This document is an assignment discussing ethics for project managers. It addresses the central challenge of ethics being the principles that guide actions rather than dictating actions in specific situations. It discusses deontological and teleological ethics, citing philosophers like Kant and Bentham. It also examines cases like whistleblowers Sherron Watkins and Julian Assange to analyze how individuals make ethical decisions and whether self-interest or principles tend to take priority. The conclusion calls for ethics codes to evolve using both deontological and teleological perspectives with exceptions allowed through rational analysis of consequences.

1. THE UNIVERSITY OF THE WEST INDIES
ST. AUGUSTINE
ASSIGNMENT 2.
The central challenge of the ethical debate is not so much what we must
do in a particular circumstance but the reasons and principles that must
guide our action in all situations. Discuss.
PRMG6016
ETHICS FOR THE PROJECT MANAGER
LECTURER: PROFESSOR WINSTON H. E. SUITE
COURSE LECTURER: PROF. WINSTON H. E. SUITESTUDENT NAME: IRWIN ARCHER
STUDENT ID: 02737073
DATE: MONDAY 7TH
DECEMBER, 2015
FACULTY OF
ENGINEERING

2. Introduction
Ethics is the activity of determining right and wrong and applying moral judgment in exercising and
enjoining appropriate behaviour in all situations. It is an old discipline, appearing in writings about
Greek philosophers such as Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. Ethics is primarily concerned with the
establishment and maintenance of a just and equitable society. It is anthropocentric in that it aims to
guide human relationships with other humans, animals and the environment toward the well-being of
human beings, present and future.
A common misconception is that ethics is a standalone discipline. In reality, it must be adapted and
incorporated into various professions and into everyday life. In project management for example, ethics
must be foremost in thought in all knowledge areas and project phases. Negligent or willful ethical
breaches can have grave consequences such as damage to personal and organizational reputations, loss
of current or potential clientele, increase in the cost of projects, decreased quality of project outcomes,
and decreased efficiency in the execution of projects. In today’s highly competitive globalized market,
project managers are under constant pressure to achieve high standards of quality, fast delivery time
and low cost in the delivery of project outcomes. Project managers may commit ethical breaches in
pursuit of unrealistic goals set by organizations seeking competitive advantage. Ethics is often trivialized
until the harsh consequences of these ethical breaches are felt. Some ethical breaches ultimately lead to
organizational failure or billions of dollars in compensation and punitive legal ramifications. The cost of
ethical breaches proves that it should be a primary concern within organizations and societies.
Ethical situations present themselves frequently in business. Project Managers are often faced with
opportunities to choose among mutually exclusive strategic options or to do nothing at all. In such
situations, every action or inaction has consequences. In some ethical situations, the available strategic
options do not resolve the ethical issue in a manner that is beneficial to all parties. Such situations are
deemed to be ethical dilemmas. In such situations, one cannot rely solely on codes of ethics for an
amicable resolution and the discerning of right and wrong is difficult. These ethical dilemmas reveal that
codes of ethics are not universal laws that must be adhered to dogmatically. Codes of ethics are simply
guides; human beings have the ultimate responsibility to assess ethical situations and apply their
judgment accordingly. The reasons and principles that guide human decisions in ethical situations will
be discussed in the next section.

3. Discussion
Ethics must be considered when making decisions in a wide range of situations. It is not feasible to
define every possible ethical situation and prescribe appropriate actions and resolutions for these
situations. The complexity of some ethical situations further compounds the difficulty of decision
making. Not every ethical situation is the ideal one in which there is a clear binary choice between right
and wrong. In some situations, individuals are often faced with a myriad of choices, each of which
cannot be categorized as absolutely right or wrong but rather they exist along a continuum; shades of
grey as it were. The goal of ethics is therefore to establish universal principles that provide guidance to
persons tasked with exercising moral judgment in all situations they may encounter. These universal
principles aim to establish justice.
Justice however is not an easily definable concept. Socrates concluded that Justice is wisdom and virtue
while injustice is ignorance and vice (Plato 2002). It is closely linked to fairness since it basically involves
ensuring that people get what they deserve. This may entail ensuring that punishments for crimes are
commensurate with crimes committed and that each similar violation is treated similarly, regardless of
the person committing it. Accordingly, justice should also ensure that rewards are earned by those who
deserve them in a fair manner. Justice has the ultimate goal of reinforcing appropriate behavior and
discouraging inappropriate behavior.
In the discussion of the driving principles and reasons utilized in ethical decision making, two schools of
thought exist. Deontological ethics involves the adherence to universal truths and principles while
teleological ethics focuses on the results that are being sought.
Immanuel Kant is the most popular philosopher associated with the absolutism that is deontological
ethics. He proposed the categorical imperative which calls for the emphasis of duty and principles over
all other factors (Kliem 2012). He argued that as rational beings, humans had a duty to subordinate
personal interests such as happiness to universal ideals. This categorical imperative applies the following
universal law:
“Act only on that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal
law (Kant 2010)”
According to this law, it is unethical to steal because one would not reasonably say that everyone should
steal. It causes individuals to question themselves: Am I willing to mandate that the entire society/

4. world should act in this way? This honest introspection is the result of the application of the Kantian
ethics and is a prime example of the deontological perspective. The motives behind actions determine
whether they can be considered as goodwill or not.
Teleological ethics calls on human beings to use the end purpose of actions as the justification for
actions. A popular application of the teleological perspective is the Utilitarian philosophy put forward by
Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mills (Kliem 2012). Utilitarianism calls for the consideration of the
consequences of actions with the aim of maximizing utility. This may be articulated as achieving the
greatest well-being for the greatest number of persons. Kant strongly objected to this philosophy as it
could allow individuals to act with evil intent under the guise of promoting a greater good. Furthermore,
the consequences of actions are not necessarily under the control of moral agents. This philosophy
could therefore lead to a moral agent harming people for a long term ‘good’ consequence that never
materializes.
In his book The Prince, Nicolo Machiavelli espoused teleological ideals that would be considered
downright unethical today. He justified harming people in pursuit of ‘good ends’, but the ends pursued
were all self-serving (Machiavelli 1515). Machiavelli taught people how to attain, safeguard and increase
political power at all costs. Tyrants and dictators could use the Machiavellian philosophy to justify their
methods of rule. It is a stark contrast to the philosophy of Utilitarianism in that it sought the greatest
good for oneself, no matter how many may be harmed in the process. It demonstrates the wide range of
application of teleological ethics. It also demonstrates the manipulative and nefarious purposes for
which the knowledge of ethics may be used.
Kantian ethics is not without criticism. The problem with this deontological approach is that no
consideration is given to the consequences of choices. It is easy to imagine scenarios in which adherence
to a universal principle can have horrific consequences. Consider the universal principle: one should not
lie. Swiss philosopher Benjamin Constant challenged that if a murderer inquired about the location of his
would be victim, one would be assisting in the murder if one were to be truthful about the location of
this potential victim. Kant responded to this challenge by maintaining his position that the principle on
lying must remain universal and it is therefore not permissible to tell lies with good intentions (Kant, On
the Supposed Right to Lie From Benevolent Motives 2012). Kant’s failure to provide exceptions to
universal principles causes many to question the rationality of Kantian ethics.

5. Far too often, people in positions of influence in Trinidad and Tobago choose to put personal interests
ahead of the rights and interests of others. The foundational principles of ethics hold that goodwill
should be the intention or consequence of actions. Altruism, integrity and honesty should be foremost
in thought when ethical situations arise. Professionals who fail to adhere to their codes of ethics are
guilty of ethical breaches and are likely to face punitive consequences. However, some professional
codes of ethics contain elements that are part of an ongoing debate as to their rationality.
Consider the issue of confidentiality between doctor and patient, lawyer and client or priest and
parishioner. These professions hold deontological views that confidentiality must be maintained despite
all other factors or considerations. But what if a murderer discloses his crime to one of these
professionals? What is the ethical thing for them to do? This scenario is similar to the one proposed by
Benjamin Constant to refute Immanuel Kant’s categorical imperative. Rationality suggests that these
professionals should take action to bring the murderer to justice. However, confidentiality is a universal
principle in these professions and this means that many professionals are torn between rationality and
the duty to adhere to their codes of ethics. This is one example in which ethics fails to achieve its
intended goal of justice. In Trinidad and Tobago however, doctors have been mandated by law to
observe exceptions to the confidentiality principle. They are required by law to report all cases of
gunshot wounds and sexual or physical abuse of minors. A criminal lawyer in such a scenario is faces
perhaps an even greater dilemma because he would then be tasked with defending the murderer in
court. This would entail either trying to minimize the punitive sentencing or secure the murderer’s
freedom by ‘proving’ him innocent. This would go squarely against the principles of honesty, integrity
and justice upon which the discipline of ethics was founded. The ethical debate continues with regard to
the issue of confidentiality. One can only hope that rationality will prevail and exceptions to this
principle will be established in law for all professions.
Another important consideration in the ethical debate is the question of loyalty. Persons faced with
ethical situations must ask themselves: to whom do I owe the greatest loyalty? In the scenario above,
the criminal lawyer must decide if his paying client’s interests and rights supersede those of his victims.
If this is so, one may be inclined to ask: what factor caused the murderer’s interests to triumph? If this
factor is money then it seems as if the lofty ideal of loyalty can simply be purchased within the criminal
law profession.
In some professions however, individuals have made ethical decisions that were motivated by rationality
and altruism. Whistle-blowing is a very admirable act in the realm of ethics. Whistle-blowers go against

6. the status quo, often to their own detriment, for the sake of doing the right thing. Acts of whistle-
blowing demonstrate that the pursuit of justice and the desire to protect the public’s interest can
become primary factors in ethical decision making. This was highlighted in 2002 when three
whistleblowers were featured as Time Magazine’s personalities of the year.
One of these ‘whistle-blowers’ was Sherron Watkins, Vice President of Corporate Development at
Enron. She testified in court about improper accounting practices at the company that ultimately led to
its downfall. The former CEO of Enron eventually got sentenced to over 24 years in prison for fraud,
conspiracy and other charges as a result (History 2015). In her testimony, Ms Watkins revealed that she
had a Masters Degree in Professional Accounting and was a Certified Public Accountant for about 24
years. When one considers these things, the reasons for her decision become clearer. Ms. Watkins
would have invested a lot of time and dedication to her studies and career to reach the point she did. As
an accounting professional, she must have understood that her greatest and most valuable asset was
her integrity. Had she been complicit to the illegal activities at Enron, her career would have surely come
to an abrupt end. In fact, Arthur Anderson, the accounting firm which performed the external auditing
function at Enron, met its demise when it was discovered that they assisted Enron in destroying
incriminating documents (History 2015). Sherron Watkins may have been concerned about the injustice
being perpetrated upon members of the public and the large scale fraud within Enron, but most likely
her concern over the effects of these nefarious activities on her reputation, career and even her
freedom would have had a greater influence on her decision to testify against the company. Some even
debate whether she is a real whistle-blower (Ackman 2002). A whistle-blower is someone who informs
the public upon observing wrongdoing in a company, but Sherron only raised concerns internally. It is
fair to say that Sherron Watkins played it safe at Enron and only testified when she had to for her own
sake. This case is a reminder that while there may be desires to protect the interests of the public,
people are often influenced by a loyalty to themselves first and foremost. Sherron Watkins is now
lauded as a hero and has become a motivational speaker. She is often praised for her courage,
truthfulness and integrity in professional and academic circles.
However there are cases in which whistle-blowers put the protection of public interest and other
universal ideals above self preservation. Julian Assange and Edward Snowden are currently evading
authorities after their acts of whistle-blowing against the United States of America. These men
publicized classified information out of concern for the public interest and a desire to promote justice.
However, their fight is against the most powerful nation in the world and this has resulted in a complete

7. upheaval in their lives. The USA sought to have Julian Assange extradited to face charges for his
publications but he was able to secure asylum with Ecuador from what he deemed to be political
persecution. The UK however, in seeking to honour geopolitical ties, placed police outside the
Ecuadorian embassy in which Assange was situated, thereby denying him safe passage to Ecuador. If
Assange leaves the embassy, he will enter the jurisdiction of the UK and could be arrested and
extradited. Assange has been living inside the Ecuadorian embassy for over three years despite pleas for
permission to access to medical care unencumbered (Weaver 2015). He is therefore forced to choose
between the human right to medical care and the human right to asylum. This appears to be a
grotesque case of injustice against a man who acted in goodwill and in pursuit of justice. As Assange
continues to avoid capture, he provides a lesson about the harsh consequences of whistle-blowing. It is
really an act that takes courage, selflessness and universal adherence to the principle of truth and
justice.
Perhaps after learning from the experience of Assange, Edward Snowden migrated to Hong Kong in
2013 before publicizing the unethical and unconstitutional surveillance activities of the National Security
Agency (NSA) in the USA. He is now enjoying asylum in Russia as he continues to evade extradition to
the USA. While the actions of Assange and Snowden are indeed courageous and admirable, they prove
that a powerful state cannot be brought to justice for unethical actions. The leaders of powerful states
are sometimes representative of the Machiavellian philosophy in that they trample the rights and
freedoms of citizenry in pursuit of narcissistic political objectives. These cases also give rise to questions
about the secrecy of the operations of the state. Plato’s Republic relates the story of the ring of Gyges
which made him invisible. Once he could not be seen, he engaged in unethical behavior in pursuit of
political power and wealth. Glaucon was of the view that no man who possessed this ring could be
virtuous and resist the temptation to be unjust if he knows that there will be no consequences for
injustice. This, he argued, is because injustice is more profitable than justice (Plato 2002). This truly
seems to be the case with secret state organizations. Secrecy affords such organizations freedom from
public scrutiny and a high level of impunity. It is difficult for ethics to achieve its goals within such a
framework.

8. Conclusion
The deontological perspective is of great value in the development of the discipline of ethics. Due to its
keen focus on goodwill, altruism, simplicity and universal applicability, it forms the foundation of many
codes of ethics. However, sole reliance on deontology is not ideal due to the diverse and complex nature
of ethical situations that may be faced in practice. As the ethical debate continues, philosophers and
thinkers search for the perfect ethical framework with which to guide human behaviour. The teleological
perspective offers the evaluation of consequences that is lacking from deontology, but it can easily be
corrupted into a self serving philosophy.
As has been done within the medical profession, codes of ethics need to continue to evolve to include
both deontological and teleological principles. That is, developers of these codes need to start with the
altruistic, universal rules of deontology, but include exceptions that safeguard against injustices being
experienced or perpetrated by adherents to these codes. The key to achieving this end is to continue to
rely on rationality and logic when developing codes of ethics. Professionals must also remember that
codes of ethics are meant to provide guidance and as such it is the professional that must embrace the
responsibility to apply rationality to the decision making process. Professionals should not adhere to
codes of ethics dogmatically then blame them for undesirable outcomes. Professionals have a duty to
consider the goodwill for all stakeholders when making ethical decisions. Professionals can safeguard
against the fallibility of human judgment by discussing ethical situations with peers or engaging in
stakeholder consultations where possible.
Ethics resides within a wider framework and is dependent on supportive systems to achieve its goals.
Human beings must strive to create the environment that allows ethics to function well. Part of this
mission involves the protection of individuals who make decisions in the interest of protecting the public
interests. Whistle-blowers must be applauded for their struggle and supported internationally in the
fight against injustice.
As long as human beings exist, ethics will continue to be an important and highly relevant discipline. We
are the most advanced species on the planet, and as such, our greatest struggle is with ourselves.
Human beings have a long history of violent and disastrous interactions. Our mastery of global ethics
may very well determine our viability as a species in the long run.

9. Bibliography
Ackman, Dan. Sherron Watkins Had Whistle, But Blew It. 02 14, 2002.
http://www.forbes.com/2002/02/14/0214watkins.html (accessed 12 07, 2015).
History. Enron files for bankruptcy. 12 02, 2015. http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/enron-files-
for-bankruptcy (accessed 12 07, 2015).
Justice for Assange. Justice for Assange. 10 14, 2015. https://justice4assange.com/ (accessed 12 07,
2015).
Kant, Immanuel. Groundwork for the Metaphysic of Morals. Jonathan Bennett, 2010.
—. "On the Supposed Right to Lie From Benevolent Motives." SophiaOmni. 2012. http://www.sophia-
project.org/uploads/1/3/9/5/13955288/kant_lying.pdf (accessed 11 06, 2015).
Kliem, Ralph L. Ethics and Project Management. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2012.
Machiavelli, Nicolo. The Prince. Danny Stone, 1515.
Plato. The Republic. IDPH, 2002.
Weaver, Matthew. Police: Assange would be arrested if he left embassy to visit hospital. 10 15, 2015.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/oct/15/julian-assange-shoulder-pain-mri-scan-embassy-
metropolitan-police (accessed 12 07, 2015).