Which option is NOT typically considered an organizational-level strategy to prevent sport deviance?

• A. Clear codes of conduct, ethics training, reporting channels, independent oversight, and strong leadership.
• B. Implementing robust ethics education and reporting channels.
• C. Reducing emphasis on ethics training and oversight.
• D. Strong leadership and clear codes of conduct.

Answer: (C)

Prevention at the organizational level hinges on building a system that makes ethical behavior the normal course of action and makes it easy to raise and address any concerns. Clear codes of conduct set the expectations for everyone involved. Ethics training helps people understand those expectations and why they matter in practice. Reporting channels enable athletes, staff, and others to flag potential issues safely. Independent oversight keeps the processes fair and credible, ensuring concerns are taken seriously and acted on. Strong leadership models and enforces these standards, creating a culture where integrity is valued and deviation is discouraged.

Recognizing these elements, implementing robust ethics education and clear reporting channels fits squarely into an organizational approach to prevention. In contrast, reducing emphasis on ethics training and oversight undermines the very infrastructure that supports accountability and proactive deterrence of deviance. It signals that ethics aren’t a priority and weakens protection against harmful behavior. That’s why lowering emphasis on training and oversight is not a typical or effective organizational strategy for preventing sport deviance. The other options describe components that form a cohesive prevention system.