A question of ethics

Share to0

ArticleEthicsDecember 1996

PM Network

Cabanis-Brewin, Jeannette

How to cite this article:

Cabanis-Brewin, J. (1996). A question of ethics. PM Network, 10(12), 19–24.
Reprints and Permissions – opens in a new tab

A questionnaire on ethical practices was sent to 500 PMI members in 1996; only 70 were returned, and of those, 56 respondents said that they encountered ethical dilemmas in practicing their jobs. Areas of concern included being offered gifts from contractors or vendors, pressure to alter status reports or mask project progress, information sharing, and abuse of power. Although some respondents' personal experiences had led them to a jaundiced view of corporate life, all the respondents agreed that their work reflected their personal values. Given the trend toward team-based organizations where work is accomplished through relationships, ethical behavior will become a new competency and can be encouraged by open dialogues within organizations about ethics as they apply to real-life situations. Includes existing and proposed PMI Code of Ethics.

img

An informal survey reveals that when looking for behavioral guides, many PMI members rely more on their own “internal compasses” than on written codes of ethics. Is the profession doing enough to foster and support ethical decision-making?

Jeannette Cabanis

Last year PM Network ran what was intended to be a humorous commentary that held unethical business practices up to ridicule (“How to Build a Low-Cost Black Box,” October 1995). The outrage that greeted the article was an eye-opener. Many readers wrote to complain that, although they realized such practices were common, PMI's official magazine had no business promoting them.

Of course, as a satire, the article did not condone unethical practices. But we felt that the fervor with which the membership greeted an article on ethical issues warranted some further investigation.

Our response was to craft a seven-item questionnaire, which included open-ended questions that allowed the respondent to share personal experiences and thoughts. It was faxed or mailed to PMI members randomly selected from the member database. The process, from selection and dissemination through return of questionnaires, was designed for respondent anonymity. Of the 500 names selected by the computer, due to missing or incorrect fax numbers or incomplete addresses, only 405 were successfully sent. Of these, 65 completed questionnaires were received (a response rate of about 16 percent). An additional five questionnaires were returned at the annual Seminars & Symposium, for a total of 70.

This response rate, which is less than half of the typical return rate of 40 percent for mailed questionnaires, in itself raises some interesting questions. The literature on survey research—not to mention common sense—tells us that response rates are higher among those who are educated in the subject matter, and/or who are more interested or more favorable toward it. Are our 70 respondents, then, a cross-section of a minority group within PMI: those project managers who both have some conceptual framework for thinking and talking about ethical issues and who are interested in the subject?

And what of the other 84 percent?

The Answers. Despite the low rate of return, the qualitative nature of the questions allows us to learn a good deal from the responses. They paint a picture of people who are basically happy with their chosen profession; who have a firm sense of themselves as ethical beings; but who are troubled by certain circumstances that recur in the daily practice of both their skills and their values. Here's the breakdown:

Do you encounter ethical dilemmas in the practice of your job? “Yes,” responded 56 of the participants. The 13 who responded “No” were asked to explain why they felt that ethical issues did not arise in their workplaces.

Now, to be fair, this first item was in the nature of a trick question, designed to highlight ethical blind spots. The theory behind this question is that those project managers who do not perceive ethical issues in their work lives may, to some extent, be unaware of the ethical implications of daily decision-making. One clue that this theory is correct is that these respondents had a hard time explaining why ethical issues were absent from their work. Many simply left the form blank. Those who did explain generally gave some variation on the theme that “someone else” was taking care of ethics for them: an audit department, an ethics program, the legal system, or those members of the organization who did work external to the company and thus presumably, faced the “real” ethical challenges.

Those who responded “Yes,” on the other hand, went on in every case to detail one or more specific ways in which their sense of right and wrong, honesty and fairness were put to the test. The majority (40) said that such conflicts arose for them either weekly or occasionally. Their areas of concern included:

  • Being offered “gifts” from contractors or vendors
  • Pressure to alter status reports, backdate signatures, or otherwise shade written documentation to mask the reality of project progress
  • Quality issues: How good is good enough?
  • Temptations when reporting or charging time and expenses
  • The quality of communication with coworkers and—especially—with management and clients. Openness, information sharing, and abuse of power were mentioned again and again.

The detail and variety of their answers shows that ethical dilemmas do indeed abound in the project environment.

External Frameworks vs. Inner Resources. So how does the beleaguered project manager confront these issues? Subsequent questions in our survey sought to determine whether or not company codes of ethics or—for the 30 respondents to whom it applied—the PMP Code of Ethics provided a useful framework for ethical decision-making.

The majority of respondents (50) work for companies that do have written codes, many of which are quite comprehensive, covering issues from relations with coworkers to outside activities and responsibilities to the community and the environment. As to the utility of these written codes, by far the most frequent opinion was that their usefulness was real, but limited. Twenty-seven of our respondents wrote that they relied far more strongly on their own private sense of right and wrong, what one respondent called the “internal compass,” than on any written guidelines. “My own ethics are far more stringent than the company code,” one project manager wrote. Another added, “If you understand the basics of ethics, you don't need a rulebook.”

Among our respondents were 30 PMPs and four others who were in the process of certification. Perhaps one of the most interesting findings, in terms of the current move to revise and update PMI's existing Code, is that only 12 of these respondents felt that the PMP Code provided useful guidelines, although many said that they appreciated their Code's project-specific focus.

Among the other 22, about a third did not respond to the question; five answered that the PMP Code was not useful to them in ethical decision-making, and a further five admitted that they didn't know what it said! (For those who are not familiar with the process, all PMPs are required to sign the Code of Ethics as a part of their certification.)

Even some of the respondents who said that they found the PMP Code useful noted that it is most useful where it reinforces their company code of ethics. More to the point, one PMP responded: “[The PMP Code provides] good guidelines, but they are generally not recognized by management.” In addition, a few of the PMPs noted that they belonged to other professional societies whose guidelines they found both tougher and more useful than PMI's. For example: “I am a member of the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario … Their ethics guidelines are far more stringent than PMI's, i.e., a three-hour exam, two books, a course, etc. I follow their guidelines. PMI's are a subset [of these].”

Other PMPs echoed the statements written about company codes of ethics: “Common sense works best for me,” was a common response.

The Carrot or the Stick? A good deal of emotion emerged around one question: In your experience, is ethical behavior rewarded? Answers tended to be complex and sometimes conflicting. Mixed in with the 42 respondents who answered “Yes” (usually with qualifications) and the 31 who responded “No” (with more qualification), were those who circled both or wrote in “Sometimes,” “Neither,” “Not always,” “It's not an issue,” or “It depends.” The consensus seems to be that ethical behavior must be its own reward; that, in the words of one respondent, although no one is ever “singled out for recognition for ethical behavior,” keeping your values and your actions at work congruent means you sleep well at night and feel good about yourself. And, over the long term, benefits accrue to you that, while intangible, can ultimately bring tangible rewards.

These benefits include “the respect of my peers,” “the trust of others,” and “the sense that others look up to me.” Several of the respondents drew the connection between these intangibles and the bottom line: “A reputation for fair and ethical behavior … is an implicit sales point for future business,” one wrote, while another said: “A company is only as good as its people and if they are ethical it will come back to the company over the long run.” One new product development project manager noted that “ethical decisions lead to better products.”

About half the respondents turned the question on its head by saying that, while ethical behavior was not rewarded, unethical behavior was punished (“If it is caught” many respondents felt they needed to add). This de facto “reward” is held in place by the negative reinforcement of seeing others get fired for ethics violations. Ethical behavior, far from being rewarded or recognized, many of these respondents wrote, was simply “a condition of employment.” Many further stressed that you shouldn't expect to be rewarded for behaving correctly—you should do it simply because it's the right thing to do.

But there were also many—about one-third of the respondents—whose personal experiences or observations led them to have a more jaundiced view of corporate life.

“Sometimes if people tell the truth it gets them into more trouble than if they just kept their mouths shut,” one respondent said. “Success is rewarded,” one person wrote, apparently meaning, no matter how it is arrived at. Another, having detailed a situation in which he or she was expected to keep quiet about impending downsizing, noted that others, who had shared information with the affected employees, “are now looking for jobs themselves.” And a few reported that they had resigned or, in one case, been terminated after taking a stand on an ethical issue.

Personal Values at Work. Perhaps the most heartening result of this survey was elicited by the question, Do you feel the work you do reflects your personal values?

A resounding 100 percent of the respondents replied “Yes.” Many went on to state that they would leave their jobs if they ever felt their personal values were compromised in any way by ethical issues at work; and a number of them related incidents in which they had in fact resigned rather than give in on an ethical issue.

Their responses make clear that this issue of ethical behavior is one in which the worlds of family, education, religious belief, professional training, and daily actions overlap and interact. Many respondents spoke of their adherence to religious principles or to beliefs instilled in them in childhood. Many of them said they were not only comfortable with their work, but proud of it. Almost invariably, they made comments similar to this respondent's: “I try very hard to keep people informed and to treat them with respect. You are very dependent on other people in order to accomplish goals, and this should encourage good behavior.”

If the test of a sane and balanced existence is to feel that your work and your personal values are congruent, these project managers are a lucky bunch. And if they truly recognize that their day-by-day treatment of others forms the foundation for ethical professional behavior, the people who work with them are lucky, too.

Lessons Learned? While this survey sample is far too small to be considered statistically valid, it does raise some interesting questions for an organization that is reviewing its ethics codes and procedures (see accompanying sidebars).

Since project managers apparently rely on personal references—either internal compasses or the advice of trusted colleagues—to keep them on the high road, we may want to look at ways to keep these compasses pointing to true north. Perhaps, rather than expending a lot of energy producing written documents that the end-users find only minimally useful, PMI and project management programs in higher education may be better off offering education in ethical issues to give project managers a conceptual framework for doing this inner soul-searching.

Secondly, perhaps the time has come to address one of the most basic and troubling conflicts that project managers refer to: the conflict between doing what's right and doing what management or the client expects you to do. This is not, of course, an issue confined to the project management environment. In the October issue of the IEEE newspaper The Institute, a letter to the editor states, “Employers and employees are not on an equal footing. The employer holds all the power … [an engineer] who went to the IEEE Ethics Committee on a public safety issue … still lost her job.” This reality shapes most business organizations: when one is not only discouraged from but punished for what the Quakers called “speaking truth to power,” the organization becomes a place where the ethically conscious are set up to fail.

Lastly, a certain percentage of project managers lack consciousness about what constitutes an ethical problem. As noted before, 13 out of 70 respondents fail to recognize that ethical dilemmas exist in their world. Yet for those conscious of the ethical dimensions of their behavior, every day is chock-full of ethical issues. Each time you communicate with another human being you are faced with the opportunity to either succeed or fail at ethical communication. So the fact that this blind spot exists, even among this small percentage of respondents, is an interesting one.

This is perhaps the result of the poor-to-nonexistent training in technical curricula for interpersonal relations and human skills. In my own experience, graduate-level engineering students in a business communications class were so out of touch with ethical communication that, when asked to do peer reviews of female students' presentations, they wrote comments about their bodies and their hairstyles! Something was missing from their education—an important something that will fit these engineers for the new realities of the workplace.

In the new organization, work relationships are less codified; boundaries are less formal, more fluid. Increasingly, in the team-based organization, work is accomplished through relationship. What author and Fluor Daniel quality process guru Russ Darnall calls “the HUM factor” (how things are humming along among the humans) has become a critical business resource. In such an organization, the ability to deal with others from a sound ethical position will become a new competency. No longer relegated to a poster on the wall in some obscure office, ethics must become part and parcel of each person's everyday work life.

Let's assume the respondents to our survey are right. Ethical behavior is its own reward, and it is doubly rewarded by the development of a sound and admirable reputation. Such a reputation is the consultant's stock in trade and pretty soon, if the pundits are correct and “the end of the job” is really at hand, reputation will be everyone's greatest asset. To prepare every project manager for the solitary soul-searching that resolving an ethical dilemma requires, companies and associations must not only codify rules and expectations, but initiate a dialogue about ethics—what it is, how it operates in real-life situations, and how unethical actions impact those around us, our workplace, and the larger community. ■

Jeannette Cabanis is a PM Network staff writer and editor of the Marketplace and Project Briefs features.

Current PMI Code of Ethics

Preamble: Project Management Professionals, in the pursuit of the profession, affect the quality of life for all people in our society. Therefore, it is vital that Project Management Professionals conduct their work in an ethical manner to earn and maintain the confidence of team members, colleagues, employees, employers, clients, and the public.

Article I: Project Management Professionals shall maintain high standards of personal and professional conduct, and:

a. Accept responsibility for their actions.

b. Undertake projects and accept responsibility only if qualified by training or experience, or after full disclosure to their employers or clients of pertinent qualifications.

c. Maintain their professional skills at the state of the art and recognize the importance of continued personal development and education.

d. Advance the integrity and prestige of the profession by practicing in a dignified manner.

e. Support this code and encourage colleagues and co-workers to act in accordance with this code.

f. Support the professional society by actively participating and encouraging colleagues and co-workers to participate.

g. Obey the laws of the country in which work is being performed.

Article II: Project Management Professionals shall, in their work:

a. Provide the necessary project leadership to promote maximum productivity while striving to minimize costs.

b. Apply state-of-the-art project management tools and techniques to ensure quality, cost, and time objectives, as set forth in the project plan, are met.

c. Treat fairly all project team members, colleagues, and co-workers, regardless of race, religion, sex, age or national origin.

d. Protect project team members from physical and mental harm.

e. Provide suitable working conditions and opportunities for project team members.

f. Seek, accept, and offer honest criticism of work, and properly credit the contribution of others.

g. Assist project team members, colleagues, and co-workers in their professional development.

Article III: Project Management Professionals shall, in their relations with employers and clients:

a. Act as faithful agents or trustees for their employers and clients in professional and business matters.

b. Keep information on the business affairs or technical process of an employer or client in confidence while employed, and later, until such information is properly released.

c. Inform their employers, clients, professional societies or public agencies of which they are members or to which they may make any presentations, of any circumstance that could lead to a conflict of interest.

d. Neither give nor accept, directly or indirectly, any gift, payment, or service of more than nominal value to or from those having business relationships with their employers or clients.

e. Be honest and realistic in reporting project quality, cost, and time.

Article IV: Project Management Professionals shall, in fulfilling their responsibilities to the community:

a. Protect the safety, health, and welfare of the public and speak out against abuses in these areas affecting the public interest.

b. Seek to extend public knowledge and appreciation of the project management profession and its achievements.

This revision was effective immediately upon approval, April 1, 1989.

The Integrated Project Team on Ethics: Creating a More Inclusive Code

During PMI's Annual Seminar/Symposium in October, the newly created IPT on Ethics met in Boston. During a day-long work session facilitated by Mary Devon O'Brien, PMP, the team members (Nora Bottino, Ruperto Kapunan III, Tony Kapsak, PMP, David Landsman, PMP, Saralee Newell, PMP, Kristy Tan, PMP, and Catherine Tonne, PMP) hammered out the following proposed draft of a new code of ethics that would, if accepted and approved, apply not only to PMPs, but to the full membership and the professional staff of PMI.

O'Brien stresses that this idea is not a departure from tradition, but rather a return to it. From its inception until the late 1980s, PMI's Code of Ethics did apply to all members. The IPT's objectives for the Boston work session were to review the existing PMP code to see if they might suggest modifications and, by editing that code appropriately, to create a new “umbrella” code that would cover all members and staff.

As you will note by comparing the existing PMP Code and this proposed draft, the changes are focused on creating a code that is both flexible enough to cover a diverse international membership and a rapidly-expanding staff, as well as stringent enough to serve as a series of signposts on the straight and narrow.

The IPT members stress that this is merely a draft and a proposal; any and all comments on the revision process are welcomed. Input is particularly invited from members who can share a cross-cultural perspective. “Although we had some international representation at the meeting,” O'Brien notes, “we welcome more.”

Fax your comments and thoughts to Mary Devon O'Brien at 201/763-2661.

(Note: The draft shown below is the one that applies to all members. The proposed revisions to the PMP code are almost identical to those shown here, with the exception that “we” in each article is replaced by “Project Management Professionals.”)

Proposed PMI Code of Ethics

Preamble: In the pursuit of the project management profession, since our actions have an impact on society, it is vital we conduct their work in an ethical manner to earn and maintain the confidence of team members, colleagues, employees, employers, clients and the public.

Article I: We shall maintain high standards of personal and professional conduct, and:

a. Accept responsibility for our actions.

b. Undertake projects and accept responsibility only if qualified by training or experience, or after full disclosure to employers or clients of pertinent qualifications.

c. Maintain professional skills at the state of the art and make a commitment to continued personal development and education.

d. Advance the integrity and prestige of the profession by practicing in a generally accepted professional manner.

e. Support this code and encourage colleagues and co-workers to act in accordance with this code.

f. Support the project management community by actively participating and encouraging colleagues and co-workers to participate in professional activities.

g. Obey the laws of the country in which the work is being performed.

Article II: We shall, in our work:

a. Strive to promote maximum productivity while striving to minimize costs.

b. Apply state-of-the-art knowledge and practices supported by the available and appropriate tools and techniques to ensure quality, cost and time objectives are met.

c. Treat fairly all project team members, colleagues and co-workers, as defined by locally accepted practices.

d. Protect project team members from physical and mental harm by providing suitable working conditions.

e. Seek, accept and offer honest criticism of work, and properly credit the contributions of others.

f. Assist project team members, colleagues and co-workers in their professional development.

Article III: We, in our employment and contractual relationships, shall:

a. Act as faithful agents or trustees in business or professional relationships.

b. Honor confidentiality agreements and intellectual property agreements.

c. Be open and honest informing employers, clients, professional society or public agencies of any circumstance that could lead to a conflict of interest, or the perception of a conflict of interest.

d. Reject bribery in all its forms. Neither give nor accept, directly or indirectly, any gift, payment or service of more than nominal value to or from those having business relationships with their employers or clients.

e. Be honest and realistic in providing timely and accurate project status and reports.

Article IV: We shall, in fulfilling their responsibilities to the community:

a. To accept responsibility in making project management decisions to protect the safety, health and welfare of the public and to disclose against abuses in these areas affecting the public interest.

b. Seek to extend public knowledge and appreciation of the project management profession and its achievements.

PM Network • December 1996

Like what you just read?

Log in or register for a free PMI account to get access 
to even more articles like this one.

Offer from our training partner

Advertisement

Offer from our training partner

Advertisement

Related Content

Offer from our training partner

Advertisement