It is now time to review a case study that focuses on ethical behavior.
Access the Open APM’s ethics case study resource provided below to read a scenario concerning ethics in projects.
Can you pinpoint a few instances of professional conduct highlighted in this scenario? Reflect on the skills employed to integrate ethical considerations into the decisions made by the individuals involved. Can you recognize them?
Share your responses in the discussion section below.
After posting your comment, proceed to the next step, where you will find some potential answers provided by APM for these questions.
© The Open University
Downloads
This case study highlights the importance of ethical awareness and leadership in project management. Karen’s diligence in reviewing the report and her willingness to speak up about her concerns demonstrate essential skills for any project manager. I also appreciate how the scenario illustrates the value of collaboration and resourcefulness in finding solutions to complex ethical dilemmas.
Also the scenario emphasizes the significance of cultural competence in project management. William’s perspective and approach differ from John’s, and their collaboration requires bridging those cultural and professional differences. The case study shows how essential skills like effective communication, adaptability, and ethical awareness can help project managers navigate complex cultural contexts.
In this case study, I noticed some potential issues with professional conduct. There’s a lack of transparency around how the engagement program was conducted, with William seemingly taking the lead without much input from John or Karen. The report’s overly positive results raise ethical concerns about data manipulation or falsification. Additionally, William’s close relationship with the research firm and government agency presents a clear conflict of interest.
On the positive side, Karen demonstrated critical thinking skills by questioning the report’s findings, while John showed courage by listening to her concerns and working together to find a solution. Both demonstrated integrity by refusing to compromise on their ethical principles.
Overall, the important ethical themes here are honesty, transparency, objectivity, and integrity, which are crucial in international project management.
In this scenario, some ethical principles were not followed properly, but the individual was able to uphold professional ethics to address them.
The main issue was poor communication, as John was not informed in advance that his task had already been completed by someone else.
Williams criticized John for not having a good understanding of the ethical rules and regulations of the company, which he claimed was the reason behind his actions against John.
Karen displayed biased behaviour that was not in line with ethical practices. She was initially concerned about John’s feelings, but the next day she defied company ethics by asking employees to work extra hours, weekends, and at inconvenient times to complete the project.
The following are the professional ethics
1. Rules of Conduct
2. Values
3. Morals Principles
4. Code of Conduct
The case study brought into fold the long term risk pose to an organization if her employees do not act in an “Ethical” manner and also the important of communication (informal spoken for example), collaboration. team work and innovation can also be seen. Below are the highlights
I. Williams was more concern about getting the job done without considering the organization ethics by accepting opinion research done by others as their own project under the guise of “”that’s how things are done in their client country”” , this its not ethical
2. John despite his initial concerns and reservation about the ethical risk poses by Williams opinion, was not able to communicate his concerns effectively to William
3. Karen was able to understand the long term risk/dangers pose if the company does not follow ethics and was able to use humour (informal spoken communication) to convince John and also shows innovation and collaboration in solving the ethical change poses by the project together
There were instances of unprofessional conduct I observed here;
Williams didn’t see a constructive research forum as ideal but was better off getting the information from the opinion research firm which is not helpful for any project because this singular act has kicked off the aim of every project which is to come together and deliberate on issues as a team and profound solutions and feedback just as team players. He (Williams) was centred on the fact that what they did was to “Deliver” and how it is achieved doesn’t really matter, which was the reason he felt the result was a good fit and would be appreciated by John not regarding the fact that due process was not followed here.
Karen felt the result was too good and needs to be faulted owing that the project in view was a large one and and they needed a real life situation but at the same time, she doesn’t know how to pass this information directly to her colleague so it doesn’t sound like a direct criticism. Here, I felt she missed the fact that it is the task that is to be criticized and not the person, so holding that back and going ahead with the project seems unprofessional as this might pose a challenge at the long run.
John wanted really appreciated the warmth welcome and reception but became withdrawn on learning that the task has been carried out and results gotten, this makes the team work here faulty because as a team, everyone’s input meant a whole lot which would make them draw a very nice feedback. John here wanted a carefully organized forum where he could get different points of view as to the larger task ahead.
I have noticed from the case study that the team had much of a experience members that could easily deliver the project to its successful stage. However, there are many factors that affected the process:
The team lacks sufficient collaboration and a member of the team would feel that he has all it takes to do the job alone.
The level of communication was very poor and has no primary help on the project.
The decision of the team would affects XYZ and even employ more risks o the company.
LACK OF COMMUNICATION AND COLLABORATION
This was a major problem encountered by the team. John and Williams did not communicate well as everyone had their own point of view as to what it should be. Williams thought that John will be ok will the report he will make. John thought that everything was ok the way it was going even though it was risky for Williams to make the analysis report alone, he was ok with it. Karen did not want to be seen as a critic. She didn’t want to say anything as she felt it would affect her probation seeing that she just started out with the company.
COMMUNICATION resolved it when John and Karen talked about it and better ideas came to the table on how to resolve the issue and when it was applied. It resolved it.
Collaboration and communication was not enough between will John and Williams for this project however quality communication will help solve the problem. John did not get enough Information about the project. Karen being afraid to criticize the project that seem not good as new member of the company may delay or stall the project.
Ifeoma
LOOPHOLES IDENTIFIED WITHIN THE PROJECT
LACK OF COMMUNICATION AND COLLABORATION:
There wasn’t a clear communication method between John and William to ensure that strategic decisions were to be taken with the consent of all stakeholders involved in the process – in this case John and William. This led to William making all the decisions based on the assumptions of what John would like.
Conflicts between team members as a result of miscommunication and inherently potentially disrupt or derail the success of a project.
TO RESOLVE THIS, EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION WAS DEPLOYED:
Karen deflected a possible situation of blame game by expressing her observation with tact and infusing humour into her conversation with John which led him to opening up to her and expressing his dissatisfaction with the report.
This helped to maintain the team spirit collaboration between them while they sought risk management intervention from external sources to the current situation.
COMPROMISE OF INTEGRITY AS A VALUE: Even though John knew that it wasn’t okay to have let William singlehandedly run the analysis of the engagement feedback and report, he verbally didn’t object but went along with it, despite knowing that there was a possibility of the data given compromising the project outcome in its entirety.
TO RESOLVE THIS, TRANSPARENCY WAS DEPLOYED HERE AS A VALUE:
Karen had a hunch about the report not being totally right and rather than keeping it to herself and letting the project derail, brought it to the attention of her team member for better investigation and resolution.
LACK OF FORESIGHT & RISK MANAGEMENT:
Risk management is the ability to foresee and identify possible scenarios of issues that can arise within a project and make contigency plans for important phases within any project. It’s important because most project don’t go as planned because of unexpected variables that can cause unlimited range of issues. John wasn’t able to mitigate the risk of making contigency plans to resolve the problem with the engagement report by him.
TO RESOLVE THIS:
Karen knew that the disruption of the project would hamper the firm’s chances of future collaboration with other clients as the reputation of the firm would be negatively impacted and sought for ways by thinking of ideas outside to mitigate inherent risks while solving the current problem they were facing in the project. This effectively resolved the current problem they faced while discovering and mitigating future risks that were bound to arise within the next stage of the project.
There was the problem of :
1. ‘scope creep’ which is failure to have an agreement or scope of work agreed upon before work starts.
2. Work with team members was absent as lines of communication were none existent.
3. There was no collaboration
Skills employed were:
1. Communication
2. Negotiation and
3. Time management