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
1. Issues of Professional Conduct:
Lack of transparency: The engagement process wasnt done as planned, and the report may not
be reliable.
Complacency: John didnt question the report at first, despite concerns.
Fear of speaking up: Karen was hesitant to raise issues due to her probation.
Cultural misalignment: William prioritized speed and familiarity over proper process.
2. Ethical Decision-Making Skills Used:
Critical thinking: John and Karen weighed the risks of ignoring vs. addressing the issue.
Honest communication: Karen raised concerns respectfully, opening the door to action.
Integrity: John chose to investigate instead of taking the easy route.
Creative problem-solving: Karen found a third-party firm to review the report.
Teamwork: They worked together to fix the problem without damaging relationships
Omeje Zipporah
Cohort 27
Team 8
My personal analysis on the key issues of professional conduct and the skills used to bring ethics into decision-making by the individuals involved:
🧩 Key Issues of Professional Conduct in the Scenario
✅ 1. Data Integrity & Authenticity of Stakeholder Engagement
Issue: William rushed the process and replaced genuine engagement with a convenient opinion research report — which raises concerns about the validity and honesty of the data used for critical decision-making.
Note: The project’s success depends on honest, direct feedback from real stakeholders. Faking or simplifying this process undermines the quality of the project and violates ethical standards of transparency and accuracy.
✅ 2. Respect for Agreed Project Processes
Issue: The original plan was to conduct forums and directly engage field stakeholders. William bypassed this process without consulting John or XYZ, showing a lack of collaborative respect and failure to follow agreed procedures.
Why?: Skipping agreed project methods violates the principle of procedural integrity and disrespects the consultancy’s role and expertise.
✅ 3. Fear of Speaking Up (Karen’s Dilemma)
Issue: Karen noticed something was off but initially hesitated to speak up due to fear of upsetting her colleague and jeopardizing her probation.
Notes: This highlights a toxic workplace risk where team members may suppress ethical concerns due to fear of conflict or job security. Ethical environments should encourage constructive critique without retaliation.
✅ 4. Cultural Assumptions & Miscommunication
Issue: John and William operated from very different cultural assumptions about how stakeholder engagement should be done. William assumed his way was good enough; John assumed his method would be followed.
Note: Cross-cultural projects require active cultural intelligence. Misalignment can cause misunderstandings or lead to unethical shortcuts.
🛠️ Skills Used to Bring Ethics Into Decision-Making
✅ 1. Critical Thinking & Risk Analysis (John & Karen)
Karen and John mapped out possible outcomes — both of accepting a flawed report and challenging it. This shows a strong use of ethical reasoning and impact forecasting.
Rather than reacting emotionally, they evaluated risks and their potential consequences for the project and company reputation.
✅ 2. Open Communication & Courage (Karen)
Even though she was hesitant, Karen spoke up — and later, with thoughtful timing and empathy, initiated a deeper conversation with John.
Her honesty and courage are key ethical leadership behaviors, especially in junior roles.
✅ 3. Collaboration & Solution-Finding (Karen & John)
Rather than confronting William head-on, they sought a constructive workaround — involving a reputable global firm to validate the local report.
This move preserved relationships while upholding professional standards. It also showed collaborative problem-solving and diplomacy.
✅ 4. Upholding Organisational Values (Karen’s Insight)
Karen reminded John that XYZ’s reputation for excellence and integrity was at stake.
This reflection on long-term impact and alignment with company values shows ethical maturity and strategic thinking.
MaryAnn Eberechukwu Igwe
Cohort 27 Team 6
One of the key challenges faced was poor communication, which created confusion around how to approach the problem effectively. Additionally, the difference in normative practices between John and the country where Williams operates led to misalignment in expectations. Williams’ lack of collaborative working style also affected the overall team dynamic. Without proper teamwork and a shared understanding, motivation dropped and progress stalled. However, through improved collaboration and thorough research, the team was eventually able to produce a complete report.
⚖️ Ethical Themes
Integrity & Honesty: John and Karen chose to question a suspiciously perfect report, even though it was risky.
Accountability: They prioritized the long-term success of the project and their firm’s reputation over short-term convenience.
Cultural Sensitivity: They respected local processes but upheld professional standards.
Courage: Karen, despite being new, spoke up about her concerns.
🛠️ Professional Skills Demonstrated
Risk analysis & problem-solving: They weighed the risks of ignoring or addressing the issue.
Communication: Karen raised concerns respectfully, and John listened openly.
Teamwork & leadership: They collaborated to find a solution and involve others.
Stakeholder engagement: They ensured real feedback was gathered from those affected.
Communication was one of the problems, also another challenge was difference in normative practice between John and the country where Williams is based. Lack of team work as Williams mode of operation was another hurdle.
Appropriate teamwork and research was essential in providing a complete report at the end.
There’s lack of proper communication about how the problem can be solved which led to lack of understanding of method to use.Team work encourage motivation which is lacking.
According to the case study Karen knew and couldn’t engage with John on the other hand William lacked team spirit, he was working alone and couldn’t do research when it comes to his colleagues. Finally Karen and John managed to communicate and come up with solutions that we call teamwork.
The core issues there was lack of quality communication and sincere transparency
In this case study, the issues are
1) Lack of effective communication and teamwork between the parties or team involved which resulted to a conflict in the project.
2) lack of team spirit
3) Lack of transparency
Skills needed
1) Effective communication
2) Team spirit sought by Karen
3) scheduling of overtime should communicated to team members
Reply
I noticed miscommunication between John, William, and Karen.
Karen didn’t speak up due to being new, showing a lack of transparency. William let pride get in the way and wasn’t team-oriented.
However, skills like ethical decision-making, teamwork, communication, and problem-solving were later applied. Over time, John and Karen improved communication and worked together to solve the problem.