Golfer wrote: ↑Mon Oct 29, 2018 8:49 pm
I'd be interested in knowing those organisations who have issued such a formal institutional apology.
Golfer, there are multiple examples from the private, public and non-governmental sectors: UK Government (Guildford Four, Hillsborough, Turing, Windrush etc. etc.), Oxfam/Save the Children (sexual harassment and abuse), Volkswagen (emissions testing), Facebook (several occasions), Apple (2015 - for offering free streaming but without paying performers), Airbnb (2015 - racial profiling), the Catholic Church (sexual abuse) and the list goes on and on.
In fact, I think it is safe to say that the good practice organizational and corporate norm nowadays is to get out quick with an apology (see this Harvard Business Review blog if you are still not sure:
https://hbr.org/2015/09/the-organizational-apology) .
Perhaps the issue is whether it is right or understandable for an organisation to hold back from issuing an apology for fear that it might trigger compensation claims (which implies that there is a basis for the claims). Or is it just a question of an organisation not believing that any mistake was made or refusing to accept any direct responsibility?
In the case of CH, very clear requests for an apology have been made, by both innocent victims of the horrendous abuse that took place and (some members of) the broader school community. At this point, it may not be clear which of the two explanations is driving the continuing silence.