Orion Shield Case

During the implementation of the Orion Shield project many ethical and legal issues
arose. These ethical and legal issues included violations of contractual requirements
which were triggered by the involved parties. These issues were further
compounded by the failure of senior management to closely supervise to the project
manager during the duration of the project. Unfortunately the SEC does not require
the production of legal and truthful documentation.

Ethical Issues
Maintaining and observing ethical rules of conduct should be a requirement
for all project managers. Failure to observe an ethical code of conduct during the
Orion Shield project produced many ethical issues which resulted in the poor
conclusion of the project. These issues can be attributed to every member of the
project.
The first ethical issue arose when Larson encouraged Gary to make false
claims about the components. Stating that the components were operable at 155 F
degrees even though the current designs limited operations at 130 F degrees
created the first ethical during the project.
The second ethical issue during the project can be found in the lack of
supervision during the project. As the director of operations Larsen should have
been available for critical designs decisions that were made during the initial stages
of the project. As the director of operations Larsen should have remained available
and supervised Garys work. However, while Larsen failed to supervise Garys
decisions about the project he did not hesitate to supervise Garys mode of
transportation.
Additionally, Garys own lack of supervision of the STI representative
contributed to the ethical issues during the project. As a project manager Gary was
ultimately responsible for the supervision of those under him, keeping the clients
informed and conducting project meetings with stakeholders. By failing to provide
an agenda to STI and providing STI with meeting minutes, Gary failed in his ethical
responsibilities towards his clients.
Finally, it was dishonest and unethical of both Larsen and Gary to not disclose
the usage JXB-3 material to the client. Due to the fact that STIs funds were used by
the SEC to test the new material (UMUC, 2003), STI should have been notified by
either Larsen, the Director of Operations or Gary, the project manager.
All of the ethical issues that occurred during the project may be traced back
to Garys lack of experience as a Project Manager and Larsens failure to supervise
and Larsens improper supervision when he chose to act.