Case Analysis: Pants on Fire, Essay Example

Ethical Issues

The ethical issues presented in the peer evaluation case study are both the actions of the Mary McKenzie, the program manager who is being evaluated, and the peer evaluation itself. Mary McKenzie has completed her self evaluation and has fabricated and exaggerated her contributions and accomplishments as a program manager. In fact, she has taken credit for work and innovations that belong to her peers. Now that it is time for peer evaluations, the other four program managers have made it a point to discuss the items in Mary’s portfolio, because the portfolios and peer evaluations go directly to the project manager for final review. The evaluation team, excluding Mary, therefore discusses the implications of being truthful in their evaluation of Mary’s work and portfolio. They are worried about telling the truth in the evaluation because Mary is favored by the project manager and she is also known for having a bad temperament. However, it is concluded that although the portfolio is mostly fabricated, Mary does complete reports in a timely manner and is good at clerical tasks. Although, she does not show qualities of a good leader and the fabrications in her portfolio explicitly state that she took leadership roles when she did not. Still, the team is worried about being honest in their evaluations in fear of her connections and retaliation.

Alternative Solutions

Although Mary has shown unethical behavior in her fabrications and exaggerations in her portfolio, she is not necessarily a bad employee. As the team puts together their evaluation of Mary, it would be beneficial to note the exact items in her portfolio that are not true, but also offer alternative, positive remarks. For example, if Mary has claimed sole credit for a project, the team can simply write in the memo who was actually involved in the project, as well as who took the lead, and describe Mary’s actual role in the project. In the case of the new database in which she took wrongful credit, the team can note that the project was from the previous year and which team members were actually responsible for the database, however should not be taken into consideration due to its ineligibility. Also, the team should make note of the positive aspects of Mary’s work and use clear and concise language that does not present bias. Most importantly, however, is making the project manager aware of Mary’s transgressions in a manner that does not make the team look vindictive and petty.

Consequences of Alternative Solutions

As noted in the study, Mary shows signs of a bad temperament, thus the open and truthful peer evaluation can and most likely will cause a backlash in the office. It is important that the team comes to a consensus about what should be writing in the memo to the project manager, because each team member will be equally responsible for their actions. Mary’s unethical behavior must be addressed otherwise it will cause a breakdown in the office, such as low morale  and confusion (Svara, 2014, p. 106). Mary shows signs of an opportunist and uses her relationship with the project manager as a means to gain recognition (Svara, 2014, p. 119). It is important that this issue is addressed before the situation is becomes unmanageable, as it is likely to become (Svara, 2014, pp. 137-139). Ultimately, in order to have a peaceful and effective workplace environment, communication must be open and truthful otherwise Mary will continue to abuse her position in the office (Svara, 2014, p. 107).

Final Recommendation

My final recommendation as the chair of the evaluation committee is to uncover and present to truth. My role is to truthfully and accurately present information discussed during the evaluation review, and in order to establish order and openness in communication, Mary’s behavior must be brought to the project manager’s attention. It is, however, important that the memo is fair and free of bias.

References

Svara, J. H. (2014). The ethics primer for public administrators in government and nonprofit organizations. Jones & Bartlett Publishers.