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
Where there isn’t a clear way forward and difficult decisions have to be made, I think the approach of communicating the project’s stall or end due to whatever brought about that circumstance, aside from clearly communicating with the stakeholders and project team, another approach I think would work in a different circumstance would be to brainstorm with the team and decide together what the next steps should be. It shouldn’t be a decision that the Project Manager should make alone. Prompt and clear communication is also another consistent feature in all three scenarios and this I believe is important, regardless of the circumstance. But I’d like to emphasize the need to be Prompt ie timely in that communication.
I think the issue was how they didn’t confront William on the matter. Yes we might have a plan B but if he isn’t told about how to go about it he will make the same mistake again. And thank God for Karen and her quick thinking. So what I think is that, John should sit with William and discuss everything that happened especially why the greenlight and clean report would have backfired so that he gets to see the reason why his work wasn’t good enough and also learn. And he should have been involved in the next task too especially since he is responsible, this will not make it seem like he was sidelined
William wasn’t transparent and didn’t care about doing things the right way which would have affected the project.
John accepted the results in the first place although he knew it wasn’t done properly, he had to find a way to fix things
and Karen saw that there was a problem but didn’t want to offend john by speaking u and for her other reasons which would have contributed to not getting thr best out of the project. at the end there was collaboration, courage and integrity
From the scenario, there are several ethical/professional conduct issues:
1. Lack of Transparency / Misrepresentation: William presents results from the engagement that:
Were not conducted as originally planned, Appear “too perfect” (all green lights)- This shows data manipulation or misrepresentation
2. Inadequate Stakeholder Engagement: The original plan required structured engagement forums Instead, William uses: A third-party opinion research firm, Limited or possibly biased data collection
3. Conflict of Interest / Bias: William refers to the research firm as “our friends”, This raises concern that:
The research may not be independent
Results could be influenced to favor project approval
4. Ethical Pressure & Organizational Culture Issue: Karen hesitates to speak up because:
She is on probation
She fears workplace tension
5. Cultural Misunderstanding: John initially assumes improper conduct, while William believes:
“This is how things are done here”
Skills Used to Bring Ethics into the Decision
1. Critical Thinking & Analytical Skills
Karen questions the report: “too perfect”
She evaluates: Risks of accepting vs challenging the report
2. Communication Skills
Karen: Openly discusses concerns with John
John: Listens and engages in a one-hour discussion
3. Courage / Ethical Awareness
Karen overcomes fear of: Probation, Office politics
4. Problem-Solving Skills: Instead of accusing anyone directly, they:
Find a third-party global firm, Use it to verify the research process
5. Stakeholder Management Skills
They ensure:
Proper engagement is eventually conducted
Real issues (hurdles) are identified
6. Long-Term Thinking (Professional Judgment)
Karen shifts perspective:
From “this project” → “firm’s reputation.”
I discovered xyz company has a good niche reputation, John is confident on their delivery strength, William wants to get solutions without getting the work done . Karen is playing safe at first without sharing her ideas on the research opinions. But later teamwork came into play, negotiation skills, communication clarity , problem solving and adaptability skills was carried out by Karen and john
Chiamaka Joy Uzoh-Cohort31 Team 2.
From the case study, I identified several important elements of professional conduct. XYZ Company demonstrated competence and technical expertise through its strong reputation in its niche, while John showed confidence in the organization’s ability to deliver. Williams exhibited good stakeholder relationship management through his interpersonal skills, and the government client demonstrated professionalism through courtesy and hospitality to John when he visited.
The strongest example of professional conduct, however, was shown by Karen and later supported by John. Karen demonstrated integrity and professional skepticism by questioning the “too perfect” report despite being new and on probation. John showed openness to feedback and accountability by engaging in honest discussions and reassessing the risks. Together, they upheld ethical standards, prioritized the company’s long-term reputation, and took proactive steps to ensure the project was handled responsibly.
I found, teamwork, research work, innovative skills and communication skills
Williams didn’t communicate with John cause he was neither ready to be transparent or collaborative with John. He just wanted to get it done
Karen, who was scared at first took the step to communicate about the research opinion to John and they both applied; teamwork/collaboration, communication, problem solving skills to resolve the issue
I found, teamwork, research work, innovative skills and communication skills
JERRY EBRUVWIYOR OSIOBE – COHORT 31 TEAM 5.
Issues of Professional Conduct.
(1). Questionable validity of stakeholder engagement results .
William presented a report from a local opinion research firm that seemed “too perfect,” with no identified risks. This raises concerns about the integrity and reliability of data being used to guide critical project decisions.
“The engagement came back with nothing but green lights across all of the key parameters.”
(2). Pressure to accept flawed findings.
John initially felt compelled to accept the report to keep the project moving, despite doubts. This reflects the ethical tension between delivering results quickly versus ensuring accuracy and honesty in project work.
(3). Fear of speaking up.
Karen hesitated to challenge the report because of her probation period and concern about workplace relationships. This shows the ethical issue of professional courage—balancing personal career risks against the responsibility to uphold standards.
“I’m worried that if I criticise the report, I’ll end up looking like I’m criticising him.”
Skills Used to Bring Ethics into Decisions.
(1). Critical Thinking & Risk Analysis.
John and Karen mapped out scenarios of what could happen if the flawed report was accepted versus challenged. This analytical approach helped them see the bigger ethical and professional risks.
(2). Collaboration & Open Dialogue.
Karen and John spent time discussing concerns honestly, despite initial hesitation. This skill of open communication allowed ethical issues to surface and be addressed.
(3). Courage & Integrity.
Karen overcame her fear of speaking up, showing professional courage. John supported her, demonstrating integrity by prioritizing the firm’s reputation over short-term convenience.
(4). Problem-Solving & Initiative.
Karen researched alternative validation methods and suggested involving a global firm to review the local research. This proactive step ensured the project was based on credible stakeholder engagement.
Williams was not honest and he lacked transparency, he tried to find a quick way to carry out the research.
John was negligent at first and forgot about the ethics of the company he was working for.
Karen was more concerned about her personal interests than the interest of the company.
The three showed teamwork in tackling the research