Aaron was worried about risking their friendship, but eventually Ben convinced him. He started immediately with a two-week intensive project review. He quickly won the confidence of the project team. They were glad to have an audience for their project concerns because the previous PM had not wanted to give Ben or the client any bad news. As a result, he had agreed to scope expansion requests without assessing their impact on cost or schedule. Although the team told him that these additions meant it was impossible to meet the client’s deadline, he insisted that they try. It was a classic “watermelon project” – green on the outside, but red on the inside.
Posted
by 
Guessing is not a strategy: How to build decision velocity with AI and real-time data
June 10, 2026 | Live Webinar
You Can’t Always Get What You Want…
| Aaron and Ben have been friends and colleagues for many years. Ben owns a small software firm, and asked Aaron to step in to rescue a major project for an important government agency. With an inflexible deadline only six months away, the project is behind schedule and in danger of failing and Ben is very concerned that disappointing this client could mean going out of business.
At the end of his review, Aaron explained his findings one-on-one with Ben. He said that the good news was that there was time to finish the development of the original scope and a good chance, but no guarantee, that full testing and defect correction could be completed by the original deadline. On the other hand, the bad news was that, while the team could commit to completing development of the expanded scope by the deadline, it simply was not possible to complete testing by then. Therefore, Aaron advocated that they focus on completing the original scope, and that he and Ben meet with the client to explain that the delivery might be delayed by two to four weeks depending on testing. He went on to suggest that they explain to the client that the extensions to the scope could then be separately provided in a subsequent release. The team felt, and Aaron agreed, that the time needed to analyze and estimate that second release should instead be spent on delivering the original requirements. He strongly argued for a fully transparent meeting with the client to explain the situation and get them to buy into the proposed new plan. To Aaron’s surprise As an experienced project manager, Victor recently joined a new organization after a five-month break due to layoffs at his previous job. He was hired as a PMO Lead and was eager to make a positive impact on his new team. However, he quickly realized that the team seemed hesitant to trust him, due to his newness to the organization or the time it would take for him to fully engage with them. Victor took various initiatives to engage with his team, scheduling regular cadence with them to get to know them better. However, he observed that the team was not seeking help when they needed it, and his peers were taking advantage of this situation. This lack of trust was affecting the progress of the team, the projects, and even the customers. Victor felt conflicted because he wanted to help the team succeed in their projects, but he also wanted to earn their trust and inspire them as their leader. He did not want the team to be affected by negative energies resulting from the trust issues. However, he realized that he was not being honest with the responsibilities assigned to him by the management and was not justifying his role as PMO Lead. According to the Project Management Institute's Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct, honesty is defined as understanding the truth and acting truthfully in communications and conduct. Victor realized that he was not being honest with himself or the organization, and this was causing him to feel like he was not fulfilling his responsibilities. He considered leaving the organization as he did not want to compromise on his integrity. At the same time, Victor also realized that he may encounter similar situations in any new workplace, and his lack of confidence in himself may be due to the five-month break he had taken. He did not want to let his peers take advantage of this situation, and he wanted to find a solution that would align with his values and principles as a project manager. After careful consideration, Victor decided to take the following steps: As time passed, Victor noticed a positive change in his team's attitude towards him. They started seeking his guidance and support, and the team's progress improved. Victor regained his confidence as a project manager and felt that he was justifying his role in the organization. He realized that by being honest with himself and others, and upholding his professional values, he could overcome the initial trust issues and create a positive work environment. "What are your thoughts on how project managers can balance the need to be honest about their challenges while still fulfilling their responsibilities and justifying their role within an organization?" Ethics and ethical behavior refer to general principles such as honesty, integrity, and morals. Acting ethically is noble and involves greater self-control, discipline, and maturity. Acting ethically is critical in our professional and personal situations. I recently came across a problem as follows. Mary* was a senior leader in ABC company that dealt with offshoring business processes to companies from other sides of the world. This was done to maintain a strategic advantage for the company and provide 24*7 cover for business operations. Mary had been a disciplined and dedicated project manager for the company with proper ethical behavior and practices. She exhibited immense integrity in the most challenging times of the project. As a result, she was often cited in meetings for her exemplary behavior. A recent incident in the organization proved challenging for Mary and her reputation. Mary was a part of the meeting with senior leadership. The meeting had been called to discuss some crucial scope changes to the existing project. The client representatives had proposed a complex feature to the application. Mary was aware of the existing skillsets of the resources on the project. The change was tricky, and she would need to retrain the existing resources or hire new skill sets. On realizing that this would pose difficulty in delivering the project, Mary quickly pointed this out. She knew she was responsible and accountable for the project. However, one of the senior leadership members challenged Mary’s concerns and asked her to agree to deliver the complex feature. Mary knew the current status and informed the leader about the situation. The leader, however, was firm in his direction as he knew the feature would help the project and the company. Mary and her team needed help to deliver the project and struggled while executing it. Due to unsatisfactory deliverables, the client withdrew their support for the project. The leadership summoned Mary to discuss what had happened. Mary put down her papers in the same meeting and resigned immediately. According to the Project Management Institute’s Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct, the definition of Responsibility is as follows. 2.1 Description of Responsibility Responsibility is our duty to take ownership of the decisions we make or fail to make, the actions we take or fail to take, and the consequences that result. Responsibility as a value is described in detail on its aspirational and mandatory standards in The Code. Did Mary act as per her responsibility? What is the difference between responsibility and accountability? Did Mary adhere to PMI’s Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct? I would like to know what you think about this situation. *Name changed to protect privacy Resources PMI’s Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct: https://www.pmi.org/-/media/pmi/documents/public/pdf/ethics/pmi-code-of-ethics.pdf?rev=6af21906e5934b638ceeabeb4137f41d&sc_lang_temp=en PMI’s Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct Value Cards: https://www.pmi.org/-/media/pmi/documents/public/pdf/ethics/code-values-card.pdf?rev=44578e34774241568ce0034489794fe4&sc_lang_temp=en PMI’s blog on Ethics, “Ethics Bistro”: https://www.projectmanagement.com/blogs/365304/ethics-bistro With the significant explosion and leap from Digital to AI technologies, organisations are often ‘out at sea’ when developing and adopting ethical AI technologies. This responsibility is typically owned by Project Management and Transformation professionals, as strategies are developed and executed. Whilst the positive and negative benefits of AI solutions are still being debated and realised; a greater challenge exists, in that there is not a wide-spread adoption of global Artificial Intelligence (AI) standards and regulations. Whilst standards do exist in most countries, these differ substantially from country to country, making it a great challenge to adopt a universal approach to ethical AI for employees and customers. A recent interview with Giovanni Leoni, a global industry leader and Advisory Board member for EAIGG: Ethical AI Governance Group, provides valuable advice – that the presence of global standards (ethical technical and process guidance and law) will become widespread and start to normalise during the years of 2023 to 2025. At the moment, the US are in the forefront of standardisation; with the release of the AI Risk Management Framework; whilst the EU are leading in terms of regulation (EU AI Act); therefore both are influencing each other. Leoni suggests, ‘In the absence of fully adopted standards, it is advised that organisations should start by aligning their AI practices with their organisational ethical policy / code.’ This includes the organisation’s training and ethical guardrails of all operational and project activities. Therefore today, there is an opportunity for organisations to initiate proactive work and commence the change management journey, which takes multiple years. In addition to the adoption of an organisation ethical policy / code, PMI’s Code of Ethics & Professional Conduct and other useful resources should also be adopted. https://www.pmi.org/codeofethics The three most common considerations of ethical AI are: how can the best data be provided; what data oversight is provided to inform effective decision making by the C-suite and Boards; and what are the ramifications of the new AI technologies? Leoni goes on to provide solid recommendations and considerations to Transformation and Project Professionals, based on common challenges experienced across global organisations to date: What is the competency and skill set required from Transformation and Project Managers? This can be extended to Business Analysts, Data professionals and Change Managers. What AI capabilities are required and what upskilling and guidance are available? As organisations embark on AI strategy and initiatives, it is fundamental to implement Risk governance - providing decision making around the risk appetite of the AI solution; the associated ethical dilemmas and how these risks will be managed and mitigated. To cater for the complexity of AI ethical implications and solutions, implementing a staged / decision gate process (Go / No Go) will allow a hard line of decision making against deliverables around functional requirements and ethical applicability. Understanding the dynamic of data shifting over time regarding data engineering, data science, data quality and integrity, data demand, the level of control and organisational maintenance is imperative. When mapping the change impact of AI on customers and employees, it is imperative that the ‘power’ is given back to individuals; by ensuring that everyone is well informed of the AI approach and that the use of data is transparent. Some areas more likely to be of concern are building trust, removing biases, ownership of data, moral approaches, loss of control, consent and discrimination. The level to which the detail of data is shared should always benefit the individual first and then the organisation; with reference to productivity efficiency. An example of this is monitoring the keystrokes of individuals. This is to avoid insecurity and psycho-socially negative environments. When sourcing AI solutions, partners and consultants, it is important that they align and trainon the organisation’s ethical policy. The value and benefits realised from AI need to benefit planet, people and profit. Two key questions need to be asked: From a business perspective – will the solution deliver value? From a technology perspective, will the technology work? In conclusion, I look forward to your insight as to how you have navigated ethical AI in your organisation, with the best interest of your customers and your employees in mind. We have been called to action. Traditionally organisations were challenged to balance corporate social responsibility with increasing revenue and cost optimisation. Currently organisations have been called to action: to effectively and rapidly introduce an ethical Environment, Social and Governance (ESG) strategy. A clear ESG strategy is executed through ESG goals (a set target that would need to be achieved to address a particular ESG issue) and a regenerative / change mindset and culture. Those who have already embarked on this journey are likely to be experiencing several challenges which are explored in detail during this discussion. These include conflicting ESG goals, the need to adapt governance and to ethically report on the progress of these goals to a variety of expectant stakeholders. Firstly, ESG goals can include carbon neutral, net-zero carbon, circular economy, biodiversity, ethical raw products, re-used and renewable, diversity, ethics, gender equality, partnership goals, innovation, health and wellbeing. These goals currently compete with profit and each other. Cyrus Mewawalla of GlobalData, suggests “The reluctance of many CEOs to fully engage with sustainability can be attributed to the age-old view that it will hurt profits. However, GlobalData’s research suggests the opposite. Companies that embrace all three elements of ESG will outperform their peers. CEOs that are too slow to improve their company’s approach to sustainability will see an exodus of customers and a drop in profits far sooner than they ever imagined.” How we address conflicting goals introduces the second challenge of how we adapt our governance to measure and manage our ESG agenda. According to the Global Data survey, 2022, two thirds of executives reported that “inadequate governance practices make it more likely that companies will fail to meet their ESG goals.” Return of Investment (ROI), prioritisation, risk management and data governance will need to be adjusted to include ESG goals to balance profit with planet. Milestones will need to be clear and escalations will need to acted upon both timeously and effectively. Governance will need to include the upskilling of practitioners to sharpen their sustainability orchestration, transformation and education across the organisation to introduce and mature a regenerative change mindset. An ethical decision-making framework will need to be introduced or adapted to enhance the governance, for complex and competing ethical decision making. Organisations will need to continue to focus on a culture of Responsibility, Respect, Fairness and Honesty to create a systemic environment from the PMI Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct. The third challenge is to ethically report on the progress of ESG goals - managing varied stakeholder expectations. These differ according to drivers and intent, both internally and externally. These range from shareholders, empowered employees, board members, influencers / brand ambassadors and product consumers. What will the accountability of an organisation be to its stakeholders for not meeting their ESG goals? Will this be scrutinised and measured with interest and intent as much as profit? Regardless of how we will assess our ESG goals in the short and long term, it is encouraged that progress against ESG goals are reported honestly and authentically. In conclusion, the discussion of the introduction / advancement of an ESG strategy and goals is timeous with the recent launch of PMI’s ESG hub and partnership with Green Project Management (GPM). When I was born I was so surprised I couldn't talk for a year and a half. - Gracie Allen |