As a criminal justice expert you are asked by a local corporation to discuss issues of workplace violence. Given the strong ties the CEO has with the college, you have no choice but to help. The corporation uses a strong performance management style of leadership. You are asked to make a plan and give suggestions on how to reduce workplace violence. Additionally, the corporation has a major morale problem with workers leaving the company in large numbers. Knowing the organizational culture and ethos, how do you handle this? What will you say?

There is an old, oft-quoted proverb the origins of which are in dispute: a fish rots from the head down. What this means is that if the leadership of an organization is corrupt, incompetent, venal, or all of the above, then the rest of the organization will similarly become corrupt, incompetent, venal, etc. It's the trickle-down theory of management. If a corporation is suffering from workplace violence, then there is a very serious deficiency at the top of that organizational hierarchy, and it would be the responsibility of any outside consultant brought in to objectively report on the seriousness of the situation. It wouldn't need to be a criminal justice expert making that determination; it could be a human resources expert, an expert on management theory, or a psychologist. In fact, it would be unlikely that a criminal justice expert would be consulted in a such a case. Criminal justice experts would be able to provide an informed opinion given their emphasis on identifying the causes of crime and on addressing those causes, but consulting them would suggest that the underlying problem at the company in question is criminal in nature rather than the product of a corporate culture that facilitates or creates the conditions for conflict among employees.
Depending upon the type of corporation involved, there might be a deliberate policy on the part of management to facilitate a competitive environment among employees. Guarantees of financial rewards or bonuses for the most productive workers, for example, can be used to incentivize employees. This need not, however, facilitate a rise in violence in the workplace. The scenario specifies that "the corporation has a major morale problem with workers leaving the company in large numbers." An operating environment, for instance, in a factory, characterized by low morale and the departure of employees--and, it is usually the better, more productive employees who depart under these circumstances--would be the same kind of environment that would foster or result in violent confrontations. All of this could be the result of rumors of an impending plant closure or lay-offs that, if true, would create a more tense atmosphere among workers. Absent that type of catastrophic development, the causes of workplace violence would have to be identified and addressed.
To reiterate, if morale among employees is low, with productive workers departing for other companies, including competitors of the business from which they are leaving, and if violence, which should never be tolerated, is occurring, the problem has to be at the management level. An expert called in to examine the situation would have to interview workers and managers, individually and in confidence, and observe the operations of the corporation first-hand. It is highly probable that, if confidentiality is secured, employees and management-level officials would provide important clues as to the causes of the violence and low morale. Those clues would then have to be included in the report or presentation produced by the consultant for the benefit of the chief executive and chief operating officers. Someone, at some level of the organizational hierarchy, has enabled the deterioration of work conditions, and the top-ranking officers have to be made aware of these problems.
It is suggested in the scenario that the expert is compelled to investigate and report due in no small part to the chief executive officer of the affected corporation's relationship to the university or institution where the expert is employed. The existence of such a relationship should not be a deterrent to the expert's performing his or her mission professionally and objectively. In the event the president of the university warns or strongly suggests to the expert that the corporation's CEO and/or COO expect to be exonerated from any responsibility for the conditions at their business, the expert is in a difficult position. The fact, however, per the scenario provided, that the CEO is the one pushing for the outside assessment should suggest that this corporate official wants an objective and thorough examination carried out and is open to the conclusions reached by the expert. Alternatively, the CEO could be hoping to use the outside assessment as a fig-leaf to conceal the extent of his or her responsibility for the deterioration of conditions at the corporation. Is there a conflict of interest involved? Possibly, but an expert, especially a tenured one, has an ethical responsibility to act professionally.
A plan on how to reduce workplace violence and reverse the decline in morale would have to identify the causes of the violence and decline in morale. Only then could a plan be credible and effective. That plan should hold accountable all individuals and departments deemed responsible for the situation, and recommendations should be included on how best to improve the situation. Those recommendations might include replacing certain individuals or changing the management structure and culture. They might include suggestions on how best to retain key employees who are leaving or threatening to leave, such as through promotions, bonuses, improved working conditions, or any other area identified as a weakness in the expert's report. Strong warnings against engaging in workplace violence, including through threats of criminal proceedings, would be a sine qua non, as would psychological evaluations to determine whether certain jobs or responsibilities are more prone to extreme stress. 
Absent better information on the nature of the problem at the hypothetical corporation, more concrete recommendations are difficult to conceptualize. The above, however, should help you develop some form of plan for how to respond to the scenario provided.