1. Enhanced Decision-Making: AI algorithms analyse massive datasets to predict outcomes and recommend actions, akin to a co-pilot guiding navigational decisions during a race. 
2. Efficiency Gains: AI automates repetitive tasks and improves processes, freeing project managers to focus on strategy—like how co-pilots manage tactical information during high-speed races. 
3. Risk Reduction: By identifying potential issues in advance, AI serves as an advisor, much like a racing co-pilot warning about challenging road conditions, enabling initiative-taking corrections. 

1. Over-Reliance on AI: Just as a driver must remain vigilant and not entirely dependent on the co-pilot, project managers risk deferring critical decisions to AI tools, potentially leading to a lack of accountability. 
2. Ethical Blind Spots: Racing ethics demand fair play and adherence to rules; similarly, ethical AI use in project management calls for attention to bias, transparency, and fairness. Overlooking these aspects can harm stakeholders or perpetuate inequitable practices. 

 

1. Unparalleled Precision: Autonomous AI can minimize human errors, akin to driverless cars maintaining perfect lane control or braking at precisely calculated intervals. 
2. Scalability: AI can manage complex, multi-layered projects beyond human capacity, like its role in optimizing traffic flows with autonomous vehicle networks. 

1. Loss of Human Judgment: Driverless cars highlight the drawback of removing human intuition, empathy, and situational awareness—a challenge mirrored in project management where human leadership and creativity are essential. 
2. Accountability Gaps: In a driverless car accident, responsibility is ambiguous. Similarly, with autonomous AI, project managers may struggle to allocate accountability for errors, raising ethical dilemmas. 
3. Ethical Concerns: Driverless cars must navigate moral conflicts (e.g., protecting passengers versus pedestrians). In project management, fully autonomous systems must grapple with potentially biased decisions affecting stakeholders, raising questions of fairness and inclusivity. 

 

• In shared responsibility (co-pilot), humans are ethically required to oversee and correct AI outputs, ensuring alignment with organizational values and stakeholder trust. Like racing, project managers retain control while benefiting from AI's support. 
• In autonomous systems (driverless cars), ethical concerns magnify as AI takes over critical decisions. Issues of fairness, inclusivity, and transparency emerge, demanding rigorous bias checks, accountability frameworks, and adherence to PMI’s Code of Ethics principles. 

 

Related discussion topic: Can project management run on AI autopilot?

• Accountability and responsibility: When AI systems are used for decision-making, it is challenging to assign accountability if something goes wrong. AI agents are not members of the project team; they are a tool that should augment human capabilities. Project managers need to establish clear lines of responsibility for the outcomes of AI-driven projects.
• Bias and fairness: AI is still in its infancy, and finding large volumes of good-quality data that can be used to train AI models is difficult. AI models can inherit biases from the data they are trained on, leading to unfair or discriminatory outcomes in areas like task assignment or performance evaluation. These biases can reinforce existing societal prejudices related to factors like gender, race, or socioeconomic status, potentially leading to workplace discrimination and legal penalties.
• Transparency and explainability: The "black box" nature of some AI algorithms makes it difficult to understand how they reach a decision. This lack of transparency can erode trust and make it hard for project managers to oversee, troubleshoot, or validate AI-driven recommendations.
• Over-reliance on AI agents and lack of human oversight: At any point in the project, the control should remain with humans and avoid over-reliance on AI. Lack of knowledge and practice can lead to a decline in critical thinking and human judgment among team members.

• Contextual application: The principles and the code are designed to be applied within the context of project work. Ethical dilemmas are often encountered when balancing conflicting needs, and the framework provides guidance for decision-making.
• Performance domains: Ethical dilemmas can arise in any of the performance domains (e.g., Stakeholders, Delivery, Performance). The principles and the code provide the tools for navigating these situations and making responsible choices.
• Focus on value: Ethical considerations are a crucial part of focusing on long-term value, rather than just short-term outputs, ensuring that projects are conducted in a responsible and sustainable way. 

• The principles in the PMBOK 8th Edition align with and reinforce the values in the PMI Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct, which are honesty, responsibility, respect, and fairness.
• Project managers are expected to apply these principles in their daily work to make ethical choices that lead to positive results and maintain trust. 
• The PMI Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct remains the primary source for detailed ethical guidelines.
• ProjectManagement.com offers webinars that discuss the connection between PMBOK 7 principles and the Code of Ethics. 

By Dr. Valerie Denney, PMI EMAG Member and PMP

Let’s discuss a hypothetical, but all too real project management situation. Let’s suppose you’ve been with the same company for 6 years in which time you have been assigned increasingly responsible positions including 2 years as a project manager.  You professional track record is impeccable but you’ve been left aside even if you are so ready for the next step!

Maybe your dreams will come true!  The director of projects approaches you and she want to promote you, if you agree to take the project management position on a high priority project that, well, “has had some tough spots”.  What a job offer!

Then the next morning, you receive more details from the director of projects: the project is 30% over budget on a fixed price contract, 50% behind schedule on a 14 months project, and two days ago there was a major technical failure.  Oh, and your business unit’s success (and the director’s job) depends on the project success.  What’s your second reaction? Do you still want the job? Now you know more about it, and you’ve been given more time to think about it.

At lunch you overhear one of the project team members say”there is no way to save this project from being cancelled”.  From other comments you realize that you didn’t know how the team moral can get any worse:  “The sponsor hates us and can’t wait for us to fail” another laments in frustration.  Now what?  What’s your third reaction?

You go back to the director of projects to discuss your concerns.  After all, you’ve been taught that open, honest communication is always the best.   You’re told it would reflect badly upon you if you don’t take this opportunity—after all it would seem that you really aren’t interested in career growth after all.  The conversation continues with comments about you “needing to step up” and “this is no place for weak players” and “she knows dozens of project managers who would jump at this opportunity if you’re not capable.”  You feel that you are being bullied into taking this position but what if you fail? Would I lose my job?  How will my family handle this, especially with a new baby on the way?

The discussion continues with what seems like a veiled positive note “you will be given complete authority to do WHATEVER it takes.”  OK, I like authority! But wait, there is more! If you are the project manager you are expected to “only bring forth solutions, and not problems”.   She concludes with “what I don’t know, can’t hurt us”. If that isn’t a red flag, I don’t know what is?  If you are not familiar with the concept of a red flag, it is an idiom or metaphor to signal a dangerous situation.

You reflect on her words and the tone.  “WHATEVER it takes”?  “Legal and illegal”?  Against company policy?  Conveniently manipulation of the truth?  Poor behavior? Flawed decisions and judgment? WHERE does this end?  Could you live with your moral self after the act? Abuse of power and authority?

Think now about the principles in the PMI Code of Conduct and Professional Responsibility.

First is responsibility:  we have a “duty to take ownership for the decisions we make or fail to make, the actions we take or fail to take, and the consequences that result.” Wow!  Am I really prepared to take responsibility for everything, even things that are outside of my control?  There is a lot of history that can’t be undone. Do I have the necessary to understand the consequences of my decisions?

Next is respect:  we have a “duty to show a high regard for ourselves, others, and the resources entrusted to us”.

Resources include people, money, and reputation among others.  Am I prepared to show respect even if I need to remove poorly performing employees? Even if I face criticism about making tough decisions? Even if I might be bullied? Even if I am told that I was selected only because no one else would take the job?

Next is fairness: we have a “duty to make decisions and act impartially and objectively”. Can I really be free of self-interest?  Mine is that I can’t afford to be fired. Can I avoid favoritism and not hurt anyone’s feelings?  Are all my decisions fair, for the project, for the team, for the organization, for myself?

The fourth and final principle is honesty:  we have a “duty to understand the truth and act in a truthful manner both in our communications and in our conduct”.

What if I am tempted to withhold information? Hide the facts? Bend the truth? Change the truth for beneficial gains? What if the project erodes further before it gets better? What if I fail?

Well, this is my reality! Enough about the questions, what about solutions?  There are no easy answers.

Sometimes we are faced with conflicts, and yes, ethical dilemmas.  I leave you with some thoughts for consideration and potential solutions.

1.      Know yourself.  Know your limits.  Know your strengths and weaknesses.  No one is expected to solve everything alone.

2.      Don’t isolate yourself when in a difficult situation. Find a mentor—a trusted person who you can talk to about your concerns and alternatives to tough problems. Who can you turn to for advice and council? 

3.      Be prepared: Take a class on project management?  Can you get Project Management Professional (PMP) certification [or renew] for that continual quest to improve.

4.      Use you PMI resources: read the PMI Code of Conduct and Professional Responsibility; learn about how to deal with a bully; practice using the Ethical Decision Making Framework. 

Learn more about these through the links below, or contact PMI Ethics Member Advisory Group (EMAG). This team is an advocate of the PMI Code of Ethics, acts as Product Leader in creating tools and techniques, and facilitate stakeholder understanding and application of the Code of Conduct and Professional Responsibility.

5.      Don’t be afraid to take on a challenge.  If you really want that next career step, give it a try! Just don’t forget about 1, 2, 3 and 4 above.

Remember that project management is a team sport.  You may have a tough road ahead, but you don’t need to navigate it alone.

For more information, click on the following links:

PMI Code of Conduct and Professional Responsibility (https://www.pmi.org/about/ethics/code)

Project Bully https://www.pmi.org/about/ethics/resources/bully

Ethical Decision-Making Framework. https://www.pmi.org/-/media/pmi/documents/public/pdf/ethics/ethical-decision-making-framework.pdf

Source of all graphics is “Creative Commons”, licensed under CC BY 2.0

“Hey Peter, here’s my submission. Apologies for the delay but had to do some research to get the algorithms working the right way”. Maya rushed into Peter’s cabin.

“Thanks. What took you so long?” Peter wanted to know.

“Oh! I needed time to check on the output. That took some time. The logic behind these algorithms was present on a website and I used that material” Maya continued.

Peter was a new project manager to the organization and had been recently deputed to a project related to Innovation in the information technology domain. He was a product of an elite business school and was chosen for this project for his innovative ideation and a drive to succeed.

Peter knew this work wasn’t Maya’s original work and it needed to be called out by providing an appropriate citation.  However Peter also knew if she did that, his project would not be considered for Innovation and that he and his team would lose out on the award.

“Well we need to make the appropriate attributions to the original document that had the logic. That would be an appropriate next step” Maya wanted to check with Peter.

“I guess so but the process of deriving output is your work and so I don’t think we need to call an attribution separately.  I have noted that the so called “original” works that are out there are actually ideas from other sources. I guess it is fine to be “inspired” by such ideas as there is always someone who would have said it before you do. I would focus on our part of the work and in this case our original work is in processing the output or the effort that has gone in deriving the research outcome. Your part of the activity is quite complex and important for the eventual objective of our project” – Peter.

“Well I don’t agree with you. After all the output is the function of the original algorithms and those are not my original scripts” Maya continued to debate.

“Well, I guess I differ with your thought. Also remember that if we do so we are likely to be disqualified and will probably be out of the Innovation contest. Do you really believe that all original work out there is truly "original"? Well we are inspired by someone's ideas and that fuels the creativity in us. Well, give it a thought and let me know what you think” – Peter seemed disappointed.

Given the easy availability of information on internet for most of the research papers today, these instances are not uncommon. This dilemma cuts across domains. It’s a belief that the scope for original thinking has reduced and that most of the works are a “copy-paste” or a derivation of someone’s original work. Blatant copying of original works and passing it off without an appropriate attribution is a common complaint. Resorting to these tricks is perceived as means for a quick success. The publishing community is quite aware of this and has set appropriate check points (created software applications for plagiarism check) to flag such instances.

What can be done in such situations? How do we drive inspiration to write original articles? How can project managers work towards an appropriate balance of creativity and derivation? Applying originality of thoughts with the right attributions builds on the credibility of the author and ensures their authenticity and appropriate processing of guidelines.

Your thoughts on this ethical dilemma are welcome….

Disclaimer: all characters, names and incidents in this story are fictional. Any resemblance to actual persons, living or dead, or actual events is purely coincidental.

Have you ever had an ah-ha moment because of something that just happens to you?

As I sat at my desk preparing for a Skype call with a colleague from across the globe,  I watched the sun rise as it kissed and glistened the morning dew.  While sitting in front of a pair of windows, I noticed the one on my right had taken on cloudiness in the glass, and the window on the left is perfectly clear. And yes, the azaleas are still blooming, and the mock cherry is starting to light up!

Since I sit right in the middle, and with a slight turn of my head I could go from a crispy clear view to a not so clear view. 

As the phone rang, a multitude of thoughts were racing through  my head, including several  quotes, “if you change the way you look at things the things you look at change!” – Wayne Dyer.

“Good leadership requires the ability to imagine life through another’s eyes”- Seth Godin.

And then I checked on a definition of Empathy- “Being able to appreciate and experience emotion from another person’s perspective.”

This led me to think about the many ways we view the world, and how often we have differing interpretations or views of the same idea or situation, whether it be a problem, an opportunity or a solution.  We tend to view the world and our impact through our own lenses.  I wondered how much we could benefit and learn from other perspectives  and how my   friend was seeing the world today.  

So, I asked…., and here is a small portion of our conversation. 

Although we did not achieve the intended purpose of our call, what we did accomplish by better understanding each other and growing our relationship was much more valuable.   

While this happened by accident, we imagined how many of our  relationships that would  benefit from having more of these types of conversations, intentionally! 

We discussed the critical importance of clarity.  What is crystal  clear to one person may not be so clear to the next person.  And within that difference, with its presence or absence, therein lies the opportunity for conflict, creativity, and growth.  And among other things, also the breakdown or building of Trust!

What is the difference between those two outcomes?

If we can so easily  become  vulnerable to see things differently, how often do we  understand the things we hear differently from intended?   Or how often do  two or more of us  hear   the same things, and walk away with a different understanding of what was said?

How often do we take the time to look at things through the other person’s lenses, and make a sincere effort to try and understand what, why or how they see things? 

Empathy is a leadership competency.  Practice putting yourself in the other persons shoes, see it and hear it from where they stand, and see if you can find a common ground to build on.

Discovering clarity on our different perspectives increases our understanding, capacity and ability to find the best solutions and outcomes for whatever we are trying to do.

If you think that is important, how might we make achieving clarity a shared responsibility?

Please join our conversation, we welcome your perspective. Where do you stand on this?