UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. –– Two members of the Penn State Smeal College of Business Ethics Case Team collaborated to sweep both categories of the 23rd Annual Undergraduate Collegiate Ethics Case Competition (CECC) held in October at the University of Arizona in Tucson, Arizona.
Brenna Boer, a third-year student majoring in marketing and minoring in information systems management, and Palmer Moore, a fourth-year finance student minoring in international business and information systems management, won both the Stephanie Chance “Bright Line” Essay Contest, as well as the presentation portion of the competition.
Boer and Moore each received $800 in scholarship money, as well as a sampling of Eller memorabilia. Moore had previously represented Penn State Smeal at the CECC. Boer competed in the CECC for the first time. Smeal won for the first time.
The second- through fifth-place teams represented the University of Texas at Austin, the University of Massachusetts – Amherst, Indiana University and Washington University in St. Louis, respectively.
The CECC, presented by the Center for Leadership Ethics in Arizona’s Eller College of Management, serves as a platform for students to engage in rigorous ethical analysis within a competitive setting. Participants are presented with complex, real-world business ethics cases that require them to apply reasoning, ethical theories and practical considerations to navigate ethical dilemmas effectively.
The 2025 CECC case was titled “Norfolk Southern: Derailed in Pursuit of Profits?” The case detailed the 2023 train derailment in East Palestine, Ohio, that spilled toxic chemicals into the community. Teams were asked to act as a consulting firm speaking to the Association of American Railroads (AAR) about the incident’s safety, regulatory and business concerns and how the industry should proceed. Teams were tasked with examining the overarching systematic issues in the freight rail industry that led to safety being compromised.
The CECC consists of two rounds of competition held over the course of two days. Round one includes two components. First, each team competes in a question-and-answer session about the case and any research the judges deem should have been conducted.
The teams are asked eight questions, which alternate between team members. Competitors are given one minute to answer each question. This accounts for 50% of a team’s score in the first round.
The second component of round one requires each team to present a 20-minute PowerPoint presentation on their recommendation to the judges, who were acting as the AAR, followed by a short Q&A.
The field of 20 teams is then whittled down to five teams, one from each bracket, that advance to the second round.
Teams are then given 40 minutes to shorten their original presentation to 10 minutes, using only the slides from their original presentation. They then present their final presentation to all judges in a large auditorium and are given a minute to answer one question.