Doing Ethics Technique - Development Methodology

This assignment analyzes a scenario in software development where ethical dilemmas arise between a junior developer and a project manager. It discusses the implications of decision-making in a corporate environment, emphasizing the importance of communication and adherence to organizational protocols. The assignment utilizes the Doing Ethics Technique to evaluate the situation, identify stakeholders, and propose solutions that maintain ethical standards while ensuring client satisfaction.

SCHOOL OF COMPUTING AND MATHS, Charles Sturt University
Development Methodology/Scenario 2
Assignment 1: Doing Ethics Technique
Your Name
Student Number
Word Count:1000

Development Methodology/Scenario 2
Q1. What's going on?
The title of the scenario is ‘Development Methodology’. The video begins with a scene
where the junior developer is having a telephonic conversation with the client. The project
manager enters the scene and asks about the progress of the technical project that they are
supposed to deliver to the client company ("Scenario 2: Development Methodology", 2017).
He gets to know from the junior developer that the client is asking to make some changes in
the software. The project manager enters the room and asks about the progress of the
project. After getting to know about the client’s demand, he asks the details of the
modifications. The scenario explains that the junior developer agrees to make the changes
in the software as per the requirement of the client.
Q2. What are the facts?
The scenario gives the description of a scene taking place in an IT based company. This
company is responsible for delivering software projects as per the demand of the clients.
The client does not seem to be satisfied with the way the software is being developed. He
asks the junior developer to make certain modifications based on his own idea (Weiss,
2014). The junior developer happily agrees to do so. Now the question arises that being an
employee of the company, whether he should have agreed so easily and taken a decision on
his own or whether he should have asked his senior authorities before agreeing. Then the
project manager enters the scene and talks to him regarding the progress of the project.
Q3. What are the issues (non-ethical)?
There can be several non ethical issues in this scenario. The junior developer accepted the
request of the client without informing the project manager. This can be considered to be
non ethical because being a subordinate who is working under a project manager; he should
have at least informed his senior before taking any decision. Another non ethical issue can
be that, the project manager shouts at the junior developer for not informing him before
taking such decisions (Schwartz, 2017). Screaming and shouting is a non professional
behavior that can also be considered to be non ethical. The project manager should explain
the developer in a polite and professional manner. Another non ethical event can take
place, where the project manager will agree with the junior developer and proceed without
Your Name

Development Methodology/Scenario 2
informing the program director. Any decisions taken in an organization must follow the
chain of order or authority. Taking independent decisions without informing the higher
authorities can be considered to be non ethical.
Q4. Who is affected?
The entire project team of the company including the program director, project manager
and the junior, senior developers of the company will be affected. They will have to modify
the changes as required by the client. This will utilize even more and extra resources of the
company. If they do not follow the client instruction properly then the client will be affected
as he will not be satisfied with the project delivered by the vendor company (Jahanshani et
al., 2014). On the other hand if the program director shouts at the junior developer for
taking decision then the developer might feel bad and not come to work and plan to resign.
This will affect the mind of the junior developer and demotivate him to work in the
organization.
Q5. What are the ethical issues and their implications?
The project manager can shout at the junior developer for taking his own decision and
agreeing with the client. This will demotivate the developer and he might not feel like
working in the organization (Shaw & Barry, 2015). This is one ethical issue. Another ethical
issue can be that the project manager encourages his junior developer to go forward with
the plan. Later on if the client is not satisfied then the program director can blame him for
not letting the higher authorities know. In an organization one must let the higher
authorities know before taking any steps. Taking independent decision does not belong to
an organizational culture. The implications of taking self decision can lead to huge loss and
client dissatisfaction.
Q6. What can be done about it?
The project manager should have faith on the junior developer and appreciate him to take
decision on his own (Baker & Comer, 2012). At the same time the project manager should
let the developer know that in an organization one must take decision by discussing with
others. The project manager should inform his higher authority regarding this. A joint
Your Name

Development Methodology/Scenario 2
decision must be taken where the opinion of the junior developer must be considered. This
will keep the developer as well as the higher authorities happy and satisfies. On the other
hand if this joint decision results in good client software then it will keep the client satisfied.
This will result in generating huge profit for the organization.
Q7. What are the options?
There are three options available in this scenario. First option is, the project manager
appreciates the decision taken by the junior developer and tells him to carry on with the
work. Later on if the client is dissatisfied with the software then the project manager gets
blamed and the entire company suffers loss (Ford & Richardson, 2013). Second option is, the
project manager shouts at the developer for taking this decision. Later on the developer
gets demotivate and stops coming to office. Third option is, the project manager tells the
junior developer to inform him and forward him such calls from next time. Here the project
manager later on talks with the client and takes a proper decision.
Q8. Which option is the best and why?
The best option according to this scenario is that the project manager suggests the junior
developer the proper procedure that should be followed in these types of situations. He
tells the developer to forward him such calls from client in the future. In the absence of the
project manager the junior developer should text him about the matter. This is the best
option because here the actions taken are ethically correct (Crane & Matten, 2016). Here
the junior developer is also not offended and at the same time the customer is also satisfied
with the modified software. This option maintains the harmony of work environment. Here
the project manager tackles the situation in an ethical manner.
References
Baker, S. D., & Comer, D. R. (2012). “Business Ethics Everywhere” An Experiential Exercise to
Develop Students’ Ability to Identify and Respond to Ethical Issues in
Business. Journal of Management Education, 36(1), 95-125.
Your Name

Development Methodology/Scenario 2
Crane, A., & Matten, D. (2016). Business ethics: Managing corporate citizenship and
sustainability in the age of globalization. Oxford University Press.
Ford, R. C., & Richardson, W. D. (2013). Ethical decision making: A review of the empirical
literature. In Citation classics from the Journal of Business Ethics (pp. 19-44). Springer
Netherlands.
Jahanshani, A. A., Hajizadeh, G. M. A., Mirdhamadi, S. A., Nawaser, K., & Khaksar, S. M. S.
(2014). Study the effects of customer service and product quality on customer
satisfaction and loyalty.
Scenario 2: Development Methodology. (2017). YouTube. Retrieved 5 August 2017, from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0npm9cEJBWY
Schwartz, M. S. (2017). Business Ethics: An Ethical Decision-Making Approach. John Wiley &
Sons.
Shaw, W. H., & Barry, V. (2015). Moral issues in business. Cengage Learning.
Weiss, J. W. (2014). Business ethics: A stakeholder and issues management approach.
Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Do not remove the following marking sheet.
Marking Sheet
Criteria Standards
Marks
award
ed
Analysis
of the
ethical
dilemma
using the
Doing
Ethics
Technique
(DET)
(Value
70%)
HD: Answers all DET questions, lists all the facts, identifies all the non-
ethical issues, lists all the stakeholders, identifies all the ethical issues,
evaluates OTHER options can resolve them and selects the best option
from these and the already given and justifies why this option is the best
using supporting arguments based on the literature.(59.5-70)
DI: Answers all DET questions, lists all the facts, identifies all the non-
ethical issues, lists all the stakeholders, lists all the ethical issues and the
OTHER options can resolve them and selects the best option from these
and explains why this option is the best.(52.5-58.8)
CR: Answers all DET questions, lists most of the facts, identifies most of
the non-ethical issues, lists most of the stakeholders, lists most of the
ethical issues and OTHER options can resolve them and selects the best
option from these and makes an attempt to explain why this option is the
best.(45.5-51.8)
PS: Answers some of the DET questions, lists a few facts, identifies a few
non-ethical issues, lists a few stakeholders, lists a few ethical issues and
OTHER options can resolve them and selects the best option from these
but without explaining why this option is the best.(35-44.8)
FL: Answers a few DET questions but fails to list important facts, fails to
identify relevant non-ethical issues, fails to list important stakeholders,
fails to identify the ethical issues and evaluates the OTHER options can
Your Name

Development Methodology/Scenario 2
resolve them and does not select the best option or does not explain why
the option selected is the best.(0-34.3)
Writing &
structure
(Value
20%)
HD: Language features and structures are used to convey meaning
effectively, concisely, unambiguously, and in a tone appropriate to the
audience and purpose with no spelling, grammatical, or punctuation
errors.(17-20)
DI: Well developed skills in expression & presentation of ideas.Fluent
writing style appropriate to assessment task/document type.Grammar &
spelling accurate.(15-16.8)
CR: Good skills in expression & clear presentation of ideas.Mostly fluent
writing style appropriate to assessment task/document type. Grammar &
spelling contains a few minor errors.(13-14.8)
PS: The text contains frequent errors in spelling, grammar, word choice,
and structure, lacks clarity, and is not concise, but the meaning is
apparent to the reader with some effort.(10-12.8)
FL: Rudimentary skills in expression & presentation of ideas.Not all
material is relevant &/or is presented in a disorganised manner.Meaning
apparent, but writing style not fluent or well organised.Grammar &
spelling contains many errors.(0-9.8)
Referenci
ng
(Value
10%)
HD: Referencing is comprehensive, demonstrates academic integrity, and
conforms exactly to APA style conventions.(8.5-10)
DI: Very good referencing, including reference list and citations.High
quality references.(7.5-8.4)
CR:Good referencing, including reference list and citations. Good quality
references.(6.5-7.4)
PS:Referencing is comprehensive, mostly accurate according to APA style
conventions, and demonstrates academic integrity. Some minor errors or
omissions in style and formatting choices (e.g. italics, punctuation, etc)
don’t impact on the transparency and traceability of the source, or
demonstration of academic integrity.(5-6.4)
FL: Sub-standard (or no) referencing. Poor quality (or no) references.(0-
4.9)
Total
Marks
Your Name