quantmleap

In a previous post I have made the sweeping claim (based on circumstantial evidence) that many recorded project failures are likely to be a result of a failure in adhering to basic rules of ethics and morality. 

One of the conclusions arising from this hypothesis is that a far greater emphasis should be put on ethical and moral teachings in training, coaching and mentoring project managers. The rationale behind this should be self-explanatory: If ethical and moral failings are amongst the leading causes to project failures, addressing those at the grass-root level should result in an increased likelihood of such behaviours ceasing to exist and, voila, resulting in better project outcomes.

Right?

Wrong!

The reason this hypothetical solution will not work is because it fails to account for one of the reasons why people are ‘pushed’ into making unethical and immoral decisions in the first place.

I believe it is fair to say that most people attend to their daily duties with a genuine attempt to deliver fair value for money while exhibiting socially and professionally acceptable ethical and moral attitudes. When things ‘go south’, individual defence systems are raised and self-preservation kicks in. It is at this moment that people are faced with the dilemma of whether or not to live up to their professional code of ethics and their own value system. Should they live up to the standard set by their social and professional affiliation at a cost of personal and professional humiliation, or not? The dilemma is therefore about contrasting the personal cost versus the external cost (as determined by the cost to the project, the company, the team, etc.). At this point it boils down to the individual’s pain threshold. The lower your pain threshold the sooner you will break your ethical and moral standards; and vice-versa.

With the above in mind we are now ready to contemplate a possible solution to this problem. Reducing the risk of a moral or ethical ‘breach’ can be achieved by attending to one (or two) of the following options:

• Help people increase their pain threshold, or
• Look into ways for reducing the actual pain

 Although it might be possible to help people increase their pain threshold, it doesn’t sound like the ethically correct thing to do. People should not be expected to perform any work that can cause them psychological stress. So I will leave this point without any further elaboration.

Reducing the actual pain is certainly something that is within the reach of every organization. As speculated above, people are driven to deviate from their ethical or moral code by the fear of public humiliation. One of the causes of such humiliation is the fear of being branded and stigmatized as a failed project manager. As outlined in previous posts, this fear results in lack of initiative and in overly risk avoidance attitude. It is also this which makes organizations come up with bureaucratic  rules and procedures stressing the need for ever-more quality assurance gates.

Removing the wholesale stigma associated with failure will achieve a number of objectives:

1. It will result in lower level of QA loading, not directly contributing to the actual success of the project;
2. It will result in greater willingness to take reasonable risk with the expectation of achieving better project results and allowing the realization of greater opportunities; and
3. It will result in reduced chances of personal pain and thus in decreased chances of professionals making unethical and immoral decisions.

Think about it!

Related posts:

1. The Impact of Ethical Project Management on Project Success
2. Musings On Leadership (or Lack of)
3. Musings About Complexity