Please login or join to subscribe to this thread
Straight to the point Deepa and you are totally right with your ethical concerns in this Chaos.
This applies to any aspect related to vaccination, starting from the responsibility and the honesty of delivering a trial vaccine to the whole population of the globe, going through questioning the fairness and respect in administrating the distribution globally and locally...
The full process requires a delicate attention and high level of values and principles and it is our role, as professionals, to highlight and keep on promoting those values.
Challenging question, Deepa!
I'm not sure that PMI's framework is designed to tackle such questions as the first three values within it can apply equally to an individual or a larger collective.
Respecting an individual's right to choose whether or not to get vaccinated might show irresponsibility to the larger group if too many individuals choose NOT to get vaccinated.
At what point do the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few?
Great debate. Sorry for this long post. I hope it helps. Because the work I am performing outside my actual work place and inside my actual work place I am part of a group of investigators which are considered between the top five in the world, not for today Covid but they are there from long time ago. But my work inside the group is related to support the group with things like data, statistics, computing, etc, not about infectology, biology or things like that. With that said, I humble believe that putting the debate in the field of anti-vaccine or pro-vaccine has no sense because you will find the same for vaccines that are exhaustively tested saved life from long time ago. In my opinion I think we have to put it in the facts at least what we know today. Here comes some of the information I have. 1-this virus is like the influence virus then, in the basement, "rules" and "behaviors" are the same. 2-phase 3 of all the vaccines that today exists has not been concluded and it will not be concluded until 2-3 more years. Because of that there are inherent risks. In the same way organizations manage other risk a risk analysis was performed and the "cost vs benefit" demonstrate it was "better" to use the vaccines with an emergency approval of phase 3 in an specific state which is not the state accepted to say "phase 3 is concluded". 3-actual vaccines, up to day, they do not prevent infection. Just they prevent that just in case a person is infected "the level" of damage is as slight as possible so they wouldn't have to wear a respirator or get to the point of dying. But with the vaccine everybody can be infected again. Just to comment, all the vaccines have a level of protection or efficiency. 4-actual vaccines do not prevent the propagation of Covid except for the fact that there is growing evidence to suggest that people with the full vaccine are less likely to be infected without symptoms (known as an asymptomatic infection) and in this way there is possibly less likely to spread the virus that causes COVID-19 to other people. That meant, if a infected person is "visible" then actions to isolate it will prevent to infect others. However, more research is ongoing.
5-while is under research, actual vaccines seems to keep people safe in the terms I stated in point 3 for 6-10 month only.
So, sorry for the long post. My only intention is to encourage people to go to "good" information and do not be afraid but take care. The only, only, only thing that is proved is the best prevention against the Covid, up to date, are wearing a chinstrap, washing your hands and keeping your distance when we are interacting especially in closed places. And remember: fear paralyzes. And like physic has demonstrated long time ago everything in this Universe must be in motion not to perish,
I think its only a fair to oneself and the community around you to comply with the directive
As a professional engineer and project manager my code of ethics does not allow me to influence the thinking of staff under my direction regarding issues/subjects outside my area of expertise. This applies not only to vaccines but also sexual orientation, politics, religion. I cannot use my position of authority to promote specific personal thoughts or beliefs, even outside the office environment. Even if I think my beliefs are in the common interest or within accepted norms.
Not only that but as a leader I have an obligation to ensure that no one else in the team tries to use their position, or their opportunity, to try and influence others in matters not directly related to the project.
If it is brought to your attention that there is discomfort, conflict or concern within the team as to exposure to a potentially unsafe or unhealthy situation you have to deal with it as a project risk and find ways to mitigate.
Stay out of peoples lives and beliefs. Focus on the project.
Vaccines, from the current research, alleviate the symptoms even if they dont necessarily prevent the disease. Research is ongoing and we all need to stay updated.
Thanks for your detailed post. Enjoyed reading it.
Your perspective on the topic is very interesting.
Imagine the scenario:
- The distrust is total
- Many members of your team stop working remotely
- 50% of your team members do not want (for this or that reason) to be vaccinated
- 50% are in favor of vaccines
How would you proceed as a project manager?
Please login or join to reply