VII
Ethics Under Ambiguity
Two values in collision, not a slogan.
What they expect
Whether you notice the ethical question at all, whether you can hold two values at once, and whether your action is more than a poster. They do not want a sermon. They want a decision process.
A strong signal
You name the tradeoff (loyalty vs. fairness, results vs. rule, friend vs. institution). You say who gets hurt either way. You choose, and you can live with the residue.
A weak tell
“I would always do the right thing.” Then what was hard? A dilemma with an obvious villain.
Why this angle exists
Professional programs are downstream of scandals. They also need people who will not freeze in a grey case. Sauder and Canadian undergrad commerce use this constantly.
Canadian flavour
Sauder debriefs often include an ethical dilemma. Ivey AEO asks when fairness conflicts with results. Schulich BBA has used friend-and-rule hypotheticals. Queen’s Commerce leans toward inclusion ethics rather than accounting fraud.
Questionnaire
Expand a prompt. Read what they are listening for. Sit the timer if it is a recorded question. Notes stay on this device.