Ethical Dilemmas

 My intent is to provide each member of the community of this class the opportunity to share with the rest of the community their considered approach to dealing with ethical dilemmas that will come up through your career (MY CAREER IS CIVIL ENGINEER).

I invite you to consider the following phases as you ponder and articulate your approach.

1. Secure your own Moral Clarity :
2. If you sense there is the potential of a problem of violation ethical standards at work or your life at large refuse to ignore it. Investigate and determine the facts of the case.
3. Always uphold paramount the standard that you became an engineer because you are dedicated securing the health safety and welfare of the public and the environment.
4. You are loyal to ethical practices of your firm institution as well as your client.
5. Know the Facts ensure that the information you are dealing with facts not opinions or distortions by:
6. Get hard documented facts, cross check the information.
7. Establish the competence and integrity of the source of the information

3.     Consider options

a. Investigating the diversity of potential actions you may take. Evaluate and discuss

b. considering the Long-term, short-term perspectives, repercussions?

c. finding out if any laws, codes, or fiduciary duties are violated by any of the alternatives

d. recognizes the potential impact of the options on you and your loved ones

e. locate a Moral Agent among your trusted acquaintance who can help you to assess any  and to your understanding of the problem and its consequences.            

f. Is there a “Creative middle solution”?

4.   Make an objective and moral decision 

a. Weigh all factors, recognize “gray areas”/compromises

b. In the process list the pros and cons of each of the alternative decision under consideration.

c. List how you will feel living with consequences of each alternative

Remember just because your deliberations followed the above phases, there is no guarantee the final decision will be easy.

2 PAGES  

Integrity
A quality of excellence that is manifested in a holistic and integral manner in individuals and organizations. Integrity is based on ethics and noble values and their concrete manifestation in their daily lives.

Integrity
• Provides access to the opportunity for superior performance and competitive advantage at both the individual, group and organizational level,
• Empowers (give strength and confidence to) the three virtue (high behaviour standard) phenomena of morality, ethics and legality.

Ethics vs. Etiquette
Ethics are the standards or codes of behaviour considered to be correct and expected by the group to which an individual belongs.
There are national ethics, social ethics, company ethics, professional ethics. Sometimes a person’s personal morals clash with the ethics he is expected to practice at work.
For example a criminal defense lawyer may find murder immoral but the ethics of his job demand that he defend a murderer to the best of his ability.

Ethics vs. Etiquette
Etiquette is a code of behaviour that outlines expectations for social behaviour within a society, social class or group. Rules of etiquette include all aspects of social interaction including manners.
But Etiquette is not just about saying ‘please’ and ‘thank you’. One important function of etiquette is that it shows respect and deference to others.
For example in many countries not jumping the queue is considered normal etiquette.

Ethics vs. Etiquette
Etiquette can vary a lot from country to country especially in business and social interaction.
For example the etiquette governing gift giving is different in different countries. So too can how much a person is permitted to touch another person.
In America it may be okay to slap a man on the back but in China it is a serious breach of etiquette

Ethics
A set of moral values and principles which form the standards guiding the code of conduct of individuals, organizations and professions.
Ethics is the principles of good and bad behavior governing what is right and wrong conduct.

based on our decisions

What is Ethics
• Ethics is the moral governing what is right and wrong conduct.
• Moral is the principles of good and bad behaviour.
• Our understanding
• Behaviour is the way in which someone behaves.
• Conduct is the manner in which a person behaves.
• Concise Oxford English Dictionary (10th Edition)

Definition of Ethics
• Ethics deals with what we believe to be good or bad and with the moral obligations that these beliefs imply.
• Ethics involves the rules for deciding right and wrong, and the code of conduct that is

Personal Ethics
• individual morality usually implies a set of internally held values;
• focus on what are held to be intrinsic or universal values – truth, honesty, or other measure of goodness;
• may guide our personal beliefs and actions

Professional Ethics
is usually connected to a shared understanding of proper conduct guidelines among a group of people associated by means of their profession;
allows diverse, multidisciplinary, and multicultural teams to work in unison toward common goals.

Why do Engineers need to know about Ethics?
• With knowledge & skills, engineers have the capability to do services to the public.
• With this capability, engineers have a tremendous responsibility to clients, individuals and society.
• Ethics help engineers to guide their decisions to ensure they act responsibly

Engineering Ethics
Means Professional Ethics for Engineers
Implies a shared understanding of proper conduct guidelines among members of the engineering profession.
Guided by code of ethics or code of professional conduct.

Code of Ethics
• Express the rights, duties, and obligations of the members of the profession.
• Provides framework for arriving at good ethical choices.
• May not be comprehensive, but all inclusive.
• Who has them?
– Professional Societies, Corporations – Government & Academic Institutions
– Others

Code of Ethics
• Codes of ethics are written by specific groups of people for specific groups of people, each group having its own purpose for existence and its own means of accomplishing its purpose.
• Codes of ethics are to be reflections of the morally permissible standards of conduct which members of a group make binding upon themselves.

Code of Ethics
• Your code of ethics defines your responsibilities to society and the environment, your employer or client, and your fellow engineers.
• Governments – federal, state, and local – impose added responsibilities on engineers through administrative rules and regulations, and civil and criminal codes.

Ethics and Moral reasoning

…
Moral Reasoning is a systematic approach to making ethical decisions
It is a structured process, an intellectual means of defending our ethical judgments against the criticisms of others
Knowledge of ethical principles is important but it’s the application and defense of rules of conduct that are core to moral reasoning 
Can you provide rational grounds upon which moral decisions have been made?
Different circumstances/ethical dilemmas- require the application of ethical frameworks which moral agents can use to make ethical judgments
Moral judgments should be based on sound ethical theories and defensible through reasoned analysis

…
Process of moral decision making
moral agent must posses knowledge and skills in three areas:
context
philosophical foundations of moral theory
critical thinking.
Understanding of the three areas will support moral decision making

The Context
Ethical decisions are not made in a vacuum
Moral agents must understand context within which the dilemma has occurred.
Context consists of all factors that could influence an individuals resolution
Understand the issue itself, facts of the situation, values, principles and moral duties of the situation
Contextual factors are often culturally determined (i.e. company values and behavioral codes)
Company values and behavioral codes can influence the rendering of moral judgments
Considerations that are unique to a particular situation constitute the context of the ethical dilemma
Moral agent must have knowledge of environment (social and cultural context)

The philosophical foundations of moral theory
Ethical principles have contributed to an individuals moral sense 
Ethical theories provide guidelines for moral reasoning
They provide standards and principles for evaluating moral judgments

…
Virtues ethics emphasize character development
Attain virtuous character through habits-practice moral reasoning
Through repetitive moral behaviors, the notion of good is inculcated into the individuals value system. Moral virtues become a way of thinking and acting
Care-based ethics: treat people affected by our decisions with respect.
Moral decisions should be based on respect for the dignity of persons as an end in itself than as means to an end.
Deontology: the intent of the act is as important as the act itself.
Moral agents have a duty to live up to moral principle

…
Utilitarianism: consequences of an ethical judgment
Recognize that difficult moral choices sometimes cause injury to others
Does not take into account the special obligations to individuals or small group of people
It forces us to weight the impact of our behavior on others. 
Relativism: what is good for one is not necessarily right or good for another, even under similar circumstance.
Determine what is right or wrong from one’s own view point

Critical thinking in moral reasoning
Critical thinking is the engine that drives moral reasoning
It can be traced back to the work of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle
It enables a more rational approach to decision making
Requires one to devote time to analyzing and evaluating the ethical dilemma and providing decision for ethical judgments made
Critical thinking is a skill that can be learnt
It involves, to some extent, learning to know when to question something and what sort of questions to ask

…
Critical thinking begins with something to critically think about (knowledge of the subject to be evaluated; principles and practices; understanding of moral theories)
Critical thinking requires an ability to identify problems and to gather, analyze and synthesize all relevant information relating to the problem
It also requires an ability to evaluate available alternatives and decisions to be made
The following list identifies the components of critical thinking that are important for moral reasoning
Acquisition of knowledge and an understanding of the context of the ethical situation
Critical analysis of that knowledge and consideration of ethical alternatives
Decision based on available alternatives

A model of moral reasoning
Situation Definition- acquire knowledge and facts and understanding of the context of the ethical dilemma
Understand the situation/subjects to be evaluated
Description of facts
Provide facts and details of the ethical situation; this may include, where possible, the original purpose/intent of the action
Identification of principles and values
Identify relevant principles and values in an ethical dilemma.(principles vary according to situation i.e. right to privacy, justice, fairness, right to life, right to information, loyalty)
Statement of ethical issue or question
Provide a clear statement of the ethical question and the question must be specific. For example; “it is permissible for public communicators to withhold information in their communication?”

…
Analysis- identify the issues, information and assumptions surrounding the problem
Examine the situation and evaluate the ethical alternatives
Weighing of competing principles and values
Examine the situation and identify conflicting principles and values
Consideration of external factors
Identify and understand external factors that may influence ethical decision making (i.e. company policies, legal constraints, precedents, political climate)
Examination of duties to various parties
Examine the standards of ethical conduct expected of a particular role and the moral duties governing behavior
Discussion of applicable ethical theories
Evaluate ethical theories that you could apply in a moral dilemma. Look at the issue from different ethical perspectives and identify the most appropriate ethical judgment

…
Decision
Rendering of moral agents decision
Defense of that decision based- upon moral theory
Examine alternative and reach a conclusion
Use available information to make a decision and defend decision based on situation definition, situation analysis as well as moral theory

References
Day, A.L. (2006). Ethics in Media Communications: Cases and Controversies. (5th Ed).USA: Wadsworth
Benz, I. 2001. Moral Reasoning (SAD) Formula. Retrieved from: web.monroecc.edu/ibenz/stories/storyReader$56

Ethicsin Engineering

Lecture #2: Ethical Dilemmas, Choices, and Codes of Ethics

Resolving Moral Dilemmas

1. Moral clarity

·

Need to know something is wrong! Do not ignore problems!

· Loyalty to employer, responsibilities to public and environment

(and complex relations between these)

2. Know the facts

· Get hard, documented facts, discuss with others

· Competence matters in gathering technical facts

3. Consider options

· Diversity of actions to take? Evaluate/discuss.

· Long-term, short-term perspectives, repercussions?

· “Creative middle solution”?

4. Make a reasonable decision

· Weigh all factors, recognize “gray areas”/compromises

· An engineering design problem?

NSPE, BER Case 96-4

· Engineer A is employed by a software company and is involved in the design of specialized software in connection with the operations of facilities affecting the public health and safety (i.e., nuclear, air quality control, water quality control). As the part of the design of a particular software system, Engineer A conducts extensive testing and although the tests demonstrate…

· that the software is safe to use under existing standards, Engineer A is aware of new draft standards that are about to be released by a standard setting organization-standards which the newly designed software may not meet. Testing is extremely costly and the company’s clients are eager to begin to move forward. The software company is eager to satisfy its clients, protect the software company’s finances, and protect…

· …existing jobs; but at the same time, the management of the software company wants to be sure that the software is safe to use. A series of tests proposed by Engineer A will likely result in a decision whether to move forward with the use of the software. The tests are costly and will delay the use of the software by at least six months, which will put the company at a competitive…

·

· …disadvantage and cost the company a significant amount of money. Also, delaying implementation will mean the state public service commission utility rates will rise significantly during this time. The company requests Engineer A’s recommendation concerning the need for additional software testing.

Question: Should Engineer A design the software to meet the new standards?

Analyzing the case…

· Moral clarity:

· What is wrong? What is the core issue/ question?

· Will the software meet the new standards? –  Why are there new standards?

· Experience shows new failure modes

· New tests designed to test new failure modes –  Engineer’s role in new standards?

· Development of new standards

· Following new standards

Analyzing the case, continued…

•  Know the facts

· It is critical software (health/safety of public)

· New standards to test new failure modes (that you need to understand)

· Testing is costly, company finances at stake

· Need to protect existing jobs

· Testing will delay release by > 6 months

· Testing will hurt competitive advantage?

· Utility rates will rise

Analyzing the case, continued…

•  Consider options

· Option 1: Ignore the new tests, take risk to public safety/welfare, save time/money

· Option 2: Conduct the tests, risk jobs, hurt finances, become certain software will work, protect safety/welfare of the public

· Option 3: Creative middle of the road solution: Is there are limited version of full tests that could be conducted that would partially test, but save some money/time?

Analyzing the case, continued

•  Make a reasonable decision

· Pick Option 2 since safety/health/welfare of the public is paramount

· If company says no, pick Option 3 and try to do a limited test for the failure mode (your

competence in coming up with an economical test is critical here). In this option, all constraints considered, you try to protect the safety, health, and welfare of the public

Resolving moral dilemmas,

“line-drawing”

· Harris et al. idea to try to make solving moral dilemmas more analytical/

quantitative

· Given moral dilemma

· Establish key features, issues

· Establish extremes of features/issues and paradigms

(indicating totally ethical vs. clearly unethical aspects)

· Construct a line drawing (see below)

· Evaluate “test case” (your current moral dilemma)

Line-drawing, bribery example

(Harris et al.)

· Victor is an engineer in a large construction firm. He has been assigned the task of being the sole person to recommend rivets for the construction of a large apartment building. After some research and testing, he decides to recommend ACME rivets for the job, which he determines are of the lowest cost and highest quality. On the day after Victor’s decision was made, an ACME representative visits him and gives him a voucher for an all-expense-paid trip to the annual ACME Technical Forum, which meets in Jamaica. The trip will have considerable educational value, but will also provide day trips to the beach and other points of interest. Question: If Victor accepts, has he been bribed?

Line-drawing, bribery example (Harris et al.)

—X——————

Feature	Paradigm (bribery)	Test case	Paradigm (not bribery)
Gift size	Large		—X——————	Small (<$1)
Timing	Before decision	—————-X—–	After decision
Reason	Personal gain	————-X——–	Educational
Responsibility	Sole	–X——————-	None
Product quality	Worst	—————–X—-	Best
Product cost	Highest	Lowest

X – test case feature evaluation, X important issue

Do you see a “creative middle solution”?

What about affect on future decisions on ACME?

What is company policy? Is there an appearance of bribery?

May not be a bribe, but still may not be a good idea!

Codes of Ethics

· Why are codes important?

· Serve and protect the public

· Guidance/support for engineers

· Inspiration, deterrence, discipline

· Shared standards, education, mutual understanding

· Profession’s image

· Limitations of codes

· Too vague to be useful in every day ethical decision making?

· Impossible to cover all eventualities

National Society of

Professional

Engineers (NSPE)

· Code of Ethics for Engineers

· Preamble: Engineering is an important and learned profession. As members of this profession, engineers are expected to exhibit the highest standards of honesty and integrity. Engineering has a direct and vital impact on the quality of life for all people. Accordingly, the services provided by engineers require honesty, impartiality,

· fairness, and equity and must be dedicated to the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare. Engineers must perform under a standard of professional behavior that requires adherence to the highest principles of ethical conduct.

Fundamental Cannons

1. Hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the

public.

2. Perform services only in areas of their competence.

3. Issue public statements only in an objective and truthful manner.

4. Act for each employer or client as faithful agents or

trustees.

5. Avoid deceptive acts.

6. Conduct themselves honorably, responsibly, ethically, and lawfully so as to enhance the honor, reputation, and usefulness of the profession.

Also…

· Rules of Practice

· Professional Obligations

· Several pages long…

· Consider a shorter code…

“Hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public”

· How to assess impact on human safety, health, and “welfare”?

· Amartya Sen uses a “capabilities approach:”

· Being able to live a long life in health

· Being able to get an education, being able to work

· Being able to have freedom of expression and association

· Others…

· Lack of welfare=capability deprivation

· Note: It does not say the engineer should be encouraged to focus on (even extreme) capability deprivation. Should it?

IEEE Code of Ethics

We, the members of the IEEE, in recognition of the importance of our technologies in affecting the quality of life throughout the world, and in accepting a personal obligation to our profession, its members and the communities we serve, do hereby commit ourselves to the highest ethical and professional conduct and agree:

1. To accept responsibility in making engineering decisions consistent with the safety, health, and welfare of the public, and to disclose promptly factors that might endanger the public or the environment;

Concern: “Disclose” phrase nice, but “consistent” vs. ABET (NSPE), “engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare”… is a weaker statement? What does

“consistent” even mean?

2. To avoid real or perceived conflicts of interest whenever possible, and to disclose them to affected parties when they do exist;

Example: Ownership in a supplier’s company

3. To be honest and realistic in stating claims or estimates based on available data;

Examples: When dishonest claims give you an advantage over a competitor, or when unrealistic claims endanger individuals

4. To reject bribery in all its forms;

Example: Supplier gifts, when are they big enough to constitute a bribe?

5. To improve the understanding of technology, its appropriate application, and potential consequences;

Examples: Importance of teaching youth about engineering, importance of publishing engineering results in IEEE publications

6. To maintain and improve our technical competence and to undertake technological tasks for others only if qualified by training or experience, or after full disclosure of pertinent limitations;

Example: A coop student who took on task that affected safety on a manufacturing line

7. To seek, accept, and offer honest criticism of technical work, to acknowledge and correct errors, and to credit properly the contributions of others;

Note: Important to keep an emotional separation to your work so that when it is criticized you do not take it personally

8. To treat fairly all persons regardless of such factors as race, religion, gender, disability, age, or national origin;

Note: There are certainly still problems in industry with these issues. We will discuss this more later.

9. To avoid injuring others, their property, reputation, or employment by false or malicious action;

Example: Speaking poorly of someone’s project results when they do not deserve it

10. To assist colleagues and co-workers in their professional development and to support them in following this code of ethics.

Example: If you are a manager, giving them opportunities for professional development (e.g., taking courses or attending a

conference)

Critique the code…

· You have moral autonomy – do not take it as given – challenge it! Demand that right!

· Some problems: “paramount” vs

“consistent” discussed earlier +

· Short! Compare to NSPE, ASCE, ASME…

· Leaves out possibility of much education/ guidance by reading it.

· Omissions? Yes! Consider our earlier definitions of professionalism that lead others to put in statements on “public service”…

Relevant portions of

IEEE Code of Ethics

We, the members of the IEEE, in recognition of the importance of our technologies in affecting the quality of life throughout the world, and in accepting a personal obligation to our profession, its members and the communities we serve, do hereby commit ourselves to the highest ethical and professional conduct and agree: …

5. To improve the understanding of technology, its appropriate application, and potential consequences;

National Society of

Professional Engineers (NSPE)

· III. 2. A. Engineers shall seek opportunities to participate in civic affairs; career guidance for youths; and work for the advancement of the safety, health, and wellbeing of their community.

· This is THE code for the professional engineer!

American Society of Civil Engineers

(ASCE), Code

· Cannon 1(e) says “Engineers should seek opportunities to be of constructive service in civic affairs and work for the advancement of the safety, health and well-being of their communities, …”.

Software Engineering Code of

Ethics and Professional Practice

· ACM/IEEE-CS Joint task force on software engineering ethics and professional practices

· Principle 1: Public: “…software engineers shall, as appropriate:”

· 1.08. Be encouraged to volunteer professional skills to good causes and contribute to public education concerning the discipline.

American Medical Association (AMA),

Principles of Medical Ethics

(June 2001)

Section VII: A physician shall recognize a responsibility to participate in activities contributing to the improvement of the community and the betterment of public health

· Section VII: A physician shall recognize a responsibility to participate in activities contributing to the improvement of the community and the betterment of public health.

For example: Free clinics, “Doctors Without Borders”

American Bar Association (ABA),

Model Rules of Professional

Conduct, ABA 2003

· Rule 6.1: Voluntary Pro Bono Publico Service: “… Every lawyer has a professional responsibility to provide legal services to those unable to pay. A lawyer should aspire to render at least (50) hours of pro bono publico legal services per year.”

The 1979 IEEE Code of Ethics

· Article IV: Members shall, in fulfilling their responsibilities to the community:

1. Protect the safety, health, and welfare of the public and speak out against abuses in these areas affecting the public interest;

2. Contribute professional advice, as appropriate, to civic, charitable or other nonprofit organizations;

3. Seek to extend public knowledge and appreciation of the profession and its achievements

IEEE destroyed a key aspect of the spirit of professionalism with their

1990 revision/shortening of the

1979 code

Social justice perspectives

· “Hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public, and encourage engineers to focus on improving the worst safety, health, and welfare problems”? Better?

· Paid, or gratuitous, engineering with this goal:

· Catholic: “preferential option for the poor” demands special attention for poor, and demands that everyone contribute to the “common good”

· Jewish/Muslim: Views on charity (which in some cases can be service, not money)

· Rawls: “Difference Principle” as it applies to a state’s institutions,

“inequalities are only allowed that will reduce inequalities”

· Sen: Broad view of how to focus on promoting justices and avoiding injustices

Individual obligations to serve vs. a profession’s encouragement to serve

· Does an engineer have an obligation to serve humanity

(e.g., for free)?

· Does an engineer have an obligation (even in paid employment) to help with the worst cases of capability deprivation?

· Are such obligations “duties” (certainly, engineers should not be coerced in any way to do these things)?

· If individuals do not have an obligation, does the profession as a whole? In connection with this, should engineering profession’s codes of ethics “encourage” engineers to do these things (or “aspire” to doing these

things)? Not a requirement that any one engineer does these things.