1. Do you think the above case involves a conflict of interest or there are more issues? Explain 2. Keeping the above case in perspective, discuss the relevance of impartiality and non-partisanship as professional value. 3. In hindsight, how do you think you could have avoided the above unpleasant situation?

The spine toppers built

1. Open

   • Define the key term first
   • Context-hook opening

2. Build

   • Numbered enumeration
   • Directive-mirroring headers
   • Both sides before the verdict

3. Close

   • Verdict conclusion
   • Forward-looking close

constructionMoves they converged on

• Numbered enumeration65% of answers

  Enumerate points as a numbered list.

• Define the key term first63% of answers

  Open by defining the central term.

• Example as evidence57% of answers

  Tag a concrete example explicitly as evidence.

• Verdict conclusion55% of answers

  End with a clear verdict.

• Directive-mirroring headers37% of answers

  Headers that mirror the question's directive.

stairsEvidence toppers carried (per answer)

account_treeCase anatomy · Conflict of interest

• Ethical issues100% of toppers
• Chosen option97% of toppers
• Justification97% of toppers
• Stakeholders82% of toppers
• Options82% of toppers
• Values in conflict76% of toppers