Behind closed doors: When decisions feel already made

 

The decision seemed straightforward, at least on the surface. A leadership role opened after the successful delivery of a project, and several team members demonstrated strong performance, commitment, and clear growth potential. However, when the announcement was made the outcome surprised many. Not because the selected individual lacked capability, mainly because the process lacked clarity.

There were no transparent criteria, no visible evaluation process, and no opportunity for others to express interest. What was visible, however, was a prior relationship between the decision-maker and the selected individual. Intentionally or not, the perception of favoritism emerged immediately.

This is how favoritism and nepotism tend to show up in project environments, not as obvious violations, but as subtle departures from fairness. Favoritism occurs when personal preferences influence professional decisions. Nepotism goes a step further, granting advantage to family members or close connections. In both cases, the issue is not always about competence, but about whether decisions are made impartially, objectively, and free from competing self-interest.

From the perspective of PMI Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct, these situations directly challenge the core values: Responsibility, Respect, Fairness, and Honesty. Here is how each value comes into play:

- Responsibility is about ownership, not just of decisions, but of their consequences. Leaders are accountable for how decisions are made and for ensuring they align with the best interests of stakeholders. Avoiding structure or relying solely on personal judgment can unintentionally create ethical gaps.

- Respect goes beyond courtesy. It requires creating an environment where individuals feel valued, included, and able to contribute fully. When opportunities are not openly communicated, it limits participation and can undermine a sense of belonging within the team.

- Fairness is where the tension becomes most visible. The Code is explicit: decisions must be made impartially, and opportunities should be equally available to qualified individuals. It also clearly states that we must not reward or deny opportunities based on personal considerations such as favoritism or nepotism. Even the appearance of a conflict of interest must be treated with care and transparency.

- Honesty is about creating an environment where truth can be spoken and heard. This includes being transparent about how decisions are made and ensuring that information is complete, accurate, and not misleading.

The consequences of overlooking these values are not always immediate, but they are real. For example: the high performer who disengages, the colleague who stops applying, the meeting where fewer voices are heard. Trust does not disappear overnight, and it gets slowly replaced by doubt.

To be fair, leadership decisions are rarely black and white. Trust, experience, and working relationships matter. But ethical leadership requires more than good intent, it requires intentional processes. This means defining and documenting clear evaluation criteria before decisions are made, ensuring transparency in decision-making, involving multiple perspectives, and openly disclosing potential conflicts of interest when impartiality could reasonably be questioned. Even when decisions are ultimately sound, the absence of visible structure and transparency can weaken trust, create perceptions of bias, and discourage future engagement from team members who feel the process was not equitable.

Because ultimately, the question is not just whether the right person was selected. It is whether the process reflects the values we claim to uphold. As the Code reminds us, every choice matters, and collectively, those choices shape the credibility of our profession.

Have you ever experienced a situation where a decision felt influenced by favoritism, and how did it change the way you trust leadership?

Share your thoughts in the comments and let’s continue the conversation

References

Link to PMI’s Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct: https://www.pmi.org/about/ethics/guidelines

Link to PMI’s Ethical Decision-Making Framework (EDMF): https://www.pmi.org/ethics/ethical-decision-making-framework.pdf

Link to PMI’s Blog on Ethics “Ethics Bistro”: https://www.projectmanagement.com/blogs/365304/ethics-bistro