Question

Case Study: Joseph desired to use an internet domain addressfor his project management services business, and the domain name included direct identification of the Project Management Institute (PMI), joetrain.pmi.org. Since he wanted to use the PMI.org domain, Joseph requested the ability to do so from PMI. PMI declined his request since it would lead people to believe that PMI endorsed or otherwise recommended Joseph’s training, and the decision was upsetting to Joseph. Joseph contacted PMI and stated that he felt PMI’s decision was unfair. He then started texting certain PMI staff members with dozens of texts per day. PMI then sent an email to Joseph advising him that PMI would not change its decision and directed Joseph to stop texting and calling. However, Joseph sent additional texts that were rude and threatened legal action, claiming he had significant influence with the government and others involved in domain name assignment. Joseph continued his messaging at a rate of five dozen messages in less than a half day. In parallel to his communications to PMI headquarters staff, he sent multiple communications with the local Chapter President and threatened PMI and the local Chapter with various actions (like litigation).

1.1 Identify the stakeholders from the case study and explain how they are involved or affected. [5 marks]

1.2 Identity the ethical principles that relate to this case based on PMI code of ethics. [5 marks]

1.3 If you were the local Chapter President, what best action would you take to address this issue? [5 marks]

1.4 Explain how PMI Ethical Decision-Making Framework can be used to guide the local Chapter President while making decisions about what action to take.

Answer 1

1. Stakeholders involved in the case are Joseph, PMI(includes Director and employees), Law, and authority.

PMI is affected by threatening messages from Joseph.

Law and authority can be involved to resolve the case between the two.

And Joseph is affected because his demand for using the domain name of PMI is not considered.

2. PMI base their work on four values, i.e., honesty, responsibility, respect, and fairness.

Here, from the case perspective, it can be seen that fairness would be at stake because, if that is done to Joseph for his management services, it should be done for other people also, which may dilute the credibility of PMI. Hence, it was not fair to favor one based on the threats received.

Another aspect is responsibility. If the name is given then, PMI would be responsible for the conduct done by Joseph and his management services. Otherwise, it would be unethical. So, two ethical aspects are highlighted here.

Plus, honesty towards the different stakeholders like clients and society is also involved here.

3. The best action would have been legal action against Joseph for his inconsiderate demands. Since he is threatening the institute members, the legal charges can be initiated by the President.

Other than that, the President can also talk and explain to Joseph how this is against the institution's policy, and this demand cannot be met.

4. PMI EDMF has the following components, Assessment, Alternatives, Analysis, Application, and Action

Assessment. Here the President must ensure all ethical dilemmas are assessed based on facts and values as the demand does not abide by the law, so it can go to the next step of alternatives, where choices can be considered.

Here the choice is to either accept or not accept, and also the alternative is to take legal actions or ignore the emails from Joseph.

After the option is selected like legal charges, its validity must be tested. Like does this option has a positive or negative impact on the project, stakeholders.

Then an application of ethical principles to the decision. Like what results in the greatest good

And finally, it is the action to decide where the President would also have to take its responsibility.

i hope it helps..

If you have any doubts please comment and please don't dislike.

PLEASE GIVE ME A LIKE. ITS VERY IMPORTANT FOR ME