UPSC Mains 2017 GS4 Q12 — Professional Ethics
You are the manager of a spare parts company A and you have to negotiate a deal with the manager of a large manufacturing company B. The deal is highly competitive and sealing the deal is critical for your company. The deal is being worked out over a dinner. After dinner the manager of manufacturing company B offered to drop you to the hotel in his car. On the way to the hotel he happens to hit a motorcycle injuring the motorcyclist badly. You know the manager was driving fast and thus lost control. The law enforcement officer comes to investigate the issue and you are the sole eyewitness to it. Knowing the strict laws pertaining to road accidents you are aware that your honest account of the incident would lead to the prosecution of the manager and as a consequence the deal is likely to be jeopardized, which is of immense importance to your company. What are the dilemmas you face ? What will be your response to the situation ? (250 words)
Question Decoded — examiner's intent
- Directive verbs
- What areWhat will be
- Scope keywords
- sole eyewitnesshighly competitivecritical for your companyhonest accountprosecution of the managerdeal is likely to be jeopardized
- Implicit sub-parts
- Identification of stakeholders including the victim, the company employees, the shareholders, and the justice system.
- Categorization of ethical dilemmas: Professional Duty vs. Moral Integrity, Personal Interest vs. Public Justice, and Organizational Survival vs. Rule of Law.
- Evaluation of available options: lying to save the deal, being a silent witness, or giving a truthful testimony.
- Formulating a step-by-step response that prioritizes medical aid to the victim and legal compliance while attempting to mitigate business fallout.
- Common pitfalls
- Focusing too much on 'negotiation tactics' instead of the ethical crisis of the accident.
- Choosing a 'middle path' or compromise that involves lying to the police to save the deal.
- Neglecting the immediate duty of care toward the injured motorcyclist in the rush to solve the legal dilemma.
- Failing to mention the long-term reputational risk to Company A if a cover-up is later exposed.
- Dimensions required
- Legal/JurisprudentialProfessional EthicsHumanitarian/CompassionCorporate GovernanceDeontological vs. Teleological perspectives
- Marks allocation hint
Allocate roughly 75 words to identifying the stakeholders and dilemmas to show conceptual clarity. Spend the remaining 175 words on the 'Response' section, ensuring a clear, uncompromising stand on truth-telling while outlining a professional strategy to manage the company's interests through transparency rather than deceit.
Unlock the full analysis for this question
You've seen the question and its examiner-intent decoding. Subscribers also get:
- 🔗 Similar Previous Year Questions — cross-year, cross-paper matches so you study the topic, not the question
- 📚 Source Map — verified citations from Laxmikanth, NCERT, PRS, Yojana, Economic Survey, Spectrum
- 🌱 How this topic is evolving — current-affairs bridge anchored to live TARS news clustering
- 🧭 Examiner's Pattern — how the topic has been framed across every year UPSC has tested it
- ✍️ Answer Skeleton — a structured outline (intro → body → conclusion) you can flesh out
- 🎯 AI evaluation — write your answer, get rubric-based scoring from gs-eval
Or browse 132+ free preview questions across all years and papers — the first 3 questions of every paper are unlocked.
Ready to practice?
Subscribers can attempt this question in 250 words and get an instant, rubric-based evaluation showing where they stand.
Subscribe to evaluate your answer →