PMP Exam Prep Companion: Ethics, Professional Conduct, and Servant Leadership Behaviors

Ethics and Professional Conduct as “Decision Filters”

On exam questions, ethics is rarely asked as a definition. It is tested as a choice of action under pressure. A practical way to answer is to run your options through four decision filters: responsibility, respect, fairness, and honesty. The best answer is usually the one that protects people, protects the organization, and protects the integrity of information—without creating unnecessary drama.

Filter 1: Responsibility (Own outcomes and protect stakeholders)

Observable actions that show responsibility:

• Escalate through the right governance path when risk, safety, compliance, or material impact is present.
• Document decisions and assumptions so others can audit and learn.
• Address issues early rather than hiding them until they become crises.
• Use authority appropriately (do not “borrow” power you don’t have).

Quick test: “If this decision is reviewed later, can I show I acted to protect stakeholders and the project, not my comfort?”

Filter 2: Respect (Protect dignity, listen, and communicate professionally)

Observable actions that show respect:

• Address behavior privately first; focus on facts and impact, not personal attacks.
• Invite input from those doing the work; don’t dismiss concerns as “negativity.”
• Adapt communication to culture and accessibility needs.
• Stop bullying, harassment, or discriminatory behavior; involve HR/leadership when needed.

Quick test: “Would I be comfortable if this interaction were recorded and shared with the team?”

Continue in our app.

• Listen to the audio with the screen off.
• Earn a certificate upon completion.
• Over 5000 courses for you to explore!

Or continue reading below...

Download the app

Filter 3: Fairness (Avoid favoritism; apply rules consistently)

Observable actions that show fairness:

• Use transparent criteria for assignments, approvals, and vendor selection.
• Disclose conflicts of interest and recuse yourself when appropriate.
• Ensure decisions consider impacts on all stakeholder groups, not just the loudest.
• Do not offer or accept inappropriate gifts or favors tied to decisions.

Quick test: “If another person did this in the same situation, would I judge it the same way?”

Filter 4: Honesty (Tell the truth; don’t mislead by omission)

Observable actions that show honesty:

• Report status using agreed definitions and evidence (done means done).
• Separate facts from interpretations; label assumptions clearly.
• Correct misinformation quickly, even if it’s uncomfortable.
• Do not manipulate metrics to look good (e.g., hiding defects, redefining scope quietly).

Quick test: “Am I communicating in a way that could reasonably mislead someone?”

A simple step-by-step for ethical decisions in scenarios

1. Identify the ethical tension: What value is at risk (responsibility, respect, fairness, honesty)?
2. Check policies and governance: What rules, approvals, or reporting standards apply?
3. Choose the least harmful ethical action: Protect people and transparency first.
4. Act and document: Take the action; record decisions, rationale, and next steps.
5. Escalate appropriately: If the issue exceeds your authority, escalate through the proper channel.

Confidentiality and Conflict of Interest: What to Notice in Exam Cues

Many ethics questions hinge on recognizing cues that confidentiality or conflict of interest is in play. The “best” answer typically protects sensitive information, avoids bias, and follows established channels.

Confidentiality cues (red flags)

• “Not yet public,” “pre-release,” “M&A,” “reorg,” “layoffs,” “pricing,” “legal,” “security vulnerability,” “personal data,” “medical info.”
• Requests to share information “off the record,” “just between us,” or “to speed things up.”
• Stakeholders asking for details they do not need to perform their role.

Expected actions:

• Share information strictly on a need-to-know basis.
• Use approved tools and secure channels; avoid personal email/consumer messaging apps if prohibited.
• Refer requests to the information owner (legal, HR, security, product owner, sponsor) when uncertain.
• Remove sensitive details from broad communications; provide summaries where possible.

Conflict of interest cues (red flags)

• A vendor is owned by a relative/friend, or you have a side business relationship.
• Gifts, travel, “free consulting,” or special treatment offered during selection/negotiation.
• Pressure to “make sure this supplier wins” without objective criteria.
• Team member evaluating their former employer or a company where they seek employment.

Expected actions:

• Disclose the potential conflict immediately to the appropriate authority.
• Recuse yourself from decisions where impartiality could be questioned.
• Use documented criteria and maintain an audit trail for selection decisions.
• Decline inappropriate gifts and follow organizational policy for reporting.

Scenario prompt: Confidentiality under “helpful” pressure

Situation: A stakeholder from another department asks you to forward a draft contract and vendor pricing “so we can align budgets.” The contract is marked confidential and negotiations are ongoing.

Select the best action:

• A) Forward the draft but ask them not to share it.
• B) Decline and offer a high-level budget range; direct them to procurement/legal for authorized details.
• C) Share the pricing only (not the contract) because it’s “less sensitive.”
• D) Upload the draft to a shared drive so everyone can access it.

What the exam is looking for: Protect confidentiality and route through the authorized owner while still enabling progress (e.g., provide an approved summary or range).

Scenario prompt: Conflict of interest in vendor selection

Situation: You discover that a key evaluator on the selection committee previously worked for one of the bidders and is currently interviewing there.

Select the best action:

• A) Ignore it; they are qualified and it’s their personal business.
• B) Ask them privately to “be fair” and continue.
• C) Inform procurement/sponsor per policy and request the evaluator be recused or replaced; document the action.
• D) Remove the bidder from consideration to avoid any appearance of bias.

What the exam is looking for: Disclosure and governance-based handling (recusal/replacement), not unilateral punishment or secrecy.

Servant Leadership Behaviors in Agile/Hybrid Contexts (What It Looks Like)

Servant leadership is tested as behavior, not a slogan. In agile or hybrid environments, the project leader (PM, scrum master, or hybrid lead) succeeds by enabling the team to deliver while protecting transparency and boundaries.

Behavior 1: Remove impediments (system, not heroics)

Observable actions:

• Identify blockers early (access, environment, dependencies, unclear acceptance criteria).
• Facilitate fast decisions by bringing the right people together.
• Escalate impediments that exceed team authority, with evidence and options.
• Reduce work-in-progress when the system is overloaded.

Step-by-step: Impediment removal loop

1. Clarify the blocker: What is blocked, since when, and what is the impact?
2. Confirm ownership: Who can actually resolve it?
3. Offer options: Provide at least two paths (e.g., temporary workaround vs. permanent fix).
4. Timebox: Set a short deadline for a decision.
5. Track to closure: Make it visible until resolved.

Behavior 2: Enable collaboration (create conditions for good decisions)

Observable actions:

• Facilitate working agreements (definition of done, meeting norms, decision rules).
• Encourage cross-functional pairing and knowledge sharing.
• Surface disagreements early and keep them about work, not people.
• Protect the team from disruptive interruptions while keeping stakeholders informed.

Behavior 3: Support transparency without blame

Observable actions:

• Use information radiators (boards, dashboards) that reflect reality.
• Ask “What did we learn?” instead of “Who caused this?”
• Promote psychological safety so risks and defects are raised early.
• Make trade-offs explicit (scope, time, cost, quality) rather than hiding them.

Scenario prompt: Servant leadership in a hybrid delivery

Situation: A cross-functional team is delivering in iterations, but a governance gate requires formal approval before deployment. The team complains the gate is “anti-agile” and wants to bypass it.

Select the best action:

• A) Tell the team to bypass the gate to maintain velocity.
• B) Enforce the gate with no discussion; “rules are rules.”
• C) Facilitate a solution: map the gate requirements, integrate them into the workflow (e.g., automate evidence collection), and work with governance owners to streamline while staying compliant.
• D) Pause all work until governance changes the policy.

What the exam is looking for: Enable delivery by improving the system while respecting governance and compliance.

Handling Pressure to Misreport Status or Bypass Process

These scenarios test honesty and responsibility under pressure. The “trap” answers often promise short-term relief (look good now) but create long-term harm (loss of trust, audit failures, safety/compliance exposure). Strong answers keep transparency, use proper escalation, and propose recovery actions.

Common pressure patterns (exam cues)

• “Just mark it green for the steering committee.”
• “We’ll fix the defects after go-live—don’t mention them.”
• “Skip the review/approval this once.”
• “If we report the delay, funding will be cut.”
• “Everyone does it; don’t be difficult.”

Step-by-step: What to do when asked to misreport

1. Anchor to definitions: Use agreed status criteria (evidence-based progress, acceptance, test results).
2. State facts calmly: “As of today, X is complete; Y is not accepted; risk is Z.”
3. Offer a forward plan: Recovery options, trade-offs, and impacts.
4. Escalate if pressured: If someone insists on false reporting, escalate through the appropriate governance/ethics channel.
5. Document: Keep a professional record of what was reported and why.

Scenario prompt: Sponsor demands “green” status

Situation: Two critical integration tests failed. The sponsor says, “Report green this week; we can’t alarm the board.”

Select the best action:

• A) Report green and fix it quietly to protect the sponsor.
• B) Report amber/red with the evidence, explain impact, and present a recovery plan; if the sponsor insists on misreporting, escalate per governance.
• C) Avoid status reporting this week and focus on fixing tests.
• D) Report green but add a vague note: “minor issues being addressed.”

What the exam is looking for: Honest, evidence-based reporting plus constructive next steps; escalation if asked to be dishonest.

Scenario prompt: Pressure to bypass a required control

Situation: A release is behind schedule. A manager asks you to skip the required security review “just this once” and deploy tonight.

Select the best action:

• A) Skip the review; schedule it after deployment.
• B) Refuse and escalate; propose alternatives such as a reduced-scope release, a feature toggle, or a timeboxed expedited review with the security team.
• C) Ask the team to sign off informally so you can proceed.
• D) Proceed if the manager emails approval so you are covered.

What the exam is looking for: Follow governance and protect stakeholders; find compliant ways to move forward (trade-offs, phased delivery, expedited but valid review).

Scenario prompt: Team member hides bad news

Situation: A team lead admits they’ve been reporting tasks as complete to “avoid getting blamed,” but acceptance is not met.

Select the best action:

• A) Publicly call them out to set an example.
• B) Update the status to reflect reality, reset working agreements/definitions, address the behavior privately, and create a safe mechanism for raising issues early.
• C) Keep their reports as-is to avoid conflict and coach them later.
• D) Remove them from the project immediately.

What the exam is looking for: Restore transparency, treat people with respect, and fix the system that incentivized hiding problems.

Mini “Action Selector” Drills (Choose the Most Ethical Next Step)

Drill 1: Fairness vs. urgency

Situation: A senior executive asks you to prioritize their department’s change request ahead of others, bypassing the agreed intake process.

• A) Do it immediately; they are senior.
• B) Explain the intake rules, assess impact using the same criteria as other requests, and route it through the agreed decision forum; offer an expedited review if policy allows.
• C) Tell them no and end the conversation.
• D) Quietly swap priorities without telling anyone.

Drill 2: Respect in conflict

Situation: Two team members argue in a meeting; one makes a personal insult.

• A) Ignore it and continue the agenda.
• B) Pause the meeting, restate expectations for respectful behavior, refocus on facts, and follow up privately; involve HR/leadership if behavior persists.
• C) Take sides with the person you think is right.
• D) Remove both from the project immediately.

Drill 3: Confidentiality vs. transparency

Situation: A stakeholder asks for detailed performance feedback about an individual team member.

• A) Share everything; transparency matters.
• B) Share only what they need to know for project decisions (role-based), and route personal performance topics to the appropriate manager/HR channel.
• C) Refuse to discuss anything about the team.
• D) Share feedback informally but ask them not to repeat it.

Drill 4: Honesty in metrics

Situation: A leader suggests redefining “done” so the dashboard looks better this month.

• A) Agree; metrics are just internal.
• B) Keep the definition consistent, explain why changing it would mislead decisions, and propose a separate metric (e.g., “ready for review”) if needed.
• C) Change it temporarily and change it back later.
• D) Stop reporting metrics entirely.