Engineering

Ethics

ENGINEERING ETHICS & CASE

STUDIES
1. ECE Pledge and Engg. Code of Ethics
2. What is Engineering Ethics?
3. Why study Engineering Ethics?
4. The scope of Engineering Ethics
5. The Professional Code of Ethics for
Engineers
6. Case studies in Engineering Ethics
a. Killer Robot
b. DC - 10
c. Whistle Blowing
e. The Challenger case
7. Sample Codes
a. Hammurabis code

My Expectations from you...

When you finish this course you must
live with the knowledge and
conviction that you have a
professional and moral responsibility
to yourselves and to your fellow
human beings to defend the truth and
expose any questionable practice that
will lead to an unsafe product,
services or process.

ECE PLEDGE & CODE OF ETHICS

ECeC 523

S.S.SABILE, PECE

THE ECE PLEDGE

I am an Electronics Engineer. In my
profession, I take deep pride, but without
vainglory; to it, I owe solemn obligations
that I am eager to fulfill.
As an Electronics Engineer I will
participate in none but honest and legal
enterprises. To him who has engaged my
services, as employer or client, I will give
the utmost of performance and fidelity.

THE ECE PLEDGE

I dedicate myself to the analysis,
synthesis
and
dissemination
of
engineering knowledge and practice.
Zealous of the high repute of my calling, I
will strive to protect the interest and the
good name of any engineer that I know
to be deserving; but I will not shirk,
should duty dictate, from disclosing the
truth regarding anyone who has shown
himself unworthy of the profession.

THE ECE PLEDGE

To my colleagues, I pledge in the
same full measure I ask of them,
integrity and fair dealing, tolerance
and respect and devotion to the
standards and the dignity of the
engineering profession that carries
with it the obligation to serve
humanity with complete dedication.
SO HELP ME GOD!

Code of Professional Ethics

and Conduct

The keystone of professional conduct is integrity.

Hence, it behooves the engineer to discharge his
duties with fidelity and competence to the public,
his employers and clients, and with fairness and
impartiality to all. It is his duty to interest himself
in public welfare, and to be ready to apply his
special knowledge for the benefit of mankind.
He should uphold the honor and dignity of his
profession and avoid association with any
enterprise of questionable character. In his
dealings with fellow engineers he should be fair
and tolerant.

IECEP
Vision
The world-class organization of humane,
competent, virtuous and globally-competitive
electronics professional
Mission
To be the showcase of professional and
technical development and a paradigm of
excellence in applying the principles of
electronics technology for the advancement of
humanity

Section 1. Relations with the

State.A. Each and every engineer shall recognize and respect
the supreme authority of the State as expressed
through its laws and implemented by its agencies,
whenever and wherever such laws do not infringe upon
the rights and privileges of citizens as guaranteed by
the Constitution.

B. He shall recognize that the well-being of the public and

the interests of the State are above the well being and
interest of any individual.

C. In the interest of justice, he shall aid the State, if and

when the technology is needed for the prevention and/
or prosecution of unjust, criminal, or unlawful acts.

Section 1. Relations with the

State.D. In the interest of good government, he shall in every
way possible extend cooperation to the State in the
accomplishment of its goals and objectives.

E. In the interest of social efficiency, he shall extend

assistance, guidance, and training to all subordinates
under his jurisdiction in order to increase their skill and
ability, knowledge and experience for the purposes of
eventually increasing their responsibilities.

F. In the interest of the national economy and well-being,

he shall always strive in the execution of his work for
optimum efficiency, economy and safety.

Section 1. Relations with the

State.G. In the interest of national security, the State
shall be given primary consideration in all his
inventions and/ or devices on electronics and
communications useful for national security
and defense.

H. In the event of any national emergency, he

shall offer his technology, skill, ability and
experience to the services of the State, even
if it will involve personal sacrifices.

Section 2. Relations with the

Public.A. He shall interest himself in public welfare and be ready
to apply his special knowledge for the benefit of
mankind.

B. He shall guard against conditions that are dangerous or

threatening to life, limb or property on work for which
he is responsible, or if he is not responsible, he shall
promptly call such conditions to the attention of those
responsible so that the conditions can immediately and
effectively be corrected.

C. He shall have due regard for the safety of life and

health of the public who may be affected by the work
for which he is responsible.

Section 2. Relations with the

Public.D. He shall endeavour to extend public knowledge of
electronics and communications engineering and he
shall strive to win or maintain the public confidence by
discouraging the spread of untrue, unfair and
exaggerated statements regarding this engineering.

E. As a witness before a court, commission and/or other

tribunal, he shall express an opinion only when it is
founded on adequate knowledge and honest conviction.

F. He shall not issue on matters connected with public

policy, any ex parte statements, criticisms, or
arguments which are inspired or paid for by private
interests, unless he identifies on whose behalf he is
making the statements.

Section 2. Relations with the

Public.G. He shall refrain from expressing any public
opinion on an engineering subject unless he is
fully familiar and knowledgeable with all the
facts relating to the subject.

H. His integrity shall be unquestionable and he

shall discharge his duties and responsibilities
with fidelity to the public, his employers and
clients, and with fairness and impartiality to
all.

Section 3. Relations with Clients,

Employer
and
Labor.A. He shall act in professional matters as a faithful agent or
trustee, and treat as confidential all matters and
information concerning the business affairs, technical
processes, etc. of his clients and/or employers.

B. He shall inform his client or employer of any financial

interest on inventions, devices, equipment or any other
thing, before undertaking any engagement in which he may
be called upon to decide on the use thereof.

C. He shall not accept any other compensation, financial or

otherwise, except from one interested party for a particular
service or other services related therewith without the
consent of all parties concerned.

Section 3. Relations with Clients,

Employer
and
Labor.D. He shall exercise
fairness
and justice when dealing with
contracts between his clients or employers and the
contractors.

E. He shall not accept any commissions or allowances,

directly or indirectly, from contractors, suppliers and all
other parties dealing with his clients and/or employers in
connection with the work for which he is responsible.

F. He shall not be financially interested in the bid or bids of

contractors, suppliers and other interested parties
participating in a competitive work or job on which he has
been employed as engineer without full knowledge and
consent of his clients or employers.

Section 3. Relations with Clients,

Employer
and
Labor.G. He shall promptly inform his client or employers of any
business in which he has any interest, business connection
or affiliation which may compete with or affect the business
of his clients or employers.
H. He shall not allow any decision in connection with his work
for which he has been employed or on which he may be
called upon to perform, to be affected by interests in any
business.
I. He will present clearly the consequences to be expected
from deviations proposed if his engineering judgment is
overruled by non-technical authority in cases where he is
responsible for the technical adequacy or engineering work.
J. He shall undertake only those engineering assignments for
which he is qualified. He shall engage or advise his
employer or client to engage specialists and shall cooperate
with them whenever his employers or clients interest are
served best by such an arrangement.

Section 4. Relations with

Engineers.A. He shall individually or collectively with others in the
profession protect the profession from
misunderstandings and/or misrepresentations.
B. He shall not directly or indirectly injure the professional
reputation, prospects, advancement and/or practice of
other engineers. However, if he has proof or personal
knowledge that an engineer has been unethical and/or
illegal in his practice, he shall inform in writing the
proper authorities for appropriate action.
C. He shall uphold the principle of appropriate and
adequate compensation for those engaged in the
engineering profession, including those in the
subordinate capacities, in the interest of public service
and maintenance of the standards of the profession.

Section 4. Relations with

Engineers.-

D. He shall not try to supplant another engineer

in a particular employment after becoming
aware that definite steps have been taken
toward the others employment.
E. He shall not compete, by underbidding,
through reduction in his normal fees on the
basis of charges for work, after having been
informed of the charges submitted by another
engineer.
F. He shall be fair and tolerant in his dealings
with fellow engineers and give credit to those
to whom credit is properly due.

Section 4. Relations with

Engineers.-

G. He shall uphold the honor and dignity of his

profession and avoid association in
responsibility for work with engineers who do
not conform to ethical practices.
H. He will exercise due restrain in criticizing
another engineers work in public, recognizing
the fact, that the engineering societies and
the engineering press provide the proper
forum for technical discussions and criticism.

Section 5. Relations to the

Profession.-

A. He shall cooperate in extending the effectiveness of

the engineering profession and endeavour to be well
informed of the latest developments in the profession
by sharing or exchanging information and experience
with others engineers, other professionals and
students; and by contributing to engineering
publications and schools and by participating in the
activities of engineering societies.
B. He shall cooperate in upholding the integrity, dignity
and honor of the profession by avoiding all conduct
and practices that will be discrediting and injurious to
the profession.
C. He shall be dignified and modest in explaining or
discussing his work and/or merit and shall refrain
from self-laudatory advertising or propaganda.

To God be all the

Glory

Team Exercise #1
In one (1) minute, list as many
professions as you can.

ENGINEERING CODE OF
ETHICS
Engineers play a central role in all
aspects of technological
development.
To hold paramount the safety,
health and welfare of the public,
engineers must be morally
committed and equipped to grapple
with ethical dilemmas they confront.

Engineering Ethics
Engineering is a profession
a calling requiring specialized knowledge and
often long and intensiveacademicpreparation
Engineering is the profession in which
knowledge of the mathematical and natural
sciences gained by study, experience, and
practice is applied with judgment to develop
ways to utilize, economically, the materials and
forces of nature for the benefit of mankind.
Accreditation Board for Engineering and
Technology (ABET)

Scope of engineers code of

ethics:
Moral reasoning and code of ethics
Personal commitments in
engineering
Environmental ethics
Honesty and research integrity
The philosophy of technology
Peace engineering

What is a profession?
Examples of professions:

Physician, lawyer, engineer, others?

Examples of non-professions:

Plumber, fashion model, sales clerk,

others?

What distinguishes professions from

other occupations?

Your ideas here!

2008 Michael C.
Loui

29

What are characteristics of

professions?
Special knowledge and intellectual skills
Formal education, often graduate degree
Professional authority, judgment, peer
review
Community sanction, accreditation,
licensing
Professional associations; in engineering,
AIAA, AIChE, ASCE, ASME, IEEE,

2008 Michael C.
Loui

30

Why do professionals have

special ethical responsibilities?
Professionals have clients, not
customers (what is the difference?)
Clients must trust professionals
Profession serves a public good
Codes of ethics: special
responsibilities of professionals

2008 Michael C.
Loui

31

Professionals?
Plumbers have special knowledge and skills too.
But professionals emphasize intellectual skills.
To acquire knowledge and skill, apprenticeship is
insufficient. Professionals require formal
education, at least college, often graduate
degree: master of urban planning, doctor of
psychology. Engineering recognizes bachelors
degree as professional degree.
Professionals exercise judgment. Clients cannot
evaluate the quality of those judgments, that is,
professionals hold authority. Only other
members of profession can evaluate quality of
educational programs and professional work, as
in a peer review.

Professionals?
To ensure public is not harmed by
professionals, a variety of social
mechanisms: accreditation of educational
programs, licensing of individuals, pass the
bar exam to practice law in a state, midwife
& social worker have license to practice.

Like other occupations, organizations of

professionals, but not like unions, which
advocate for benefit of members, rather,
professional associations are devoted to
sharing information through publications
and conferences, and organizing
accreditation and licensing.

ETHICS AND
PROFESSIONALISM
Technical skill and morally good judgment need to
go together in solving ethical dilemmas, and, in
general, in making moral choices.
MICRO ISSUES concern the decisions made by
individuals and companies in pursuing their projects.
MACRO ISSUES concern more on global issues,
such as the directions in technological development,
the laws that should and should not be passed, and
the collective responsibilities of groups such as
engineering professional societies and consumer
groups

ETHICS AND
PROFESSIONALISM
Dealing with complexity requires close
cooperation among the engineers of many
different departments and disciplines such as
chemical, civil, electrical, industrial, and
mechanical engineering.
Silo Mentality disregard or denigrate the
work carried out by groups other than their
own. In this case, it can be difficult to
improve a design or even rectify mistakes
under such circumstances.

Team Exercise #2
In three (3) minutes, list as many
traits of a profession as you can.

CODE OF ETHICS
Code - state the moral responsibilities of engineers as seen by
the profession and as represented by a professional society.
Roles:
serving and protecting the public
providing guidance
offering inspiration
establishing shared standards, supporting responsible
professionals
contributing to education
deterring wrongdoing and
strengthening a professions image.

OATH
a statement or promise strengthened by
such an appeal.
a formally affirmed statement or promise
accepted as an equivalent of an appeal to
a deity or to a revered person or thing;
affirmation.
the form of words in which such a
statement or promise is made.
How would you relate this oath/pledge to
your profession in the future?
How can you fulfil this oath/pledge?

Interaction Rules of Behavior

Etiquette - rules of acceptable
personal behavior and courtesy when
interacting with others in a social
setting.
Laws - a system of rules and
punishments clearly defined and
established by a society to maintain a
safe and orderly social environment.

Interaction Rules of
Behavior (cont)
Morals - personal rules of right
and wrong behavior derived from
a persons upbringing, religious
beliefs, and societal influences.
Ethics - a code or system of
rules defining moral behavior for
a particular society.

What is Engineering Ethics?

Ethics is synonymous with morality; refers
to moral values that are sound or
reasonable, actions or policies that are
morally required (right), morally permissible
(all right), or otherwise morally desirable
( good).
Ethics is an activity (and field) of studying
morality. It studies which actions, goals,
principles, policies, and laws are morally
justified.

ENGINEERING ETHICS
ENGINEERING ETHICS consists of responsibilities
and rights that ought to be endorsed by those engage
in engineering, and also of desirable ideals and
personal commitments in engineering.
Skills: Moral awareness, cogent moral reasoning,
moral coherence, moral imagination, moral
communications, reasonableness, respect for
persons, tolerance of diversity, moral hope ,
integrity.
Professional life
Personal conviction

What is Engineering Ethics?

Normative sense of Ethics refer to
justified values, desirable (not merely
desired) choices, and sound policies.
Descriptive sense of Ethics refer to what
a specific individuals or groups believe
and and how they act, without implying
that their beliefs and actions are justified.
What are moral values?

Why study Engineering

Ethics?
It is important, both in contributing to
safe and useful technological products
and in giving meaning to engineers
endeavors.
To increase our ability to deal effectively
with moral complexity in engineering
Strengthens our ability to reason clearly
and carefully about moral questions
Increase Moral Autonomy.

Why study Engineering

Ethics?
Moral Autonomy
- Self- determining
- Skill and habit of thinking rationally
about ethical issues on the basis of
moral concerns and commitments
- Being sensitive to the needs and
rights of others, as well as of
ourselves.

Professional Ethics
Ethics is the study of the
morality of human actions.
Professional ethics guide the
conduct of a professional.
Most technical societies have
written codes of ethics.

Code of Ethics
As professionals,
engineers have a code of
ethics

Team Exercise #3
In two minutes, explain
why is it important for
engineers to have a code
of ethics?

What is the point in studying

engineering ethics? What
can be gained from taking a
course in ethics?
Engineering ethics course is
not about preaching virtue
rather, its objective is to
increase your ability as
engineers to responsibly
confront moral issues raised
by technological activity.

THE SCOPE OF ENGINEERING ETHICS

Moral
Reasonin
g&
Ethical
Theories

Engineers
and
Managers,
Consultant
s and
headers

Engineering as
Social
Experimentation

SCOPE OF
ENGINEERING
ETHICS

Global Issues

The Engineers
Responsibility
for safety

Responsibilit
y to
Employees
Global
Issues
Rights of
Engineers

Engineering as Social Experimentation

All products of technology present some potential dangers,
and thus engineering is an inherently risky activity.
In order to underscore this fact and help in exploring its
ethical implications, we suggest that engineering should be
viewed as an experimental process.
It is not, of course, an experiment conducted solely in a
laboratory under controlled conditions. Rather, it is an
experiment on a social scale involving human subjects.

Ethics in Engineering, Martin MW and Schinzinger R,

McGraw-Hill, 1996

WHAT IS ENGINEERING
ETHICS?
Engineering Ethics is the study of
moral issues and decisions
confronting individuals and
organizations engaged in
engineering.
The Study of related questions
about moral ideals, character,
policies and relationship of people
and corporations involved in
technological activity.

Engineering Ethics
Engineering is a profession
a calling requiring specialized knowledge and
often long and intensiveacademicpreparation
Engineering is the profession in which knowledge
of the mathematical and natural sciences gained
by study, experience, and practice is applied with
judgment to develop ways to utilize,
economically, the materials and forces of nature
for the benefit of mankind. Accreditation Board
for Engineering and Technology (ABET)

Social Importance of Engineering

Engineering has a direct and vital effect on the
quality of life of people. Accordingly, the services
provided by engineers must be dedicated to the
protection of the public safety, health and welfare.
Why is the Professional Ethics Important
For Engineers?
Because the Professional Ethics shall be a part of
education for every socially important profession, as
one of essential constituents of the meaning of the
term professionalism!

Engineering ethics
Study of engineering ethics can achieve at least four
desirable outcomes:

a) increased ethical sensitivity;

b) increased knowledge of relevant standards of conduct;
c) improved ethical judgment; and
d) improved ethical will-power (i.e., a greater ability to
act
ethically when one wants to).

Davis, M. Teaching ethics across the engineering curriculum. Proceedings of International Conference on
Ethics in Engineering and Computer Science. Available online at:
http://onlineethics.org/essays/education/davis.html .

Engineering ethics
Ethical responsibility...
involves more than leading a decent, honest, truthful life. .
it involves something much more than making wise
choices when such choices suddenly, unexpectedly
present themselves.
Our moral obligations must . . . include a willingness to
engage others in the difficult work of defining the crucial
choices that confront technological society
Langdon Winner, 1990. Engineering ethics and political imagination.pp. 53-64 in Broad
and Narrow Interpretations of Philosophy of Technology: Philosophy and Technology 7,
edited by P. Durbin. Boston: Kluwer. Cited in Joseph R. Herkert, Continuing and
Emerging Issues in Engineering Ethics Education, The Bridge, 32(3), 2002.

Law vs. Ethics

LAW

Creates rules to
guide conduct
Balances
competing values
Punishes conduct
that is illegal
through formal
structures

ETHICS

Offers guidance on
conduct
Addresses situations
in which competing
values clash
Incentives and
disincentives may be
created by group
(formal or informal)
57

From CSUN ME Senior Ethics Lecture

SAMPLE CODES
Building Code
(Hammurabis Code)
If a builder has built a house for a
man and has not made his work
sound, and the house which he has
built has fallen down and so caused
the death of the house-holder, the
builder should be put to death

Examples of Engineering Codes of Ethics

Accreditation Board for Engineering and
Technology (ABET)
National Society of Professional
Engineers (NSPE)
Institute of Electrical and Electronic
Engineers (IEEE)
American Society of Mechanical
Engineers (ASME)

Some ideas for this lecture was based on the work of Dr. Jerry C. Collins
Department of Biomedical Engineering, Vanderbilt University

CASE STUDIES

Case Studies
Engineering ethics is often times
best explained through the use of
case studies.
Case studies allow examples of
good and bad decision making in a
real world context.
*** These case studies have been selected from among the various rulings of the NSPE Board of Ethical Review.
Ref: http://onlineethics.org

Problem Solving in Engineering Ethics

State the Problem
Get the Facts
Defend Viewpoints
Formulate Opinion
Qualify
Recommendation

Ref: What Every Engineer Should Know About Ethics, by Kenneth K. Hum

State the
Problem
Clearly define exact nature of ethical
problem or dilemma.
Need to be clear so that we can
anticipate the kind of solution that is
required.
Want to provide an answer that is
relevant to the interests at stake.

Get the Facts

Want to make an informed decision.

Must possess and understand the

relevant facts.

Must make clear any interpretations of

factual matters or the values that
underlie conflicting moral viewpoints.

Identify & Defend Competing

Moral Viewpoints
Critically assess the strengths
and weaknesses of competing
moral viewpoints
Begin by identifying what we believe to
be the most compelling reason for the
course of action
We must be able to justify the course of
action

Formulate an Opinion
As engineers we do not have the
luxury of postponing questions or
leaving a question unresolved
Decide which of the plausible
viewpoints is the most compelling
The committee approach (voting) is
advantageous because the decision is
representative of the general public

Method of Casuistry Approach

we find negative and positive
paradigm cases
Application of principles to moral questions
The application of general rules and principles to
questions of ethics or morals in order to resolve them
Moral theories hard to apply to specific cases. Method
of Casuistry starts from specific cases.
Gained popularity in 1980s with discussions of
bioethics. People couldnt agree on applying general
moral theories, but could achieve consensus on
specific cases.

2008 Michael C. Loui

67

In the Method of Casuistry, we

find negative and positive
paradigm cases

For example, should we give a

customary grease payment to a lowlevel government official for expedited
handling of our paperwork?
Negative paradigm (clearly wrong):
Extortion
Positive paradigm (clearly right): Gift

2008 Michael C.
Loui

68

 and we compare their

features
Extortion
Large size
Transaction
Before action
action
Influence
decision
Requested by
recipient
2008 Michael C.
Loui

Grease payment
Gift
----------------------x-- Small size
x------------------------ Friendship
x------------------------ After
----x--------------------

No influence

----------x-------------- Not requested

69

Qualify the Opinions or

Recommendations
Committees must qualify the
recommendations they make by
describing the level of consensus that
was received
Should include the voting distribution
and any dissenting opinions

CODE OF ETHICS FOR

ENGINEERS

THE FUNDAMENTAL
PRINCIPLES

Professional Ethics in
Engineering,
Credits: The following slides were taken
from the lectures of Mr. Michael C. Loui
Professor of Electrical and Computer
Engineering
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Engineers Obligations to Other

Engineers
Conflicts of Interest
Engineers shall not directly or indirectly give,
solicit, or receive any gift or commission, or
other valuable consideration, in order to
obtain work, and shall not make contribution
to any political body with intent of influencing
the award of contract by governmental body

73

Engineers Obligations to Other

Engineers
Reputations of Other Engineers
1.Engineers shall not attempt to injure,
maliciously or falsely, directly or indirectly, the
professional reputations, prospects, practice or
employment of other engineers, nor
indiscriminately criticize the work of other
engineers
2.Criticize cautiously and objectively with respect
to the persons professional status

74

Fundamental
Principles

Published by the Accreditation

Board for Engineering and
Technology (ABET)

Preamble and Four Parts

Fundamental Principles
Engineers uphold and advance the
integrity, honor and dignity of the
engineering profession by:
I. using their knowledge and skill for the
enhancement of human welfare;
II. being honest and impartial, and serving with
fidelity the public, their employers and
clients;
III. striving to increase the competence and
prestige of the engineering profession; and
IV. supporting the professional and technical
societies of their disciplines.

Fundamental Canons
1. Engineers shall hold paramount the safety,
health and welfare of the public in the
performance of their professional duties.

2. Engineers shall perform services only in the

areas of their competence.

3. Engineers shall issue public statements only

in an objective and truthful manner.

4. Engineers shall act in professional matters for

each employer or client as faithful agents or
trustees, and shall avoid conflicts of interest.

Fundamental Canons
5. Engineers shall build professional

reputation on the merit of their services

and shall not compete unfairly with others.

6. Engineers shall act in such a manner as to

uphold and enhance the honor, integrity
and dignity of the profession.

7. Engineers shall continue their professional

development throughout their careers and

shall provide opportunities for the
professional development of those
engineers under their supervision.

Professional Ethics in
Engineering,
Responsibility

Are you responsible?

You are an engineer at International
Programmable Machines (IPM), which
makes computers. You are visiting a
manufacturing plant of one of IPMs
suppliers, which sells parts to IPM and
other companies. You notice that a nonIPM system is not properly grounded,
and it could cause an electrical shock.
What should you do? For what reasons?
2008 Michael C. Loui

80

Software errors in the Therac-25

resulted in deaths
In the early 1980s, Atomic Energy of
Canada Limited made the Therac-25
cancer radiation treatment machine
Between 1985 and 1987, radiation
overdoses by the Therac-25 caused
severe burns, which killed three patients
and seriously injured three others
Who was responsible?
2008 Michael C.
Loui

81

What are different kinds of

personal responsibility?
Causal
Role: when you are assigned a task, or by virtue of
your position
Legal: can be sued
Moral: unlike others, can be shared. Many engineers
are together morally responsible for safety. Rather
than assign blame for past event, moral responsibility
focuses on future actions.
A virtue: responsible person

What are different kinds of

personal responsibility?
Causal

Operators keyboard entries caused the overdoses

Role

Software engineers developed and tested the

control program, but overlooked errors

Legal

The manufacturer was liable for damages

Moral

Unlike others, can be shared

2008 Michael C.
Loui

83

Engineers are morally

responsible for safety
Engineers shall hold paramount the
safety, health, and welfare of the
public.
Code of Ethics, National
Society of Professional Engineers
When you see unsafe objects or
practices, you are professionally
responsible to act even when you are
not assigned that task
2008 Michael C.
Loui

84

Professional Ethics in
Engineering,
Conflict of Interest

What is conflict of interest?

Conflict of interest as an idiom applying to
professionals who exercise judgment.
Example:
Engineer who recommends purchase of parts made by manufacturer where her
brother works, or has a significant financial interest in, or where he recently
worked.
Academic example:
Graduate student supervised by professor, but student also works in professors
consulting firm. Judgment of professor in making decisions about students
academic progress could be colored by employer-employee relationship.

How should you advise the

committee?
You are an engineer who works for the state
government, but you hope to leave soon for
a higher-paying job with Bucknell
Corporation. You are advising a committee
that is considering three bids for
constructing a new government building.
One bid comes from Bucknell, and you think
that Bucknells bid is the best.
Should you advise the committee to accept
Bucknells bid? Why or why not?
2008 Michael C.
Loui

87

When does a conflict of interest

exist?
Not conflicting interest
Person in a position requiring
exercise of judgment
Special interests that might interfere
with the exercise of that judgment

Financial interests
Family connections
Prior relationships

2008 Michael C.
Loui

88

Why does a conflict of interest

seem unethical?
Ethical concerns raised by conflict
of interest

Potential bias
Perceived deception
Loss of trust

Appearance of a conflict of interest

2008 Michael C.
Loui

89

What can you do about a conflict

of interest?
Recusal
Disclosure
Management

2008 Michael C.
Loui

90

Professional Ethics in
Engineering,
Confidentiality

Can you work on the new

engines?
You designed the engines that Galactic Motors
hopes to use in future all-electric automobiles.
Six months ago, you left Galactic for a
managerial position with Forge Motor Company,
a direct competitor. After a restructuring,
however, Forges vice president asks you to lead
a design team to develop engines for Forges
planned electric autos. The vice president hints
that Forge is interested in the design concepts
that you previously developed at Galactic Motors.
How should you respond? For what reasons?
2008 Michael C.
Loui

92

What is a trade secret?

Information with commercial value
Represents an economic investment

Required effort to develop

Actively kept confidential by owner

Need not be patentable
Violations covered by criminal law
No legal recourse if independently
discovered (unlike patent)
2008 Michael C.
Loui

93

You have obligations to former

employers
Confidentiality of trade secrets
Promises in signed nondisclosure
and noncompete agreements

2008 Michael C.
Loui

94

Professional Ethics in
Engineering,
Ethical Decision-Making

Moral reasoning? How can we

approach moral problems?
Identify

Affected parties
Rights and responsibilities
Additional information needed

Consider alternative actions

Imagine possible consequences

2008 Michael C. Loui

96

How can we evaluate morality of

actions?
Basic ethical valueshonesty, fairness,
civility, respect, kindness, etc.
Moral tests:

Harms test: Do the benefits outweigh the

harms, short term and long term?
Reversibility test: Would I still think this
choice is good if I traded places?
Common practice test: What if everyone
behaved in this way?

2008 Michael C. Loui

97

How can we evaluate morality of

actions?

Legality test: Would this choice violate a law

or a policy of my employer?
Colleague test: What would professional
colleagues say?
Wise relative test: What would my wise old
aunt or uncle do?
Mirror test: Would I feel proud of myself
when I look into the mirror afterward?
Publicity test: How would this choice look on
the front page of a newspaper?

2008 Michael C. Loui

98

Example: Can sending spam be

moral?
Spam is unwanted bulk e-mail
Could be honest, free speech, but
Harms: Costly, reduces trust in e-mail
Reversibility: Senders dislike receiving
spam
Common practice: Would clog network
Legality: SPAM law (if there is) does not
apply outside our country, where much
spam originates
2008 Michael C.
Loui

99

In the Method of Casuistry, we

find negative and positive
paradigm cases

In another country, should we give a

customary grease payment to a lowlevel government official for expedited
handling of our paperwork?
Negative paradigm (clearly wrong):
Extortion
Positive paradigm (clearly right): Gift

2008 Michael C.
Loui

100

 and we compare their

features
Extortion
Large size
Transaction
Before action
action
Influence
decision
Requested by
recipient
2008 Michael C.
Loui

Grease payment
Gift
----------------------x-- Small size
x------------------------ Friendship
x------------------------ After
----x--------------------

No influence

----------x-------------- Not requested

101

CASE STUDIES

Gifts and Bribes example

Case 1: Denise is an engineer at a large
manufacturing company. It is her job to specify gears
for a new product. After some research and testing,
she decides to use ACME gears for the job.
The day after she places a 100,000 order for gears,
an ACME representative visits her and gives her a
voucher for an all-expenses-paid trip to the ACME
Technical Forum in Jamaica.
The 4-day trip will include 18 classroom hours and a
day-long tour of the coastline.
Does this trip fall under the category of bribery?
What should Denise do?

Method of Casuistry

(the application of general rules and principles to questions of ethics

or morals in order to resolve them)

1.
-

2.

State the problem or a question.

Is this trip to Jamaica a bribe or not?
Is this trip a case of bribery or a morally unproblematic
gift?
Set up paradigms
a. Set up ends of spectrum:
- Positive Paradigm: case that is clearly ok
- Negative Paradigm: case that is clearly not ok
- look at or question
b. List features of Positive Paradigm costs 1
c. List corresponding features of Negative Paradigmcosts
USD
5,000

Method of Casuistry
3.

Mark which features are the most important

4.

Compare paradigms with Test Case on each of the

features

5.

Judge which paradigm Test Case is closest to

6.

State Conclusion - Trip is/is not a case of bribery

Is the trip to Jamaica a gift or a

bribe?
Feature

Positive
Paradigm

Test Case

Negative
Paradigm

Creates an
obligation

No

Yes

Denises decision
making power

None

Sole

Timing

After decision

Before decision

Reason

Education

Pleasure

Quality of Product

Best

Worst

Gift size

USD1000.00

USD 5,000.00

Credit for Engineering Work

Case 2
Introduction
Engineer A is designing a bridge as part
of an elevated highway system.
Engineer B is asked to help with the
design and helps design critical elements
of the bridge.
Engineer A enters the bridge design into
a national competition and wins, but fails
to credit Engineer B for her part in the
design.
Ref: http://onlineethics.org

Credit for Engineering Work

Question
Was it ethical for Engineer A to fail to
give credit to Engineer B for her part
in the design?

Credit for Engineering Work

Code of Ethics References

Issue public statements only in an objective and truthful

manner. Engineers shall be objective and truthful in
professional reports, statements or testimony. They
shall include all relevant and pertinent information in
such reports, statements or testimony.
Engineers shall avoid all conduct or practice which is
likely to discredit the profession or deceive the public.
Engineers shall not accept financial or other
considerations, including free engineering designs, from
material or equipment suppliers for specifying their
product.
Engineers shall, whenever possible, name the person or
persons who may be individually responsible for
designs, inventions, writings, or other accomplishments.

Credit for Engineering Work

Discussion
Basic to engineering ethics is the responsibility
to issue statements in an objective and truthful
manner. The concept of providing credit for
engineering work to those to whom credit is
due is fundamental to that responsibility. This is
particularly the case where an engineer retains
the services of other individuals because the
engineer may not possess the education,
experience and expertise to perform the
required services for a client.

Credit for Engineering Work

Discussion, continued
While each individual case must be understood
based upon the particular facts involved, we
believe that Engineer A had an ethical
obligation to his client, to Engineer B, as well
as to the public to take reasonable steps to
identify all parties responsible for the design of
the bridge.

Credit for Engineering Work

Conclusion
It was unethical for Engineer A to fail to
give credit to Engineer B for her part in the
design.

Case Study: An Engineers Right to

Protest

Introduction
Engineer A works as an engineer for a
defense contractor reviewing the work of
subcontractors.

Engineer A discovers that certain

subcontractors have made submissions
with excessive cost, time delays or
substandard work.
Ref: http://onlineethics.org

Case Study: An Engineers Right to

Protest

Introduction, continued
Engineer A advises management to reject
these jobs and require subcontractors to
correct the problem.

After an extended disagreement about the

subcontractors work, management places

a warning in Engineer As file and places
him on probation, warning of future
termination.

An Engineers Right to
Protest
Question
Does Engineer A have an ethical
obligation, or an ethical right, to
continue his efforts to secure change in
the policy of his employer under these
circumstances, or to report his
concerns to proper authority?

An Engineers Right to Protest

Code of Ethics References

Code of Ethics- "Engineers shall at all times recognize

that their primary obligation is to protect the safety,
health, property, and welfare of the public. If their
professional judgment is overruled under circumstances
where the safety, health, property, or welfare of the
public are endangered, they shall notify their employer or
client and such other authority as may be appropriate."
Code of Ethics- "Engineers shall not complete, sign, or
seal plans and/or specifications that are not of a design
safe to the public health and welfare and in conformity
with accepted engineering standards. If the client or
employer insists on such unprofessional conduct, they
shall notify the proper authorities and withdraw from
further service on the project."

An Engineers Right to
Protest
Case 3:
Discussion
Here the issue does not allege a danger to public health
or safety, but is premised upon a claim of unsatisfactory
plans and the unjustified expenditure of public funds.
As we recognized in earlier cases, if an engineer feels
strongly that an employer's course of conduct is
improper when related to public concerns, and if the
engineer feels compelled to blow the whistle to expose
the facts as he sees them, he may well have to pay the
price of loss of employment.

An Engineers Right to
Protest

Discussion, continued

We feel that the ethical duty or right of the engineer

becomes a matter of personal conscience, but we are not
willing to make a blanket statement that there is an ethical
duty in these kinds of situations for the engineer to
continue his campaign within the company, and make the
issue one for public discussion.
The Code only requires that the engineer withdraw from a
project and report to proper authorities when the
circumstances involve endangerment of the public health,
safety, and welfare.

An Engineers Right to
Protest
Conclusion
Engineer A does not have an ethical obligation to
continue his effort to secure a change in the policy of
his employer under these circumstances, or to report
his concerns to proper authority, but has an ethical
right to do so as a matter of personal conscience.

Complimentary Seminar
Registration
Case 4
Introduction

The ABC Pipe Company is interested in becoming

known within the engineering community and, in
particular, to those engineers involved in the
specification of pipe in construction.

ABC sends an invitation to Engineer X announcing a

one-day complimentary educational seminar to
educate engineers on current technological advances
in the selection and use of pipe in construction.

Ref: http://onlineethics.org

Complimentary Seminar
Registration
Introduction, continued
ABC will host all refreshments, a buffet
luncheon during the seminar, and a cocktail
reception immediately following. Engineer X
agrees to attend.

Complimentary Seminar
Registration
Question
Was it ethical for Engineer X to attend
the one-day complimentary
educational seminar hosted by the
ABC Pipe Company?

Complimentary Seminar
Code of Ethics References
Registration

Code of Ethics- Engineers shall not solicit or accept

financial or other valuable consideration, directly or
indirectly, from contractors, their agents, or other parties in
connection with work for employers or clients for which
they are responsible."

Engineers shall not accept commissions or allowances,

directly or indirectly, from contractors or other parties
dealing with clients or employers of the Engineer in
connection with work for which the Engineer is
responsible.

Engineers shall encourage engineering employees' efforts

to improve their education."

Complimentary Seminar
Registration

Discussion

The Code unequivocally states that engineers

must not accept gifts or other valuable
consideration from a supplier in exchange for
specifying its products. However, in this case
we are dealing with a material supplier who is
introducing information about pipe products to
engineers in the community and has chosen
the form of an educational seminar as its
vehicle.

Complimentary Seminar
Registration
Discussion
We view the buffet luncheon and cocktail
reception immediately following the seminar as
falling within the minimal provisions noted in
previous cases, and thus it would not be improper
for Engineer X to participate in those activities.
We note, however, that had Engineer X agreed to
accept items of substantial value (e.g., travel
expenses, multi-day program, resort location, etc.)
our conclusion would have been quite different.

Complimentary Seminar
Registration
Conclusion

It was ethical for Engineer X to attend the

one-day complimentary educational seminar
hosted by the ABC Pipe Company.

Engineering Disaster
Case 5: The Ford Pinto Case
Crash tests reveal defect in
gas tank rear-end collisions
over 25 mph resulted in
rupture and explosion
Cost benefit analysis estimation
Cost to pay for injuries
180 Deaths, 180 Injured, 2100 Burned Cars = $ 49.5 million
Cost to make safe cars
$12.5 million cars x $11/car = $137 million

Ford Pays
Over 500 documented deaths related
to rear-end collisions in the Pintos
Lawsuits and personal injury cases
totaled over $450 million even
as Ford continues to argue the car
was safe if driven correctly
Company nearly folded after the lawsuits
and low sales due to lack of trust in Ford
products

The Challenger space shuttle

On January 28, 1986, the Challenger space shuttle was scheduled to take 6
astronauts and one civilian teacher to the moon. NASA managers were
anxious to launch the Challenger for several reasons, including economic
considerations, political pressures, and scheduling backlogs. Engineers
argued that the cold weather could exaggerate problems with the joint
rotation and O-ring seating. From previous testing, the engineers believed
but did not have data to prove that the boosters could experience O-ring
erosion at low temperatures. The managers saw the inconclusive data as
insufficient reason to stop the launch; consequently they over-rode the
engineers arguments and approved the launch to continue.
During the launch, the solid rocket booster O-rings failed to seat properly
and allowed hot combustion gases to leak from the side of the booster and
burn through the external fuel tank. Consequently, the Challenger exploded
only minutes after blast-off with fatal results.

CASE 6. THE CHALLENGER CASE

After a lot of delays CHALLENGERS 8th flight was scheduled
on 28th Jan 1986. Allan McDonald of MortonThiokol who
designed the solidrocket booster knew the problems with the
field joints on previous cold weather joints and 28th Jan was
expected to be cold.
Seal experts Arnold Thompson and Roger Boisjoly of Morton
Thiokol, explained to NASA representatives how upon launch
the booster rocket walls bulge and the combustion gases can
blow past one or even both of the O rings that make up the
field joints.

CASE 6. THE CHALLENGER CASE

The O rings char and erode, as
had been observed on many
previous flights. In cold weather
the problem is aggravated
because the O rings and the
putty packing are less pliable
then (more brittle). Senior Vice
President Jerry Mason told Bob
Lund (Vice President
Engineering) TO TAKE OFF
YOUR ENGINEERING HAT AND
PUT ON YOUR MANAGEMENT
HAT. The managers (not
engineers) voted that the seals
COULD NOT BE SHOWN TO BE
UNSAFE.

CASE 6. THE CHALLENGER

CASE
The count down ended at 11.38 AM. The temperature was 36
degrees. As the rocket carrying the Challenger rose from the
ground, cameras showed smoke emanating through the rings. Soon
these turned into a flame that hit the external fuel tank and a strut
holding the booster rocket.
The hydrogen in the tank caught fire, the booster rocket broke
loose, smashed into Challengers wing, then into the external tank.
At 76 seconds into the flight, by the time Challenger and its rocket
had reached 50,000 feet, it was totally engulfed in a fire ball.
The crew cabin separated and fell into the ocean, killing all abroad.
Mission Commander: Francis Scobee. Pilot: Michael Smith. Mission
specialist: Gpegory Jarvis, Ronald McNair, Ellison Onizuka, Judith
Resnick. Teacher in space: Christa MacAuliffe (Chosen from 11,000
applicants)
ISSUES:

Challenger Explosion
O-ring Sealing problems
Engineers argued against
launch at low temperature
Management over-ruled
the engineers warnings
Shuttle exploded minutes
into the flight
7 Lives lost

Ethical Questions
Were the decisions made unethical?
Who is to blame for these disasters?
What were the ethical obligations for
management? For the engineers?
This is a famous case involving the explosion of the Challenger space shuttle.
This disaster was the product of poor and unethical decision making.

Ethical Summary
Professional ethics for engineers
Set of rules and guidelines for
professional behavior for engineer.
For personal, moral, social, professional
and environmental well-being of
individuals and the communities that we
serve.

Do the right thing!!!

Credits

Thismoduleisintendedasasupplementtodesignclassesinmechanical
engineering.ItwasdevelopedatTheOhioStateUniversityundertheNSF
sponsoredGatewayCoalition(grantEEC9109794).Contributingmembers
include:

GaryKinzel..Projectsupervisors
JimPiperandRachelMurdell..Primaryauthors
PhuongPhamandMattDetrick...Modulerevisions
L.Pham...Audiovoice

References:
Murdough Center for Engineering Professionalism, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas

National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) and reference the 1995 NSPE Code of Ethics
What Every Engineer Should Know About Ethics, by Kenneth K. Humphreys

Disclaimer
This information is provided as is for general educational
purposes; it can change over time and should be interpreted
with regards to this particular circumstance. While much effort
is made to provide complete information, Ohio State University
and Gateway do not guarantee the accuracy and reliability of
any information contained or displayed in the presentation.
We disclaim any warranty, expressed or implied, including the
warranties of fitness for a particular purpose. We do not
assume any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy,
completeness, reliability, timeliness or usefulness of any
information, or processes disclosed. Nor will Ohio State
University or Gateway be held liable for any improper or
incorrect use of the information described and/or contain
herein and assumes no responsibility for anyones use of the
information. Reference to any specific commercial product,
process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacture, or
otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its
endorsement.

Case Study Example

Actions Affecting Human Life:
A leather manufacturer disposes of
dangerous leather-cleaning chemicals in
the river causing the citys water to be
contaminated with carcinogens. Eight
children died by leukemia.
SOUNDS FAMILIAR?
A Civil Action starring John Travolta.
A perfect case of professional ethics.

Case Study Example

(cont)

What should the owner of the plant do?

1. Say nothing about the problem. If challenged, claim
that it is impossible to prove that the plant discharge
caused the leukemia.
2. Work out a cleaning system that would rectify the
problem.
3. Admit that he made the error, clean the discharge, clean
all contaminated areas, have the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) inspect the cleaned areas, and
pay a settlement to the families of lost children.
4.Other?

CASE 7: WHISTLE BLOWING

Definition:
Whistle blowing is alerting relevant
persons to some moral or legal
corruption, where Relevant persons
are those in a position to act in response.
No topic in Engineering ethics is more
controversial than whistle blowing.

CASE 3: WHISTLE BLOWING

Carl Houston was a welding supervisor for a nuclear power facility in
Virginia (1970) for Stone & Weber
He saw
Improper welding procedures
Use of wrong materials
Welders were not trained properly
The Situation was dangerous
He reported to Stone & Webers Manager, who ignored him. He
threatened to write to Stone & Webers Headquarters. Shortly
thereafter he was fired on trumpedup charges.
Finally he wrote to Senators Howard's Baker and Albert Gore. The
Senators prompted the Atomic Energy
Commission to investigate, which confirmed his allegations.
ISSUES :

Case Study Example

(cont)

Do Ethical Canons
Apply?

Ethical Canons
Engineers shall hold
paramount the safety,
health and welfare of the
public in the performance
of their professional
duties.

Resource Allocation
Engineers are often responsible
for allocating limited funds to
projects.
These projects may affect the
general health and safety of the
public.
These projects may have
detrimental effects on some
segments of the population.

Team Exercise #5
Identify three situations
in which an engineer
must make resource
allocation decisions that
may affect the public.
Three minutes

ENGINEERING
ETHICS
CASE STUDIES on
safety engineering
ethics

CASE 1 : THE CASE OF THE

ROBOT
KILLER
Jane McMurdock, prosecuting attorney for the city
of Silicon Valley, announced today the indictment
of Randey Samuels on charges of manslaughter.
Samuels employed as a programmer at the Silicon
Techtronic's Inc. The charge involves the death of
Bart Matthews, who was killed last May by an
assemblyline robot.
Matthews worked as robot operator at Cybernetics
Inc., in Silicon Heights. He was crushed to death
when the robot he was operating malfunctioned
and started to wave its hands violently.

CASE 1 : THE CASE OF THE

KILLER
The Robot arm struck Matthews, throwing him against a wall
and crushing his skull. Matthews died almost instantly.
According to the indictment, Samuels wrote the particular
piece of computer program responsible for the robot
malfunction.
Theres
a
smoking
gun!
McMurdock
announced
triumphantly at a press conference held in the hall of
Justice." We have the hand written formula, provided by the
project physicist, which Samuels was supposed to program.
But he negligently misinterpreted the formula leading to this
huge gruesome death. Society must protect itself against
programmers who make careless mistakes.
The Sentinel observer has obtained a copy of the
handwritten formula in question. There are actually three
similar formulas, scrawled on piece of yellow legal pad
paper.

CASE 1 : THE CASE OF THE KILLER

Each formula describes the motion of the robot in

one direction: east-west, North-south and up
down. The Sentinel-Observer showed the
formulas to Bill Park a professor of physics at
Silicon Valley University.
He confirmed that these equations could be used
to describe the motion of a robot arm. The
SentinelObserver then showed Park the program
code written by the accused in the programming
language.
We asked Park who is fluent in C and several
other languages, whether the program code was
correct for the given robot arm formulas.

CASE 1 : THE CASE OF THE KILLER

Parks response was immediate. He
exclaimed, By Jove! It looks like he
misinterpreted the formula. Hes guilty
as hell, if you ask me.
The SentinelObserver was unable to
contact Samuels for comment. He is
deeply depressed about all this, his
girl friend told us over the phone," but
Randy believes he will be acquitted
when he gets a chance to tell his side
of the story.

ISSUES?

CASE 2: DC 10 JUMBO JET

The fuselage of the DC 10 Jumbo jet of which the
cargo door is a part was developed by Convair, a sub
contractor for McDonnell Douglas.
Convairs senior engineer directing the project, Dan
Applegate had written to the Vice president of the
company:
The Cargo door could burst open, leading to crash of
the plane. Hence the door has to be redesigned and
the cabin floor has to strengthened.
Top Management at Convair neither disputed the
technical facts or the predictions made by Applegate.
The liabilities and the cost of redesign were too high.
Two years went by. In 1974 the cargo door of DC 10
Jumbo burst open and the jet crashed near Paris
killing 346 .
ISSUES:

References:
1. Martin, Mike & Schinzinger,
Ronald: Ethics in Engineering,
3rd Ed. McGraw Hill
http://temp.onlinethics.org/cas
es/robot/article- 1.htm/

Is legal the same as

ethical?
YES:

Law defines duties,

rights, allowable
conduct.
Compliance approach
to business ethics:
fulfill legally
recognized duties, and
dont go further.

NO:

Law does not address all

ethical dilemmas
Legal duties may not
meet standard of ethical
conduct
Beyond Compliance
approach: fulfill legally
recognized duties, but
dont stop there.

In case of conflicts, its generally held that legal

standards must give way to ethical standards
155

From CSUN ME Senior Ethics Lecture

Consider This: You and Al

You are the manager for Big-Mart, a large
discount retailer. You recently fired Al, a sales
clerk, after Al punched a customer during a
dispute in the store (Al admitted this after the
customer complained).
Sue, manager of your competitor, Mega-Mart,
calls you to tell you that Al has applied for a
job at Mega-Mart, and to ask you whether Al is
good with customers.

WHAT YOU SHOULD DO ?

156

From CSUN ME Senior Ethics Lecture

An ethical dilemma?
Choice to be made
Implicates competing values, rights,
& goals
Potential harm to decision maker?
Potential harm to others?
Ripple effect: long-term, far
reaching implications of decision to
be made.
157

From CSUN ME Senior Ethics Lecture

How to Resolve Ethical

Dilemmas
Identify relevant facts
Identify relevant issue(s)
Identify primary stakeholders
Identify possible solutions
Evaluate each possible solution
Compare and assess consequences
Decide on solution
Take action
158

From CSUN ME Senior Ethics Lecture

How to Evaluate Solutions: Some

Theories

Stakeholder/utilitarian theory: greatest

good to the greatest number

Rights Theory: Respecting and protecting

individual rights to fair and equal treatment,
privacy, freedom to advance, etc.

Justice Theory: fair distribution of benefits and

burdens: can harm to individual be justifiable?

Categorical Imperative: what if everyone

took such action?

Front Page Test: What if my decision was

reported on the front page of the Phil. Daily
Inquirer?
159

From CSUN ME Senior Ethics Lecture

Legal vs. Ethical: You and Al

Ethical?

Unethical?

Legal
Al admitted
to punching
a customer.

Illegal
[You contact
another
store, X-Mart,
to warn
about Al]

No
comment

He is great
with
customers.
160

From CSUN ME Senior Ethics Lecture

NCEES Model Rules of

Professional Conduct
NCEES is the National Council of Examiners for
Engineering and Surveying
http://www.ncees.org/

161

The Preamble
Purpose is to safeguard life,
health, and property, to promote
the public welfare, and to maintain
a high standard of integrity and
practice.

162

DISCUSSIONS...
ISSUES...

Case Study
A resident in a subdivision expressed her concern
about radiation safety health hazard due to the
proximity of her residence to the Smart Comm. Cell
site tower. She filed a complaint at the NTC and
has been asking for a certification to that effect.
What should the NTC engineers do to address the
situation, considering they are not radiation experts.
DOH is responsible for the issuance of radiation
hazard certificate to the Telcos prior to the cell site
construction. If the NTC engineer will not issue the
certification, the complainant will file a complaint at
the Ombudsman for negligence and not acting of
her complaint. What are the factors that must be
considered by the NTC engineers in making
decision whether to issue or not to issue the
certification?

Case: Cellular Phones

Cellular phones are one of the most popular items on the
market today. They are attractive and extremely
convenient, with some phones transmitting and receiving
signals in the 800 MHz band and up to and beyond a 30
mile radius. Lately cellular phones have been in the news.
A Florida man sued a cellular phone manufacturer after
the death of his wife. His wife died of a canceros tumor in
the brain allegedly caused by her cellular phone.
The problem originates with the frequency and the
location of the antenna. Under normal circumstances, the
antenna is very close to the skull and has an isotropic
radiation pattern (360 pattern of radiation) in the
azimuthal plane and a figure eight pattern in the elevation
plane . Approximately one half of the power is dissipated
into the brain. Therefore, the near field effect on the brain
needs to be investigated at normal operating intensity.

Case: Cellular Phones

Very little is known about the near field effects of
radiation on the body, especially brain tissue. IEEE
has proposed a standard of how much radiation
could safely be dissipated into the human body as
a whole. This standard is 0.4 Watts/kilogram.
This is an average for the entire body, but recent
research shows that the tissue of the brain is much
more susceptible to radiation. This means that the
standard for the brain should be significantly lower
than the IEEE standard. How much lower no one is
sure, since the effect of radiation on the brain is
unknown.

Case: Cellular Phones

III. Ethical Problems

1. Andrew is a young engineer working for a cellular phone manufacturing

company. When doing a bit of off the job research he read the latest
report about the susceptibility of the brain to radiation.
2. The next day he reviewed the calculations of the radiation given off by
the antenna of his company's hottest selling cellular phone. He found
that the S.A.R. to the brain was 0.35 W/kg.
3. Later that afternoon he visited his boss with a suggestion to modify the
antennas on the phones and perhaps doing a recall on the ones
already sold. "Andrew," screamed Diane, head engineer, "what you're
suggestion would cost us hundreds of thousands of dollars! You can't
possibly be serious. That's our fastest seller. Recalling them would be a
disaster and there are more important things to be done. You don't
even know that this is dangerous!".

Case: Cellular Phones

III. Ethical Problems

" But what about our obligation to the public?"

"What about your obligation to the company? Look, I don't want to make a big
issue out of this. We're within IEEE standards and unless we have further
word from them then we're in the clear."
What would you do if you were in Andrew's shoes?
Would you talk to someone above Diane or try to convince her, etc. ?
Can you think of options that would be fair both to the company and to the public,
especially in the light of the uncertainty about the health risks?
Explain your reasoning.
Assume that Andrew asks Diane for paid time to research the matter further and
Diane refuses his request.
Now what should Andrew do? Discuss your rationale.

Case Study
Express your comments or views in the
following situation:
Robert is a 3rd year ECE student who has been
placed on probation for a low grade point average,
even though he knows he is doing the best work he
can. A concerned friend offers to help him by sitting
next to him and sharing his answers during the next
exam. Robert has never cheated on an exam before,
but this time he is desperate. What should he do?

THANK YOU

Group Exercise
Each group is given 10 minutes to discuss and
prepare solutions in Powerpoint, and 10
minutes for presentation to class and Q&A

Group
Group
Group
Group

1:
2:
3:
4:

Case
Case
Case
Case

1
2
3
4

(15.3)
(15.4)
(15.6)
(15.7)

Cases are designed as problems for you, so

seek resolutions that you personally can live
with.
171

Case
1
Newly hired as a production engineer, you find a potential problem on
the shop floor: workers are routinely ignoring some of the government
mandated safety regulations governing the presses and stamping
machines.
The workers override the safety features such as guards designed to
make it impossible to insert a hand or arm into a machine. Or they rig up
"convenience" controls so they can operate a machine while close to it,
instead of using approved safety switches, etc., which requires more
movement or operational steps. Their reason (or excuse) is that if the
safety features were strictly followed then production would be very
difficult, tiring and inefficient. They feel that their shortcut still provides
adequately safe operation with improved efficiency and worker
satisfaction.
Should you immediately insist on full compliance with all the safety
regulations, or do the workers have enough of a case so that you would be
tempted to ignore the safety violations? And if you're tempted to ignore
the violations, how would you justify doing so to your boss?
Also, how much weight should you give to the workers' clear
preference for not following the regulations: ethically, can safety standards
be relaxed if those to whom they apply want them to be relaxed?
172

Case 2
You and an engineer colleague work closely on designing and implementing
procedures for the proper disposal of various waste materials in an industrial
plant. He is responsible for liquid wastes, which are discharged into local rivers.
During ongoing discussions with your colleague, you notice that he is
habitually allowing levels of some toxic liquid waste chemicals, which are
slightly higher than levels permitted by the law of those chemicals. You tell him
that you have noticed this, but he replied that, since the levels are only slightly
above the legal limits, any ethical or safety issues are trivial in this case, and
not worth the trouble and expense to correct them.
Do you agree with your colleague? If not, should you attempt to get him to
correct the excess levels, or is this none of your business since it is he rather
than you who is responsible for liquid wastes?
If he refuses to correct the problems, should you report this to your boss or
higher management? And if no one in your company will do anything about the
problem, should you be prepared to go over their heads and report the problem
directly to government inspectors or regulators? Or should one do that only in a
case where a much more serious risk to public health and safety involved?

173

Case 3

Your company has for some time supplied prefabricated wall sections, which you
designed, to construction companies. Suddenly one day a new idea occurs to you
about how these might be fabricated more cheaply using composites of recycled
waste materials.
Pilot runs for the new fabrication technique are very successful, so it is decided to
entirely switch over to the new technique on all future production runs for the
prefabricated sections. But there are managerial debates about how, or even
whether, to inform the customers about the fabrication changes.
The supply contracts were written with specifications and functional terms, so that
love bearing capacities and longevity, etc., of the wall sections were specified, but no
specific materials or fabrication techniques were identified in the contracts. Thus it
would be possible to make the changeover without any violation of the ongoing
contracts with the customers.
On the other hand, since there is significant cost savings in the new fabrication
method, does your company have an ethical obligation to inform the customers of
this, and perhaps even to renegotiate supply at reduced cost, so that the customers
also share in benefits of the new technique? More specifically, do you have any
special duty, as a professional engineer and designer of the new technique, to be an
advocate in your company for the position that customers should be fully informed of
the new technique and the associated cost savings?

174

Case 4

Your company manufactures security systems. Up to now these have raised few ethical problems,
since your products were confined to traditional forms of security, using armed guards, locks,
reinforced alloys which are hard to cut or drill, and similar methods.
However, as a design engineer you realize that this modern technology much more comprehensive
security packages could be provided to your customers. These could also include extensive video and
audio surveillance equipment, along with biometric monitoring devices of employees or other
personnel seeking entry to secure areas which would make use of highly personal data such as a
persons fingerprints, or retinal or voice patterns.
But there is a problem to be considered. A literature search reveals that there are many ethical
concerns about the collection and use of such personal data. For example, these high-tech forms of
surveillance could easily become a form of spying, carried out without the knowledge of employees
and violating their privacy. Or the data collected for security reasons could easily be sold or otherwise
used outside legitimate workplace contexts by unscrupulous customers of your surveillance systems.
Your boss wants you to include as much of this advanced technology as possible in future systems,
because customers like these new features and are willing to pay well for them.
However, you are concerned about the ethical issues involved in making these new technologies
available. As an engineer, do you have any ethical responsibility to not include any such ethically
questionable technologies in products which you design and sell, or to include them only in forms
which are difficult to misuse? Or is the misuse of such technologies an ethical problem only for the
customers who are buying your equipment, rather than it being your ethical responsibility as an
engineer?

175