In the case of the General Electric Company’s employees being implicated in the turbine trade secrets, the firm could have instituted a number of measures to mitigate or possible avert such occurrences. It would be apparent that this responsibility largely lies on the Contract Authority (CA) which controls the project issues in tandem with state or federal legislation and the legal soundness of the projects or any undertaking by the company employees. They need to clearly define the behaviour of the employees and give direction on the possible dire steps that will be taken against violation of the contract (Staff, 2016). The contracting authority has the moral responsibility and authority to impose probity and honesty virtues in the workers of the company and defines clearly the behaviours required of the company workers, thus the General Electric Company needed to empower the CA so that it exercises its powers.
It also is within the project manager (PM) and the organizational executive committee to manage the human resources in a company with a view to maintaining a strong employee code of conduct so that every future employee will follow the probity culture that they find within the organization. In addition, the PM and the organizational executive committee should have an impeccable probity record so as to motivate their employees and take drastic measures against any dealing that falls short of the predefined company culture. Furthermore, the Contract Authority should be able to place prominence on trade secrets and probably require members in any project to sign a performance contract that will guide their dealings on anything to do with the project (Staff, 2016). The project leader (PL) should also be able to manage the behaviour of the team members geared towards maintaining a good team membership where trade secrets are kept as discreet as possible thus the decision on membership in a project should be limited to trusted individuals.