Your boss has asked you to prepare a feasibility report to determine whether the company

should advertise its custom-crafted cabinetry in the weekly neighborhood newspaper.

Based on your primary research, you think they should. As you draft the introduction to
your report, however, you discover that the survey administered to the neighborhood
newspaper subscribers was flawed. Several of the questions were poorly written and
misleading. You used the survey results, among other findings, to justify your
recommendation. The report is due in three days. What actions might you want to take, if
any, before you complete your report?

SOLUTION

When you are writing the report, the ethical move would be to mention your recent
discovery about the faulty survey in the introduction (explain “limitations”–factors
beyond your control that affect your report’s quality). Because the report is due in three
days, you’ll probably want to go ahead and present your findings and recommendations
but inform your readers of the discrepancy you found. In truth, a better-administered
survey might come up with similar or identical results, so you have no reason to throw
out your conclusions just yet, and you’ll want to mention this fact in the introduction as
well. Depending on the circumstances of your report, you might also suggest follow-up
research to counter the flawed survey with a second or revised report to be submitted
before the company takes action.