PMI Talent Triangle®: how to classify PDUs related to ethics
Categories:
Decision-making,
PMI Talent Triangle,
Power Skills,
Ways of Working,
Business Acumen,
Ethics
Categories: Decision-making, PMI Talent Triangle, Power Skills, Ways of Working, Business Acumen, Ethics
| 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 Eighty percent of success is showing up. - Woody Allen |
Posted
by 
Posted
by 
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 
