation provided for absence (Source: Para 12)

Information Gaps

• Employment status of subject (potential job loss or relocation).
• Medical or emergency status (legal/privacy constraints on information sharing).
• Contractual language regarding involuntary withdrawal (refund liabilities).

2. Strategic Analysis (Strategic Analyst)

Core Strategic Question

How should the program balance rigid policy enforcement against the risk of reputational damage or potential liability regarding student welfare?

Structural Analysis

• Stakeholder Alignment: The current inaction alienates other students who carry the workload of the missing member.
• Policy Integrity: Exceptions granted without cause undermine the cohort model.

Strategic Options

• Option 1: Immediate Dismissal. Enforce the 80% attendance policy. Trade-off: Clean adherence to rules; risks potential litigation if the student has a protected medical condition.
• Option 2: Final Notice and Mandatory Meeting. Send a formal notice via certified mail requiring a response within 48 hours. Trade-off: Provides due process; delays resolution by one week.
• Option 3: Administrative Leave. Place the student on forced leave, freezing tuition payments. Trade-off: Mitigates academic disruption; creates financial complexity regarding future re-entry.

Preliminary Recommendation

Option 2. The institution must demonstrate that it attempted to contact the student before taking punitive action to protect the school from liability.

3. Implementation Roadmap (Implementation Specialist)

Critical Path

1. Day 1: Legal counsel review of enrollment contract regarding termination clauses.
2. Day 2: Dispatch formal notification via certified mail/courier to last known address.
3. Day 3: Notify cohort of procedural status without disclosing private student details.

Key Constraints

• Legal/FERPA: Privacy laws limit what can be communicated about the student to the cohort.
• Contractual Binding: The university is bound by the student handbook; arbitrary dismissal invites lawsuits.

Risk-Adjusted Implementation

If no response is received by Day 7, initiate formal withdrawal. If the student responds with a medical justification, transition to an immediate leave of absence status to bypass the attendance policy conflict.

4. Executive Review and BLUF (Executive Critic)

BLUF

The program is prioritizing process over closure. The failure to reach the student is an operational failure, not an academic one. Terminate the student’s enrollment if no contact is established within 72 hours of the final notice. The school is currently subsidizing a ghost student at the expense of the paying cohort. The risk of inaction—specifically the erosion of program standards—outweighs the risk of a potential grievance from an AWOL student.

Dangerous Assumption

The assumption that the student is still alive or capable of responding. The silence could indicate a medical emergency or fatality, which changes the institutional liability profile significantly.

Unaddressed Risks

• Reputational Risk: If the student has suffered a tragedy, the school risks appearing callous by sending automated disciplinary emails.
• Cohort Attrition: Continued disruption will lead to dissatisfaction among students paying full tuition for a functional group experience.

Unconsidered Alternative

Engage a third-party wellness check or private investigator to confirm the student’s physical status before proceeding with academic dismissal. This shifts the focus from tuition to duty of care.

VERDICT: APPROVED FOR LEADERSHIP REVIEW