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
Adebayo Funke Blessing
7:52pm
Team 1
With the best of my knowledge,John did right by collaborating with Karen and they both went over the problem and resulted into a good solution.
The unethical practices are lack of communication, poor leadership skills by the Project manager, No team work, selfish interest, lack of stakeholders engagement, not upholding the organisation ethics by the team member
This can be solved by
Good leadership skills by the PM
There should be proper communication and team work among the team members
The organizational values should be uphold all the time.
There should be proper critical thinking and problem solving skills by the PM
1. Can you identify a couple of issues of professional conduct featured in the scenario in APM ethics case study 1-3?
a. Conflict of Interest / Lack of Objectivity
• Issue: The project manager fails to maintain impartiality—perhaps favoring a personal acquaintance, vendor, or internal stakeholder—even when that bias affects decision-making.
• Why it matters: Professional standards require transparency and fairness. Favoring someone due to personal ties undermines trust and distorts project decisions. It may result in suboptimal vendor selection, inflated costs, or compromised quality.
b. Breach of Confidentiality / Improper Use of Information
• Issue: Sensitive data (e.g. proprietary company strategy, budget details, or confidential stakeholder information) is shared without authorization—whether with external parties, other teams, or in public settings.
• Why it matters: Ethical frameworks emphasize protecting stakeholder information. Unauthorized disclosure can damage the company’s competitive position, harm stakeholders, or even violate legal/regulatory obligations.
2. Reflect on what skills were used to help bring ethics into decisions used by the people involved in this scenario
a. Ethical Awareness and Judgement
• What it is: The ability to recognize when a situation has ethical implications, and to assess those implications carefully.
• How it helped: The individuals who addressed the ethical issues demonstrated an awareness that certain actions—such as favoritism or misuse of information—could lead to unethical outcomes. They paused to question whether decisions aligned with professional standards and organizational values.
b. Critical Thinking and Problem Solving
• What it is: The skill of analyzing situations objectively, weighing consequences, and evaluating multiple courses of action.
• How it helped: Ethical decisions were guided by a logical review of the risks, benefits, and long-term impacts—not just short-term convenience or personal gain. For example, someone may have considered the reputational risk of ignoring a conflict of interest.
c. Communication and Influence
• What it is: The ability to express ethical concerns clearly and respectfully while influencing others to consider integrity in decisions.
• How it helped: Some individuals likely had to speak up or push back against unethical suggestions. They used tactful communication to raise concerns or suggest more ethical alternatives—helping steer the team in a better direction.
d. Courage and Integrity
• What it is: Standing by ethical principles, even when it’s uncomfortable or unpopular.
• How it helped: Ethical action often requires courage—especially when it involves challenging a superior or whistleblowing. The scenario likely involved someone taking a principled stand, upholding the public interest and professional standards.
e. Stakeholder Awareness / Empathy
• What it is: Understanding how decisions affect different stakeholders and striving for fairness.
• How it helped: Decision-makers considered the broader impact of their actions—not just on the organization, but also on clients, suppliers, and colleagues—thus promoting fairness and responsible outcomes.
The core issues there was lack of quality communication and sincere transparency.
Issues of Professional Conduct Identified
1. Conflict of Interest
The project manager’s dual role as both the client representative and the project lead created a conflict of interest. This compromised objectivity and could lead to biased decision-making.
2. Lack of Transparency
Key stakeholders were not adequately informed about project changes, leading to mistrust and potential project risks.
3. Inadequate Stakeholder Engagement
Failure to involve all relevant stakeholders in decision-making processes resulted in overlooked concerns and reduced project buy-in.
4. Neglect of Professional Responsibility
The project team’s disregard for est
1. Critical Thinking
Team members who questioned the dual roles and sought clarification demonstrated critical thinking, essential for ethical decision-making.
2. Effective Communication
Open discussions about ethical concerns facilitated transparency and collective problem-solving.
3. Stakeholder Analysis
Identifying and understanding the interests of all stakeholders helped in addressing potential conflicts and aligning project goals.
4. Adherence to Ethical Frameworks
Applying established ethical guidelines ensured decisions were made with integrity and professionalism.
Discussion Reflection
This case underscores the importance of maintaining professional boundaries and upholding ethical standards in project management. Recognizing and addressing conflicts of interest, ensuring transparent communication, and engaging all stakeholders are vital for project success. By employing critical thinking and adhering to ethical frameworks, professionals can navigate complex situations and make decisions that uphold the integrity of the project and the organization.
For me
Lack of communication coherence and organisation is trying to impede their projects
From my perspective, a lack of communication and transparency among the three project managers nearly impacted the project’s success.
At the beginning there was a lack of transparency and communication from Williams end, Which made John to have a bit of doubt and confusion but then the clear communication between Karen and John allowed then do a proper research thereby solving the issue that was on hand and that is how Teamwork is done.
ChatGPT
You said:
APM_ethics_case_study_1-3.pdf
PDF
Your Role is to Open APM’s ethics case study resource below to read a scenario about ethics in projects. Can you identify a couple of issues of professional conduct featured in this scenario? Reflect on what skills were used to help bring ethics into decisions used by the people involved in this scenario. Can you identify them?
ChatGPT said:
Here’s a breakdown of the ethical and professional conduct issues in the APM case study, along with the skills used to bring ethics into the decisions:
1. Issues of Professional Conduct
a. Lack of Transparency and Due Diligence
William claimed that the stakeholder engagement had already been conducted and results were available, but:
It wasn’t conducted according to the agreed method.
The research appeared too perfect and lacked critical insights.
This raises concerns around fabrication of data, lack of stakeholder engagement integrity, and misrepresentation of project inputs.
b. Pressure to Conform and Fear of Speaking Up
Karen initially hesitated to voice her doubts about the report because:
She was new, still on probation.
She feared disrupting office harmony or offending John.
This highlights issues like power dynamics, organizational silence, and the ethical risk of prioritizing personal security over project integrity.
2. Skills That Helped Address the Ethical Challenges
a. Ethical Awareness and Courage
Karen noticed the “too perfect” nature of the report and reflected critically.
She chose to speak up despite being new and on probation.
b. Critical Thinking and Risk Assessment
John and Karen mapped out potential risks from both accepting and challenging the report.
They didn’t react emotionally, but assessed consequences systematically.
c. Collaboration and Problem-Solving
Karen brainstormed with colleagues and researched alternatives.
Together, they found a third-party firm to audit the initial findings, leading to a more accurate engagement outcome.
d. Integrity and Professional Responsibility
John ultimately acted in the interest of the project’s credibility and long-term reputation of the firm.
This shift reflects putting professional integrity above short-term convenience.
Some issues of professional conduct in the scenario included lack of transparency in communication and pressure to prioritize results over responsible practice. These can lead to mistrust and long-term harm to the project’s credibility.
Skills used to bring ethics into decision-making included active listening, critical thinking, and stakeholder engagement. The people involved demonstrated integrity by balancing competing interests and choosing actions that aligned with professional values, even under pressure.
Acting ethically means staying true to project values, being honest, and putting the wellbeing of all stakeholders first—even when it’s the harder path.
John, the professional project manager made sure to keep up his consultancy organisation ethics and standards by not being carried away by the sight seeing done by the local in the place of business with the overseas government. He made sure to prioritize time management over the fun he had.
Williams was willing to break the ethics and standards as that was the internal driven adversity of his organization.
John played a good role by playing a good team work by including Karen in the discussion of the contract.
And I would also say John didn’t have any knowledge of the regulatory environment that was set for the meeting and agreement.