Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Patrick Spooner
6/25/21
Running Head: Module 6: Ethical Communities 2
The situation that I will be covering in detail for my PCA is a Change Order
Management meeting that was held between the General Contractor, the Sub-Contractor (my
company) and the Material Manufacturer that was utilized on the project. This was a conflict
and contractual change management resolution meeting between the three parties. All parties
have varying viewpoints on the various topics that are discussed. I was the Project Manager
for the Sub-Contractor on this specific project and represented my company, Spooner’s
Woodworks Inc., along with the Owner of the company, our division manager and our project
supervisor who managed the installation crews in the field. The Contractor argued that due to
our lack of quality control of our installed products, they feel they do not owe us any of our
requested change orders. Our side of the argument was directed more towards the materials
that were selected and approved by the Owner and the Design Team and how they were not a
good fit for the project, which had all exterior, highly exposed conditions.
To summarize the outcome of the meeting, the General Contractor issued us back
charges in excess of $100k and we had requested change orders in excess of $200k, however,
the Contractor felt some of our change order requests needed to be thrown out due to late
issuance and not enough supporting documentation. By the time they threw out our change
orders we only had around $60k of what they felt were payable, legitimate changes and
therefore we still owed the Contractor $60k due to the $120k back charges that they issued to
us. The meeting ended in complete disagreement on both sides and neither party agreeing to
any sort of payment terms. Unfortunately, to avoid a legal battle and to receive the remainder
of our retention payment, we ended up having to pay the $60k in back charges out of our final
retention payment. Since the Contractor holds our money and pays us at their discretion in
The Ethics of the Organizations within my Personal Case Analysis were different in
many ways. The Ethical values of the company that I work for were actually quite strong in
certain areas and weak in others. I would say their strongest, most prominent ethic was that of
Excellence, in that it was a manufacturing company and the processes and procedures had to
be followed to a tee in order to achieve optimal results. “One of our oldest images of
peanuts, or five-year-olds) come in the door and leave as finishes products (refrigerators,
peanut butter, or educated graduates). The ethical imperative of the factory is excellence:
ensuring that work is done as effectively and efficiently as possible to produce high quality
yields.” (Bolman & Deal, p. 393). Everything at my Organization revolved around this
central theme, and therefore lacked in other areas like showing that they truly care for their
employees.
With that being said, the General Contractor clearly embodied the ethic of “The
Jungle: Justice and Power”. The Contractor from the start of the project clearly only cared
about their own well-being and success on the project, and did not hesitate at the opportunity
to throw their sub-contractors under the bus in front of the owner. “As the metaphor suggests,
(Bolman & Deal, p. 393). After speaking with multiple other sub-contractors on the project,
they also admitted that the General Contractor had blamed them multiple times for issues that
were not theirs and attempted to withhold money from them for additional work that they
were promised they would be paid for. Based on my experiences on past projects, I knew
Contractors had the tendency to be self-serving but not to the extent I experienced on this
project.
Running Head: Module 6: Ethical Communities 4
Looking back at the situation, I would use one of the ethical communities to support
the case in that I would’ve used The Jungle: Justice and Power to counteract the GC and
demand fair treatment and justice. I would’ve consulted the other sub-contractors earlier on in
the project so we could band together and form a ‘unionized’ and more powerful group to
protect our companies from the unfair treatment that we were receiving. “In a world of
competing interests and scarce resources, people are continually compelled to make trade-
offs. No one can give everyone everything they want, but it is possible to adhere to a value of
fairness in making about who gets what” (Bolman & Deal, p. 393). Together as one powerful
group, we could have made the Contractor adhere to the value of fairness as described above.
I believe this sort of action would have had a positive net effect on the project as a
whole and everyone would have had an opportunity to exit the project on a positive note. I
believe this is an area in construction where there is a void that needs to be filled. Sub-
Contractors can hold weekly or bi-weekly meetings without the GC involved to help each
other and take action in the event the GC is taking advantage of certain companies. If I ever
do get back into the sub-contracting line of business, I think this type of ‘Union’ event is the
first thing I would attempt to organize with the various sub-contractors on projects.
As mentioned above, the one major thing that I would have done differently knowing
the outcome, would be to put far less trust in another organization when you truly do not
know where their ethical standards align. Clearly, I gave them far too much credit and we
went out on multiple limbs, jumped through hoops to meet their demands, with the promise of
re-payment. “Leaders who hoard power produce powerless organizations. People stripped of
power look for ways to fight back: sabotage, passive resistance, withdrawal, or angry
militancy” (Bolman & Deal, p. 393). This is the environment that the General Contractor
Running Head: Module 6: Ethical Communities 5
created on this project and it was miserable to be a part of. Unfortunately, our passive
When matters of business are at hand, and you are unfamiliar with the ethics of
Organizations you are contracted with, you must proceed with caution and consistently
record, track and monitor all project correspondence. In these situations, you need to proceed
with the idea that the project will inevitably end in litigation and the more evidence you have
to support your position, the better. When dealing with companies of low ethical and moral
standards, I now understand that there is no such thing as over preparation to support your
References
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2017). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and