Feedback:
During the module/ quiz:
Emma should ignore the email notification and answer the MCQs as she would have done had she not seen the email.
The multiple-choice questions, and answer options might be ’randomised’ so the correct answers might change for each individual taking the test, and for each login/ session. And, if Petra has sent Emma her responses, some of them may be incorrect! So while Emma may think she has the correct answers, this may not be the case.
Just because the training is an internal module, it doesn’t mean it’s not important. If Emma hasn’t learned from the module (i.e. if she would have failed had she not seen the answers), then at the very least, she should re-sit it.
If she hasn’t started the quiz yet, there may be an option to pause the quiz and take it at a later date. Or, Emma could consider abandoning the module now, and resitting it at a later date (and, this time, switching off her email notifications).
After the module/ quiz:
Under the Integrity principle of the Actuaries’ Code (the Code), it could be argued that while Petra (assuming the email was from Petra and not another colleague, or a ’spam’ email) has acted with a lack of integrity, Emma is also lacking in integrity by answering the quiz having had sight of the answers. So she will need to reconcile this to determine whether her judgement and behaviour has been influenced.
Under the Speaking up principle of the Code, Emma will need to speak to Petra to explain the professional and ethical implications of what’s happened. Petra may just have wanted to help a busy colleague out, but Petra’s placed Emma in a difficult ethical position where it could be argued that Emma’s ’cheated’.
It’s worth considering whether there is a more systemic issue within their employer. How seriously is the internal training being taken? Is this just a one-off instance of a colleague wanting to help another, or is it a symptom of the culture within the company? Emma could consider speaking to her manager about the lack of security around the training in general, without specifically mentioning Petra.
Given that Emma has received an email with the quiz answers, her employer’s IT department could access this, so it may be better to ’come clean’ now and explain what’s happened. Emma and Petra could speak to a manager together.
Integrity: Emma has a professional obligation to act honestly—which means she shouldn’t be cheating in the quiz, irrespective of whether it’s informal internal training, or something more formal (such as the IFoA examinations, where cheating is taken extremely seriously and can lead to expulsion or suspension of membership).
Impartiality: Conflicts in this scenario include:
- The pressure Emma’s under at work and the need to pass the training module so as not to have to re-sit, versus the need to undertake the training properly and to achieve the learning objectives.
- Emma’s loyalty to her colleague who may just be wanting to help her out because she’s busy, versus her professional obligation to speak up in the face of unprofessional/unethical behaviour.
Competence and Care: There may be implications under this principle if Emma hasn’t achieved the learning objectives of the module, and only passed it due to having been given the quiz solutions.
Compliance: By not having undergone IT/Data protection training appropriately, Emma may be non-compliant with any local regulation—and this could have implications for her employer.
Speaking up: Emma has an obligation to speak up if she believes or has reasonable cause to believe that behaviour is unethical. This doesn’t mean she has to go straight to a manager or report Petra—the first step would be to discuss the matter with Petra.
- Are Emma’s obligations different if Petra is also an actuary?
Emma’s obligations in relation to her own behaviour will be the same, but in relation to Petra’s behaviour, Emma will know that Petra is also under an obligation to the Actuaries’ Code. Emma should therefore speak to Petra about her obligations and point out which areas of the Code Petra may be in breach of.
- What are Petra’s obligations under the Code, if Petra is an actuary?
Petra’s obligations are similar to Emma’s. However, it’s more clear-cut as to whether there has been a breach of the Integrity principle, given that Petra initiated the issue by sending the email with the quiz answers. She should have considered the Integrity principle before sharing the quiz answers, as well as the difficult position she’s placed Emma in.
Even if Petra didn’t send the correct answers, but sent the email for a joke, this isn’t showing respect for a colleague and therefore violates the Integrity principle.
At the very least, Petra should commit to not doing this again. Even if she had the best of intentions to help out a busy colleague, she has put Emma in a difficult position where Emma is, inadvertently, at risk of being in breach of the Code. If Emma is busy, there are other ways Petra could help her out, by providing support in work tasks.
Under the Speaking up principle, Petra should consider whether she needs to discuss the matter with a manager, which may depend on whether this is an issue that has occurred before, or whether it’s prevalent among staff, and therefore indicative of a wider, cultural problem.
