What's wrong with this picture: visual analysis and interpretation

Ethics & Morality

Decision Criteria

In order to determine the best way to deal with this situation, some decision criteria must be set. The first criterion is the alternative's value to the organization. As a consultant, you have been hired to perform a task. The most important driver in any decision within that task is the impact of that decision on the value of the outcome of the task. In this instance, the value of the outcome has been severely compromised. The best outcome is likely not an option, so the alternative should have the objective of finding the best outcome given the constraints.

The second criterion to evaluate is the alternative's value to you as a business. As a consultant, your reputation is important so the decision should be evaluated against any potential impacts to your reputation. Your track record of success is a key driver for future business, so this should also be taken into consideration. Work that is below your standards will ultimately reflect on you as much if not more than on the client, so the decision should be weighed against your ability to maintain your professional standards.

The third criterion should be your personal ethics. Regardless of the standard of work you are able to submit, your work should ideally not violate your personal ethical code. As a person, you do need to be able to sleep at night, no matter how much money the job pays. Moreover, it can be a detriment to your business if you are seen by potential customers as putting money ahead of ethics, especially if your job involves writing a code of ethical conduct. It is critical that you maintain the ethical high ground. If the company is curtailing your ability because it lacks strong ethical standards, that will come out sooner or later, and your name will be attached to that company and its lack of ethics. Defense of your own personal ethics must be taken into consideration.

Alternatives

One alternative is to continue with the project under the constraints without question. This means working around the constraints to put the best code of conduct and mission statement together for the company as possible. While it is understood that the quality of the code will be compromised by the actions of Green's legal department, you were hired to do a job and you should do it to the best of your abilities, regardless of the value of the output.

A second alternative is to demand that the constraints be removed. This may involved going around the legal department to the top managers, or back to the human resources manager. The firm would then be informed of the ways in which your work will be compromised by the legal department's stipulations. A request should also include testimony as to the value of having those constraints removed. This alternative demonstrates professionalism, affords you the opportunity to conduct your work they way you want to, and is the only way to gain leverage over the intransigent legal department.

The third alternative is to walk away from the project. This alternative would prevent you from violating your own ethical code. Also, it would prevent you from being forced to turn in substandard work. There would be a small hit to your professional pride about not finishing the work you were hired to do, but ultimately as a consultant you must have control of your methods, resources and outcomes in order to be effective.

Recommendation

The first alternative is the weakest of the three, and should not be exercised. The output will be poor, which damages your reputation. Moreover, it will compromise your ethics. There are no winners with the first alternative, except perhaps a company with some things to hide that merely wants a code of conduct for cosmetic purposes.