View answer copy →Answered a very similar question
Their question: “Case study (a/b/c): CPWD Chief Architect harassing junior Seema; retaining her and completing project”
Both are workplace sexual-harassment cases, a powerful senior harassing a junior woman while the head must act; Aayushi's Seema case answer (support victim, due process/POSH, retain her) models the 2013 Mrs X dilemma.
Key learnings from their answer
- ›Her case-study answers follow a fixed, examiner-friendly skeleton: an enumerated 'ethical issues' list first, then stepwise action, then a short-term-vs-long-term justification, and Q12 (Kerala landslides) explicitly splits the cognitive vs affective dimensions. Lesson: a repeatable case-study template (issues -> stakeholders/action -> short- vs long-term) lets you answer all five case studies (Q12,13,15,16,17) fully and consistently under time pressure.
