Ethical Scenario Discussion

Discuss the dilemma before deciding A short practice scenario for managers facilitating team learning Fictional example: At Northstar Services, a project lead is preparing a supplier renewal recommendation when the supplier offers complimentary seats at a professional conference. Use the scenario to explore how people identify competing considerations and what they need to check before acting. It is a learning example, not company policy, legal advice, or a decision about a real matter. For a live concern, use the organization's approved guidance and advice routes. What is pulling in different directions? Both perspectives raise questions for discussion; neither settles the decision. Ask the group to distinguish known facts from assumptions. Relationship-building rationale The conference could provide relevant professional learning and a chance to discuss project needs with the supplier. The project lead may believe accepting would not change their recommendation. What legitimate work purpose might the offer serve? What alternatives could meet that purpose without accepting the offer? Impartiality and fair process The offer arrives while the lead is preparing a renewal recommendation. Even without an intended influence, acceptance could raise questions about perception, equal treatment, and confidence in the process. Who could reasonably question the recommendation or process? What facts or approved guidance would the lead need before taking any action? Facilitate the conversation Keep the group focused on reasoning, not guessing at a policy outcome. A facilitator can capture answers in meeting notes without recording confidential details on this page. Separate facts from unknowns Record what the scenario states: a supplier made an offer while a renewal recommendation is being prepared. List what is not stated, such as the organization's applicable rules, the offer's conditions, and who else is involved. Name affected people and interests Consider the project team, the supplier, other suppliers, decision-makers, and people who rely on a fair recommendation. Ask who may be affected even if the lead believes they can remain impartial. Compare possible responses Discuss options such as declining, asking for clarification, or pausing the decision while seeking authorized guidance. For each, consider transparency, fairness, and what remains uncertain; do not treat this list as an approved procedure. Identify the handoff before action If this were a real or unresolved concern, identify the appropriate Legal and Compliance or locally designated advice route under approved organizational guidance before proceeding. Prompts that deepen the discussion Invite evidence and alternatives; avoid asking the group to decide what company policy says. Test the facts Which missing fact could change how you understand the situation? What would you verify rather than assume? Would the timing or conditions of the offer matter? Look beyond intent Who could be affected or lose confidence in the process, even if the project lead intends to be impartial? How might another supplier view the process? What would a colleague need to see to understand how the recommendation was reached? Compare alternatives What response could preserve a fair process while the relevant facts and guidance are checked? Which option avoids making an unsupported assumption? What should wait until authorized advice is available? When a real concern needs advice If a real or unresolved concern arises, pause any decision that could create a conflict and consult the appropriate Legal and Compliance or local designated advice route under your organization's approved guidance. For an urgent or sensitive matter, use the established reporting or escalation channel. This page does not define those channels or replace the authoritative conduct policy. The Legal and Compliance content owner is responsible for the page's accuracy and correction route; review it when approved guidance or the applicable local advice route changes.