Value Conflict — Tuatha Renewables and the Sliabh Bán Crisis

A four-round, advanced business-ethics & sustainability simulation set inside Tuatha Renewables plc, an Irish onshore wind and solar developer headquartered in Galway (480 MW operating, 600 MW pipeline, 310 staff, EUR 168M revenue) that built its entire brand on being “the developer communities trust.” On 9 March 2026 a leaked ecological review finds that the consented, 40%-financed 90 MW Sliabh Bán wind project will damage ~14 hectares of culturally significant protected peatland — and the stakeholders who were aligned now hold irreconcilable demands. The local community and a heritage group (~1,200 residents) want the turbines halted or relocated; the infrastructure-fund investor wants its EUR 140M committed capital and ESG-flagship returns protected; an environmental NGO demands habitat protection yet warns that cancelling loses ~180,000 t/yr of avoided CO₂; ~220 construction jobs and EUR 18M of local spend hang on it proceeding; and a credible challenge could trigger a 12–18 month judicial-review freeze inside a 45-day financing window. Drawing on Schormair & Gilbert’s “Creating Value by Sharing Values,” you do not solve this by power or cash. Across four rounds you (1) DIAGNOSE the dispute as a clash of legitimate values and decide who has an affectedness-based claim to a voice; (2) CONVENE a genuine deliberative process — not consultation theatre — choosing transparency, ground rules, and a decision rule you would actually act on; (3) make and DISCURSIVELY JUSTIFY a contested decision (proceed, redesign/relocate at EUR 0–22M, or halt) with reasons disappointed stakeholders could reasonably accept, plus a proportionate harm-remediation plan; and (4) REBUILD legitimacy under a live public challenge and pitch a dual audience — the investment committee and a community representative at once. The scoring deliberately separates moral Legitimacy from public Reputation so they diverge: the math punishes the five classic errors — the quiet cash settlement that confirms bad faith when leaked, staged consultation theatre, resolving everything for investor returns while treating the community as a comms problem, chasing full consensus until the financing window closes, and justifying by legal compliance alone. Final KPIs track Reputation, Legitimacy, Project Margin (EUR M) and Stakeholder Voice — teaching that an unpopular decision can be legitimate while a popular back-room deal is not.